CONTROVERSY▪ logic▪ Or The method to come to truth in debates of Religion.  
Written by THOMAS WHITE, GENTLEMAN.  
ANNO 1659.   

THE INTRODUCTION.  
MR. John Biddle (who is represented to me, as one of the most learned and most rational, among the enemies of the Roman Church) wrote a book wherein he declared what opinion he had framed to himself out of Scripture, concerning the blessed Trinity. And that, not out of Scripture alone; but also out of the Fathers of the first three Centuries; smoothly skipping over (according to the usual activity of a Protestant Doctor) above a thousand years at a leave. By which proceeding he pretendeth, that neither the Caluinist; nor any other who sticketh to pure Scripture; nay, not the Protestant himself, who extendeth his authority to the Fathers of the first three hundred years, and no further; have any law or right to censure him, seeing he maintaineth all the Principles of both these sorts of persons, and offereth to justify out of them by disputation whatsoever he hath written. Excepting which two pretended authorities (namely, of Scripture, and of the Fathers of the first three Centuries: both of them, privately interpreted) there is nothing but mere wilfulness to move any of the forementioned persons, to believe firmly any conclusion of faith and Religion, or to censure rationally any who hold the contrary opinions.  
This man (not withstanding his so conformable plea, and the main position of liberty of prophesying; which is the Basis of all those who refuse the judgement of a speaking Church) we see detained prisoner by public authority, and his book burned by the hand of the public Executioner.  
This begot in me (as I conceive it did the like in sundry others) a desire and curiosity of speaking with him. Which not being able to compass by my slender power; My next work, was to read his book. After which, I must not deny him this commendation, that, supposing the principle of every man's choosing his Religion out of Scripture Grammatically intrepreted (at is the manner of all those who recede from the authority of tradition) he proceedeth very rationally and consequently. Neither do I imagine that any of his persecutors is able to give a satisfactory answer to what he hath written. And this hath been confirmed in me, since I have understood, that some have set out works against him, which have not afforded the discreeter part even of their own followers, the content they expected from them; And that others have attempted to do the like, but have been so discreet as to suppress their endeavours, upon their finding the success did not correspond to their wishes.  
This hath made the book be esteemed exceeding dangerous to Christian Religion, by those who thought they have no rule to know what is solid and what is not in Matters of Religion, yet are by the force of custom and consent of the greatest part of the Christian name, detained from renouncing the godhead of the whole Trynity; as esteeming it the main foundation (for a material point) of Christian belief, and that which hath brought forth during to many ages those heroyke actions and noble effects, wherewith the Christian world is enriched, above the neglected times of paganism.  
Now, this consideration, or rather experiment; as it convinced clearly, that disputations between all such as adhere solely to Scripture, are for the most part merely vain and fruitless; (for, witty men will never commit too great a folly, as to maintain by Scripture what is palpably and ungloseably against it) so, it made me reflect, that even the disputations which we Catholics do use against Protestants, are seldom, and only by accident, profitable: And by farther rumination, my thoughts sprunge out the ensuing treabise.  
I may not conclude this preamble, without reflecting upon Mr. Biddle's appeal to the Fathers of the first three Ages; which exclusion of those of the following Ages: Not because it is his; but because it is common to him and to the Protestants; and ever to the learnedest Calvinists, as may be seen in the works of Chamier and Daille. Truly, to my thinking, it is a most ridiculous and unreasonable proposition. For, I would fain know how it can fall into the brains of any indifferently discoursine man, to doubt whiter the Fathers of the fourth Age did not know what the Fathers of the former Ages held, better than we can discover it out of their writings that remain to us. Then, more of them were extant; Neither was there any cavils (or at lest very few) which of them were true, which suppositions: The stile, the phrase, the circumstances, the practices of the times wherein those Fathers wrote, were then better understood: And (which is the chief o fall) there were yet witnesses alive, who either had known them, or at least knew others that had known them and had conversed with them so that, by being acquainted with the opinions of the men, they could not doubt of the sense and interpretation of such hard passages as by inaduertence (Natural, even to the most diligent and most wary writers) could not chose but sometimes fall from their pens.  
These were the advantages of the 4th Age, over this wherein we now live. And consequently, if we can ask the 4 Age what it was that these fathers held; and may have their assured answer to our question; There can be no comparison between that evidence, and what we can guess at out of those scraps and remnants of dark expressions, which in many cases must be the subject of our enquiry, if we examine their writings. I will give you for an example, this book of Master Biddle, that hath occasioned the following discourse. Read the testimomyes he allegeth: they will seem to you, the very contexture of the treatises out of which he hath drawn them; so large in some places; so continuedly, page after page: (whereas, generally, our Protestant citations, are burr of a line or two, spoken upon the by, whiles the author's discourse concerneth an other business:) And yet never the less, nothing can be more manifest, then that the doctrine he pretendeth to abet by those testimonies, was not the opinion of the fathers he allegeth for it. The council of Nice, called the Great; that is, the universal Christian world, with open mouth and one consent, condemning the Arrians of novelty; And St. Athanasius, so many times upbraiding them to their faces, that their progenitors were only Caïphas and Artemas and such like, and that their Clergy men were fain to learn how to profess their faith and how to speak; a certain token of their having been formerly taught the contrary. The like, in effect, is in all other controversies between Protestants and us. for, in any of them, the 4th Age doth testify that the doctrine it holdeth, is descended from their forefathers, and is in quiet possession of belief in the Church, and that the opinion they dispute against is a nowelty: they do thereby declare the doctrine of the precedent age, more efficaciously, than any testimonies we can draw out of the writings of that precedent age, are able to convince.  
Thus (Rational Reader) thou seest what hath been my motive to spin this third, for thee to work thyself out of the ambiguities and labirinths wherein our country is at present so perplexed in matters concerning Religion: the design of it is, to make thee discern, that disputation at large, as it is commonly managed, is needless, useless and dangerous. Needless; because there are other means; Easy, for those who are otherwise busied, and need believing, and clear, for those who will take the pain and employ the time requisite for their instruction. Useless, because neither the overcommer, doth gain his cause, nor doth the weaker lose it: since in such a disputation, nothing is compared, but what the two Antagonists did say, or (At most) could have said, which is little or nothing, to the main cause itself. Besides; such a running discourse, may well fill the auditors heads, but can hardly ever clear them, there wanting, time, rest, and quiet, to settle a mature and solid judgement. And lastly, such disputation is dangerous, because in encounters of that nature's wit, tongue, and chance, do for the most part bear a great sway, and have a main stroke, and oftentimes, do break and disorder the better cause; and the weaker sort of hearers (apt to judge by the event) do take sinister impressions, and receive damage, at the indiscretion or misfortune of an oversett disputant. In a word, the scope of this short discourse, is to show, that quietness and solitude; in which, our brain is serene, and our spirits are calm, and a man hath his best wits present to him: Not, public disputes, wherein usually, is nothing but wrangling, and provoking one another into distempers and mutual animosities: Is the most proper means to discern truth, and especially in matters of Religion. And I dare confidently say, that whosoever shall take this course, will find the fruit of it: which I heartily wish to all those who stand in need of it.  
As for Mr. Biddle's book: If those of his adversaries who are separated from the Catholic Church, are able to confute it by their principles, that is to say, if they can show, not only that the truth which they maintain is more plain in scripture then his errors are, but that it is so evident that the explications which may be brought for his party are not receivable; and so, that his errors may be condemned out of the force of scripture alone: Then, Catholic writers will not need to engage their pens against him. But (if I am not much mistaken) whosoever shall go about it, will find it a hard task, the question being of such a nature as requireth a seeming contradiction in words to express it; and so, the knot of it lieth in determining, which part of the seeming contradictory passages, aught to be explicated by the other. Now, how such a controversy can be decided by bare words, I can not comprehend. If then, those adversaries do prove to weak too maintain this cause; and the inefficaciousness of single scripture, in this so main a point, do become evident; It may be necessary to use Catholic arguments for the defence of Christian truth. Unto which, the following considerations may prepare thee.   

The first reflection. What, Religion is.  
TO understand a right, the nature of disputation about Religion; we must first know, what Religion itself is. We do not here take it in the sense of schoole-divines, for a special virtue, by which we perform the honours due to almighty God, to his friends the saints, and to what ever holy things do belong to him and his. But, Religion, in our present treaty, signifieth a skill or art of doctrine coming to eternal bliss. To understand this the better, we are to remember, that it hath ever been received as an undoubted truth among the true-beleevers both in the law of nature and in that of Moses, as also more evidently among Christians, that man hath two lives: The one, in this state of mortality and corruption, while we live under the laws of change and of necessity in this world: the other, which we expect after the end of this, to dure for ever, in great bliss and happiness if we behave ourselves here as we ought to do; or in great miseries and torments, if we neglect our duties in this world.  
Now, the life of the next world, being to last for ever; and the consequences of it for good and bad, being so highly exalted above the contentments and afflictions of our present life; it followeth, that the art or skill of steering a right course towards it, is incomparably more necessary and more esteemable, than any art or learning whatsoever belonging to the affairs of this world. Beyond the skill of trading and of gaining wealth, in which the Eastern and Arabian wizard's place their wisdom: Beyond the out witting and the over powering glory of the potentates and State. Masters of the Earth; whose felicity, is to ensnare the world into the necessily of a wilful bondage to their unlimited ambition; beyond the self-pleasing contentment of those who settling in their own nest, do laugh at the restless negotiations of such as turmoil in the waves of fortune, and to satisfy themselves with the enjoying of homebred and easily-compassed delights of body and of mind. So that, the skill designed by the name of Religion, in our proposed discourse, is of an excellency, and of a necessity, not to be paralleled by any other whatsoever; and being compared to all others, it outweigheth their worth, beyond all measure and proportion; and at that rate deserveth to be esteemed by us; and to be sought after with our whole force, and with our utmost endeavours.  
Besides what we hitherto said; Philosophers do offer us yet another consideration, not to be neglected. They make a general division of man's actions, into two kinds: whereof the one, they seem to say are the actions of man as he is man But that the others, do proceed from him as he is endowed with some particular quality; yet withal, that such quality is proper only to human nature. As for example; no living creature but man, can be a smith, a carpenter, a Pilot, a musician, a Philosopher: And yet, none of the actions peculiar to these persons, are in themselves considered to be the Actions of Man as he is Man. But if any Action be prudently, valiantly, justly, or temperately, performed; they say that action proceedeth from him who doth it, as he is Man. But truly, according to my judgement, this is not properly a division of Actions as Actions; but rather, of the degrees or of the qualities of the same kind of actions. For, the smith and the Pilot cannot exercise their respective trades, but that their working must needs be either in convenient measure and circumstances, or out of such; and accordingly, what they do must be either prudent or imprudent, just or unjust, etc: So that, to be virtuous or vicious, is a quality common to all sorts of Actions; not a special kind of Action: And yet, an Action is said to proceed from Man as Man, as far as it is virtuous or vicious. Neither is there any Action so proper to virtue and vice, as not to include some other nature within itself. Fortitude, requireth some action or passion to gouverne, and wherein to exercise courage and stoutness; temperance, hath pleasures to moderate, as in meat and drink, which belong so an other faculty; Justice, hath civil actions to regulate, which are determined by laws and by customs: And Prudence, is a common eye over all. Yet possibly, though the actions be the same, the sciences wherein they are concerned may never the less be divers: As, the skill of music or of logic, is very different from the science which teacheth to make use of them with moderation in due time and place, So, Philosophers assign Arts to the one; and the science of moral to the other. Wherefore it is apparent, that what in Christian language we call Religion, is correspondent to that which the heathen wizards termed moral Philosophy. Correspondent, I say, or rather proportionable; with the imparity of pagan darkness, to the light of truth delivered us by almighty God. For, as the next world was altogether obscure and unknown to those old Philosophers; So was also by consequence, the true end of human life and action: And therefore, all their skill and study, fell short, and was notable to bring them to the least action perfect in the way of nature; since it was not possible for any action to be perfect in respect of nature, which not only missed but not so much as aimed at her true End; and consequently, was uncapable of reaching to the circumstances due thereunto.  
Now, that which I draw from the mention I have made of these Philosophers, is, that Reigion is in proportion to Christian life, what they did esteem moral Philosophy to be towards a good or happy life in naeure.   

The second reflection. How, Religion is naturally to be bred in mankind.  
FRom these premises, it followeth clearly, that if man's nature were in its due perfection, Religion would be as well known and with as much security assented to, as are now the common principles of nature and of natural living. For, since according to the maxim of Philosophers, no one action can be performed by man as man, but that it must be either virtuous or vicious; and by consequence, in every passage of his life, a rule is necessary for him, by which to square and regulate his proceeding, that it may be virtuous: It is manifest, that if he be not very secure and perfect in this discipline, he must unavoidably fail and swerve from virtue and nature, and consequently, he would not be complete in the course of nature nor enjoy that perfect State which is conformable to his nature. Therefore, enjoy the perfection of human nature, it is necessary that he have all security of his belief, and a complete rule for his actions: and consequently, the principles of Religion, aught to be as evident to him as the principles of nature.  
No less is evident out of the former part of our discourse. For, if Religion be the skill of obtaining beatitude or heavenly glory; and if this be the end of our birth and of our living in this world; It followeth, that our very life here, can not be so directed as it ought to be, unless we have the science and rule of Religion. And because the right direction of our life to eternal Beatitude, is of greater value and worth than our continuation in this world, It is evident that the science of attaining Beatitude, aught to be more clear unto us, than the skill of guiding ourselves in our corporal life Wherefore, seeing that we find, Religion is not now so clear and certain unto us, as are the Principles of our natural and civil life, we may easily gather that we are not in the right temper which human nature requireth.  
And from hence one may argue, that if the happy state in which our first Parents were created, had continued till their multiplication had filleth the earth, the knowledge of God, and other principles for gaining so celestial bliss, would have been as natural to them, as the providing of meat, clothes, houses, and such natural accommodations are to us now; and would have been derived from Parents to children with the same connaturallnes, and would have been embraced by the children with a like or greater heat of affection: And that the unhappy apple, was the cause it is not now so; as it likewise was, of all other disorders in mankind, whereof this is not the least, if not the source of most of them, as they who look into the matter, will easily discern.  
The due way therefore to attain the knowledge of Religion, is by nature. Such nature I mean, as we may obscure to work in children when they learn their first languages; which, as it is not effected without the delivering of them by their mothers and nurses, so neither is it without the endeavours of the little souls labouring to express their thoughts and minds. And nature hath in her such principles, that neither the one party nor the other, can give over the pains, till they have brought the effect to pass. After the same; manner in that happy state of innocency, children would have been trained up in Godliness as perfectly as in natural qualities, without any violent straining of them thereunto; and as it were, even before they should have been awarie of it. And this is clearly deduced out of an axiom that Philosophers do use in the beginning of logic, where they teach us logic ought to be learned before other sciences, because it is an instrument or method to obtain sciences by, and consequently, aught to be possessed before one setteth himself to the gaining of science. So, Religion being the instrument and method to guide us for the well acting of our lives, when once we are come to the use of reason. It is clear that it ought to be planted in us, before we come to the age and use of discretion. Again since no action ought to be exempt from the direction of Religion; not, even the very first, It can not be doubted but that Religion ought to take possession of our hearts, even before Reason▪ Neither do I speak this as a thing that should have been only in the state of Paradise, but as what is connatural to us here, and is practised by many pious Mothers, who teach their children their prayers, and stamp in their minds a deep conceit of God and of heaven, before they are capable of judging in matters concerning temporal commodities. So that it is plain, that it belongeth truly to the nature of Religion, to be propagated in man kind by discipline and by delivery over from father to sonne, and to be embraced in the mere virtue of such a reception through the natural credulity of children to their parents and teachers. Yet I do not hereby exclude, but that as riper years come on, so they ought to gain stronger grounds and maxims to confirm what they first accepted of in a more simple manner.  
But here peradventure it will be expected; that, since we say we mean not in this discourse by the term Religion, the virtue so named by Divines but the skill of attaining to eternal bliss; we should give the reason why we call this Religion. The answer hereunto is not difficult; for, since the end we ought to aim at in this life, belongeth to the next; And since we know so very little of that; (even the great Clerks; much less, the ordinary sort of Christians, whose chief endeavours are bestowed upon their temporal concernments;) It was requisite for our nature, that this science should be delivered us from God himself: And coming from him, the most conf●rmable course was that it should be done by way of command; that only, becoming his greatness, and taking away all possibility of dispute in us. Which being so effected, you see, the art of obtaining happiness, was now become a matter of obedience to Almighty God.  
Besides; the object of our Beatitude being the divine essence; the way to attain it, must consequently be an ardent affection to Almighty God: And such affection, proceeding from a high esteem of him: And the performance of duties, and the acknowledgements of the greatness of him we honour, flowing naturally from such esteem: It followeth, that the chief, if not the whole skill of acquiring bliss; must consist, in making due acknowledgements, and in framing vehement affections towards the godhead. And thus you see, that the skill which before we seemed to make different from the virtue of Religion, as preceding and directing it; is now found to be coincident or convertible with it. And though the name of Religion seemed to be spoken aequivocally of the two; and in truth, is so, seeing the notions are quite divers: Yet, because the things that are executed by both, are the same; the name, is justly and fitly derived from the one to the other; and so necessarily, that without due consideration, we can not find in what one signification differeth from the other.   

The third reflection. That the Religion, without which there is no salvation, is but one.  
OUt of what we have hitherto discoursed, it is evident, that, if according to the course of all other arts and sciences, and according to the custom and rule of nature in all her other proceedings, the way of conquering the high walls of heaven by our violent affections, be but one: That is to say, that as our nature and her acts and her defects are proportionable one to another, and of one kind in all men; so the happiness all men aim at being but one; also the best way unto it ought to be but one; and the defects from the best, one proportionate to an other, that is, the way of all men to bliss proportionably considered; aught to be but one then; it followeth clearly, that if God intendeth to direct us wisely, and conformably to our Nature, towards the End he created us for (which he must of necessity do, under forfeiture of his great wisdom and goodness; should he make nature, and us in it, with design to bring us to our eternal well-being, and not use the means for it) his commands to us, can be no other than of such things as by their essences do integrate the straight and direct way, in which (did we know the causes of things) we should, of our own inclinations, and by the skill of moral Philosophy, both march ourselves, and guide others in our charge. And out of this, we may conclude manifestly, that Religion is but one only: which if we hit on and put in execution, we become happy; but if we miss of it, we become unhappy; whether the fault of missing it, be ours or no. Not, that I suppose the missing can happen without our fault (which is an other disputation) But, that this rule is universally true, that whosoever hath not the true Religion, miscarrieth and faileth of obtaining bliss.  
By this we see how dangerous the rock is, to which so many seek for refuge of their shippe-wracked consciences, solacing themselves with such discourses as these: God is good and merciful, and therefore commandeth not impossibilities, but is content if I do my endeavour to fulfil his precepts. Ay, for my part, am very ready if I knew them: Nay, I labour and study to find them out, and yet can not: Therefore why should I trouble myself any further? Rather let me cast away all anxiousness, and trust to the mercies of so unlimited a goodness.  
For, if what we have hither to laboured to evince, be true; namely, that God's commands are not mere voluntary ones; but of such actions as do naturally breed the effect for which they are commanded; then, labour as much as you will, if you do not that which is commanded, that is, if you take not the true way of going to heaven, you shall never come there. The prescriptions of the doctor to the Apothecary, are commands: But if the Apothecary (though he endeavour never so much) do not mingle the right drugs, and temper them according to the doctors prescriptions, the physic will not prove healthful to the Patient. The husbandman's prescriptions to his kind, are commands; Yet if his servant (though he work by his greatest wits) should sow pease instead of wheat, the crop will not come up fit for the Master's table. So in all other trades and arts; It is not enough to do our endeavour; But the things themselves must be really performed; or else the desired effects will not follow. Then assuredly, those who content themselves with this cold comfort, that God is merciful, do make less account of that so important business of their salvation, than they do of those meaner profits which arise out of vulgar arts and occupations.  
These two then do stand very well together▪ that the same thing may be a command, and withal, a natural action towards the end for which it is commanded. Nay, ordinarily and regularly it is always so; and no command is otherwise unless where there is some fault, either in the commander or in the subject. The general's commands, are of doing such things as are ordered to safety and victory; the statesman's for keeping peace, and for procuring plenty; the Bishops, of those actions which breed virtue and good life in the people; Yet, all these are commands; and have therefore power of forcing obedience, because they are (or at least ought to be supposed) such as of themselves are necessary for the common good; in respect of which one man subjecteth himself to another. And from hence, the silliness of this excuse is more evident. For, if it be natural to all good commands, that they be of actions conformable to the end for which they are given; and, that the command be made for the action, as the action is for the end (which must be in God's commands; by which he ordereth us to eternal life: his commanding, being the Idea to all actions; and this matter, being the principal on which he exerciseth that power) it is evidently convincing, that whether the command be possible or impossible, known or unknown; if it be not fulfiled, the action is not done, without which the end can not be obtained: And consequently, the party becometh damned; Not because he did not obey the command; but because he did not the action, nor followed the way, necessary to salvation: which if he had done without command, it would have saved him; for it is in virtue of doing the action, that the fullfilling of the command saveth all those whom it doth save; and without it, none are saved.   

