THE JUDGEMENT OF AN VNIVERSITY-MAN CONCERNING M. William Chillingworth his late Pamphlet, in Answer to Charity Maintained.  
¶ Imprinted with Licence, Anno M.DC.XXXIX.   

TO THE RIGHT WORSHIPFUL my Noble Friend N.H.  
SIR,  
I must ever acknowledge myself obliged in term's of Friendship to satisfy your so reasonable demand, which is only to show you my opinion concerning a late borne Treatise, The Religion of Protestantss' a safe way etc. For your own part you profess you are satisfied already for the matter itself, that nothing solid or substantial can come forth, for the defence of so bad, or offence of so good a cause; but the world (you say) cries it up, and you would gladly see it disabused. Indeed, as concerning the vulgar acceptance, I understand no less, and withal I remember how the Father, or grandfather of this, was the popular applause and acclamation for a while, & those upcryes coming often to my ears, I said as often I confess, — O saclum insipiens, & infacetum! Grieving together with some little indignation, that of true judgement in writings of this nature, there appeared so great penury and barrenness in this Land: though I was not ignorant that very many were to be found of either University, whose more solid erudition and understanding decried it as fast, though not so loud.  
But before you have my censure of the work itself, I shall acquaint you with the common voice (if perchance you have not hard it) concerning certain circumstances of the Work; the why's and wherefors, the motives to these enterprizing and advocating for other men: & first of all concerning his joint-printing and coedition of his Adversary with his own work, some said it was square and fair dealing; other's that it was a prodigious conjunction, no loss then the Hippocentaure; others that this committing himself with his Adversary in the same volume, would cause an odious comparison, disaduantagious to the Author.  
Sic interpositus vitio contaminat uncto  
Vrbica Lingonicus Tyrianthina Bardocucullus.  
Sic Aretinae violant Chrystallina testae.  
Sic niger in ripis errat cùm fortè Caeystri  
Inter Laedeos ridetur coruus olores.  
Sic ubi multisonâ feruet sacer Athide lucus,  
Improba Cecr●pias offendit pica querelas.  
Vindice nil opus est, aut charactire malign●,  
Stat contra, & cuius tua sit mihi pagina clamat.  
Which superlative difference they observed (as I conceive) rather in the spirit of writing, then in the wording. And namely they observe that his personal reproaches, his style of contumely, compared with the civil and mild composure of his adversary; his iocularie and jeering humour, with the others grave and serious menage; his fraudulent and sophistical syllogizing, with his plain & regular discourse; his lurking, and scotizing, and affecting obscurity, his overcasting with mists of subtle interpretations his adversaries plain words, seeking or making the Knot where it is not, paralleled with the others openness and endeavour to give day to truth; lastly his immethodical structure and digesture of the whole work confronted with the others perspicuity and light of order, will appear in this nearness and vicinity much more contemptible, then if they stood aloof, and at distance in several impressions.  
Yet others say again, that even in this he was wise, and provident in his generation: yea that surely some higher power directed his design; as the Goddess of wisdom is said to have carried the arrow drawn at the breast of Menelaus upon his belt, & so of no force to wound as was intended, but yet enough to occasion continuance of the War, and the ensuing victory of the Grecians; that by these two provisions divine and humane, of God & M. Ch. (if this commission be not yet more odious than the former) many things are effected commodious to all sides.  
To his adversary; whose work by this opportunity is every man's money, and in every man's hand's Come Privilegio, hath his protection from his adversary; and out of a strange mistaking Charity, is permitted to fight under his Shield, like a little Teucer under his cousin Aiax buckler, shooting not only at the common enemy, but even at Aiax himself, out of a like confidence perhap's that, having combated himself, and having been too hard for himself so often, he is unconquerable by any other, Nec quisquam Aiacem poterit superare, nisi Aiax.  
Commodious to the reader, who hath the joint-impression at an easier rate both of price and pain's; hath now no more to do, but turn the leaf, and (if he please) sing a new song: yet with this odds, I confess, that while he read's, or hardly read's the Catholic volume miserably contracted like another Homer into a nutshell; he beholds the Protestants Attorney like a new Edgar under sail, gloriously swelling in displayed Characters,  populus tumido gaudeat Antimacho.  