The fourth reflection. That, Religion is certain: And the means to attain unto it.  
THe case standing thus, that either we must do what God hath commanded us in this world, or else must suffer his indignation in the next; And, that there is no excuse for ignorance: I need not urge to any one who is sensible of their soul's interest, that the knowledge of the law of God ought to be certain, and undoubted, both in itself, and to us: That is, that every one, according to his particular circumstances ought to have a constant and immutable assurance, that it is God's law in which he walketh: And, that in the Church, there are means left by our blessed Saviour to secure us of this truth, (for every one, according to his capacity) if the execution be conformable to the principles.  
The first part is so clear, that time were spent in vain to declare it. For, since the end of our faith and knowledge, is the observing in fact, and not only in will, the commandments of God; with the loss of bliss, and incurring eternal damnation, if it be not done in effect. And since on the other side, it is impossible that he who is uncertain whither he be in the truth or no, and hath but a changeable opinion concerning the law of God, should constantly and firmly in all his works perform that law: It is evident that such a man is not fit for Christian life; but is like one that whilst he holdeth the plough, is still looking back; nor can he hope for any thing from God, because his faith is wavering and unstable: In his practice he can not choose but be carried too and fro with every wind of opinion; Now forwardly, now backwards, and never steer any constant course towards heaven and bliss: Whereas this rule of good life (as is before declared) is of a nature that it comprehendeth all our actions, the highest and the lowest, the first and the last, and all that are comprised between these extremes.  
As for the second part of what we have above said; Namely, that God hath left in his Church, means for all sorts of people to come to this degree of certainty; for every one, according to his growth: It is of itself manifest to all such as have so reverent a conceit of God, as to think he doth not his works by halves, nor leaveth mankind (for whom he made the world) destitute in the chief point, and in that for which (as for his sole end) he created man himself; to wit, for bringing him to bliss and eternal happiness. For, since man's nature is made, in the most excellent part of it, to require evidence; and that it is so laudable, in matters of Geometry, Astronomy, physics, metaphysics, and whatsoever is of great importance, not to be satisfied without evidence and certainty, and to aim at it with all our strength; and that truly our understanding were abused, if it should be forced to accept of what it doth not clearly see, and is not certainly assured of (its nature, being made to see, and its essence being a power of seeing) How can any rational discourser think that God hath failed us in this so material and principal concernment? Certainly, no man of judgement, can suspect it.  
But, to satisfy even hard believers, let us look into particulars: And presently we find that men, in respect of knowledge, are of two sorts; some, who by themselves are capable of understanding truths, others who live upon trust of the former kind of knowing men. Of this latter sort, are all they whom we call scholars: who at the first, do trust their masters, till themselves grow up to the ripeness and ability of knowing and of teaching others. And much more, all those who arrive not so forward as to be scholars; which, in some respect or other, are the greatest part of mankind. The physician, trusteth the Pilot when he is at sea, the soldier, when he is in an army, the baker for his bread, and the brewer for his drink; the Gentleman, trusteth his husbandman for his corn, the physician for his health, the Lawyer for his suits, and every master in his kind. Now, in matter of Religion, God hath given us an advantage, which is not in any of the trades or sciences necessary to our temporal life. For, he hath provided us, not some one man, or some meeting of a dozen or twenty (which is a great consult, in other affairs) but he hath given us a whole world of men to consult withal, and that at one meeting. Consider how vast the Church is, which holdeth communion with the See of Rome. All that, at once, is your warrant. You can not imagine they will tell you a lie for they speak to you, not in words, but in their lives; and therefore they must be cozened themselves, or else they can not cozen you; there, you have a fidelity pledged unto you, beyond the certainty that Euclid or Archimedes could afforded you. For, it is more impossible, that so great a part of mankind should live in a continual hypocrisy and dissembling, then that the surest consequences Geometry can make should be false. If you seek skill; that Church is full of learned men in all kinds of Sciences that any other can pretend unto. Search but the booksellers shops, and you shall find a hundred Catholic Authors, for one of any other Communion; thousands, continually studying in Colleges and Religious houses, whose perpetual search may justly challenge the probability of knowing truth. If you look after outward piety, and the means of preserving and increasing of learning, you shall find it there in a higher degree than in all the communities of other sects. So that if one may rely upon outward signs, there is no comparison between any other company of men, and that Church. And consequently, it is beyond all doubt or question, unto what authority, a discreet person who can not, or will not take the pains to look himself into particular points, aught to adhere under pain of forfeiting his judgement. If he be never so little conversant in the learning of the world, he must needs be a madman if in the way of modern authority he followeth any other, or so much as misdoubteth there can be any other comparable to this.  
As for the other sort of men, who of themselves are able and curious to look into the veins in which the roots of Religion do run: let them but reflect on the change that hath been made in the world since Christian Religion began to flourish, that is, since Constantine's time, and since the first 300. years after Christ, and they may demonstratively conclude, that seeing the long space of 4. or 5 thousand years of nature, was not able to produce those great and noble effects, which we evidently see have sprung up so abundantly in so far shorter a time; the finger of God must necessarily be in this time; and that Protestants; by rejecting it as papistical, do confess plainly that all the great effects of Christian Religion, are proper to those whom they term Papists. And seeing that the Ages since the first three after Christ, are the whole flourishing time of the Christian Church, this their disclaiming them, will appear unto any understanding man, to be the very renouncing of Christianity itself.  
Now, if he who pretendeth to knowledge, be able to manage human nature, and to see how a freedom of heart from the pleasures and cares of this world, is that which bringeth all good to man, both in temporal and in spiritual considerations: And that this freedom can not be introduced, without a settled assurance of the goods of the next world; nor that persuasion, be wrought by any other means then by faith and by the course which Christ took for it: He will, not only forbear admiring, that the world, though fraught with arts in the first 2000 years, should deserve the just revenge of the deluge-waters; But will also discern, that as in the latter 2000 years before Christ, it had advanced nothing at all; So, had it endured 4000 years more without the light that Christ brought into it, it would never have grown better; The love of worldly goods, exalting arts and civility to a certain pitch; and then by its increase into immoderation, reducing all back to barbarism; Or at least, floating mankind in a certain compass too and fro, and never permitting it to grow into any height of perfection.   

The fifth reflection. How, Christian Religion hath been propagated and conserved.  
THe thread of our discourse, hath by this time woven us into the consideration of the means where by one may come to the true Religion. In which, two inquiries occur unto us: the one, concerning the beginning and first publication of Religion: the other, concerning the circumstances that belong unto it, now, in the present age wherein we live. As for the former, we, having our saviour's command to express that it ought to be done by preaching, and having the testimony of all Christians ever since, that it was so performed, there remaineth no place to question, how Christian Religion came first into the hearts of mankind. The Apostles, had (by God's special gift) the knowledge of all languages. By this, they could speak to all natitions: And so, it is generally understood, they did, and that by word of mouth, they propagated through all the world, that faith which themselves had learned from Jesus Christ. But, that they carried any books about with them; or, that they did set the nations they preached unto, on learning those languages in which the scripture was written, there is no mention at all: Nor is it either probable, or possible, that they did so, it is well known, that many of the Nations which at that time became Christian, had no writing or reading in many ages after. And so, it is evident that the general propagation of Christian faith was by vocal preaching, and by vocal tradition, from father to son, of the doctrine first planted among them by the Apostles. And indeed, supposing Nations to be unlearned, it is clear that there can be no other ordinary way of conveying this necessary discipline to posterity.  
No doubt but the method of the first institution, is in a manner ideal to the following continuation: which is but a kind of repetition of the beginning. And so, we might justly conclude without any further pains, that the conservation of Religion ought to be likewise effected by original delivery; that is to say, by Tradition. But, the very thing itself, affordeth us more light to see evidently the truth of our Conclusion. For, looking into the nature of that which is to be done, we shall see plainly that it is impossible it should be effected by any other way. What is it we mean by planting Religion in a Country, but that the People of it should have the knowledge of the way how to go to heaven?  
Let us then examine what signifieth this word People. There are two Notions of it. The first is, that it signifieth the men, the women, and the Children of a common wealth or nation; so comprising all the individuals of human Nature, that live in that nation. Now of these it is the property of children to believe what is told them, without doubting whether it be true or no, or ever judging of the thing proposed. As for women; a great part of them, participateth of the same quality; And the most of them are governed by their husbands, esteeming them (if they have any worth in them) the best of men. The third member of this division, falleth under the second notion of the word People, and single, is the whole subject of it: for it signifieth a multitude of men, employed in seeking and in attending to their livelihoods and subsistence, not looking after learning, or applying themselves to study; for which the greatest part of them wanteth either leisure, or capacity, or inclination. Now, in which sense soever this word is taken, I● appeareth manifestly, that Tradition is the necessary and only means to establish faith in the people. For, the maxim is well known, that he who is not of an art, must (in what belongeth to that) trust those whose particular skill and profession that art is. And thus it is evident, that the People taken according to the explication given, must rely upon an Authority, for knowing what is the true Religion, and what is not.  
But when we once come to Authority; there is no pretence for any, but for that of the Catholic Church, she only can speak authoritatively, all others speaking from their own heads; and she only, professing to speak from the mouth of Christ and of his Apostles; she only, having had the sense and meaning of the Apostles delivered to her; because she only hath continued ever since their times, all the rest, having nothing but dead words, and the killing letter delivered to them, whiles for the sense of those words, they have no further recourses them to their own imaginations and discourses.  
In the next place, let us consider, what is the knowledge of heaven▪ And our first remark will tell us, that it is such a knowledge, as God himself was forced to take man's flesh upon him to teach it us; because it was so high and transcendent beyond all that our eyes had ever seen, or that our ears had ever heard, or that our imaginations had ever conceived or fancied: that a less authority than God's essential verity, was not enough to settle our belief upon so sublime and so admirable mysteries. Now, this being so, can we imagine, that the discussion of ambiguous words, in which such incomprehensible mysteries are hidden, should be left to the fanciful changeableness of human apprehensions? Who seeth not, that man's understanding must of necessity always incline the balance towards those things he useth to be conversant with, that he is wont to see, to hear, and to conceive? Which is in effect directly contrary to the reason of our saviour's coming. And accordingly, we daily meet with some that laugh at the doctrine of the real presence of Christ's Body in the blessed Sacrament, some at the blessed Trinity; every one, framing grounds to himself, according as his fancy driveth him, or as the company he converseth with, draweth him. Now, if the scanning of ambiguous words will not serve to settle the belief of Christian doctrine in the hearts of mankind. It is clear, that nothing but Tradition can perform that work, since there remaineth nothing else that can pretend there to: And consequently, nothing but Tradition can be the means to plant and continue Religion in the world.  
Lastly, let us look into the quality of this doctrine. And presently it appeareth to us, that it ought to comprehend all our actions; and consequently aught to precede the very first of them, while as yet there is no judgement in us: and when we are grown to the ripeness of judging, it ought to Master our very judgement itself; since the exercising of that, is also one of our actions. How then can it be supposed, that Religion ought to be studied and learned like a science or skill, when as, it ought to be possessed even then when we begin to study; and, that our very study ought to be regulated by it?   

The sixth reflection. That the Scripture, duly read; will bring a man to the truth of Religion.  
SEeing it is agreed on by all parties, that the Scriptures were written by the same spirit, which guided the Apostles in their preaching: There can be no doubt, but that the doctrines contained in their witings, must needs be conformable to what they delivered in their sermons, and in other vocal instructions; with this difference, that there could he no dispute about their meaning in what they preached and catechised, by reason of their often inculcating and plain expressing it: Whereas nothing can be more clear, then that in what they have written, their sense is oftentimes obscure and very difficult to be discovered and penetrated into. And therefore, the Scriptures are to be interpreted by the law written in the heart of that Church, which hath always adhered to the doctrine that from time to time they have received from their predecessors: though withal, I have no scruple but that if the Scripture be read in such sort as it ought to be, it will of itself, bring the man who so readeth it, to the true Religion.  
The conditions that I require for the due reading of Scripture, are these: First, that he have a sincere intention and affection to submit his own mind and judgement to the Scriptures, and not strain them to his opinion. Secondly, that he have a sound understanding, not apt to be carried away lightly. Thirdly, that he meddle with no commenter or interpreter that is more cunning than himself; nor rely upon any thing for the mind and sense of the Scripture, but what the Scripture itself affordeth him. Fourthly, that he read it long and attentively. And Lastly, that what he understandeth by reading of the Scripture, he endeavour to put it in practice, and govern his life accordingly: For, practice doth wonderfully enlighten any book which giveth rules in any kind of operation. These things observed, I doubt not but who taketh Scripture for his rule, will not fail of becoming a Catholic, at the last. For, both the reason before delivered, in the beginning of the reflection, and experience, and the instances of doctrines, whereof part follow and more might be brought, do manifestly declare, that this effect must of necessity follow.  
To see what the Scriptures will direct us, in order to Catholic doctrine; Let us begin with this very question concerning the interpretation, of the Scriptures themselves. It is plainly set down, that it ought not to be by the private spirit, Pet. 2. c. 1. That Christ set in his Church, Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, Pastors, Doctors, for the of building his body; that the faithful may not be turned round by every blast of doctrine; Ephes. 4. That the Church is the Pillar and strength of our faith. These and many more texts he shall find to show him that the interpretation of Scripture, aught to depend on the Church. In other places he may read, that the Scripture is useful for our comfort, for preaching and for exhorting, &c. But, not one word of looking in it for our faith, unless when itself is taken into the question; That is to say, when the question is, whether the new gospel be conformable to the old; which is the sole matter of controversy; wherein the Scripture (that is to say, our Saviour in the 5. of St. John, and St. Paul in the 17 of the Acts) directeth the searching and looking into Scriptures. For, in both these places, this only was the point they spoke unto.  
If the question be of the Pope's supremacy; (that is to say, of St. Peter's Primacy among the Apostles: For, only so much, can belong to Scripture) we have it expressly in the 10. of St. Matthew, Simon, the first: And so he is counted by the other two Evangelists; Whereas, the order of the other Apostles is not kept. We have tribute paid for Christ and for him as a special officer, Matth. 17. We have him forwardest in the confession of Christ, Matt. 16. The Church promised to be built upon him, and the keys in a special manner to be delivered to him: So that, it is not to be wondered at, if presently after, the tribute was particularly paid for him. We have the sheep of Christ, in a special wise recommended unto him; John the last. We have Christ's prayer personally for him, and a charge given him to confirm the rest, Luc. 22. We have him ordering the Church in the election of St. Mathias, Acts the first▪ Him first preaching to the Jews, Acts the 2. Him first receiving the Gentiles, by God's special order, Acts the 10. Acts the 12. the Church praying for him. He first giveth the Holy Ghost, Acts the 8. Acts the 16▪ he in the council is the first that resolveth the question. So that, if the Scripture be sincerely consulted in this point, there is all appareance, or rather evidence, of St. Peter's Primacy, both in word and in deed.  
If the question be, of the church's infallibility or indeficiency: The Scripture will tell us, that Christ promised to be with his Preachers for ever, Matt. 28. That the gates of hell should not prevail against his Church, Matth. 16. That the Holy Ghost should stay with his Disciples for ever, John the 14. That there should be of the Elect at the end of the world, Matth. 24. Mark 13. Luke 17. That persecution should not end in the Church, until the coming of Christ, Matth. 10. Nay, that after the beginning of the Resurrection, some shall yet remain, 1. Thess. 4.  
If the question be of the real presence▪ that is to say, that our saviours body is truly in the blessed Sacrament; We shall read, this is my body, Matth. 26. Mark 14. This is my body which is given for you, Luke 22. This is my body which shall be delivered for you, 1. Cor. 11. And in the former Chapter he presseth it; Is not the chalice we bless, the participation of the blood of Christ? And the bread we break, is it not the participation of our Lord's body? What can a sincere heart that believeth the Scripture, reply to this?  
If the question be, of Remission of sins in the Church: Do we not read, the power of binding and of losing, given to men, Matth. 18? Of forgiving and of retaining, John the 20? We read, that the Apostles received the ministry of Reconciliation, the word of Reconciliation, 2. Cor. 5. James 5. Confess your sins, one to the other. Also Matth. 9 The people glorified God, for having given unto men, the power of remitting sins.  
If Confirmation (that is to say, the giving of the Holy Ghost) be in question: We read St. John Baptist testifying, that he who sent him to baptize in water told him that Christ baptised in the Holy Ghost, Mark 1. and John 1. But in John 3. That he who is not newborn of water and the Holy Ghost, cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven. And, that this was meaned of that descent of the Holy Ghost which is after baptism, is our saviour's own declaration, who in the 1. of the Acts saith. You shall be baptised in the Holy Ghost after not many days: Whereof, the whole story is told at length in the 2. Chapter; And in the 8. the Apostles were sent to Samaria, to impart there this giving of the Holy Ghost. In the 11. St. Peter remembered in the saying of our saviour in the same sense. And in the 15. St. Paul useth the same Ceremony to 12. Persons after they were baptised, with the same reflection on Saint John Baptist.  
As for the Sacrament of Order; there are two parts in it; the Mission; and the outward Ceremony: Both which, are largely expressed in the Consecration of Aaron, and of his sons. Levitic. 8. The designation and Mission, Matth. 10. Mark 3. Luke 6. and again 22. when he gave them command to consecrate the blessed Sacrament for the faithful. Luke 10. He designed the 72. Disciples. Hebr. 5. The Law is established in general; As also Rom. 10. How shall they preach, unless they be sent? As for the outward Ceremony, though we can not doubt but it was performed by our saviour, when he sent his Apostles and Disciples; Yet we have expressed also in the 20. of St. John, where we are told of insufflation, with these words receive the Holy Ghost. In the 13. of the Acts, we are told of fasting and of imposition of hands; and in is it specified, that they who were so sent, were sent by the Holy Ghost. And in the 1. to Tim. 4. We have the imposition of the hands of the Presbytery by Prophecy.  
For Matrimonies being a Sacrament: We read everywhere, that the conjunction of Man and Wife is from God. Gen. 2. He brought her to Adam. 1. Cor. 11. Neither Man without woman, nor woman without man, in our Lord, Matth. 19 And Mark 10. What God hath coonjoyned; let not man separate. Nature, giveth to all cultivated Nations, to do this with an outward ceremony; and therefore, surely, among those who hold it a special action of God, it is most fit to be performed by the minister of God. Now, that sanctification is due to it: We read 1. Cor. 7. The unbelieving man, is sanctified by the faithful woman; and the unbelieving woman, by the faithful man (to wit, in their common operation) otherwise your children would be unclean; whereas now they are holy.  
Of extreme Unction, there is not so frequent mention; But, most manifest, and undeniably obvious. We are told in the 6. of St. Mark, that the Apostles anointed the sick with oil, and cured them. Ja. 5. Is any man sick among you; let him bring in the Priests of the Church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of our lord: And the prayer of faith shall save the sick man: and our lord will ease him; and if he be in sin, his sins shall be forgiven him.  
I doubt not, but if what I have already alleged out of Scripture, do light into an even soul, not biased by interest or prejudice to the contrary party; It will be sufficient to satisfy him fully that the out side and letter of Scripture, is clearly on the side of antiquity and of the Catholic Church. Yet I can not leave this subject, till I have mentioned one point more, because it is so much vaunted by our Adversaries, though with very little reason. The Catholic Church administereth the holy Eucharist, sometimes in one kind, some times in both: Protestants, always in both kinds. The question ariseth, which of these practices is favoured by Scripture. It is evident that the Scripture speaketh sometimes of receiving both the bread and the cup▪ But much oftener, of one alone. Jo. 6. This is a bread coming down from heaven; that whosoever eateth of it, may not die. I am the bread of life, which descended from heaven. If any one eat of this bread, he shall live for ever. He that eateth this bread, shall live for ever. Luke the last, he took bread, and blessed, and broke it, and gave it to them; and their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and he vanished out of their sight. Acts 2. And they were persevering in the doctrine of the Apostles, and the communion of breaking of bread, and prayer. Acts 20. When they were assembled to break bread. So that, if we distinguish between the time of giving the communion, and the time of the priest's consecration (in which the Catholic Church, observeth inviolably the doing it in both kinds) we shall find more places in Scripture for communicating in one kind, then for doing it in both. But what shall we say to this speech of St. Paul 1. Cor. 11. Therefore, whosoever shall eat this bread, Or drink this cup, unworthily; he shall be guilty of the body, and blood of our saviour? what meaneth this Or, but that some, even then, took the one without the other? Else, there had been no place for that disjunctive Syllable.  
I easily believe, that many a pert bachelor will be ready to tell us, that he can find ways to salve all these places of Scripture, and many more if they were urged. But that concerneth not me. I inquire only, what the outward face of Scripture is; and to what belief it will lead an honest heart, left to its own strength. For if those queinte disputants do encounter with a person that is not enured to the Sophistry; they will turn black into white, make two eggs three (as the tale goeth of the impertinent forward scholar) and bring to pass whatsoever they undertake. Therefore it was necessary to impose among the conditions of reading the Bible, this for a principal one; That they, who by Scripture, aim at coming to the truth, should admit of no Interpreter. And this, because of the danger in lighting upon a false one, instead of a true one, before one, hath grounds to discern which is a false one and which a true one. For, the case is very indifferent between a Catholic Interpreter, and any other. The Catholic, knoweth the doctrine of Christ (that is to say, the sense of the Scripture) independently from the words of the Scripture. And therefore, in substantial points which concern Christ's doctrine he cannot teach or interpret amiss, without swerving from his own faith. But it is evident that every other, who hath no rule for his belief, besides the bare letter and words of Scripture, is subject to error, through every passion and prejudice, which hiddenly swayeth his heart awry and corrupteth his judgement, by pride or other affection: So that he may be rightly compared to a rotten cane; that being leaned upon, will break, and with its splinters, wound and gore him that expected support from it.   