Gainful last to himself, who by this co-impression becomes more vendible, and makes a more swift return of the commodity; his friends buy him more greedily, out of an appetite and curiosity to see the man, committed face to face with his adversary, how manfully he bestir's himself. The friends of his adversary perhap's convinced with the evidence of his discourse and deductions, will be covetous to see what can be said to these; how such arguments will be cleared; how the Advocate will untie the Gordian Knot like an Aristotle, or like an Alexander: All men I think, after so large and lowed promises of an utter confutation will be desirous to understand, Quid dignum tanto ferat hic promissor hiatu.  
Thus all sides, a man would think, will be pleased, and he, the author of this co-impression, most of all; who having been at great charges, and having his money out upon the work, would gladly, no doubt, see it back again, together with the fruit of his expectation. And to say sooth, who sow's but he would reap? who plant's a vineyard but he would eat the fruit thereof?  
I have met with some other Censurers, who in my judgement proceed too far this way, taking the boldness to penetrate those adita, those very conclaves of men's intentions. And, whereas there are to be considered two ends in every artificial work, the one intrinsique, the other extrinsique, the former the end of the Art, the later of the Artist; this being so sacred, that he might justly interdict all ingress to any mortal man, might paint two snakes at the entrance with this Epigraphe, — Sacer hic locus, extra etc.  
Yet to such an Hyperbole of presumption are men arrived in this age, that enter they will like any Pursuivant, into the very inroomes, and bowels of the most secret counsels and designs of other men. But while by glozing his intention they will seem forsooth to excuse him, in my opinion, they do but geere him; who, as though they had heard what he spoke in his hart, take upon them to personate him in his own words.  
What I do in this writing for Protestant's, I do it not, out of malice; nor out of any ill will towards the cause I impugn, no nor good will towards the cause I propugne: but, (ut verum fabuler,) to deal plainly with you, reflecting upon myself standing thus neutral between two potent factions, and being now as weary as any Posthorse with Canterburying so oft from Thebes to Athens, and from Athens to Thebes, and by all these journey's and defatigations, having gained nothing by either but sweat and jealousy; calling often to mind the wise sentence of Sallust, Frustra niti, neque aliud se fatigando, nisi odium quaerere, extremae dementiae est; 'tis mere madness to take pains to no purpose, to make no other purchase, but displeasure; I resolved upon a course how to endear myself unto one, and the rather to that part, which professed most faith, as the most likely to believe me. But these truly I hold to be but idle comment's and surmises, wholly Heterodox from his true meaning and intention.  
As that likewise of some others, that by these so many his turns and returns, he affects a Name, to make himself known to the world, upon that knowledge and diffamation to raise his fortunes; or to lie like a football between the Goals, to become the ambition of Competitors, — Multorum spes invidiosa procorum: and then, a Qui plus, qui potior est ad dandum etc. win me, and wear me.  
Now this Fescennine liberty of Censure, for mine own part, I utterly dislike. For I love the man, and wish he may so come off after all these changes, that he may not be loved without a rival. And 'tis well, yea surely a singular argument of God's goodness and providence, that the things in nature most necessary for man's use, are the readiest at hand, and the most obvious acquest: as even here, for this advocate, I hold it much more easy to become a good Christian, then to be thought so. And if it be true which one saith, Nec vixit malè qui vivens moriensque fefellit, He hath not lived amiss whom no man knows how he hath lived or died; I am in good hope he may yet live and dye well, and begin then to be Magnus coram Domino, great in God's ey's, when he shall be little in the ey'sof men, especially in his own.  
To return now to the matter in hand, permitting these and many the like censures to his verdict who hath one common key to unlock all closerts of hearts, to whom alone that office belongs, it shall be far from any presumption of mine to pass any censure upon these extrinsecall ends. The fines Artis alone, shall be my aim; so far forth as to discover in this work, or rather in some part of it, what is pernicious of itself, and of force to do more harm than he perhaps intends. If more than this, any personal touch of censure chance to fall from my unwilling pen, meeting with his like humour and begotten of it, as simile gignit sibi simile, like begets the like, heat produce's heat, & fire produce's fire; and as his personal humour running along through his discourse (indeed a very salt humour) may cast some salt into my pen, I shall hope that a reasonable defence or excuse may be presumed from any indifferent man, even out of the consideration of these Premises; wherein also I can easily maintain a very honest intention, as to show the man himself in a convenient distance from himself, for that indistancy of the object is wont to hinder sensation. In the mean time verily it may seem an incredible effect of a prodigious Philautie, or Authadie, or what else you will please to call that dark and cloudy affection, able to put out the light of the sun at midday, if it could reach it, that a man otherwise rational, yea who makes reason his Oracle, his Card, his Cynosure; witty too, yea an idolater of wit, should owe so little to either, as not to have discovered his own, so many gross follies errors, vanities, indecencies, yea incivilities; besides his so many frauds and shifts, and Paralogismes and fallacies, his wilful and affected mistakinges and misunderstanding his Adversary, and the like, for which his conscience hath more to answer then his wit; and that after making so large an ostentation of all kind of literature, he should do nothing else in all, but abuse all; and fall so short of the expectation of those who knew him, that now they can by no means know him, in his Worke. For my own part, I have been so charitable as to think the Work none of his who entitles it; or his so altered, and Sophisticate, that he may justify the disclaiming it: Therefore as conceived such upon good grounds I shall make the more bold with it.  
Now then only to satisfy your entreaty, what I have here censured in general terms, I shall apply to particulars as they lie in my way, while I run along with this whosoever, or incerti generis Author; but yet so, as to be at liberty, to take up when I list. For I am not matched with him; and I doubt not, but he hath met with his match: yet perhap's, I shall take up so, as it shall appear I might have made it good to the last.   

M. CHILLINGWORTH his Title to his Preface.  

The Preface to the author of Charity Maintained, with an answer to his Pamphlet, entitled a Direction to N. N.  
I HAVE observed this ordinary Tapinosis, or phrase of degradation, very frequent in Protestant writers against the Catholic: but if withal they have Christened it a Popish Pamphlet, I dare say, 'tis more than half the confutation. Now fain would I know how many rheims of paper may vindicate a Book from the contempt of a Pamphlet? In my opinion a large volume in folio may be a Pamphlet in substance, and a Manual book of a very few sheets may contain the weight & worth of an ample volume. True, if Glover's and Gross be made judges, your swelling volumes are more useful for such occasions. They should do well to send them thither, where they shall be valued according to there bulk, 
— Ad vicum vendentem thus & odores  
Et piper, & quicquid chartis amicitur ineptis.   
But the Printer will be paid according to the number of sheets, and good reason. Therefore you have purchased with your purse a title of Honour to your Work above a Pamphlet; therefore he will not call it Pamplet, but I may, who take by weight of wit, and substance, that of ink and paper. And to deal plainly and seriously with the man, if all the Parergas, or impertinences of his book were culled out, and the solid remains bound up by themselves, this would be a very Pamphlet indeed, much less then either of the two so termed by him, M. C. or by his Patron D. P. Howsoever if a Goliath chance to be defeated by a little David, had it not been more credit for him to have called him a Giant then a dwarf? Thus much for the Pamphlet.  
Preface. I came (saith he) with such a mind to the reading of it (Charity Maintained,) as S. Austin before he was a settled Catholic brought to his conference with Faustus the Manichee.  
Answer. He could not compare himself amiss with any thing unsettled. Neither in my judgement, could he stand by S. Austin in comparison with any decorum otherwise then as invested with this formality, not settled.  
Pref. For as he thought, that if any thing more than ordinary might be said in defence of the Manichean doctrine, Faustus was the man from whom it was to be expected; so my persuasion concerning you was, 
— si Pergama dextrâ  
Defendi possunt, certè hac defensa videbo.   
Ans. And why so? behold his Rhetoric in his witty gradation.  