The seventh reflection. That, the reading of the Fathers, will bring a man to the truth of Religion: And, that natural reason, will greatly advance a man thereunto.  
IT seemeth strange to me, that any man who acknowledgeth Scripture, should reject the Fathers: since he can not renounce them; without professing at the same time by so doing, that he believeth himself to be able (with his little wit, and generally less study and learning) to penetrate deeper into the intelligence of Scripture, than so many ages eminent for industry, science, and holiness, could reach unto. And all this, upon no other pretence, but because they were men; and consequently, liable to erring: As if himself were not a man; but something else, so far beyond comparison with all other men, that we ought rather to confide in his ability and honesty, then in all mankind that went before him. Which is so unworthy and so intolerable a pride, that I admire how any auditory can endure it.  
But to come more closely to the point. I say, that seeing the Holy Fathers, did, both receive the prevaching of the Apostles nearer hand than we do; and did hold the truth of Scripture as strongly as we do; and did spend much time in the earnest study of it, and proceeded therein with as sincere hearts as we can: It may in no wise be doubted, but that they had the means and the wills of having the true faith; and consequently, that they had it.  
Therefore, what was their universal Tenet in Matters of faith, can not be false nor aught to be rejected; Or, with any colour of reason, be questioned by us as disagreeing with Scripture. Besides; their writings being large and numerous, (in which, upon several occasions and in differing circumstances, they repeat and inculcate the same things by different words and expressions) it must needs thence follow, that their sense and meaning, in most things of importance, can not choose but be sufficiently explicated. So as who ever shall read them with candour, ingenuity, and judgement, can not possibly doubt of it.  
And accordingly, experience hath showed us, that the judicious Protestants who gave themselves to the reading of the Fathers, were in judgement near unto Catholics, in most of their opinions: And that which detained them from being absolutely Catholics, was (besides the chains of interest) nothing but a secret pride of not submitting themselves to the Tradition of the Church, in some particular points in which Tradition was not so clear to them. Though withal I deny not, but that a wrong apprehension of some Catholic Tenets (presumed upon the explication of some particular Doctors) might unhappily contribute to this their obstinacy. No doubt then, but if any indifferent person, not preimbibed with any wrong maxim, shall bestow competent pains in reading the Fathers, he will infallibly become Catholic. Especially, if he take this rule along with him; to compare the practice of Protestants, with the practice of the Fathers and of the former Church. By which he will see, that this which they call Reformation, hath cut away under pretence of abuses, not the abuses, but the very things themselves in which the abuses were; like unskilful chirurgeons, that cut of a leg, to cure a small sore in it; or like Mahomet, who took away all use of wine, to cure drunkenness. And in the mean while, they cavil at petty questions, in which they strive to show that the Church hath erred.  
As for natural reason; No man will expect that it should be an entire means of attaining to the knowledge of the supernatural truths which are contained in Christian Religion; But only, that it may be a help thereunto; by showing, that they are so far from contradicting reason, as indeed nothing can be more conformable to true reason, than the whole economy of them is. And I dare promise whosoever shall seek this; that, if he come unto it, armed with true and sound Philosophy, he may arrive to a full contentment of his understanding and heart, in all that concerneth so noble an enquiry. Now, since Catholic Religion hath been so intelligibly divulged in the world. St. Augustin maketh mention, that he found the Mystery of the Trinity, in the Platonists books. Now, if you ask me how this came to pass; I answer, that God provided in Alexandria (a City much addicted to learning) one Ammonius Hermias, a great Philosopher and a Christian. He, to make Christian Religion more acceptable, sought to join it with Platonic Philosophy: Which was no hard matter to do; Plato having b'ing been (as Numenius saith of him) Moses speaking Greek; that is to say, one who having lighted upon the Hebrew learning, had sucked much out of it. Now, this Ammonius; finding in Plato the Ideas of Being, and of unity, and of Life, and such other airy notions, easy to be wrought upon to what he designed; endeavoured by these, to instill into his scholars the Mystery of the Trinity. Which he did with such happy success, that of the three prime wits of his school, the one (Origen) became so great and eminent a Doctor of the Church, as antiquity hath acknowledged him.  
The other two, Amelius and Plotinus, proved two conductors of the Platonic school; and brought into it the imitation of the Trinity which is found in their discourses and in the writings of their followers: So amiable is truth, that the very likeness of it enamoureth the understanding: How much more, would the substance do so, were it rightly pursued and truly discovered? Which without question, it may be, even in this very particular; the terms, in which this sublime Mystery is delivered, being so natural; and the thing itself, being the connatural substance of Almighty God, that dependeth not upon any chance or free disposition; and the intention of revelation, being (generally) to bring us to the knowledge of the thing that is revealed.  
And therefore (you will say) the wonder is not so great, that since Christian Religion was known and voiced about in the world, these Mysteries should be treated of by Philosophers in their schools and writings: But if in any of them before the coming of Christ, there should have sprung, out of pure nature, the least intimation of any of these supernatural Mysteries; That, would be a strong confirmation of what we have here said.  
Certainly, if this may be expected from any, it must be from Aristotele; He being of the only person amongst the Heathens that hath written with solidity. Of him than it is reported, that as he lay upon his deathbed, considering the miseries that poor mankind falleth daily into through Errors, and that it is not in the power of Nature to deliver Man from them, he pronunced this great sentence. That Homer had much reason to make the Gods take human shapes upon them, to draw by that means poor Men out of errors. Behold the Incarnation of the son of God as so lively grounded, as any Christian can speak of it; And this, by the mere strength of reason. And is it possible, that now, after so glorious publication of the Christian faith through the whole earth, there should be found any Christians so unreasonable, as to think it unreasonable that God should become man, to save us from our sins; which are the true root of all our miseries?  
The like is of the holy Eucharist. Did but men understand so much of metaphysics, as to know the Nature of their own growth or augmentation, they would find no difficulty, in that, now by many so disbelieved and decried, though in itself so heavenly and needful a Mystery. But, ignorance and pride, maketh that to be held for absurd, which in truth is most conformable to Nature.  
I will add but one word more upon this occasion, for their sakes who are affected with reason, and are best satisfied with discourses built upon that foundation. This Principle being supposed, that all things are governed in the perfectest manner that may be, in conformity to the general rules of nature (which Divines use to express in these words, that God, ever doth that which is best) then presently; All the Mysteries of Christian Religion. Namely, the creation of Man; the fall, the economy, or conduct of the world until the coming of Christ; since Christ; the end of the world; the last Judgement; the Resurrection; the several States of souls before it, and of men after it. Beatitude; Damnation; And whatsoever else is in Catholic belief, as, the Doctrine concerning the Church, church-government, the Sacraments; and whatsoever else belongeth of necessity to credulity and obedience. All these (I say) will appear so mainly evident and reasonable, that no man of a just capacity and unpassionate mind, can take any exception against it. Whosoever will employ his time and endeavours in this search; and shall begin it with a right understanding of Nature; will find, with unspeakable comfort and satisfaction to himself, that what I have here said, is true. I confess, some pains are required to know these things; as also there are some necessary to comprehend the demonstrations of Archimedes and the Cronickes of Apollonius Pergeus; about which we see so many strain their wits to understand them, for the delight that is in them, when they are once mastered; And yet, the importance ad consequence of them, is not comparable to the knowledge of these truths; which looked after with a like attention, in a due progress, will become as evident as they. But we must not expect to attain to the depth of all these points, by only discoursing of them in familiar conversation, for our divertisement and recreation; or by reading some treatise of them, in such sort as one would do a Romance, only for entertainment or pastime and delight. They who are skilled in Geometry or Algebra, do well know they never purchased those sciences so cheap. Seeing then that this is of so much higher a strain in itself, and of so far greater a concernment towards the government of their lives: let them, if they can not be satisfied with simply believing these truths, use industry to find Masters able to instruct them, and employ a competency of labour in pursuit of them.   

The eighth reflection. Of conference and Disputation, in common.  
AFter the way of reading; there offereth itself to our consideration, that of personal discoursing or Dialogising. This may be performed, in two Manners. The one; when he who is to learn, contributeth on his side; bearing himself with a desire to come to truth; and helping it on, by acknowledging candidly, what seemeth to him true out of his former persuasion; and proposing, wherein he findeth difficulty; and asking no more, then to have that opened unto him, which some preoccupation hath obstruted. This Manner of treating is called Conference. And no doubt but it is a far shorter and more efficacious way to come to knowledge, then reading. Provided, the teacher be an able Man and Master of his profession. For, a writer can speak but in common; whereas such a teacher, knoweth by the answers of his opposer, wherein particularly lieth the difficulty he is to remove; and accordingly, spareth and contracteth many discourses wihch the writer is forced to deliver at aim and at hazard. Besides; the very oral delivery, is far more intelligible, and giveth a singular energy to what is so taught.  
The other Manner of Dialogising, is, when the auditor standeth upon his guard, and yieldeth nothing upon foreknowledge; but will be co●vinced, and see evidence, for every thing he is to allow: And this, is properley called Disputation. The parties in this, are clearly two; and no third to moderate the Disputation: though oftentimes one be necessary to moderate the Disputants, Who otherwise, through contention and earnestness, may be apt to neglect the rules of disputation▪ whereof the first or chief is, that the one, meddle not with the others office, as long as he holdeth to the rules of Disputation.  
The parties being two; a disputant, and a respondent. The first thing the disputant is to do, is to state the question; or rather, to require of the respondent to do it, if it be necessary: That is, if he suspecteth the terms of the Thesis to be equivocal. Then, is he to oblige the respondent to explicate his meaning in the position: For, that belongeth to the respondent; who can not be forced, to hold by the words of his Thesis, any more than himself meaneth by them, He may also oblige him to yield the reason of his Tenet, if it be such a one, that the opposite is the more common, or of Authors that he is bound not to forsake without great reason. For, as in truth it is an impudence to maintain any thing without a reason; So, the reason failing, the maintainer is put from his position; though peradventure, the position itself be not confuted. Neither ought there to be required more reasons than one, for one truth. Not, but that many arguments may be framed to prove the same conclusion; but because, among them, one at the least, aught to be irrefragable, and which can not be convinced of defect. For, if none be such, the respondent ought not to maintain his assertion for true▪ since he himself must needs think that peradventure it is false, not having evidence or knowledge that it can not be otherwise then as he affirmeth it.  
The second duty of the disputant, (in a serious disputation intended for the finding out of truth) is, to propose no argument but such as in his opinion is convincing. We can not oblige a man to know so much; For, all of us are fallible in particulars; and even Geometricians themselves, do sometimes mistake a truth for demonstrated, when really it is not so. But that which we may exact of our disputant, is, that he esteem his argument convictive, and propound it for such and he is to make account that himself is overcome, if (fair law being given him) he do not overcome, For, his part being to prove; if he do not that, faileth of his end; which is, to lose the day: and if before he begin, he doth not expect to do this, he cometh not to dispute, but to mock the Auditory, and to persuade them or to make a show of that which in reality he knoweth he can not perform.  
His third duty is to proceed in form. Now, by true and rigorous form, is meaned syllogistical form. So that, in rigour, every attempt of his should be a syllogism. But among expert and ingenuous logicians, This is not exacted; unless it be upon a pinch, where there is a controversy upon the consequence: For then, the rigour of form concludeth the question. Otherwise, to go (as they call it) by Enthymemes (that is, by putting one only Antecedent, whence the denied proposition is averred to follow) is the shorter and the clearer way. For, it taketh away both length and confusion from the respondent.  
And because, if the Antecedent be false, it is but one; and so the denial or distinction of it putteth the arguer in his ready way; and if the consequence be nought, that is to be proved, the Disputation goeth the more smoothly on.  
His fourth duty is, to prove what is immediately denied him, and to bring that in his consequent; whether it be a proposition, or a sequel he ought to make good.  
These are the necessary and main duties of the disputant. For, although anciently he was allowed to make what demands he pleased of things pertinent to his proof, before the respondent could discern what he aimed at by his questions: Yet our latter school-practise hath cut of this liberty, as being very subject to circumvent the respondent; and rather captious, than a solid means to arrive at truth.  
As for the Answerer: His first duty is, to remember his name; that is to say, that he sitteth there to answer; and therefore, aught to speak no more than he is asked. His solemn words, are known to be, I grant, I deny, I distinguish. As for granting, it is at his danger. As for denying; he ought not to deny any proposition, that of itself is known to be true. As for distinguishing; he must show that the Arguers words do bear more senses than one; or else he giveth no distinction. He must also show, that the parts of his distinction, are to the purpose of the argument; otherwise, his distinction is frivolous. This he must do, when the actor requireth it. Otherwise, he must only give his distinction, and grant the one part, and deny the other; to the end, the arguer may choose, whether he will accept of that which is granted, or prove that which is denied. If he grant a proposition formerly denied; or if he deny a proposition formerly granted; he hath lost the day. Whether he may distinguish a proposition, that he hath before simply granted or denied, is a question touching the honour of the defendant. But without doubt, in rigour it is lawful to be done: For, no proposition can be supposed to be granted or denied in all senses possible; And therefore, upon further occasion, it may be declared in what sense it was formerly allowed or denied.   

The ninth reflection. Of the Application of the same to Religion.  
BUt, to apply these observations to our present subject, we must cast our eyes upon the aim and scope of our disputation. Other disputations, that are not of Religion, we see are sometimes done for the exercise of young scholars, to enure them to a subtle and rigorous Manner of discoursing, and to make them perfect in the consequences to their Tenets: which is a laudable course, according to the worth of the sciences they are about. Other whiles, men meet to dispute, either for recreation sake, or for ostentation of their wits. The latter is pardonable in young men; and the former, is a commendable Manner of passing their time, for those who have no better means of spending it.  
But when all this is applied to Religion, it taketh an other hew. For, here, we look for truth in the most necessary part and business of our life; in which, to be deceived, is the greatest mischief that can befall us. Beyond the ruin of our estate: Beyond the taking away of our life; Beyond the extinguishing of our family; And beyond the loss of all that is dear to us in this world. Wherefore, he that in this Matter maintaineth any position, merely for ostentation of his wit is guilty of a most Sacrilegious action; and committeth upon the party he seduceth, the worst sort of murder that man's Nature is capable of. in like Manner, to make a mere recreation of such disputing; Is a high contempt of God, of eternal Beatitude, and of Divinity. For exercise, it may be necessary, so it be known to before that end; and, that under colour of exercise, no wrong persuasion be induced into the Auditory.  
Yet is all this, from our present business. For, the Disputation, for which these rules are intended, is a kind of trial of the truth of Religion; By which, the Auditory may take an Apprehension of what they are to follow during their whole life. So that it is not to be allowed, without just security from both parties: From the Arguent, for his disputing, and from the Defendant, for his answering. And accordingly, since it is well known, that nothing but Demonstration, can give security of a disputable truth: He who in a Disputation of this nature undertaketh to prove an assertion, ought first to engage his credit that in his conscience he esteemeth the argument he intendeth to propose, to be Demonstrative: How ever he may apprehend a failing on his part in pressing it, either through want of sufficient skill, or through the over proportion of his adversaries abilities, or through the difficulty of well opening the Matter and making the truth appear. If he refuse to do this, he is to be protested against for a thief and a robber (as our Saviour himself styleth such) who hath a design to abuse his hearers, and to draw their souls (for some private interest of his own) into eternal damnation: And the Auditory is to be contested, that such a disputation as the Arguer intendeth, is a mere juggle and imposture; a brabbling, base, counterscuffle, not fit for a grave Man to have a share in; but a mere scolding, loss of time, and vexation, both to the hearers and to the actors.  
The Respondents task, is not so rigorous. It is enough for him to maintain, that his adversary can not convince his Tenet of falsity: he being, for this passage, but a defendant; not a prover.  
Thus far, for Opponents and Defendants in common; But now, to apply this to Catholics, and to those who have parted from them; Let us begin with considering, how their main difference consisteth in this, that the Catholic holdeth his doctrine, because it came to him by his forefathers from Christ; and relieth upon his forefathers for the truth of this: The Adversaries, Universally, do rely upon, either Scripture, or reason. As for reason, it is evident that it can not be a sufficient ground of a doctrine that is held by authority. And as for Scripture, the Catholic maintaineth it as strongly as they. Neither have they it, but upon the credit of Catholics: And therefore all the arguments they can bring out of Scripture against Catholics, do bear in their forehead a prejudice of being either false, or at least uncertain.   

The tienth reflection. Of some particulars belonging to Catholics; Others, to their Adversaries.  
OUt of these premises, there follow some very considerable differences between Catholics and Protestants, in point of Disputation. The first is: That a Catholic, ought not, for his own satisfaction, to admit of any disputation at all, in Matters of Religion. For, he relieth upon a better ground, than any his Adversary can offer to him: Namely, an infallible and irrefragable Authority. He taketh reason for an insufficient Judge in controversies of this Nature. And against disputing out of Scripture, he hath two prejudices: The one, that he holdeth his faith by the same rule by which he receiveth the Scripture, and therefore, if Scripture should prove any thing against his faith (which is impossible) it would make him believe neither; and so, would not change him to be of a new Religion, but cause him to be of none.  
The other prejudice is, That he who argueth out of Scripture, proceedeth Texts whose sense is disputable in the words themselves: Whereas the Catholic, is beforehand assured of the sense, as far as concerneth faith; Therefore, it were in vain for him to search, in an uncertain instructor, the knowledge of that which he already knoweth certainly.  
Yet further: If any Catholic do admit Disputation for his own sake and satisfaction; he leaveth being a Catholic. For, the end of Disputation, is to clear a doubt: And therefore, where is no doubt, there is no need of disputing. Neither can a Catholic have any doubt in any Matter of faith, unless he suspecteth his rule: Which if he once do, he is no longer a Catholic. On the other side; The Protestant, building all his faith upon the ambiguous words of Scripture (so loud disputed, and eternally disputable) must necessarily, if he be a rational man, live in perpetual doubt. For, the very opposition of so many wise and learned men as affirm that the words he allegeth do not signify that which is necessary for his position: is sufficient to make any rational man be in doubt of an exposition of words that may bear several senses, which he seeth is so obvious and ordinary a rock of mistaking. Therefore, a Protestant were not rational, if he should not always demand searching and disputing until experience shall have taught him, there is no End of it, or by it. He must resolve, either to be ignorant and to trust, or else to dispute without end. And in very truth, his disputing is to no end. For, suppose he be the arguent, and do convince his adversary; yet after all his pains, he hath gained no more than only to perceive that his adversary is a weaker disputant than he; or that peradventure he was at that time surprised; so that when he shall be in his better wits, he may happily be able to salve his arguments. And if he be the Defendant, and chance to maintain his position, yet it followeth not, that a better Opponent than he had to deal withal, Might not have convinced him. So that, on neither side, there is any security to him, because he bringeth no Demonstration, but only the bare appearance of ambiguous words.  
There is an other impurity between Catholics and their adversaries, in this, that if the Catholic be the Opponent, he can dispute but of one point; namely, of the Infalliblity of the Church, because his adversary is obliged to no other. For, take what point you will besides; and one may be a perfect Protestant, whether he hold it, or deny it. The authority of Bishops, is the main point of protestancy, by which it is distinguished from all other Sestaries: Yet, when it is for their turn, the French Presbyterians (so great enemies to that government of the Church) are their dear brethren. The Greeks, the Lutherans, the Socinians, the Anabaptists; how many positions, do they maintain different from the Protestants? nevertheless, when it pleaseth a Protestant to make his boasts of the large extent of the Reformed Churches; all these are of this communion. Nay,  
Nay, when he talketh of the universal Church: No Arian, Eutychian, Nestorian, or other professor of whatsoever damned Heresy that hath a share against Popery, is excluded by him from being an orthodox Member of the Catholic Church; but all are registered in his calendar, as professors of the only true faith, and as witnesses of Christ's doctrine. So that, if a Catholic be to argue, he loseth his labour in disputing of any point but of the Infallibility of the Church; because he advanceth nothing by having the victory in any other. For though he should reduce his adversary to be of his mind, in all other articles: yet not being so in this too, he is as far as ever from being a Catholic; since the not believing of any one article of faith, maketh a man no Catholic, or (which is all one) a Protestant.  
On the other side; If it be the Catholics share to be the Defendant: He is bound to make good, many points; That is to say, all that doctrine which we maintain to be of faith, and to have received by Tradition.  
The Conclusion therefore is, that the Catholic hath much to maintain, and little to oppose: The Protestant hath great choice of what to oppose, and little to maintain. So that his advantage, on this hand, is very great, in regard of disputation. Since, if he receive a wound in any limb of that great body he is to defend, it is a mortal one to his cause: And his adversary is invulnerable to him, everywhere but in one point. The reason of this difference, dependeth of the known axiom, 
Bonum, ex integrâ causâ,  
Malum, ex quolibet defectu.  The Catholic Party, hath a Religion; hath an Art and skill of living well, and of going to heaven. Such a thing, must have a body: And a body, can not consist without many members and parts: Every one of which, must be defended and made good.  
All other Sects, are but deficiencies, more or less, from this rule: Those, more; who cleave fastest to the rule of deficiency; that is to say, to the rejecting of all that cannot be convinced out of Scripture: Those less; who perceiving the inconveniencies this bringeth upon them, do soonest recede, in practice, from this crooked rule, and to contradict their main ground of all being fallible, by forcing their subjects to hold their Tenets; that they have no authority for; themselves having forsaken the legitimate authority, by which the Catholic Church sticketh to Tradition.   

The eleventh reflection. Of some particular Caveats for Catholics.  
THe Catholic defendant, having so hard a task; some few notes will be necessary for him. As first; that he should not ofter to maintain, against arguments drawn out of nature, such positions as he is not able to satisfy himself in: for example; against an Arian or Sabellian, let him not undertake to dispute and argue, in reason, how the same thing can be one and three; unless he be first sure that he understandeth it well, and that himself resteth satisfied with reason in that point. For, it is impossible to give the Auditory satisfaction, if he hath it not himself; Especially, if the disputant be subtle, and able to manage his Argument.  
The like is of the blessed Sacrament, to show how one body can at the same time be in more places than one.  
In this case therefore, the Defendant is to keep himself upon the general defence, that we believe Mysteries of faith, whether we can answer Arguments against them, or no; That the word of God, is able to give us certitude, above all demonstration, and above all that we can understand. Neither are we without the example of our Adversaries themselves, when we do thus. For, in this very Mystery of the Eucharist, they will tell us that Christ is really and truly present in it. But that the Manner how he is there, is not understandable. In the Trinity, and in the Incarnation, Protestants do the like; acknowledging these Mysteries to be true, but withal professing them to be above their understanding.  
Yet, this rule is not so peremptory, but that by discretion it may admit exception. For, our Adversaries are so weak; that they ground most of their axioms and proofs, rather upon confidence we will not deny them, then that themselves are able to make them good. So, in the Mystery of the Eucharist; when they insist upon the maxim, that the same body can not be at the same time in two places; If you put them to prove it, you shall find that their word will be to say that even our own Doctors confess it, or that experience assureth us of it: Whereas, experience is no Argument against God's Omnipotency: And as to what private Doctors affirm, it is at every man's pleasure to grant or deny it. So that, if you understand your adversary's strength, you may non-sute him by putting him to prove what you know he can not. But this is a hazard: And you are shamed, if you fail.  
An other Caveat for our defendant, is; Not to engage himself in a Controversy, upon the opinion of one party of divines; Nor undertake to defend against his Adversary a position which some of our own divines do oppose; and so, is rather a question of scholastical Divinity, than a Controversy of faith. To this purpose it is to be noted, that some opinions are of a greater latitude, than others; establishing faith upon that, whereof others confine it but to some one part.  
As, in the Matter of Infallibility; some place it in the Pope, some, in a general council; some, in both; some, in the whole Church; which containeth all these, and more. Here, the cautious Controvertist that hath care of his Safety, will be sure to choose that which is most ample; and so quitteth himself from the trouble and danger of answering Arguments made against the single parts; and keepeth himself to the strong hold of Christianity, wherein all parties agree. True it is, that if the defendant be put to declare his position: and an Argument do press him: he may sometimes be obliged to choose one opinion of Divines before an other; or rather, is forced to follow that which he is best acquainted with. But the rule I give, must serve where, and when there is place for it. And besides the already mentioned advantages that this course giveth; It causeth a great narrowness or brevity in controversies; which bringeth the dissenting parties, far nearer to agreement; and settleth more stableness in Religion, by making men dicerne what belongeth to faith, and what doth not; but is the opinions of particular Doctors.   

The twelfth reflection. Of the qualities of some sort of Arguments drawn out of Scripture.  
THe next thing we are to look into, Is, the quality of the Arguments which are to be used in those Disputations. By the precedent discourse, it is evident, ●hat they are of three kinds; Out of Scripture, out of Fathers, and out of reason. To begin with Scripture; It is again● clear, that arguments may be thence deduced, two ways, The one, out of the pure force of the words: The other, out of the connexion of the sense and discourse acknowledged ●n the words: With the conclusion that i● to be proved.  
In the former way, Arguents, either press the words of one single sentence which they bring, thinking to make it evident that their assertion is the very meaning of those words: Or else, they bring a conglobation of sundry places, of which the one fortifyeth the other; so as to make it evident, that the plain sense of words so often reiterated, cannot choose but be the true meaning of the Scripture.  
To begin with the first branch of the Manner of drawing arguments out of single Texts of Scripture; we may divide into two kinds, the Texts that are produced for this purpose. For they are either such as say, or are pretended to say, in express terms (or equivalent ones) the proponents Conclusion; so that the outward face of the words is plain for his Tenet: As when Catholics produce the following Texts; this is my body; Simon the first; The Gates of hell shall not prevail against my Church: whose sins you forgive, shall be forgiven, and any the like (upon which occasion, I may not forbear to note, that Protestants have not any one text of this kind, against Catholics unless they make use of the precept of not making graven images, which concerneth Christians no more, than doth the sacrificing of a lamb at Easter: Both of them being commands given singly to the Jews.) Or else they are such Texts, as though they do not contain the proponents conclusion in express words, yet he pretendeth that it followeth out of the sense of them.  
Now in these Texts, there may be a double incertitude; First, whether the place alleged, do signify what the proponent pretendeth; Secondly, whether his conclusion would follow, though that were granted.  
Now in both these kinds of Texts; When the Argument is drawn out of the force of the words; and their force, no other then from the grammatical or Dictionary-sense of those words; it is ordinarily a pitiful weak Argument, and the whole Disputation is no better than boys-play, and but like a construing of Terence: It being, almost, if not altogether impossible, in our controversies to find a Text of Scripture absolutely convincing, and consequently fit to be insisted upon.  
The reason whereof is, that the down right signification of a word (especially, in discourses when, the Author doth not deliver his mind in a dogmatic way) is more wavering and changeable than the aspen leaf.  
I remember how, as I once pressed to a disputant, this which I now say, he immediately objected this Text to me, Abraham genuit Isaac; which he took to be unexplicable in any other sense, then that Abraham was Isaac's Father.  
I was not at the present furnished with the diverse explicationse of the word Genuit: But God provided me an answer out of the first of St. Matthew, where it is said, joras genuit Oziam; and yet there were some intermediate generations between Joras and Ozias.  
Whence it was clear, that out of the bare words, Abraham genuit Isaac, it could not be Demonstratively inferred that Abraham was Isaac's Father.  
Now, after such an instance, what evidence can be expected out of the simple signification of words? Besides; who can be so shallow as to imagine that a Sect which hath men of any wit in it, should maintain a position against that sense of the letter which every Boy can penetrate; but that it hath armed itself with some subterfuge; which (ordinarily speaking) can not be weaker than the argument that dependeth upon so variable a ground as the use of words in human speech? Nevertheless, this kind of arguing, is the most used, and much vaunted of.  
As for example: The Lutherans and the Calvinists agree, in saying there is bread in the blessed Sacrament. Their argument against Catholics (who allow it not to be so) is, that Christ called it bread after Consecration. If you answer them, that he doth not call it barely Bread, but this bread, or bread of life; or with some other character to distinguish it from ordinary Bread; They presently cry out, that the word Bread signifieth bread made of wheat; and turn to their Dictionary to justify that signification; and sing victory, as if nothing were answered. So, when they press these words out of the English translation, he took bread, blessed it, broke it, and gave it: If you desire, instead of the word blessed it, to put in turned it into his body; telling them, that the blessing, was the saying, this is my body: and the saying so, was the very turning of the bread into his body: If you reply thus, they will grow impatient, as if you committed an intolerable absurdity, and ask you in what Dictionary, or in what Author, to bless signifieth to turn into ones body▪ and will not hear that since in this case blessing was the pronouncing of such words, it must of necessity signify the turning into his body. Is it possible, that otherwise witty men, should be so overweaned of their own side, as to believe there is any force in such allegations, which every schoolboy that construeth (not by rote, but understandeth what he saith) is able to discover?  
The reason (as I conceive) of this low and shallow impertinency, is, that this disputative kind of men, never raised their understanding to geometrical Demonstrations, or to any solid discourse; and indeed, not beyond the practice of Grammar rules in Scripture, and some quaint criticism of the same pitch: and therefore, may be of a fit size to talk in a pulpit to a vulgar auditory, or to cavil about words before unlearned persons, who were never present at a solid Disputation, nor are capable of the rigour or strict laws of such a one: But they are not strong enough to frame an argument that may bear water and endure the touch, among judicious examiners; Though, like junior Sophisters, they can pop out a great many slight objections, and ruin a large course from one to an other, to make a show of learning without any substance of it.  
Such a kind of Argument (in the last mentioned question of the Eucharist) is their great Achilles out of Theodoret, and an obscute writer called Gelasius, who say, the nature of bread remaineth after consecration. If you answer them, that the word Nature signifieth Quality, even in our ordinary Manner of speech; and that so they have gained nothing by the allegation of these authorities, since we acknowledge and see that the Quality of bread remaineth after Consecration; They again cry Victory as before, as if the most grammatical signification of one single word must cawy the bays, without any consideration of the circumstant words or of the connexion of the sense. Which if any schoolboy of an upperforme should do, he could not but expect a smart reward from his Master. And yet these petty, slight, arguments out of Scripture, are in a Manner the strongest they have, by which they endeavour to overthrow the Religion of their forefathers.  
An other kind of argument is frequent with them, which is, yet weaker then this. It is when from some superficial sound of words, that signify no such thing as the conclusion they are to prove they take occasion to allege a sentence of Scripture, that in effect is nothing to the question in hand; and yet they will make a noise that Scripture is clear against you. As when (Esay 58.) they cite, your wills are found in your fastings, to prove that voluntary fasts are unlawful; or (Matt. 15) That which entereth into the mouth, defileth not the soul: But that which cometh out from the heart. And against works of super errogation (Luke 17.) When you have done all that is commanded you, say, you are unprofitable Servants. In all which Texts: neither is that said (so much as by the outward words) which they intend by alleging them; nor is there any show of connexion with what they pretend. But rather, for the most part, such places do favour the adverse party. As, the first reprehendeth the fastings of the wicked Jews, because they continued their impieties, notwithstanding their afflicting themselves: Which signifieth, that the fasts themselves, were good; but that the Manner and circumstances in which they were done, were nought. The second, clearly concludeth, that seeing the disobedience in eating forbidden meats floweth from the heart, it is sin not to abstain from them.  
The third, supposeth evidently, that the commandments may be fulfiled (which is denied by Protestants) and implieth that more may be done; and consequently, admitteth works of super errogation.  
I deny not, but that both these sorts of arguments, are common to both parties. Yet it is with this difference; that the Catholic relieth not upon them; as being fixed upon his own firm and solid basis, of having received his faith by succession from Christ: And therefore, in his mouth, such are condesciences to the weakness of his auditory: Whom he hopeth, by this milk, to make capable of a stronger settlement. But among Protestants, such arguments and conjectural inferences, are the very foundation of their Religion; Unto which sandy ground, they strive to bring their auditory, hindering them from settling upon the rock of the Church.   

The thirteenth reflection. Of other sorts of Arguments drawn out of Scripture.  
BUt, leaving these shuttlecock arguments, which are easily bandied from either side; Let us look upon the next kind of argument, which maketh use of a heap of Texts, to prove the Conclusion intended.  
I do not deny but that this is a strong proceeding; If it find, either an able Logician to manage it, or an Auditory capable of it; both which, are very rare; And therefore, this course is fitter for writing, and for reading with deliberation; then for a sudden conflict upon the place.  
There are two ways of using this weapon. The one, simply accumulateth many Texts; giving every one its force, in short; and overwhelming the auditor by their multitude.  
This doth well in an Oration or Sermon, and carrieth a great resemblance of strength in it.  
But if the whole discourse cometh to be anatomised by the adversary, and the wakeness of every e text showed in particular: Then, the conclusion standeth naked and ashamed: and the author Amazed a see his own opinion so unexpectedly changed. And therefore, in a Disputation, where the adversary hath his law to answer only one, this accumulation of Texts serveth to little purpose, more than to spend time.  
The other way of employing a conglobation of Texts, is to pretend to bring all the Texts that may be found in Scripture favourable to either side, and by comparing them, to show which party standeth with Scripture, which against it.  
But first, it is evident that this proceeding is not proper for a regular combat. For, the adversary will have right to claim the planting of his own battery himself; and may refuse to accept it from his enemy. Again, to do this thing well, and to make this comparison in due Manner: So many things are to be considered, that it is rather the subject of a book, then fit for the proposal of one party, to which the other is to answer immediately upon the place. For, the Texts ought to be examined, that it may be determined, which of them do formally contain the position that is to be proved; And which, only some verity connexed to it, from whence it may be drawn; and the degrees of such connexion. Again, what speeches are proper, what metaphorical, and the degrees of translation in them. Likewise, the occasions of the speaking those words, and their coherence with actions or words, precedent and subsequent. All which considerations, are so manifold, and so tedious to be well performed, that they can by no means be brought into the brevity of a Dialogisticall opposition: But will require the making of long speeches, like whole sermons, on each side: Which can not choose but be irksome and displeasing to the Auditory: And in conclusion, must necessarily be without effect, seeing that it is impossible, ordinary memories should bear away such a multitude of notions, so perfectly as to be capable of framing an exact judgement of them. Besides, if any one Text of these were absolutely convincing, the rest would be burdensome, and but hinder and embroil the evidence of the Conclusion: And if none of them do prove it clearly: Then, all of them together, can but make one side more probable than the other: Which signifieth no more, then that, since the best of them is but probable, you can rely on neither of them, as true and certain: And consequently, all that is said, is of no effect towards the ending of controversies; but is purely a superfluous labour and a trial of wits; not a deciding of questions, or a settling of the auditory in the right way to heaven.  
It now remaineth only (in order to Scripture-disputation) that we speak of such arguments as are drawn from places of Scripture, which do plainly contain such verities, as are known and agreed upon by both parties, without the authority of Scripture to prove them: So that, the sense and meaning of those places is not at all ambiguous, or controverted by either side: And out of these, you make your way, to your conclusion, or to other truths that are as yet unknown to you, but that you desire to have certainty of.  
Now clear it is, that, it would avail as much, to take the naked Truths in themselves, without the words of Scripture; as to allege the words in this case. For, the Truths themselves being acknowledged by both parties, it is needless to bring any proof of them, And therefore, Scripture serveth but for an ornament in this discourse: And the whole force of the argument, is drawn from the confessed Truths▪ And consequently, it is clear that this is a discourse of reason not of authority: however, a far off, it may in some sort depend on Scripture. Therefore, we need not trouble ourselves at present with discussing this sort of arguments; but shall remit it to the examination of reason, where on it dependeth.  
I should here end speaking of arguing out of Scripture. But because it is that which our adversaries do use most (at least, the Protestants and Calvinists, and the Sects of their growth) and because some persons are so maddely careless of their own salvation, that they will content themselves with probability for their Religion; especially if Scripture be made the pretence of it: I am forced to add yet a few lines, in regard of such persons as making Scripture the only ground of their Religion, and judge their Controversies, do not so much as aim at convincing arguments by the allegations that are brought out of Holy Writte; Nor whether the point proposed, be true or false: But whether side is the more probable or plausible, purely in relation to Scripture.  
Clearly, he who in any point will proceed according to conscience and prudence in this way of arguing, is obliged to consider all that is contained in the whole Scripture concerning that point; Weighing what he putteth in each side of the balance, with the best judgement God affordeth him; that so he may judiciously pronounce sentence. For the doing of which, he ought to consider, not only the number of places that concern his purpose, but their qualities also; and be able to compare those, one with an other. Now this is so hard a task, that the learnedst and ablest man a live, may despair of ever being able to effect it. For, how can he, or any Man, with reason persuade himself, that either he, or any other, hath ever produced, or ever can produce, out of Scripture, all that may from thence be alleged for any point in controversy; since our Saviour himself, hath given us a clear example that arguments may be drawn (and those, efficacious ones) from Texts where we least dream of any such sense? As, when disputing against the Sadduces, he made this argument: God, is God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. But he is not God of nothing: Therefore Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, shall rise again, or do remain in soul, hoping for their body and resurrection: who can be confident of saying or knowing all that is in Scripture, concerning any point, when the proofs of truths may lie in such unlikely places? Surely it must be, either a great ignorance, or a great temerity, to undertake it. And therefore we may conclude, that it is impossible we should ever arrive so far in this way of search, as to know really what is more, or less probable out of Scripture. But all that we may hope to attain unto, is, only to be able to judge what is more or less probable, out of those places which well ourselves do know; or at most, out of those places which the Authors we have seen, do bring. And so, it is evident, that they who rely on Scripture, or rather that profess to do so; do not in truth rely upon it; but upon their own, or their teacher's diligence, whom they suppose to know the whole latitude of scripture-proof. Which is not only false, but impossible for any man to do.   

The fourteenth reflection. On the Arguments drawn out of the Fathers.  
THe second nest of Authority, out of which, Arguments take wing. Is the copious library of Fathers. Wherein it is to be considered, that whether Catholic or Protestant be to argue, the Text he allegeth hath a double remove from the conclusion he would prove, For, whereas in allegations of Scripture, both sides agree, that what it saith is certainly true (and so, all the difficulty consisteth in knowing what is true meaning of the place alleged) it is otherwise allegations of Fathers: For, in them, there arise two questions; The one, whether that which the argugent pretendeth, be the father's opinion; the other, whether that which the Father saith be true, after it is agreed to be his opinion.  
For, neither Catholic nor Protestant, doth agree to all things that one or two Fathers may hold. But, indeed, Protestants do defy them all, And Catholics require an universality in them, to make them infallible. So that, if either Catholic or Protestant be the Arguer, he ought to settle beforehand with his adversary, that such a Father or Fathers, as he intendeth to produce, be of unquestionable authority between them; Or else, not to meddle with them; for it were but labour lost, and breath cast away.  
The Protestants use to make two comparisons in Fathers: The one, in Age or Antiquity; the other, in learning or reputation. As for the former; they insist much upon the three first Ages; supposing them to be purer than the rest. In doing of which, it is evident that their aim is to reject all: For, when they list, and that it concerneth them, they will tell you that the impurity of doctrine began as soon as the Apostles were dead. Now, if by this Impurity, they mean damnable errors; then, by saying so they evacuate all the authority of Fathers: For, they allow it no further, then as it pleaseth every disputant or Minister to declare the point controverted, to be, or not to be, a damnable error. And thus, even the three first Ages, are blown away with the rest. But if the point in Controversy, be no damnable error, than the father's authority importeth little; erring being but of small consequence in such Matters as do not concern salvation, and there being no obligation upon a Christian to know unnecessary truths.  
In a word; If the Church can err, and hath erred these thousand years; it is but courtesy, to say she did not so, in the former six hundred: And so, in truth, the Fathers have no authority at all. But if it can not err; nor hath erred; Then, the Fathers of the latter Ages, own as good witnesses, as those of the former, so they be induced with Universality.  
The other comparison or distinction, that Protestants use to make of the Fathers, concerning their learning and reputation; is as little to the purpose as that of their Antiquity. For, we do not cite Fathers, as Doctors (whose opinion, is no better than the reason they bring for it) but as witnesses; whose authority consisteth in a grave and moderate knowledge of what is believed and practised by the Church, in the ages respectively wherein they lived. And out of this it followeth, that for wittnessing of Christian faith, no one Father is to be preferred before an other. It is true, in some sense the testimony of a more ancient Father, may be said to be preferred before a more modern one; because the formal witnessing of it, is of more nearness to Christ, and of longer durance towards us. But in regard of learning: No Father hath more authority, nor is more to be valued then an other, for what concerneth faith; though in other respects it be very considerable. For, a less learned Father, is as credible a witness as the learnedst, of what is the present practice and belief of Christians; so he have learning sufficient to warrant his understanding and knowing so much.  
And in reality, any Father whose authority carrieth us beyond the apparent memory of mankind at present living, is as good as the best, for declaring the faith of the Church in the time he lived in. Which because it received its doctrine by entail from age to age; every father's testimony (in such Matters of faith) is firm and irrefragable.  
To conclude therefore; The Catholic maketh no difference of the quality of Fathers, nor much of their Antiquity; but admitteth all, so they come with universality.  
The Protestant; though he will a little simper at it, yet in Conclusion he rejecteth all; setting his own judgement (which he calleth Scripture) for high Umpire of what in them is right, what wrong. Therefore it is fruitless to dispute against a Protestant out of the Fathers; unless you first settle what proof of Fathers he will admit. Neither is it easy for a Protestant to argue strongly against a Catholic out of the Fathers. For, if the Catholic will bind him to it, he must bring an universality of them; or else, the Catholic is not obliged to receive them: And how can he go about to do this, I understand not. I mean, in a private disputation; where a Matter of three or four testimonies, are capable of spinning out the whole time, that people generally are willing to lend unto such an entertainment. Nevertheless the presumptuous and vain Sophisters, are forward to cry out that all the Fathers are on their side; as their Patriarche jewel begun the tune to them, so shamefully, that his own chaplain forsook him for his impudent falsehood.  
But, concerning this point, It is to be noted, that although they break (avowedly and confessedly) from the universal face of antiquity in all Church-practise (as, in the Liturgies, litanies, mass, praying to Saints, praying for the dead, most of the Sacraments, relics, Altars, Pilgrimages, Fastings, Processions, Cochibate of Priests, religious men and women, and almost all things of that nature) yet have they so little ingenuity, or rather they are so impudent, as before women and ignorant persons, to boast themselves Sectators of antiquity: and they undertake to prove it by certain broken ends of Texts, concerning some special circumstance or nice point, in which they have found some dark place in some Father.  
I therefore put these questions to any judicious person, who is curious to hear disputation in Religion: Whether, in so large a book as the Scripture, it be possible (morally speaknig) that there should not be divers hard and obscure passages. And then; whether an eloquent Sophister may not make use of such places, to circumvent and delude weak souls, unable to remember or mark the contrary Texts, and to judge between them. Which if he also grant (as he can not choose but do) I ask him again, what security he hath or can have, that his disputant is not such a one; or at least may not be such a one. And what I say of Scripture, may be with much more force transferred to the works of the Fathers, which are much more ample; and besides that, may contain errors in them. So that in conclusion, all disputation out of Fathers, is but beating the air; unless the parties be first agreed, what Fathers authorities shall be allowed sufficient to decide and terminate their differences.  
Yet after all this; the Protestant that is carried away with a belief of his disputants abilities; will be still apt to reply, that at the least it can not be denied, but that he who hath studied the Fathers so well, as to be able to make out of them, against Catholics, a ranged battle of such obscure places, must needs be an able and a learned Man: and therefore he is not to be blamed for following such a guide, who hath read so much, and is conversant in the Fathers; Seeing that they who are unlearned, and cannot upon their own stock judge of such Matters, must rely upon those who have made them their long and serious study. To him who shall make such an objection, it ought to be represented; How mean and pitiful a change it is, to fall from the splendide authority of the whole Church, to the obscure authority of a private Doctor, be he what he will. As also, that to retire from the authority of few, or but of one, were a, great imprudence in an unlearned man; Who because he is not able to judge of the quality of Doctors, hath reason to adhere to the quantity and number of them. Besides, in all likelihood, this great Doctor (especially, if he be young) hath not read the Fathers themselves; but hath taken out of other Authors, that write of controversies, such places as he hath found cited in them for his purpose. And this argueth but a small Modicum portion of learning; though happily he may make a great show with it, among unlearned persons; like one who can recite three verses of Homer, in a country school.   