Pref. For I conceived, that among the Champions of the Roman Church, the English in reason must be the best, or equal to the best. as being by most expert masters trained up purposely for this war, and perpetually practised in it.  
Ans. Now Sir, if you withdraw this base, or corner stone, will not all this imaginary structure of discourse, this aery conceit fall flat to the ground? I deny then, then in reason the English must be the best, or equal to the best; their training-maisters are the same, their practice for this war, that is, disputes of Controversy concerning faith, less than others have. For the Catholic cause hath the same Adversaries in some other Countries, and those very many, and (as the opinion of most men is) more able Champions for Protestancy then the English; with these the encounters of Catholics of those Countries are more frequent, more public, because more secure and free; all which considerations make this first Assumpt & Fundamental conceit incredible.  
Secondly, that (purposely, and perpetually practised) if I deny, how will he prove it? which the Roman Orator accounts great weakness of discourse to bring in for proof that which is either confuted, or silenced with a Nego, a direct denial.  
Pref. Among the English, I saw the jesuits would yield the first place to none.  
Ans. I deny that he saw this; or if he did, it was a false vision: he saw it with eyes of a deluded imagination, not of true judgement; well he deserves to be numbered with those, for aught I see, of whom the Prophet jerem. Threns. 2. Prophetae tui viderunt tibi falsa, & stulta: thy Prophets have seen false & foolish things. Concerning the viderunt tibi assumptiones falsas, this is one of the number of false Assumpts which this Prophet saw, that the jesuits would yield the first place to none.  
Pref. And men so wise in their generation as the jesuites are, if they had any Achilles among them, I presumed would make choice of him for this service.  
Answ. In which words, as likewise in the former, though I find but little salt, yet I discover not a little gall: he would have you take notice of the jesuites arrogancy, and their presumed or pretended wisdom. Now, a man would wonder how he became so inwardly acquainted with the jesuites. Sure this man is not he of whom 'tis said, Sapientis oculi in capite su●, a wiseman's eyes are in his own head; but his eyes seem to dwell in other men's hearts, where they are so busy, that they are blind at home. And would any man think that this man was never Catholic above two months at once, who knows the jesuites so well? or is this some end of an old song which he singes by rote, and thinks not what he singes?  
Or how knows he the jesuites conceived any such difficulty in answering D. P. that some Achilles was to be sought forth, to encounter him? Was he such a Hector? O but have patience to ascend step by step to the top of this gradation, there shall you find M. C. himself enthroned in the clouds: for if with so much ado, an Achilles were to be found for such a Hector, who shall be the man, that after much enquiry, shall be supposed an equal match at least for this Achilles? Now what Don Q— is this, who having raised an imaginary Castle in the air, will go fight against it himself and batter it? or become another Paris in conceit, shoot at his aery Achilles, hit him in the heel, and, if his hart be there, kill him. But see, I pray you, see him building his castle, and fortifying it with strong assistants, and how he backs his Achilles with his many bands of Myrmidons before he will vouchsafe to encounter him.  
Pref. I had good assurance, that in framing this building, though you were the only architect, yet you wanted not many diligent hands to bring you in choice materials towards it: nor of many careful and watchful eyes to correct the errors of your work.  
Answ. If he had indeed so many watchful eyes employed in correcting his errors the more happy he; and he, this Advocate, the more unhappy, who of so many eyes as surveyed his work, had not one Watchful; as may appear by the innumerable errors which have escaped their corrections, that a man would wonder what Mercury had piped them all a sleep. But what of all this? Marry that which follows, out of this presumption or preimagination of such a castle, or such an Achilles, with his so many bands of Myrmidones, and watchful eyes coming against him, he had great reason to expect the utmost that could be done or said in defence of the Roman.  
Pref. And to assure himself, that if his resolution not to believe it, were not built upon the rock of evident grounds and reasons etc. now the wind, and storms, and floods were coming which would undoubtedly overthrew it.  