The Fifteenth reflection. On Arguments drawn from reason, for Religion.  
THere remaineth yet to be discoursed of, the last kind of arguments that may be employed in disputations of Religion; whose store house, from whence they may be drawn, is reason. For the performance whereof, let us consider; how Religion is apprehended generally to be a knowledge above nature, and to be derived by authority from a source of higher understanding than ours is. Yet on the other side, It is evident that it can not be planted in us, otherwise than that the root of it must of necessity be in Reason, seeing that Reason is our nature. Now then, the root and basis of believing, is manifestly from this, that we are persuaded we ought to believe; which importeth as much, as that it is reasonable we should believe. And therefore, the arguments, which in Matter of Religion, ought chiefly to be managed out of Reason, should be in common, whether it be Reasonable to believe what is proposed unto us. And because no man can doubt whether it be reasonable to believe what God proposeth; the whole question is reduced to this point, whether it be reasonable to believe what the Church or our forefathers deliver unto us, as the doctrine which Jesus Christ (whose authority, no Christian excepteth against) did teach and deliver to the world, from his eternal Father. In which question, the affirmative reasons, belong only to Catholics; the negative, to all others.  
Here, the Catholic disputant, hath two ways to proceed: The one, is in a manner metaphysical, and of a rigorous consequence; by showing that this principle, of Adhering to our forefather's doctrine, in the way that the Catholic Church relieth upon it, could not have been taken up in any middle age; but must of necessity have been continued from the beginning. And then, by proving, that if this Principle hath continued from the beginning, it is impossible that any error should have crept into the Church.  
After the doing of which; It is as evidently demonstrated, that Catholic faith, is the sole true Christian faith, as that the three Angels of a Triangle, are equal to two right Angels, or any other verity in Euclid or Archimedes.  
The other way is, to assume, to prudent moral men, that whosoever seeth a like evidence for Religion, as he judgeth, sufficient to venture his life, or his estate, or his honour upon (and not be excused) neither in prudence, nor in conscience, nor in honour, if he doth not embrace it. For, if he seeth the same advantage in two several cases; and will venture in the one, and not in the other: It is evident, he proceedeth not according to Reason in one of them.  
And in our case, whatsoever he may say to justifye himself, he cannot be excused from making (in truth) no real and serious apprehension of the future life, and of the goods of it. But, that sense prevaileth in him above reason.  
Now, that the Catholic faith, hath all the advantages, upon which wise men, do use to adventure their lives, estates, and honours, will easily and clearly appear, if the right way be taken to show it; the authority of the Church, being so far beyond all witnesses used in judgements, and all probabilities men use to rely upon in war and in marchandising, that there is no comparison between them.  
And the objections which heretics use to bring, to hinder their clients from embracing the Catholic faith; are for the most part but authorities of the nature of those we have discoursed of before: Which, in such abundance of writings as are in Scripture, and in the Fathers, cannot fail of being easily met with, by those who purposely seek them; there being in them so many sayings delivered upon the by, whiles the Author is attentive to some other question, or in circumstances not well known to us: In fine, such difficulties as is impossible to be avoided in much speaking; and that neither convince the author's mind, nor (much less) the verity of the question debated.  
The Arguments which are drawn from reason, for the proof or disproof of particular points, are chiefly about Mysteries difficult in nature; against which, heretics use to frame the ordinary obvious objections. As, against the blessed Trinity, how the same thing, can be one and three? against the Incarnation, how the same person, can be God and Man? and against the Holy Eucharist, how can Christ's body, be divided like a homogeneal body; or be at the same time in different places? such kind of arguments, Universally, are hard to be answered; because, neither the propounder, nor the auditory, have (usually) Philosophy enough to understand the solution: and sometimes, the answerer himself falleth short. For, not every Catholic, nor yet every Catholic disputant, is necessarily a great Philosopher. At the least, if the Catholic disputant suspecteth his adversary's subtlety in questions of this nature, he ought either to be provided for him, or abstain from disputing, or profess himself no Master in such speculations, and so rather wave them with his own disparagement, then attempt them with the dishonour of the cause.  
In other points, the objections against Catholic Truths, are generally very trivial ones. As, against the Pope's authority, that there cannot be more heads or foundations then one; and that Christ, is that one. Against satisfaction for sins, that Christ satisfied sufficiently for all mankind. Against praying to Saints, that there is but one mediator, or, that Saints have no ears, and therefore can not hear: And the like; which are pitiful pulpit-bables, to fill the mouths of weak persons; as soon as with one of these they have troubled some simple person, that themselves are fit to dispute with the Pope of Rome. Such toys, are obvious against any thing: And an exercised disputant, can not be ignorant of the answers to them; though he may soon be weary of the employment in answering them, and ashamed of having suffered himself to be drawn unto it.  
As for arguments from reason, to prove Catholic Truths: They may have as much strength, as the disputant is capable of. For, no argument is so strong, but that if it be shot from a weak hand, it may prove wholly blunt and impenetrant.  
And therefore, I leave the Catholic disputant to his own discretion in this part: Which will tell him, that he ought not to engage himself in it, unless he be assured, both that his dart is a good one, and that he hath the dexterity to aim it right, and the strength to throw it home.  
Out of this short survey of the nature of arguments; a good Logician will easily discern, that it is mere loss of time to fall on disputing with one who is not able, or will not so much as profess, to bring a demonstration for what he intendeth to prove: It being indeed to no more purpose, than the tossing of balls in a tennis court.  
So that the reason, why we answer, or at lest ought to answer heretics arguments is; because they think them demonstrative, which are not for want of sufficiency in logic; and we make oppositions which are not demonstrative, because they are not able to judge what a demonstration is, for to please them with apples, whose stomachs loaht strong food.   

The sixteenth reflection. On the Qualities requisite in the Auditory, that is present at the Disputation.  
HAving said thus much of the disputants; It is reasonable to say a word or two of the Auditory. Those then, before whom you are to dispute, are either favourable to you, or contrary, or indifferent. And because these qualities, arise either out of the understanding, or out of the will, we will take a survey of these two faculties. To begin with the understanding: It is clear, that in order to that, nothing rendereth a man unfit to be at such a disputation, but incapacity. And this, is either natural, or for want of study and art, or by custom. The incapacity of nature, is helped by much explication, and so is that which proceedeth from want of study: with this difference: that natural incapacity, is taken away by explicating the particular Matter in hand (which is tolerable, because it doth not draw the disputation out of its own bounds. But when the incapacity is through want of study: It is because the disputation supposeth some principles, whereof the Auditory is ignorant. And these are of two kinds. The one, logical: the other, Theological.  
The first, happeneth chiefly in the use of disputation. As, if the Auditory be ignorant of the form that ought to be used in disputing: and so, will have the disputant play the defendants part: or contrariwise, the defendant act the disputants part: or desireth, that instead of rigorous form, they fall on discoursing or preaching at large. Likewise, if he be ignorant of the right use of distinction: And so, either hindereth the defendant from distinguishing, when it is necessary he should, or permitteth it him, when there are not truly two senses in the words, the disputant speaketh: But the defendant, by adding some words of his own, seemeth to find two senses, where indeed there is but one. As for example: If the disputant should assume that it is the nature of a man, to have two legs: And the answerer should distinguish, allowing it to be the nature of white men, but not of black men; or the nature of Europeans, but not Africans.  
Now if this be allowed, the disputant is wronged: For, taking his rise from this, that to have two legs is the nature of a Man; he might prove that Africans have two legs, because they are men.  
So, for want of Logcik in the respondent, and in the Auditory, the defendant is not allowed to take the nature of Man in common, but is confined to the nature of an European, and so is put beside his argument.  
The second happeneth, when the Auditory is ignorant of some theological point, with is out of the lists of the Matter; So that the debate is drawn to an other business: And the Auditory remaineth unsatisfied and discontented, thinking it is the disputants fault, whereas it is their own▪  
After the Incapacity which arriveth by nature, and that which proceedeth from want of study: The third is, that which accrueth out of custom. And this is likewise twofold. The one general, the other particular.  
The first is, when the Auditor hath been used to slight discourses in Matters of study or learning; and so never bendeth himself to penetrate deeply into the proposed question, but taketh his resolution by fancy, who speaketh well, who doth not.  
The particular incapacity of the Auditor proceeding from Custom, is when he is meanly versed in the question itself; and hath been used to hear certain terms for the final solution of it; unto which when the disputants are arrived, he taketh it for granted that all is said that can be said; and never considereth, whether the solution be solid, or the reply upon it be efficacious, or no.  
This incapacity, is proper to half-witted men, and to that kind of science which is called Inflans; That is, a portion great enough to make one talk, and think himself wise, but not able to make him know any thing solidely.  
Thus having gone through what concerneth the understanding; We are now to consider what imperfections springing from the will, may render an Auditory unfit to assist at a disputation.  
Let the first be, a Vanity or secret pride, which maketh some men come to it, not to see the truth of the thing in question (for, they suppose they are already perfect in that; as thinking themselves to know more than any man else doth; and esteeming all knowledge to be but flashes of wit) but merely for pastime, or to censure the disputants.  
Now these Men, having no aim or desire to improve themselves in any truth; If any good happen to them, by being present at a disputation, it is against their will: For they seek none.  
There is an other sort of Auditors, faulty through the contrary disposition. For, they are so diffident of themselves, that they dare not judge of any thing: Or (which is worse, though possibly, themselves know it not) they have their opinions and beliefs, absolutely tied, either to the repute of wisdom ad learning, or to the Eloquence, of some particular person they passionately esteem.  
Now clearly, it were labour lost, to dispute for their sakes, who dare not trust themselves to see the evidence of what you say; But either, confer afterwards with your adversary about it, and have not an equal recourse to you; Or will not hear you speak, unless they have some body by, toblott out the notions you endeavour to imprint in their understandings, before they can settle in them.  
So that it is in vain to cast your seed into such high ways; Where the birds of the air, are continually picking it up, before it can take root.  
A third, (and that, the most universal) imperfection of the Will in an auditor; consisteth in some affection or interest; which he who hath it, either can not, or doth not see.  
Some are in awe of their Parents, or some powerful Friends; others, apprehend their wife, or some familiar acquaintance; some, are afraid of perscription; some have pretences and hopes of rising in the world; some, of marrying themselves, or their children; some, are carried away with the esteem of other persons, either for their learning, or for their wisdom: Every one of them, is biased by some respect, or other.  
Yet if you tell them so; they are ready to protest, that were the truth evident unto them, they would value none of these things, more than the dirt of their shoes.  
God forbid, I should think they counterfeit when they say so: For, you may often perceive in them, evident tokens that their hearts go along with their words; So that they deceive themselves, more than they do others.  
And (which is their greatest unhappiness) they never suspect that these interests, do prevent their seeing the truth, and hinder them from penetrating and sticking, to what they hear and weakly apprehend.   

The seventeenth reflection. What is the best Manner, to find the truth of Religion, by Conference.  
OUt of what hath been hitherto said, it followeth, that Disputation seldom happeneth to be the means of advancing any man in the truth of Religion. For, laying for your foundation, that disputes in Religion between contrary parties, are not to be instituted, but for the finding out of truth; you presently discern, that all such arguments, as pretend not certainly, aught to be excluded: Else, Religion is not to be taken for a speculative truth. This being done, disputation is in a Manner cut off. All grammatical arguments are taken away and laid aside: as a laudable exercise for boys, but unworthy of grave Men.  
All such arguments as are called probable, are likewise banished the lists. And these two being taken away, there remaineth little, worth the noise of Disputation.  
On the other side, in relation to the Auditory; It is not to be undertaken, but before such a one as is able to judge of the due form and laws of disputation; that can determine what is pertinacy, what well replied; and can moderate the heat of the disputants.  
Now, such a one, where may we hope to find? Surely, men endued with parts fit for such a purpose, are not to be met with in multitudes.  
Therefore, to have any good proceed from such a conference; the Auditors should not be above two or three, or some very small company. For, as it is not easy to find many, so qualified, as is necessary, for such an Action: So likewise, if they were found and assembled, they would not easily concur to the right governing of it; some of them, understanding things one way; some, another.  
After the manner of disputing; and the qualities requisite in the Auditory, that is, to be present at the disputation; there remaineth a third thing to be considered: Which is the subject or Matter to be disputed of. This aught to be confined to such points as are necessary to be believed. Though in very deed, this caution is only for Catholics: all others being free to what ever they can defend, doth not contradict Scripture. So that, being bound to maintain nothing at all, they have (in their own behalfs) no occasion to dispute. And when they do it; it is merely for the unsettling of others; especially, of Catholics: who only, have a settled rule, and are bound to a known doctrine. Wherein, if Catholics would hold themselves to such Tenets, as are truly necessary, without engaging themselves in others that are not so; they would mainly disappoint the large objections of their Adversaries.  
But, to approach to our Conclusion. If disputation do carry in it such difficulties, as it can scarce ever be either necessary or profitable; And yet, the work of drawing to the true Religion● those who are gone astray from it, be so important and perpetual as it is. What shall we determine to be the best course, to deal with erring people, to reduce them into the path of Salvation? The answer is not hard, for either their will, or their understanding is faulty. If the will, you are to consider, what be the particular obstructions of it; whether, some love of temporal things; or merely tepidity. Of the former, the common remedy is to inculcate the vanities of this world, and to represent what will become of us in the next. Tepidity, proceedeth from not being sufficiently acquainted (as I may say) with the affairs of Religion, and the next life, or out of a dullness of nature. The first is to becured, by engaging the party in familiar conversation with good company, where he may hear such spiritual Matters often handled and discussed (whether it be by sermons, or by discourses, or by colloquies and conferences) whereby, in process of time, the fire may kindle of itself, and break out into a quick flame. But, the second is to be wrought upon with fears; as, by frequent commemoration, and of hellfire. For, by any other course, nothing will be gained of such a temper; especially, if the dullness be of that nature, that allurements have little force upon it.  
If the fault be in the understanding: It is, because the true motives of Christianity, do not sink deeply into his soul. Now seeing that both experience and reason do teach us, how the soul judgeth best. When it is most at rest and in quiet; you are to draw your patient, what you can, into a kind of solitude. That is; to choose the seasons, when least turmoil, either of business or of pleasures, doth infest him: procuring also, that there be no adversary, at that time, to hinder your reasons from taking root in him. For it is cerraine, that he who will hear nothing but in opposition; and under contestation; shall never, or but very slowly, come to understand truth: his soul being like a Cistrne, into which the water runneth by a spout at one end, and emptieth itself as fast by a hole at the other end. For, if as soon as one maketh a proposition or short discourse to enlighten the hearers understanding, that he may see the truth of what is laid before him; an other at his elbow presently crosseth it, saying it is false, or raising difficulties, before it be rightly apprehended; such a man shall never come to understand what is said to him. Not but that happily he may get some glimpse of it: But it will be like a flying vision; which permitteth not the judgement to work upon it.  
Let him therefore weigh deliberately with himself, how Religion is the seriousest, the severest, and the most important affair we have, or can have in our whole lives: That it containeth many propositions or parts; that every one of them, requireth a quiet and a settled judgement to determine it: That this judgement can not be made by him, but in a calm, serene, and quiet position and state of his brain: And after all this, he will clearly see, that it is impossible, he should be able to perform that duty of Assent which is required in so grave a concernment; whiles two adversaries do disquiet and importune him with their earnestness and wrangling; in which their sayings do slide by with great violence, and multiply themselves, before any one of them can be quietly possessed.  
But, what then? Must he not hear oppositions, and the conflict of both parties? Yes, by all means. But in doing so; he must be sure, first, to make himself Master of what one party saith: And when he findeth himself able to propose his difficulty to the bottom; then, in the name of God, let them encounter the adverse party. For, when only two rational men discourse of a point, it will not be hard for him who seeketh truth, to penetrate so far as to see whether or no the adverse party is able to give satisfaction to the argument proposed.  
If he can salve it; then no change ought to be made in the inquirers opinion and judgement; seeing both sides are equal.  
But if he can not, than it is apparent on which side the truth lieth; as far as may be discerned, out of the learning of these two men.  
So that, we may conclude there is no solid way but this, of arriving to truth in matters of Religion: To converse first with the maintainer of one opinion: afterwards, with the maintainer of the contrary opinion: with both of them, as much without passion, as is possible: But never to bring them to conflict together; when, both animosity, and shame of being overcome, shall debauch their endeavours; and their quick replies, and many ambayes, shall leave the auditor unable to judge solidely of what they say; though there were nothing besides, to obscure and hinder the clear sight of Truth.   

The eighteenth reflection. On what is learning: And how mistaken.  
I find still remaining, a disadvantage to the disputant of either side: which I must strive to remove, if it be possible. It is a certain pre-possession, settled in the belief of the Auditory, or of him that is to be persuaded; of the learning and goodness of some private person or doctor; upon whose authority, truly, dependeth the belief of the party; though perhaps he pretendeth the authority of Scripture, or of Fathers, or some other rule for his assent. This enforced by custom (as impetuous a cause, almost, as nature itself) lieth like a great load upon the heart of him, who hath a long time (either by his own judgement, or by the constant cry of his neighbours, and of those with whom he converseth) fixed and redoubled in himself a deep apprehension of such a persons ability and honesty.  
I shall therefore add here, some few marks, or rather distinctions, of learning; to hinder men from erring in their judgements concerning it.  
And first I must note, that there are divers sorts of learning: And that it doth not follow, that he who is eminent in one sort, must therefore (of necessity) excel in another. Geometry, physic, Law, Philosophy, metaphysics, and Divinity; are all of them different sorts of learning; all, so independent of one another, that he who is excellent in one of them, may have but a small share in any of the rest. Nevertheless, I often see that, if a man hath any of these in such a measure as to deserve reputation for it; the common sort of people thinketh he knoweth all things, and hath recourse to him for what belongeth to another science: As if all learning were but one, because the name is but one. Nor is this proper to the vulgar alone; but even they of better rank, do often mistake the true kind of learning that concerneth their present occasion and purpose; expecting to find it in him, who hath somewhat like it: as will appear by further discourse.  
The next observation then which we have to make, is, That not every ability which is oftentimes taken for learning, is truly such; though it be a commendable quality, and such a one as peradventure belongeth properly to learned men; however others acquire it, and there by gain the opinion of being learned men. Of this kind, is the knowledge of languages. The which, are divided into two sorts; some of them being termed vulgar tongues others learned. The name of vulgar imparted ordinarily, that such a language is spoken naturally in some country, and is proper to the people of that place, or to some part of it. That language is generally accounted learned, which requireth books to the leaving of it, and hath grammars and dictionaries to Study it by. Though indeed, the term of a learned language hath a higher signification; to wit, a language necessary to the attaining of learning; or, in which learning was or is delivered. For, learning generally being brought into our Northern climates from the Eastern ones; and being first written in the languages of those parts they have gotten the prerogative among us to be esteemed the learnt ones. First, the Latin came out of Italy; then the Greeck, than the Hebrew and consequently, the Arabic, the Syriack, the chaldaic, even the Persian, the Cophtick, and the Abyssive: though the principal ones, are the three first; in which, the chief of sciences, Divinity, is originally delivered unto us. Out of which it is clear, that the knowledge of these languages in themselves, is not true learning; but that it is the knowledge of things delivered in them, which deserveth truly to be esteemed so: and the knowledge of languages, only instrumental to true knowledge or learning, so that, as we do not account a man who is expert in French, Spanish, and Italien (properly speaking) to be a learned man for having them, but a well-qualified Gentleman  
In like manner, we should also say of him who is expert in the Oriental, or learned languages, that by such excellency alone, he doth not deserve the title of a learned man; but of a well-qualified man; ranking this quality (in its due degree) with the arts of music, designing, Painting, Fencing, Dancing, ●iding, and such other innocent employments of unbusied persons. Yet, because they are as it were a step to learning, and do belong to learned persons, they have a higher rank than those low and merely fanciful exercises, both in themselves, and in their claim to the attribute of learning.  
This mistake of the term learning, in applying it to the knowledge of words; is of so great consequence, that it forceth me to look further into the nature of learning. Learning then, is that which is made and begotten in a Man by teaching. A teacher, is a master and an instructor. Now, seeing that the exercise of both these qualities, is proper to men, and not to beasts; he is truly a teacher, who teacheth those things which belong to Man as Man: That is to say, such things as make him more man, or more perfect in the nature of man; which are, those on which dependeth the government of himself. The doing of this, dependeth first and principally, of Divinity among Christians, as of metaphysics and Morals, in the way of pure nature. It dependeth in the next place, on the knowledge of the world, the which is taught us by the science of Physikes or of natural Philosophy: And to this, arithmetic and Geometry are necessary: though peradventure these two may also have an other claim, upon their own right for admittance, to a share of informing our soul of nature, seeing that Quantity is the highest condition of natural things or bodies.  
After these, the notion of learning, is derived to the science of Medicine or physic, by which we govern our bodies. Lastly, and of all the rest most weakly, to the knowledge of Law, by which we govern our fortunes: our disordinate affections, having made it necessary to us, and in a manner a part of the government of ourselves.  
These then, and only these knowledges do make a learned man. What besides these, is called learning, is through mistake of the name: All other knowledges, belonging only to some accidental action, or circumstance of man's life; not to the governing of him as he is man. Not that I will quarrel about the use of the word: But I endeavour to prevent the abuse of the things, arising from the equivocation of the word. For, it importeth not how the name is used; as being at the will of the Speakers: but it importeth, that the well-meaning auditor be not abused by the mistaking of that for real and true learning, which is not so, nor can avail him for his pretended use and behoof. Let this than be concluded, that no knowledge of words, maketh a learned man; but only the knowledge of those things which belong to the government of man's life.  
There is yet an other quality, which more seemingly, though peradventure not with so good ground, pretendeth to the appellation of learning. It is a faculty of talking of those things which sciences or true learning do profess and teach. And because true teaching consisteth in a verbal, and that chiefly oral delivery of the teachers mind; this hath a strange force ('mong persons, not well able to judge of the matter itself) to persuade that such talkers are truly learned. He needeth have a strong judgement, to be able to avoid the snares these men use to lay. The knots of their equivocations, are to close; the thread of their discourse, is so subtle; the smoothness of their words, and the well-ordering of their pathetic expressions, is to penetrant; that no ordinary Auditor can escape them. He who is to cope with such agamester, must either be truly learned, or beyond measure cautions. And yet (as I said before) this plausible speaker, hath not so fair a claim to learning, as the Grammarian hath, against whom we lately discoursed.  
For, the Grammarian, truly knoweth what he professeth: But this man, after he hath made a discourse of an hour long, after he hath quite persuaded you: If after all this you have access to the cabinet of his soul, and there inquire of him, what opinion himself hath, of what he hath so handsomely spoken, and that he will ingeniously disclose his heart to you: he will tell you, that he knoweth not whether what he hath said be true or no, but at the most, that of any thing he knoweth, it is the likeliest to be true. Some ages passed, there was in one of our Universities a man, who having made a long speech in defence of Christian religion, with exceeding great applause of all his auditory, who were ravished and fully satisfied with what he had said, did, through excess of vanity (the predominant humour of such falters) break out into this horrid blasphemy. Little Jesus! how much art thou beholding to me? For if I would have spoken against thee, how far more efficaciously could I have declaimed? The story saith, that he was suddenly strucken with such a loss of memory, that he was fain to learn of new to read. Deservedly he: But what I deduce out of this relation, is, first, that his reasons, though in his own judgement they were not efficacious, yet they convinced the whole auditory; and that, of no common persons. By which we may understand, that the reasons he brought, were not demonstrations; nor were the best that might have been alleged for that subject; Celse better could not have been opposed.) And nevertheless they carried so great an Auditory. From whence we may infer, how violent a power, the force of this art of talking must necessarily have upon the ordinary sort of men, to make them take their Master for a great Doctor. An other note that I make upon this occasion, is that all the talking of such men, is not, or ought not to be, sufficient to persuade us, not only, that they speak the truth, but even, that they speak their own minds. And after all their earnestness, we may suspect their discourse is framed but to comply with the humour of the times, or to promote their present interest, or to please their auditors. Tully professeth the same of his orators; and saith he also practised it himself. But here I may not omit the story of that expert general and understanding man, Hannibal the Carthaginian. Antiochus having furnished him with a puissant and flourishing army, would entertain him also with an Oration, concerning the art of war, and the manner how he ought to proceed in it, made by a famous and long-practised orator, Phormio: who in the presence of Antiochus and his captains, discoursed to Hannibal of this subject, to the great applause and admiration of all that heard him, excepting Hannibal; who being asked how he liked him, answered that in all his life-time he had never heard such an old dotardly fool prate. A strange censure, one would think, on a man so generally exacted and cried up. Yet if we consider, that Phormio had learned his skill of war, only in written discourses and Histories; but Hannibal, in the field and in action itself; we may easily conceive that Phormios Oration talked of things in the air, and formed his adversary in his fancy: whereas Hannibal had studied the things in themselves; and so, knew groundedly what he spoke; and saw that all the orators glorious speech, was but a painted pageant, not any effectual exhibition of truth. Hence we may conclude, that the ability of discoursing in a high strain and in a pathetike manner, is no argument of true learning in him that exerciseth it; unless juggling and folly in impertinency, may pass for learning. Who were better talkers, or better discoursers than the academics? Yet their profession was, that they had no truth; and that (indeed) there was none to be found.   

The nineteenth reflection. On what Divinity; And who is a Divine.  
Let us now apply this to practise, and to our present subject. Religion (as we have already said) is the most important and the most necessary business, that belongeth to man's nature and action. It is so precisely one, that if a man chance to mistake in it, be the cause what it will, he is lost for ever. For, as he that misseth his way, cometh not to his journeys end; whether it be his fault, or others misguidance, that hath made him miss his way. So, who treadeth not in the true path of Religion, never arriveth at eternal happiness; let the fault lie where it will. Now, if learning in Religion, be the skill of showing the path to heaven; and if all the great noise that these talkers make, helpeth one never a step thitherwards, as not delivering any point of truth that may be relied upon: It is evident, that the pretended learning of such persons, is much further from the notion of true learning, than the Grammar learning we spoke of before. For though learning be low ad mean, as being only of words; yet, of them at lest the Grammarian hath knowledge. Whereas this prating, this parrot-virtue; though it be of things; yet is it not a science of them; but all is mere words and wind. I hear them reply (as they want neither words, nor impudence to dispute against evidence,) that though it is true they promise no certainty, because none can be had; yet they make out high probability; which is the Princess that governeth human affairs. I will not at present discuss whether there be any certainty or no. It is enough that the Catholic Church professeth certainty, and ever hath done so: and nature forceth even the deniers of this truth, to act as if they had certainty, in persuading and forcing others to their opinions. But I wish that these men would speak plain English; and that in lieu of this quaint term High probability, they would tell us the meaning of it in words, that honest men may understand.  
Let me see if I can help them. That which they mean by prohability, must either be, some access towards truth, on the objects side; Or a strong persuasion made in the Auditor. If it be a persuasion In the Auditory, without any approach to the object; clearly, it signifieth nothing else but a high cheat, or an excellent juggle, with praise, neither may I deny, nor do I envy, to such men. Then, for the objects side; If there be no fixedness or certainty of the object, by all the arguments of this high orator: I can not comprehend, there is more in all he saith, than peradventure it is true, peradventure not.  
So that, High Probability, signifieth High Peradventure. Which how great a nonsense it is, if applied to fixed verities, that are not subject to the mutability of change and chance (that is, how ridiculously it is applied to Religion, and to truths of faith) is evident to every sensible man. If now, men will needs have one termed a Divine, because he can thus finely talk in the air, of God, and of things belonging to him; he must be a Divine of blind Tiresias his tribe, who in the poet professeth his Divinity in these terms; 
O Laërtiade!  
Quicquid dicam; aut erit, aut non:  
Divinare etenim, magnus mihi donat Apollo.   
The last part of the reply, telleth us, that Probabiliry governeth all human action, I deny it not. But withal, I take notice, that Action, is one thing; belief, an other.  
Human action, is about the gaining of a future End, which dependeth on fallible principles; as all mortal things do; Which are continually involved in a thousand uncertainties and changes.  
But faith, is of unchangeable verities; which nothing hath power to make otherwise, than it is already settled. It is a parallel to science; I mean, to true science; such as we see exercised in Geometry: for which, no man looketh into probabilities. And to expect that faith should depend on probabilities, is no less ridiculous than to think the like of Geometry; since it is more necessary, and more important than Geometry; and the way to heaven is missed with greater danger and loss, than Geometry is neglected. Therefore it were a great folly to imagine, that faith should not be as certain, and as easy to arrive unto, as Geometry is: But that, whiles there are certain and infallible rules for the measuring of lines and angles; there should be no certainer course to secure ones eternal happiness and, avoid endless woe, then to venture it upon the hazard of the dice, or to play it at cross and pile: For, his condition is no better than so, that taketh his faith and Religion, upon the recommendations of Probability.  
But, when one's affection is once engaged, it maketh his ears flow, and his understanding dull, to any thing that can be said in opposition to what it is set upon. And so, me thinks I hear these men redouble their complaint, and ask me with indignation; what can we think? that one who hath spent 30. or 40. years so well, should after so long earnest study be still accounted an unlearned man? To this question, I dare scarce reply what is fitting. Yet with their leave, I shall ask again of them, whether he that should have spent 30. or 40. years in gathering rags out of the kennels, to furnish the paper mills, or had cried card-matches as long; must of necessity, be thought worth a thousand pound a year at the end of his labour; though no exceptions could be made against him, either for diligence in getting, or frugality in conserving what he had gained. In like manner; he that will judge a right of a scholar or learned man; must, not only reckon up the years of his study, and the pains and industry he hath employed in it; but consider also in what he hath bestowed it. For, if it were applied, only to seek out the proprieties of Latin, and Greek words; if only in criticisms, whether of grammar, or of History; It will avail him no more towards the attaining of true learning, than the selling of Card-matches, towards the purchasing a manor of a thousand pounds a year.  
But peradventure some may object, that the comparison holdeth not in these two cases. For, the Student here spoken of, is supposed to have spent his age, not in turning over tryffling books; but much of it, in reading the holy Scriptures and Fathers; in which, by our own confession, true learning is contained. Therefore how can he be suspected of ignorance and want of learning? Nevertheless, even this objection shaketh not my resolution. Only, it obligeth me to take new information, of what it was he looketh for, all this while, in those learned books. It is said of the Kings of Narsinga and of Pegu, that in their prosperities, they gathered such vast treasures, both of precious metals and stones, that they were fain to let them lie heaped up in great courts, because chambers were not able to contain them; the successor ever vying to out do his predecessor. Now I ask if a dunghill cock had been turned into these courts, how much richer would he have come out then he went in? Certainly, nothing at all: Because he looked not there for the heads of Gold or Diamonds; but searched about for some grains of wheat or barley, or scratched the ground for some worms, and such things fit for his stomach.  
In like manner; when a young Gentleman that traveleth into foreign countries upon pretence of endeavouring thereby to enable himself; if during his abode in any great city, as Paris or Rome, his enquiry is after nothing, but where the best taverns and entertainments are; Can it be expected, that at his return home, he should be able to give a good account in substantial matters of the places he hath been in? So, if these great Students look into the scriptures or Fathers, to find out what a Metreta, or a Corris, or an Ephod is, or in fine, sift out Genealogies or Chronologies, and spend there forty years in such peddling divinity; can it be imagined that at the end of them, they should be any nearer the true quality of Divines, than when they began?  
Besides, though they should seek for true knowledge; yet if they take not the right way, it is impossible they should ever acquire it. As those pictures which are contrived by the ingeniousness of Mathematicians, to be looked upon, either through some kind of glass, or purely by choosing a certain position, do require some one determinate Situation for the eye to be placed in; else they appear not: so, is the nature of all words and their objects, as far as the truths are dependent from the clothing of the words.  
Especially, there is a degree of attention belonging to them: which if it be too little, the words are not understood: If too great; that which before was clear to you, becometh dim by equivocations of words and their constructions: And the more you look upon them without passion, the more changeable is their aspect to you, and you grow less certain of what they mean. Whereas, with Reason it fareth contrary wise. The more, and the more impartially, you look upon a demonstration; the more clear, and the more certain it becometh to you. Therefore in a text where Reason and the nature of the words, do concur to the explication of those words; they will be better understood by arguments from Reason, than the sense and reason from the words: And when ever it happeneth, that the sense and meaning is certain by reason, but the text or letter ambiguous, it is evident, that the latter aught to be governed by the former. And accordingly, they who in matter of Religion, do receive knowledge of the truths belonging to it, by a way not depending on a certain form of words; have a mighty advantage in the explication of scripture, over those who do but, as it were, shake the words together like lots in a bag: which is the condition of those who have nothing but the bare words of scripture to rely upon, to understand the true meaning of them. It is not then the number of years, that a man hath spent in turning over the bible, or that he hath employed in reading Greek and latin authors, which can justify him to be a great Divine: but there must be considered also, what he sought there, and how he sought it; and with what freedom from passion and partiality; which alone hath a huge stroke in making a man understand rightly or erroneously what he readeth.  
Upon this occasion, there cometh into my mind a truth; which peradventure may seem a Paradox; but being looked into, will appear evident of itself: and it is, that a boy, who can neither write nor read, may be a greater Divine them some man who hath studied scripture his 40. years. He who doubteth of this; let him remember, that divinity hath for its End, the knowledge of these truths which are to guide us to heaven; and that the knowledge of them is so necessary that without it, no excuse of that ignorance can hinder our perishing eternally; and therefore, that the knowledge of them ought to be as certain, as any demonstration can be. Then, let him consider, that 40. years' study may be employed, without arriving (by the force of such study) to demonstration sufficient to assure a man of all points necessary; as the hundred years' debate between Catholics and Protestants, (without being one foot further advanced, than the first day) doth amply make manifest. The conclusion than is evident, for as much as concerneth the student's part, that 40. years' study doth noth necessarily make a man a Divine. Now let us turn to the other side, and consider a child of a dozen years old, never put to school, further than in the Church to be taught in a catechistical way the sum of Christian doctrine; and to know that it is to be held because it is descended from Christ, by the perpetual hand it from age to age in the whole Catholic Church. And let us inquire whether this child be a Divine or no. If the question be of the matter: He knoweth what is sufficient for him, to bring him to heaven; to breed in him the love of God, and obedience to the Church, set by God to direct us in doing our duties for the attaining eternal salvation.  
Again, this child hath that ground for his belief, which is more certain than any demonstration in Euclid or Archimedes. Why then should we doubt but that this boy hath all that is necessary for the being a Divine; and much more, than the long studied pretender to divinity can show for himself? One may object, that he doth not penetrate the force of succession, which is the foundation upon which his divinity is built.  
But whether that be or no, this is certain; that he holdeth it upon that rule and Principle. And if we should oblige a science, or any kind of certitude, to understand throughly all its principles, we must take away all sciences but metaphysics, and blot out of logic, the distinction of sciences subalternative and subalternated, and deny Geometry and arithmetic to be sciences because the most of Mathematicians do not understand, nor teach the force of those maxims, by which a syllogism necessitateth our assent.  
Peradventure, some may reply that divinity, properly, signifieth a science drawn out of articles of faith, either alone, or joined with certainties of Philosophy: And that this boy can not pretend to such a science. To this we answer, that speaking rigorously in the use and phrase of the school, Theology or divinity signifieth indeed such a quality as the objecter saith. But in ancient writers, it is also taken for the knowledge of faith; And that when we speak of a boys being a Divine, we mean it in this latter sense. Nevertheless, if the comparison be made in the former sense of the science of divinity, (which is properly such; and which neither of them hath) the boy is nearer to it, than this Doctor. For, as it is true, that he who knoweth never a demonstration in Euclid, can not be called a Geometrician, though he have learned the axioms and Petitions and definitions premised before the demonstrations: so, neither is he a Divine that knoweth only faith yet (to continue the same comparison) as he who acknowledgeth the definitions and other prerequisite truths, is nearer being a Geometrician, than he who doubteth of them: so, the boy, who believeth all the articles of Christian faith which he already knoweth; and hath the rule by which to be certain of any other, when they are proposed to him; is nearer being a Divine, than he who calleth himself a Divine; because for 40. years together he hath doubted and disputed of the Principles of divinity; which must be agreed unto, before divinity itself can be so much as commenced. And out of this, may easily be understood, how great a cheat and imposture is put upon well-meaning people, when such teachers are termed Divines, and pass for Doctors; who truly are but petty sophisters and wranglers in that noble and holy science.   