Ans. Note his Rhetorical and grave exaggeration; that no small matter, not wind alone, nor wind and storms, no not winds and storms and floods could be able to overthrew this rock of Resolution M. Ch. Now if you would say notwithstanding all this, this rock of resolution hath been shaken at the least, and that again and again, and again and again, for every wind once, or perhaps as many times as there are collateral winds too, or storms and tides in the year; for if he be the man he is thought to be, a new Academic or so, he may alter his resolution as often as he list, so he follow only what seems more probable, for the time, the day, the hour etc. O, but now his Resolution if become rock, neither is this so incredible a thing but that an Academic in Religion may believe it, as verily as he believes any point of Christian Faith. For both Pliny and other good authors tell us, of some certain things of a soft and fluid nature, which in time, yea and often on a sudden, become hard, yea very stone & rock: which for the greater confirmation you shall hear out of Ouides Metamorphosis, who had he lived till now, might have added this rock of Resolution to the number of his changes.  
Victa racemifero Lyncas dedit India Baccho;  
E quibus, ut memorant, quicquid vesica remittit  
Vertitur in lapides, & congelat aenre tacto.  
I pray good after so much rocking and reeling he be not rocked a sleep, & become as deaf as a rock, nor by any wind or storm of divine threats or floods of reasons and persuasions any whit more movable, towards Religion, Quàm si dura silex, aut stet Marpesia cautes.  
So that now to question his constancy of resolution in this kind, were to question the constancy of the Moon which changeth so constantly every month. Notwithstanding I would have you to take notice of the constancy of his discourse, and how easily he falls of from his rock within three lines (I know he may do so, and yet be constant and true enough to his new Academiques:) for having immediately before professed his rocky resolution upon evident reasons, not to believe the Roman Doctrine, he adjoines forthwith.  
Pref. Neither truly, were you more willing to effect such an alteration in me, than I was to have it effected.  
Answ. How stands this rock of resolution upon evident grounds not to believe, that is, not to be altered with willingness, yea so much willingness to be altered, especially that evidence supposed by him to be such as no wind etc. no force of reason, or persuasion could overthrew? Unless in saying his Adversary was not more willing to effect such an alteration, than himself to have it effected, he thought perhaps that his adversary had no will at all to effect any such alteration, as of one so often altered already, that to alter him again would not quit the cost; conceiving that after another alteration, he would be still more easy to be altered then ever to be settled; who goes about to settle the wind, or fasten it to any one corner of the world, or any thing else governed by the winds, windmills, or weather rocks, or the like.  
Pref. Yet because he makes show of some desire to go the right way to eternal happiness, though whether this way lie on the right hand or the left, or strait forward, to him it is indifferent.  
Answ. I will tell him my opinion; which is, that his way lies neither on the left hand, nor the right, nor strait forward, no nor backward (though this last was not well omitted by him in his distribution, as lying nearest to the right way) but rather indeed strait downward: as if you would settle a weathercock in one constant positure, the readiest ways willbe to take it down, and place it on the ground.  
This was the way S. Paul was put into (though his alteration by the way, is no Apology for this Attorneys so often iterated & reiterated alterations:) he changed with the change of the whole world. Ecce ego nova facio omnia; in Christo neque praputium, neque circumcisio est aliquid, sed nona creatura: and 'twas his fault he changed no sooner; nor was it yet indeed a change. For who will say he is changed, who convertes with him, who is never changed, in quo non est mutatio nec vicissitudinis adumbratio? But this way, 
Act. 9  I say, was downward; Cadens in terram audivit vocem etc. Falling flat upon the proved, lying now even with himself, that is, with dust, earth, and nothing, there he heard the voice of his direction; which eavenesse of place, and centre of truth he ever after kept, both in life and doctrine; qui existimat se aliquid esse, cum nihil sit, ipse se seducit; he who thinks he is something, being indeed nothing, he beguiles himself. At what time also he became blind, that he might see. For he was rather indeed shown then made blind: he regained his sight by the imposition of hands of Ananias, without further dispute; who if he would have disputed with him, he could have done it, and remained blind still, with a resolution built upon a rock of more evident grounds, than any M. Advocate hath to build upon.  
He would if he had been of his humour, have questioned the credit of all those visions, as being perhaps (he would say) illusions, or at the least not infallibly true; and then what could flow from those Principles more strong and infallible than the Principles themselves? And suppose they were of infallible authority; well than he was to persecute no more; or if he were to be a Christian too, yet why was Baptism necessary? why Circumcision not sufficient? why such a Christian as Peter or john? See (would he say) how many Syllogisms you are short of the Conclusion you would infer. Thus might he have vanished away 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, in his disputes, and have proved rather a Vessel of Contention, than Election. And yet after all, might have returned with this or the like glory, that he was now more confirmed in his belief of judaisme then ever; or with somewhat like to this, Ego exprobravi agminibus Israël hodie; date mihi virum ut ineat mecum singulare certamen: I have braved the hosts of Israël this day, challenging the best man among then to single combat of dispute with me. I have heard of some such Braves of the new Academy, who had little cause of any such glory, and who have found their match more than once: but they are so wise as to make their Adversary's silence, or secrecy their advantage.  
And yet I verily think you need not go far to match this Goliath, this Pythagorique Transmigration: do but match him with himself; if he fight not with himself, yea if be not to hard for himself, almost in every page, & in some oftener than once or twice, I dare be bound to answer the forfeit. As even namely in this place, having boasted his resolution built upon a rock, not to believe the Roman Doctrine, very soon after he professeth he retains a Trauailer's indifference, which way of religion to take of so many way's as are now in the world. When will this indifferent Traveller come to his journey's end, who is not yet resolved of his way, nor knows yet whether he be in it or no? Yea, and if he prove true to his principles, will always be thus indifferent. So that if he have gone twenty miles to day on the left hand of truth, he will go to morrow as many on the right, if he meet with a more apparent, or howsoever more prevailing reason, which may be nothing else perhaps but a better friend, or some greater commodity, or the like. The third day you shall have him gone as far a third way; the fourth, a fourth way, and so forth: and a thousand to one after many years, you shall find him very little advanced in his way; Inue Academiâ umbriferâ, nitidoue Lyceo; In some Colledge-grove, or Cloister, there you shall have my indifferent Traveller, disputing of Religion 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
But where is now that invincible Resolution? Was it only a negative Resolution not to believe the Catholic doctrine? And hath that of all others deserved so ill of him? Indeed he lost his fellowship by it; but I presume the Catholic would have given him a better, had he but held out his year's probation. Yet now it seems he is resolved upon evident grounds to be an indifferent Traveller to all other Professions, but never to believe himself again, whatsoever he can object for the Catholic. No, he hath believed himself that way twice already, and hath deceived himself: therefore now he will never more dispute that question with himself again, but with this resolution before hand, either to confute, or not to believe himself.  
But to return to that expected Achilles which this Advocate had fancied, Electum ex millibus, the choice Champion of thousand's, what becomes of him? Marry this, (which we may suppose to have been the drift of this Chymerique discourse) he hath met with this Advocate, a stronger Giant than he, who hath despoiled him of all his confidence, shown him his weakness.  
Pref. True, some snares he found and colour, which might deceive the simple, but nothing that might persuade, and very little that might move an understanding man, and one that can discern betwixt Discourse and Sophistry.  
Answ. Now to show this weakness in his adversary, is indeed to vanquish him; and himself must need's be supposed this Vnderstanding-man who hath discovered it: so that he hath made his adversary an Achilles to great purpose, to make himself a greater Achilles. in defeating him. Which success that he nothing doubted, hear his words.  
Pref. In short I was verily persuaded that I plainly saw, and could make it appear to all dispassionate and unpreiudicate judges, that a vein of Sophistry and Calumny did run clean through his book from the beginning to the end.  
Answ. Now Sir, if this charge be true, which even a passionate man, if not wholly blinded with passion will presently discern to be most false; then is this very objecting of a throughout continued Calumny, and Sophistry, a Gigantique victory indeed: but the point is yet to prove. And yet I will not urge upon him this way, but for once will do him the courtesy myself to prove evidently that what he saith is true. For his answer, as being indeed a very mine of Sophistry and Calumny, (as it shall manifestly appear) and by this joint-edition running through his adversary's book, it will easily follow by true consequence, that a vein of Sophisty and Calumny runneth clean through the said his Adversary's book from the beginning to the end.  