The twentieth reflection. On the Civilities to be used, in treating of Controversies.  
BUt it is no easy Matter to allay a passion once raised. One objection cannot be so soon quelled, as an other boileth up and breaketh forth. And so the same men press, that be their Master's learned or ignorant; however, they are good moral men, and that civility at lest is due to them, and that they ought to be treated with honour and respect. Far be it from me to deny it. For, civility is a duty between man and man, upon the score of manhood; not upon any spiritual account: and therefore, every one who maketh not himself unworthy, is the object of it. But least, out of general sayings, there should grow mistakes in particular; it is fit we should a little unfold the common axiom.  
The name of Civility, cometh from that of a city: because, both first, and most generally, the sweetness of behaviour expressed in this term, is seen and practised in cities. It extendeth itself no further than to conversation; those virtues, which bear a man to goodnesses of more serious considerations, purchasing to themselves nobler denominations. It consisteth of two parts: The one negative, to prevent offence; the other positive, to afford content and satisfaction. It dwelleth (as most virtues do) between two contrary vices; being infested with rudeness below, and with flattery above. Its matter, is both in Action and in words. Rusticity, is in action, boisterous; in words, offensive. Adulation, is in action, Apish, in words, hyperbolical and lying. Now Civility▪ in all actions, bewareth giving offence, and is prompt to any convenient service. In words, as far as it can, it taketh no notice of others defects, and giveth the true poise to their perfections. And human actions are so ordered by God and Nature, that there are very few, which lie not open to reprehension on some side or other; and none, but may deserve to be commended for something, so that it is in the power of a judicious man, to commend or to discommend, with truth, the actions of any man whatsoever: And much more, the actions of those persons, unto whom a great variety both of actions and of qualities, must necessarily appertain.  
Prudence therefore ought to govern Civility (as it doth other virtues) and instruct a man, when, and how far, in particular circumstances, any Action is to be blamed or commended. And as it governeth the language that belongeth to civility, so it ought to do the like in the action relating to it, which are apt to fall into excess or defect, unless the bridle of Prudence do guide them to march in the straight middle path. Out of all which it is apparent to the discreet Reader, that the moderation of Civility, is a task hard enough to describe; and many times disputable both sides, how far the duty of it obligeth.  
To apply this doctrine to our particular use, we must add one little note with it, that the civility exhibited, may be in respect of the present action or quality out of which the action formally is considered; or else, in respect of some other quality of the same person.  
To speak more clearly. A Catholic, who writeth or disputeth against a Protestant, or conferreth with him, may defer to him, either in his very argument, or in other things not concerning it, as, he may acknowledge him an eloquent man, a good Linguist, a subtle Critike, or some other commendation belonging to either his understanding or his will:  
Or else, that his argument is good, or hard to be solved, or that his skill in divinity, is extraordinary, or the like. Now as for this last commendation; It is evident that it can not be given him without prejudice to the cause the Catholic maintaineth.  
And therefore, even if it should prove true (which it is impossible it should) Prudence would advise his adversary to wave taking notice of it, as far as ingenuity will allow him. But he needeth not apprehend being reduced to straits upon this account. For, Protestant arguments out of authority, are easily answered: And if some drawn from reason, be difficult and intricate; it is, because that nature upon which the question dependeth, is obscure and unknown; not because the Divinity part hath any special difficulty in it. What the pitch of Divinity is, that a Protestant may arrive unto, we have already declared. As for other qualities both humanity requireth we should afford them a friendly esteem of their good parts; and the very aim we have in discoursing with them, (which is, to change their judgements, to agree with ours) maketh it no small part of our business, to proceed with a fair and just difference towards them; if we understand, how much the will conferreth to incline the judgement, and how powerful courtesy is over the will.  
As for the arguments themselves; it is necessary (especially in writing, which alloweth descending to many particulars) to show that they are but slight ones, and that they proceed out of ignorance, and that they imply a great distortion in the will of him that maketh them (which only causeth them to be well esteemed of) and the like, according as there shall be cause. It is necessary also to display, how the producer of such arguments, is not a man to be replied upon; nor hath those qualities which are requisite in a teacher. For, either his brain is weak; or the will of maintaining an evil cause, worketh upon him to throw out pitiful and trivial objections, instead of framing strong and solid ones, which is the worse condition of the two. Now, with what justice, may one give the commendations of an honest man, to one that for his own honour or interest, will maintain a proposition himself knoweth to be false; especially, of that nature, that the salvation or damnation of the hearer (as well as his own) dependeth on it.  
Were it not better, he cheated me of my purse, robbed me of my credit, took away my life; then to bring my soul into the hazard of perpetual damnation? How then can he who doth this, be esteemed an honest man, and worthy of such civil testimonies, as shall enable him the more to ensnare poor souls; who will rely the more upon him for his receiving such applause?  
He may peradventure defend himself, by saying, that if he seduceth others, he is first seduced himself; and so, ignorance excuseth him, at least from being malicious and wicked.  
But, he mendeth his cause very little by this plea: since, he who undertaketh to be a Master of others, (especially, in matters of so great consequence and hazard) must not be admitted to allege ignorance for an excuse. Why doth he undergo the office of a teacher, if he understandeth not what he undertaketh to teach? He who will affirm any thing, must first know it: Else, he is a liar; and if it be in a matter of great prejudice, a knave. Perhaps he will again answer for himself, that there is no means to come to certainty in Religion; and that therefore he is not more faulty for being a teacher, than every one else is that doth the like. In saying thus; first, he blasphemeth against God; as not having provided mankind of that, which far beyond all other things, is most necessary to it. Secondly, he proceedeth very rashly; for, how doth he know, or what demonstration hath he made, or can he make, that he knoweth all that can be said to the contrary? Thirdly, he knoweth (with out the least doubt) that either himself or his very late predecessors, did leave the way they were bred in. Now if it were but for likelihoods, and that there be no certainty in Religion, how was it honestly done by the first that made the breach; or is now, by him who maintaineth it, only upon peradventures.  
But to make it appear more evident, that they who have left the Catholic Church, or that still keep out of it, are unexcusable; and to take away their misunderstanding of some points, wherein their mistaking of what we believe, may seem to justify (in some sort) their deserting us: I will set down a short explication of Catholic doctrine, as far as it is controverted by judicious and sensible men on both sides: Against which, I scarcely believe that any prudent person will think it fit to make an objection: unless it be, out of natural reason, where the Mystery is difficult; not for itself, but because we understand not nature. As he who perfectly understandeth logic, will have no difficulty to believe the Trynity: who knoweth the composition of body and soul in Man, will easily admit the Incarnation. And who comprehendeth how living Creatures do nourish themselves, will not stick at the Mystery of the Eucharist.  
I pretend not to set down all: For, as there is no All, of those demonstrations (for example) which may be made of the natures of a Triangle or of a circle; So far less, of the dependencies of the Mysteries of our faith; which the opposition of Adversaries may make necessary to be known and professed. Therefore I content myself with those, which I apprehend to be the most troublesome, among the points in controversy now at present.   

A brief Explication of Catholic faith, in order to modern Controversies.  
We believe, that from all Eternity there was a Thing not made by any other, but having its being from ●●selfe, without beginning or springing That this thing is unchangeable an● immortal: Having neither parts no● composition, and so, is perfectly indivisible and spiritual. That this same Thing, is Substantially and Essentially knowing and loving itself: And so, is a substance known, a substance knowing, and a substance loving the Thing known. That, as a thing known, it is from which the thing knowing is, and as a Thing known and knowing, it is from which the substance or Thing loving is.  
That, as it is a substance knowing or knowledge, we explicate it well by a name taken out of our natural considerations, that is, by the word son: and likewise, as it is a substance known, by the word Father: But, as it is a substance ●ove, it is not well expressed by either ●f these names; but by the common ●ame of an Holy Spirit or Ghost, made proper by want of a proper expression. And this is that we mean, when we ●ay there are in God three Persons: Fa●her, son, and Holy Ghost.  
This indivisible thing, we call God: ●nd profess, that he made time; and in, or with, the beginning of time, all other things: Whether, spiritual and indivisible, or bodily and subject to division and corruption or mortality. Among the rest, and as the principal of these Creatures which we know by our sense and conversation, he made Man: that is, one man and one woman. He made them such, that by the corruption they were subject unto, they should not be extinguished like the other Creatures set round about them: but should remain, spiritual things, capable seeing him, and of eternal happiness.  
These two, he created in such state, that reason was in them more powerful than sense: And could, with ease, have kept them from all unreasonable actions, and from the unhappy effects of them; had not the Envy of an other intellectual creature (whom we call the devil) seduced the woman, and by her means, made the man also eat of fruits, which they were forewarned would bring them death and misery.  
By this means, disorder being brought into the two first men, both in body and soul; all their progeny became vicious; every child drawing from his parents, disorderly inclinations, which avert him from the love and care of true bliss; and which, strengthened by custom and opinion, were able to carry the whole mass of mankind to eternal infelicity, the just and deserved punishment of this default and its evil consequents.  
This slavery of Man kind to sin, was so strong, that God Almighty was forced to let great reins destroy it all; reserving (by his mercy) only 8. persons to people the world a new; making the world itself much less distractive or inveighing with the pleasures of it, by making it fuller of miseries. And after a while again, he was forced to pitch upon one man and his seed, (neglecting the rest) to conserve in them (though weakly) by laws and special government, the seeds of virtue; often strengthening them by extraordinary means, and increasing their knowledge. Yet for all that, virtue faded much in them. This people, he governed first in republic, afterwards in Royalty; and lastly by Priests, until, notwithstanding all his care and their science, the people was grown into an extremity of perverseness.  
Then he came to the last remedy; and taking, or as it were, grafting into his own substance, the nature of Man; became the teacher and example to mankind, of all virtuous actions and good life. And because man's nature was grafted by its noblest part; that is, by his Meus, or root of understanding; to which God, as a substance knowledge, hath proportion; It is rightly delivered unto us, that the son of God took flesh upon him, to be our guide and rule; and not, the Father or Holy Ghost; though they, (both of them) are inseparably in him.  
So, God; who by his Ministers had hitherto instructed mankind by Allegories and similitudes, proportionable to their carnal imbecility; Now, in his own person opened the way to heaven in as plain terms as man's nature is capable of; teaching to abstract ourselves from the love of creatures and to adhere to him by love of future bliss of our souls.  
Having completed the course of his teaching by word and example; and having showed us how to bear, not fear, the miseries of this world, even death itself; he thought good to give us a scantling of our future bliss of body, being raised to life the third day after his death, and during 40. days showing us a new Nature which our bodies are to obtain in the last resurrection, if so we deserve it.  
During his abode upon earth, he chose certain believers, called Apostles, and under them, did set a number of disciples: gave them authority to preach; and practised them in it, even during his own life; but ordered them more especially towards his departure, how they should behave themselves in the conversion of Jews and gentiles, and how they should govern the people they converted and brought to his belief.  
After this, he left them; ascending in their sight above the clouds. And after 10. days (according to his promise) he so replenished them with faith and charity, that he made them fit Executors of his commands, and instruments of building the Church, he intended to spread over all nations. He gave them fervour of heart, knowledge of tongues, and power of miracles; together with discretion to use all, to the end for which he designed them.  
This Church, being to consist of all mankind, as one body-politic; He thought fit to set universal rules of certain external actions and practices common to all; by, and in which they should communicate together and know one another.  
And, the main scope of this instruction being to bring Men to the honour and service of God, He made likewise for the principal of our eternal actions, one to be a public testimony and recognizance that God is the sole Author of good to us, and absolute Master of Life and death, of Being and of Not-Being. Such a ceremony, is called a Sacrifice.  
This he did immediately before his death, taking bread and wine; and after imposition of his hands or blessing them, he assured us that the thing he then gave, was, that very body which was to be wounded, and that very blood which was to be shed, for us. And so, against all prejudice of sense, we believe that the substances of bread and wine, were changed really into the substance of this body and blood; notwithstanding that the Natures (that is, all the operations and resemblances) of bread and wine, do remain as before.  
This he commanded his Apostles to do; and by mediation of this sacrifice or obtestation or highest Prayer, to obtain for the quick and the dead, what ever is fit to be impetrated for them. He commanded also that doing this, we should remember, or rather commemorate, (that is, offer in a human phrase to God's remembrance) his death and passion.  
For, as it is a true sacrifice by the real and local parting of his body and blood; so, this being done under the shapes of bread and wine, becometh a figure and allegory of the real and blondy separation of them made upon the holy cross. This sacrifice, performed which convenient ceremonies, we usually call the mass.  
This incorporation of all Christians into the body of Christ, by participation of this sacrifice; is the highest motive of love to Christ and to one another; that can fall into man's heart; and therefore hath ever been a symbol or token of peace among Christians; and is esteemed, the Mystery or sacrament of Charity. But because Christian life, consisteth of seven virtues; three, theological; and four, Cardinal) Christ delivered other six Sanctifications or Initiations, to enter us in the other six virtues.  
Baptism, for faith: Confirmation, for hope: Penance, to redress the wrongs we do to God, and to our neighbour: Matrimony, and Extreme-Unction, to injure us to temperance, and to fortify us against the terrors of death.  
Prudence, because it eminently belongeth to commanders, received its proper initiation in the installing of spiritual Gouvernours; which are, Priests and Bishops. Who being more eminent in Science and Charity, have power to govern the flock o● Christ.  
And to the end that emulation might not break unity among them; Christ, by his own practice and mouth, gave the Primacy to Saint Peter: to whose see and successor, inferior Bishops were to have recourse, in all public necessities or dissensions of the Church: And who at this day is commonly called the Pope.  
It is incredible, how great increase of devotion and Charity, accrueth to Christian people by the reverent administration, and faithful reception, of these sacraments. What respect and awe towards to what adhesion their teachers; their doctrine; what obedience to their directions; in fine, how great a life to the Church, and eminency above such synagogues as are destitute of these holy institutions.  
The Apostles therefore, armed with these and the aforesaid powers, dispersed themselves into all the quarters of the earth; planting this common doctrine and practice through the universe; and dying, left the inheritance of the same to their successors: Who, in debates about doctrines, and in other dissensions, meeting together, and finding what the Apostles had left to the Churches they had planted, did cast out such as would not conform themselves to the received Tradition.  
And so, Christians were divided: The parties cast out, being denominated from their Masters or particular doctrines; The part adhering to the Apostles Tradition, retaining the name of the Apostolic Church. Which because it was, as it were, the whole of Christians, was therefore termed Catholic or universal.  
These Apostles and Disciples, left certain writings: But, neither by command nor with design, to deliver in any or all of them, a summary of our faith; but, occasionally teaching what they thought requisite for some certain place or company; which the Holy Ghost intended for the comfort of the Church. In which, as we profess, there is nothing false or uncertain; so we know the unwritten Preaching, aught to be the rule of their interpretation; at least negatively.  
Neither can we vindicate those books from the corruption of transscribers, and much less of interpreters: whose labours can not pretend to the authority of scripture, otherwise then by a known conformity to the Originals.  
Tradition therefore, became the rule of faith: and counsels and apostolical Sees, became the infallible depositaries of Tradition. The other Sees failing, either by the destruction of Christian Religion in those quarters, or by a voluntary discession from the rule of faith, the Roman See, first instructed by the two chief Apostles, and afterwards by perpetual correspondence with all Christian countries, and their recourse to it, in matters of faith and discipline; remained the only single Church, which was able, in virtue of perpetual succession, to testify what was the Apostles doctrine.  
Afterwards, heretics confounding, equivocally, the names of Apostolic and Cathlick, by an impudence of saying what they list, without show of reason; the Catholic party hath been forced, for distinction sake, to add to their Church the surname of Roman: Declaring there by, that the Roman particular Church, is the Head and Mistress, and cause of unity, to all those Churches that have share in the Catholic.  
By this link of truth, namely, of receiving doctrine by succession; and by the link of unity, in the Roman head of the Church; as the Church hath hitherto stood in Persecutions, Heresies, and schisms; so, we are assured, it will never fail until the second coming of Christ; but do hope it will increase into an universal kingdom of his; to dure an unknown extent of Ages, (designed in the Apocolypse by the number of a thousand years) in great prosperity; and in freedom, both from Pagans without, and from heretics with in; and in great abundance, of Charity and good life.  
This being evidently the effect of Christ's coming; we see, that the general good life of mankind (which proceedeth from the knowledge of the End, to which we are created; and from other motives and means delivered by Christ's doctrine) was the great and only design for which he took flesh; that is, to be the cause to us of a happy life, both in this world, and in the next.  
The which, having been the main advantage of the State of Paradise, or of our nature before corruption; It is clear, that Christ hath repaired the fault of Adam, by making whole Mankind, capable of attaining everlasting bliss; unto which, before his coming, one only family had means to arrive.  
The settling of Mankind in this repair; restored it to such a condition in respect of God, that from thenceforth, he resolved to bestow his greatest benefits upon it; that is, eternal felicity: Whereas before, as long as it was in the state of sin, his decrees were for its universal Damnation,  
By which, it is clear, that Christ appeased his father's wrath, and made him a friend, of a foe he had formerly been, unto us.  
So that, because eternal bliss followeth out of a good life, and out of a constant habit or inclination to it: as likewise, damnation, out of the state of a sinful inclination: formal justification and sanctity, do consist, in the habit of good life, and the state of damnation, consisteth in an habitual inclination to sin: Neither the one, nor the other, in an extrinsical acceptation or refusal of the Divine Will, or its arbitrary Election or dislike: which are only the efficient causes, from whence (proportionably to their natures) they depend.  
Further, because mankind was not able, of itself, to get out of the State of sin, and by consequence, lay in subjection and slavery to it: And seeing that Christ by the explicated means and actions did set it free, and gave it power to come out of that subjection and misery, he did clearly redeem mankind from this servitude of sin, and of sin's Master the devil; and gave it the liberty wherein it was created at the first.  
And because Christ did this by his death, and by the penal actions of his life, he is rightly said to have by them paid a ransom for mankind.  
Notwithstanding this general preparation, by which mankind was enabled to well-doing, no particular man arriveth to any action of virtue, without the special providence and benevolence of Almighty God: By which, (by convenient circumstances, both external and internal) he prepareth the heart of that man unto whom he is gracious and favourable, to receive these common impressions, and maketh it good earth fit for the seed of his eternal cultinatour; who without any respect to former merits, planteth faith and charity, and all that is good in him, merely of his own benignity and graciousness.  
This he doth; not, by immediately determining the man; but by so sweetening the proposals, that they overcome his heart, and make it determine itself according to the will of God.  
For, Divinity teacheth, that the power of God, after it hath given Being unto creatures, doth nothing immediately by itself; but all, by the mediation of the second causes, only setting them on work. So that, if (as some Philosophers held) and is yet the manner, by which many apprehend creatures to work, they could work of themselves, and did so, without being pushed on by him, just the very same things would happen, as now they do. So that, neither Predestination nor Reprobation, by being what they are purely in God, do bring any change at all in our wills determinations: Nor ought there any mention to be made of them, further than to show God's wisdom and goodness, who foresaw and fore-willed, and so caused (like an universal, not like a particular cause) all our actions, as far as they are good.  
Only, where something occurreth, wherein it is fitting that the course of material causes should be moderated, and directed above their own line, to the right government of mankind; there, the almighty goodness hath other instruments to perform his will. These, we call Angels; incorporal and spiritual substances. The which, being created with the beginning of time, but not subjected to time, were, independently of time, perfected for their own bliss or Misery: Those who envied man's felicity in becoming God, remaining in such darkness and torments, as extremity of wilfulness causeth in natures of that kind, which are, beyond all that we can imagine: the purer part of them by adhesion to God's disposal, becoming participant of his sight, with an unconceivable bliss and happiness.  
These, under his divine Majesty, do govern human actions, and their negotiation for bliss: the blessed Party of them, being ready to furnish us with all goods, as far as the course of Providence requireth and permitteth: The bad being prompt to inflict upon men, all harms of soul and body, when ever the hand of Providence doth not hold the reins.  
This, each sort of them doth, in common and in particular, when the ordinary course is to be inverted, for the sweeter bringing of mankind to the intended bliss. And such of them, as are specially intent to particular persons, are used to be called, their Guardian Angels, if they be good; devils or Accusers, if they be wicked Spirits.  
By these ways and Instruments, Christ planted his Church, and governeth it, and will conserve it as long us this world (which was made for it) shall continue: keeping it free from error, and in the quality of a Teacher, a Commander, and a visible tribunal unto which all may repair who seek salvation.  
But when the fore-designed work shall be finished, and the number of our brethren be completed, then, shall the world be consumed by fire, mankind rise, and appear before Christ, their Judge, and receive their eternal doom, and all time and motion be ended and turned into a constant state for all Eternity.  
The good, shall receive the full reward of their virtue, which in this life, is but inchoated in their souls. If they went out of their bodies, perfect in charity, they enjoyed immediately the sight of God, and do assist us now by their prayers, as they did, living, by their merits, that is, by their good example and profitable labours for their posterity.  
And so, we invocate them, and desire God, that both their prayers and merits may be beneficial to us.  
And because we account them Persons highly worthy, and in the favour of God, we therefore testify so much, by keeping their dying-days festival, for the encouragement of others to imitate them: And we bear a respect to their relics, such as we do to holy instruments, as the Bible, chalices, consecrated oils, and the like: And as we kiss the hand of a Prince, or the garment of a Prelate, intending it as a ceremony of honour to him, so, we kiss the relics or pictures of Saints, and especially crosses, (which we take for the pictures of Christ crucified) making that kissing, the ceremony of expressing honour to the Person represented. This, in the Greek and Latin expressions, is called Adoration, which signifieth, kissing: That, being the most ancient and natural ceremony of protesting a loving honour.  
And, the words reaching, in a divers sense and meaning, to the thing immediately touched, and to the Person to whom the honour is done; It is said, that both of them are adored by the same act of adoration; but, the one materially and corporally; the other, with the heart and mind: we submitting ourselves to the one as to our better, and making the other the means by which we express it.  
The absolutely wicked, confounded and terrified by the sight of their Judge, will be confined to perpetual darkness of spirit, and gnawing of their conscience, and to the anguishes of their raging thoughts and desires, for all eternity.  
The middle sort, consisting of those, who according to the course of all corporal, deficient, and mortal goods, do go out of this world, substantially in Charity and love of God, but not without some weaknesses and sicknesses of their soul; cannot, before they are purged, be admitted to the sight of God.  
And so, they expect in darkness and grief, that happy change, to which, the prayers of the living do much avail them.  
These, are the Heads of the Christian profession of that Church, which being in the communion of the Church of Rome, pretendeth to have received her doctrine from Christ, and his Apostles, in a perpetual public exercise and profession; handed down, without interruption, to this our presentage. And out of which, have issued all particular congregations, which (in their several seasons) separating themselves from her, have been denominated by several Appellations; the name of Catholic, ever remaining to her, inspite of all invasions.  
Divines, may find many more Articles of faith, and heretics may daily occasion more and more. But, all are only explications of the here proposed doctrine.  
Now, the oppositions which heretics make against the Catholic Church; are only, the breaking down, of all Christianity and good life, either in itself, or in its outworks.  
As, the Socinians, by denying the godhead of the the blessed Trinity, and of Jesus Christ; the Pelagians, by denying the fable of Man, and the necessity and efficacy of Grace; the Puritans or Presbyterians, by denying the necessity of good life to justification; do destroy the very Essence of Christianity and virtue. Divers, denying the solemn and holy sacrifice of the Altar, which is the highest extern act of our Religious duty to God; by cutting of most of the sacraments, by rejecting prayers to the saints and angels, and all devotion for the dead, by abolishing holidays and public fasts; by pulling down the pictures of Christ and his saints, which our pious ancestors did set up, to renew the memory of their examples and to excite us to follow them; do demolish the fences and bullwarckes of the same Christianity and good life.  
But all they who deserve the name of heretics, do agree to charge the Church of Christ with corruption and adultery: and do deny in her, both infallibility to know Christ's doctrine, and power to govern: And consequently, they destroy external unity and the essence of it. Which, as it is not formally to ruin good life, so it is more than to break down her outworks; since it entrencheth upon the very substance in common, and leaveth no means, but mere chance and hazard, to come to the knowledge of Christ's law; and consequently, to eternal salvation.  
Whence we may understand, what this name Popery signifieth: to wit, An affection or resolution to maintain faith and good life; and, the causes of conserving them.  
There are divers other points, controverted between Catholics and Sectaries. But they are such, as for the most part, require no explication, but, a flat denial. As, when they accuse us, to have deprived the laity of half the Communion; we deny it. For, besides that, the general practice of Christians hath been from the beginning, to give the sacrament, sometimes in one kind, sometimes in both; the Church hath always believed, that the entire communion was perfectly administered in either. We likewise deny, that ever the Church held the necessity of communicating Infants: The Pope's personal infallibility; that Indulgences can draw souls out of Purgatory: that Prayers ought, of necessity be in an unknown tongue to though we may think it fitting in some circumstances, that the public service, for reverence and Majesty, be so performed: that faith is not to be kept with heretics: that the Pope can dispense with the subjection to Princes: And many such other Tenets; which are injuriously imposed upon Catholics by Sectaries; and are flatly denied by us; and therefore require no further explication or discourse about them.   

A Sampler of Protestants Shuffling in there Disputes of Religion.  
COntroversy logic, or the art of discoursing in matter of Religion; between those who profess the Law of Christ, can not be complete, unless, as Aristotle made a Book of fallacies to avoid cavils in his organ, or instrument of science, so we also discover the common fallacies used in controversies: Not all, but the chiefest, and most ordinarily in this business. This then is the scope of my present work. For which the first note I make, is that hour Ancients have taught us, and by experience we daily find, that heresy is in a manner as soon overthrown as laid open, falsehood like turpitude being ashamed of nakedness. Therefore 't is falsehood's game to vest itself like an Angel of light, in the skin of the lamb, and to seem to wear the Robes of truth. I mean by words, like those of the Catholic party, to delude the simplicity of the Innocent and well-wishing People. And now must it be our theme to unveil their Shufflings.  

The first Shuffle. Of the Word Scripture.  
And first, If we ask them what they rely upon, they braggingly answer on God's word, upbraiding Catholics to rely upon men when they fly to the church's witness; but if we press them to declare what they mean by God's word, to wit, the Book of the Bible, or the meaning of it, they are forced to answer the sense, for even beasts can convince them, that we have the Book as well as they. Marching on another step, and pressing to know by what instruments or means they have the sense, there is no subterfuge from confessing it is by reading, and their own judging or thinking the sense of the Scripture, is that which they affirm, though all Catholics affirm the contrary. And although even in this they are cozened, following, for the most part, the explication of their preacher, Yet I press not that, for they know not that they do so: But I conclude, see what you mean, when you say you rely upon Scripture or God's word, to wit, that you rely upon your own opinion or guessing that this is God's word. So that this glorious profession of relying upon God's word, is in substance and reality, to rely upon the opinion or guessing, of a cobbler, or Tinker, or some housewife, when the answerers are such; or at most of a Minister, who for his own interest, is bound to maintain, this is the meaning of God's word.   

The second Shuffle. Of general Councils.  
SOme Protestants are so bold, as to profess they will stand to general Councils. Now a General Council, in the language of Catholics, is a general meeting of the Christian World, by the Bishops and Deputies of it, to testify the Doctrine of the Christian Church: And is accounted inerrable in such determinations, and therefore to have power to command the faith of Christians, and to cast out of the Church all who do not yield to such their determinations and agreements, and by consequence to have a supreme Authority in the Church, in matters of faith. The Protestants loathe to leave the shadow, though they care not for the substance, use the name, but to no effect. For the intention being to manifest the Doctrine of the Christian World. They first agree not upon the notion of what a Council is, Requiring sometimes that all Bishops should be present, sometimes that all patriarchs, though known to be professed heretics, and under the Turk, sometimes objecting want of liberty, and mainly that they decide not by disputation out of only scripture, or that they taught false Doctrine. So that to the Protestant a Council signifies an indefinite and uncertain (when, and what it is) meeting of men, going upon the scripture: Which (as it is before declared) signifies every cobbler or Ministers fancy: which hath no authority to bind men to believe, and is to be judged by the Doctrine or agreement in faith with the Protestants.   

The third Shuffle, Of the consent of Fathers.  
THe consent of the Fathers, or doctors of Christians before our age and controversies, bears so Venerable an aspect as that few heretics dare (at least before honest understanding Christians) give it flatly the lie. Therefore the discreeter part of Protestants acknowledge it, yet with a salve that they were all men and might be deceived, which in effect is to say, that it is no convincing or binding Authority, as Catholics hold it to be, nay to be a stronger authority than that of Councils, as being the judgement of the Catholic Church, or the learned part of it, which is all one as to faith. The Protestant first, at one clap cuts of a thousand or 13. hundred years, nay some 15. hundred. The one saying S. Gregory the great was the last Father and first papistry; the more ordinary course being to acknowledge, only the Fathers of the Persecution time before Constantine, finding Popery (as they call it) to public afterwards; some pressing, that ever since the decease of the Apostles, the Church hath been corrupted: So that they neither give any authority to the consent of Fathers, nor do acknowledge the thing the Catholics call the Fathers, accepting thereof commonly (that is the two latter opinants) no considerable part of them, and the larger opinion nothing near the half. So that the consent of the Fathers, in the sense of the Protestants, signifieth nothing but the opnion of some few, who have written either nothing, or little and obscurely of the points in controversy   

The fourth Shuffle, Of this Word Catholic Church.  
TO the Catholic Church all plead, the Apostles Creed forcing them to the name: And catholics, by this word, understand a Church which hath endured from Father to Son from Christ's time to ours, still teaching the same Doctrine, and living under an outward Visible government, the head of which, is in the Church of Rome, and is the Pope. And so acknowledge and obey a Visible and determinate authority, to which recourse for Doctrine may in every moment be made, by looking into their catechisms and lives, which are public (as those which were made by the order of the Council of Trent) and in great ocasions to general meetings, and in the mean while to the particular Church of Rome. But the Protestant, by this name, pretends to a Church, made of all whom they account good Christians, which hath no other Rule then of the scripture, that is, of the fancy of every particular Congregation, for their opinions, no common government, no bounds or limits to be known by, but such as the particular fancy of the Protestant shall upon occasion, set to include or exclude whom he pleases. So that plainly what they mean by the name of the Catholic Church is no determinate Congregation of men, nor can have any influence to govern either faith or behaviour.   

The fifth Shuffle, Of consent, with the Greeck Church.  
SOme Protestants highly brag of their communion with the Greek Church, or rather of their consent of Doctrine with it, for I have not heard of any communion unless with the Patriarch Cyril, who for that cause was put out as an heretic) a business though of no consequence now, yet for the name of what it hath been anciently of a colourable credit to them. Let us therefore see what the Protestant means, by this communion or consent. Two points there are (and only two of moment) of dissension betwixt the Greek and Latin Church. The one about the Procession of the Holy Ghost, in which the 39 Articles men agree with the Latin Church against the Grecians, and yet these are the men who most pretend to the Greek union. The other of obedience to the Pope, in the which the Greeks freely acknowledge the Pope's Primacy (which is the stumbling block to the Protestants) and confess he were to be obeyed, if he made just commands, and only except against his oppression (as they call it) and claiming of more than his right.. And in this which is no matter of faith, but of schism, and (if unjust) confessed (if doubtful) suspected rebellion. So that this glorious consent they boast of, is not in Doctrine or sacraments the life of Christians, but in a case of schism and disobedience which is common to all heretics.   

The sixth Shuffle, Of Roman Church.  
Nay some of them being ashamed of their own orphanage, and that they can not name their Father or Mother, will in spite of the Roman Church and her defying them, intrude themselves into heroff spring, saying she is substantially a true Church, though she coucheth insufferable errors in her faith, which force them not to communicate with her: let us therefore see what these mean, by this Word the Roman Church. Catholics mean by the name of Church a Congregation of men, joined with Rome in an obligation of Government, for the maintaining faith, sacraments, and good life, taking this obligation to be that, which maketh the mean bound together by it, to be a Church: The Protestant takes this obligation to be an unsufferable Tyranny, will have no rule of faith, but such an one as he can turn which way he thinks best for his interest or fancy, sacraments and government no other, than what he cannot avoid out of his proposed rule of faith, or at most, without the shame of the world. So that he means nothing that belongs to the making a multitude of men a Church, but only the multitude of men, of which a Church may be made, as if a man, should call a house or Palace the ruins of one lying in a heap where it was fallen.   

The seventh Shuffle, Of the Word Mission.  
THese are some, but Generally the prelatic party engages, in deriving themselves by Mission from the Roman Church. Let us see than what they intend by this word Mission. The Catholic interpretation is, that Mission signifies a command given to the party, sent, to deliver a Message to them to whom he is sent, which makes the Apostles question good; How can they preach if they are not sent? That is, if nobody deliver them an Errand to carry: and God is said, to put his own Words in the Mouths of those he sends, and Christ, when he sent his Apostles, bade them preach or deliver to the world, what he had taught them. Now because this command, or commission, is delegated in the Catholic Church, by a certain ceremony which is called ordination, or the sacrament of Order. The Protestant grew ambitious of this outside, and so pretends his first Prelates had an Ordination from the Catholic Bishops, whom they had deposed, or at least violently cast out, from their sees. And this they call to have a Mission from the Roman Church. So that they do not as much as pretend to the substance of the thing called truly Mission, but to an outside and shadow good enough to serve their turns, who love the Glory of men and seek not after God's honour.   

The eighth Shuffle, Of being like to the Primitive Church.  
Another thing in which they insult over Catholics, is Antiquity, the which because it hath a venerable awfulness in itself, they (specially the Presbyterian party) much presume upon, professing their Church, to be more like the Ancient Christian Church, then the Catholics is, asking whether S. Peter were the Prince of Rome? Bishops in such great pomp, had such Courts, Altars, Churches, pictures in such abundance, and so richly attired, Ceremonies and Sacraments, performed with so great magnificence and Order? By which we see, wherein these men place the Antiquity they pretend to, to wit, that the Church had not those means to draw weak hearts, which need the helps of bodily appareances, to raise themselves to the conceit of invisible goods; Whereas the Catholic pretends to Antiquity, and to be like the primitive times, in the substantial means of Christian life, as in Church government, and power of Bishops, their accommodating of the quarrels of the faithful, by the order of the Apostles, Performing the mass, baptism, Ordination, and other Sacraments with exactness and diligence, the relics and Holy burials, having Feasts, Fasts, Penitential Canons, flocks of People of both Sexes dedicated to God, Religious Ceremonies, and all sorts of enticements to love heaven and follow good life. So that the Antiquity the Protestant pretends to, is of wanting wilfully those means of helping souls, which the primitive Church wanted by the Violence of Persecution; and the Antiquity meaned by Catholics, is of being like the Ancient Church, in all things that promote virtue inwardly and outwardly.   

The ninth Shuffle. Of the Word Tradition.  
TO Antiquity hangs Tradition, that is, the receiving of Doctrine and customs from the Ancient Church. The which Catholics place in this, that it is derived from the Apostles, to us, by the continual and immediate delivery of one Age to another: the sons continuing their Fathers, both belief and conversation in Christian life, and treading the same paths of Salvation. This was a bit of too sour a digestion, for Protestants being not able to show any Masters from whom they had received their belief. Yet a Tradition they must have, not to be openly convinced of having forged their doctrine: Some of them therefore said they received their doctrine, by the Tradition of the Bible, made unto them by the Churches continuing since the Apostles time: Wherein you see an open equivocating, in the word of Tradition, Catholics taking it for the delivery of doctrine, that is of sense and meaning, the Protestants for the delivery of a mute book or killing letter. Others call Tradition the Testimony of the Fathers of all Ages, and so at least divert the Question, Turning the proof of Religion (which is plain and easy to every ordinary understanding) into a business of learning and long study, in which though they be worstted, yet the People cannot see it, nor descry their falsehood.   

The tenth Shuffle. Of the word Really.  
TO descend from the Universality or defence of their whole Religion, to special articles of it, we shall find them there like themselves. As for example, those who bear an outward respect to the Fathers, finding them concurring so thick to testify Christ's Body to be in the Holy Eucharist, will see me to say the same, and use the word of Christ being Really, and verily, and truly, in the Sacrament: and that they only question, the manner how he is there, which is lawful amongst Catholics to do. So that you cannot almost distinguish them from Catholics, until you come to explication. There the Catholic sayeth, that Christ's Body is in the sacrament, as the substance of Bread was in the thing, which before we called Bread, and now is no more, but turned into that body which was hanged on the Cross, by an entitative and real mutation. The Protestant will tell you, that it is still Bread, and naturally and entitatively the same thing, which it was before consecration, but that by faith (which is a real action) it is Christ's true body to us. How to justify these words, that by Faith it is Christ's true body, is impossible, unless they will have us believe by faith, what they tell us is false. Therefore others say it is an assurance of Christ's Body, as a bond is of money: Peradventure of enjoying Christ in Heaven. But how different both senses be from the Catholic, which they seek to be thought theirs, and from the natural meaning of the words every man can see. So that the manner of being Christ's Body, which they question, signifies whether it be truly there, or no, but only by a false apprehension they call Faith.   

The eleventh Suffle, Of the Word Sacrifice.  
The like is of the word Sacrifice, and Altar, and such other. In which the Catholic position makes these words proper, and that the Mass is as, or more properly signified by the word sacrifice, as the sacrifice of the old law. That there is a true and real separation of the body of our Saviour from his blood, and more proper to the names than nature can make, which can not make a true body when the blood is separated, nor true blood when the body is left out, which in this sacrament is performed, and nevertheless Christ entire and untouched. But a Protestant will tell you that when the Holy offering is called a sacrifice, it is meaned a sacrifice of praise or thanks giving, that is, in reality no sacrifice but an outward ceremony of praise or thanks giving, others that it is a resemblance or representation of a sacrifice, to wit, of that of the holy Cross; so that you see the difference of the two significations is no less then when by the same word (as of Christ's) one means Christ's Person another, a Crucifix or the picture of Christ.   

The twelfth Shuffle. Of the Word Priesthood.  
In consequence and conformity to this, they abuse the Word of Priesthood. For finding all Antiquity gloriously full of this name, they must also use it, and finding St. Paul had too expressly taught us, that a Priest was a public Officer, ordained to offer to God gifts and sacrifices, and that he ought to be legitimately called to the office; and that catholics take Priesthood in this meaning: And how, on the other side, themselves had taken out of the Church, all solemn offerings, and sacrifice the business of a Priest: and nevertheless shame on one side, and ambition on the other, egged them on to call themselves Priests, they were forced to corrupt the Word sacrifice; first as is declared to come to the name Priesthood. So that Priesthood in the Protestant meaning, is an officer chosen to sing psalms, in the sight of the People. The which how different it is from the Catholic explication, of being the public Officer of the eternal sacrifice, is too plain to be declared. Only I must add, that who takes ordination, with the intention, only to become the chief or high singer of the Parish, receiveth not Priesthood, as it is meaned, and used in the Catholic Church.   

The thirteenth Shuffle. Of the word Faith.  
THe abuse of this name Faith, must not be omitted, which Catholics taking for a persuasion of such truths, as are necessary to bring us to good life and salvation, which persuasion we settle upon Christ's doctrine delivered unto us by Tradition of the Church. The which meaning is clear in the Apostle, who expresseth himself to speak of faith that works by Charity. The first Protestants took the word Faith, as excluding Charity, and cried down good works as improfitable; the latter ashamed of this, as destroying good life, and plainly contrary to the whole design of Scripture and Fathers, took it for the same faith that Catholics do, but would have it have force, precisely out of its being a persuasion, and the working to follow to no effect; but as a hanger on without any End; whereas Catholics make the persuasion to be chiefly or wholly to breed Charity, which is the true cause of salvation. But the Presbyterian party, and the plainer dealing Protestants, have quite changed and destroyed faith: saying, faith is a Persuasion that the believer must have, that he in Person is one of the Predestinate, and shall be saved, by this persuasion, through the merits, of Christ, without any regard to his works and life. Of which sense, seeing there is no revelation, there can be no relying upon the word of God for any such effect, and so it is clear, these people have nothing like Faith, the former Protestants having at least the Carcase, but renounce the soul, life, and being of it.   

A bundle of divers shussles.  
If we should, as thus, pass over all the points controverted between catholics, and all that have separated themselfs from the Catholic Church; we should find very few freely disputed, but that either they calonniate the Catholic position or counterfeit it. As concerning images and Saints, they pretend we worship them as Gods: As for marriage, they report we disallow it. For the merits of Christ, they say we rely not upon them, because we understand them otherwise then they do. For the Catholic Church understands, that Christ, by his life and passion procured the Establishment of the Holy Church, the preaching of the Gospel over the whole earth, a settled means to continue, and increase, what he by himself and his Apostles begun, a seed and root of good life, planted by the sending of the Holy Ghost to remain in the Church for ever, a Government of Bishops and doctors for ever, sacraments to be universally administered, Extraordinary Examples of heroic virtues in Martyrs, confessors, Monks and nuns: and in a Word, all that was necessary to bring the universality of mankind, to heavenly bliss, and these means to be derived to single Persons, according to God's all good providence and the connatural suit of causes. The protestant understands, that Christ in his private prayer, spoke to his Father in particular for every one of the predestinate, to save him for his and his passions sake, and so infer, that the belief that he is one of those for whom Christ specially prayed is that which must apply the grace granted by Christ's eternal Father to his soul, and thinks the Catholic relies not upon Christ's merits, because he doth it not so sillily as he does, In penance the Catholic holdeth it a sacrament, in form of a judgement, in which the penitent is absolved or condemned, according to his desert. The Protestant holdeth only, as it were a compliment of ones acknowledging himself a sinner and asking of mercy, and that the preacher without farther ceremony absolve him. Those who believe not the mysteries of the Trinity and Incarnation; nevertheless use the words of one God and three Persons; and profess, that though they hold the son and Holy Ghost to be creatures, yet that they are to be called each of them God, and likewise though some hold Christ, to have no other nature then of a Man, yet that he is justly called God, for his great perfections and unity in Charity with God. It were superfluous to multiply more examples to show how it is not the zeal of truth, but either ignorance, in them who do not understand the true difference, betwixt the Catholic Church and its deserters; or malice in them who disguise, either their own tenets, or those of the Catholic party. God prosper the labours of those who seek unity, and by his sweet conduct, bring all who profess the name of Christ into perfect concord, in one flock, by the unity in faith, and charity.    

PAg. 3. l. 16. Leap. p. 6. l. 8.50. l. 18. so. p. 7. l. 4. with. l. 7. even l. 27. of all p. 13. l. 6. too weak to. p. 14. l. 14. of coming p. 17. l. 22. a quality. p. 18. l. 7. to p. 21. l. 1. to p. 21 l. 1. to p. 22 l. 23. observe p. 23. l. 7. same manner l. 9 Godliness p. 27. l. 23. and 4. one; then it p. 30. l. 6. hind p. 52. l. 1. be turned p. 58. l. 3. cultivated p. 59 l. 5. biased p. 51. l. 27. different p. 74. l. 7. preaching p. 66. l. 18. cure drunkeness p. 69. l. 23. bring the p. 70. l. 9 God as solidly p. 72. l. 15. Conics p. 74. l. 18. obstructed p. 76. l. 10. be forced p. 82. l. 22. before to be for p. 87. l. 4. proceedeth upon l. 2.5. long. p. 88 l. 24. solve p 89. l. 7. imparity p. 92. l. 8. and contradict p. 93. l. 8. offer p. 103. l. 22. overweened p. 104. l. 21. run p. 105. l. 8. see l. 13. carry p. 107. l. 19 condescendences p. 109. l. 10. to see p. 117. l. 17. of allegations p. 119. l. 22. are as good p. 122. l. 25. Coelibate p. 128. l. 10. Angel's l. 17. upon, can l. 28. excused neither p. 131. l. 25. who as soon l. 26. think that p. 133. l. 9 not, for l. loath p. 136. l. 21. which is out p. 140. l. 12. persecution p. 142. l. 15. certainty p. 146. l 4. of death and of l. 13. best when p. 148. l. 24. solve it p. 152. l. 16. importeth p. 153. l. 13. Abyssine p. 154. l. 9 singing and p. 157. l. 16. are so close l. 19 is so p. 158. l. 21 of such talkers p. 159. l. 12. (else p. 160. l 24. exalted p. 163. l. 6. though their p. 164. l. 14. which praise p. 169. l. 14. heaps p. 170. l. 5. a Corus p. 182. l. 25. just indifference p. 184. l. 4. on it? p. 189. l. 2●. capable of p. 190. l. 18. default p. 195. l. 18. with p. 1▪ 6. l. 11. enure us p. 197. l. 10.11. toward their teachers, what adhesion to p. 198. l. 23.24. profess there p. 203. l. 21. cultivatour p. 206. l. 14. long as l. 201. l. 20. the fall p. 202. l. 25. tongue though.