¶ And this is the business I undertook, dear Sir, whereby to satisfy your request concerning my judgement, which shall appear in actu exercito, by what I shall note unto you out of my observation in these two kinds especially, of Sophistry and Calumny; for to follow him a long in his quoted authorities of Books, as I could not do it, having neither those books at hand nor opportunity to procure them; so I make no doubt but it will be fully done by a better Champion, though no Achilles neither; but one, I dare say, who might seem a dwarf standing by this Giant, if selfe-conceipts might pass for true presumptions.   

Calumnies and Sophistries of M. Ch. gathered out of his two Answers: And first out of his answer to the Direction given him by the Maintainer of Charity.  
SECTION I.  
AS among men, 
Soph. Elench. c. 1.  saith Aristotle, some are of a healthful complexion and constitution, some are not but seem to be so: and of metals some are true gold or silver, others may have the likeness and lustre of either, but yet are neither: so of rational Discourses, some are indeed and really true discourses, some are only apparently such.  
Now, saith he, because to some men it is more gainful and advantageous, to seem wise and knowing, then to be, and not to seem; therefore such men make choice rather to seem to do like wise and skilful men, then to do it only, and not seem to do it. The Sophister is such an one, one who trade in false coins of Discourse or seeming knowledge, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Because the return indeed i● quicker than in true gold of lawful argument's, and it is easier to deceive the most part of men by fallacious inferences then to convince understanding men by true Conclusions.  
The end and scope of Sophism, 
Soph. c. 3.  is Victory, intimated by the Philosopher in that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ambitious of Victory: and a further end of this victory is some desired purchase as of riches, honour, or the like; which are purchased thus at the cheapest rate, as that which is bought with copper, or the like counterfeit trash, comes cheaper to a man, than what he buy's with current gold. For this cause therefore the Sophist serveth himself of such fallacious and adulterate forms of discoursing, which having only the false face of true Syllogisms, are indeed mere Sophisms and Paralogismes.  
I have no mind to introduce in this place an odious comparison between these two, the Author of this answer, with his Antagonist: yet they who know them both, will be able I think to make some probable conjecture, to whether of the two this character of a Sophister 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, a trader or dealer in, or for commodities may seem the more proper to him, who hath solemnly renounced and divorced all traffic with the world, not only by profession, but by a total and actual dispossession: or to him who having added to the inclination of corrupt nature, the poise and sway of a bad repentance, is fallen back upon the world with a greater swing; who converseth daily with trade and traffic, seeking to improve his fortunes by all the thriving ways he can. Therefore so often, and so loudly to declaim against his Adversary's Sophistry and Calumny, I cannot imagine impudence enough in him to do it; but an exigence ra●her & necessity, to remove from himself by his pretended dislike and detestation of these vices, all opinion of them to withdraw men's eyes from beholding them in himself, where they are most palpably to be seen, and to derive the just hatred of them upon his Adversary. 
1. Calumny, and Sophism.  So while he most proclaimeth his adversary's sophistry, even then, & in that, he employeth his master piece of a most sophistical Calumny; which I note as his primitive and original Sophism & Calumny running throughout his whole Work from the beginning to the end, as shall appear by the sequel of particulars. But withal I am to premonish you, Sir, that you are not to expect to find all these fallacies, within the number of Aris●●tle's, who were he now alive and would undertake to reduce them to those forms of Sophisms described and observed by him (and he was a man of no small observation in this kind, & had inherited the observations of many others) I am verily persuaded he would have found himself reduced to greater & impossible, than ever he had meddled withal. But now to prosecute our history of Fallaci●'s and Calumnies.  
It is a Fallacy, a Non-cause for a Cause, where dissembling the true cause or causes, which he could not but know, of his Adversaries (as he calls it) tergiversation, 
2. Fallacy.  in truth, Refusal to give him (as he saith) a fair, but more likely a foul meeting; he would impose upon the world, that the cause was his Adversary's diffidence and distrust in the cause of religion which he defends. But hear his Challenge, or Protestation to this purpose.  
Pref. Which Protestation (saith he) by God's help, I would have made good, that if you, or any other that would undertake your cause, would give me affair meeting, and choose out of your own book any one argument, whereof you were most confident, and by which you would be content therest should be judged of, and make it appear that I had not, or could not answer it, that I would desist from the work which I had undertaken, and answer none at all.  
Answ. And is not this a Goliath indeed? Date mihi Virum; give me a man; excepts no man. And observe withal his Rhetoric of a most Hyperbolical Confidence: Choose (1) ou●, of your (2) own book, (3) any one (4) argument, whereof you (5) were most (6) confident. (Soláne perpetuâ me, reus carpêre iwentâ?) But first, Sir, if confidence might carry the cause, there were no dealing with this Champion. Secondly it is an unreasonable postulate that the force of all the rest should be judged by the defence of any one Argument, or (much more) by the ability of any one defendant: neither is every man best able to defend his own best argument, though he may live to see the worst sufficiently defended, though not after the manner which he prescribes. But suppose that one argument chosen out, what shall be done next? make it appear. To whom? that he had not, or could not answer it. But when? and how answer it? For the time being undetermined, when can it appear that he cannot answer it? and the manner of answering not expressed, how shall it be made appear that he can answer it after no manner whatsoever. 
Experto crede etc.  For he who knows M. Ch. will never believe that he will ever be brought to such a non plus of answering, that he will not be able to answer at least, 'tis ally, or call his adversary Knau●; or swear, t'●s as he saith; challenge his adversary to swear the contrary etc. No doubt he hath many ●hi●t's and suits of answers, and that none will fit, who can tell?  
But now at length, what if? when all this were made to appear. Marry than he would desist from the work, and answer none at all; as much as if he had said, if his mouth were stopped, he would hold his peace. O but now, en crimen, en causa, lo the crime and cause which he expostulates with his Adversary.  
Pref. That having by all the arts he could possibly devise (being Master I dare say of more than seven) provoked him to such a trial, accumulating threats too, that if he refused it, the world should be informed of his tergiversation; notwithstanding all this, he hath perpetually and obstinately declined it.  
Ans. What challenge could be devised more piquant and irritant than this? and than what greater testimony of Cowardice, than not to answer such a challenge? therefore he addeth very consequently.  
Pref. Which to my understanding is a very evident sign, that there is not any truth in your cause, nor strength in your arguments.  
Ans. Whereupon, as having gotten the victory, proved what he intended, that his Adversary conscious of a bad cause had refused the trial, he triumphs out of Scripture.  
Pref. Every one that doth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved etc.  
Ans. But doth not this Fallacy, especially set off with such confidence, make a goodly flourish and show of truth? & is it not well followed by the sophist? Now to detect this Fallacy is indeed to shame it: and therefore falsehood is wont to hide itself behind some curtain of apparent Truth; draw the curtain aside and the monster appears. 'tis a secret vicer or loathsome sore, 
— Quod lato balteus auro  
obtegit.—  Now I dare presume there is no vulgarly understanding man, acquainted only with the circumstances, time, place, persons diversely affecting and qualifying these men, the Advocate and his Adversary, who cannot of himself imagine other most just causes of this so guilefully traduced refusal to give a meeting (if there had been any such offer or provocation to trial or meeting, which his adversary denies) and by this discover the fallacy. Nor could the advocate himself out of his little experience of the condition of such men which he might have gathered in the space of half a year or there about, while he was connumeratus in nobis, one of our number (as S. Peter said of judas,) be ignorant of other causes.  
As for his protesting and setting it under his hand, he hath protested so often, that no man I think will ever hereafter give credit to his Protestancy. As on the other side, no man I doubt would believe he were a Catholic, though he would set that under his hand again; for which cause no man I know hath greater occasion to practise that singular virtue of selfe-content, or self-repose in the testimony of his own conscience, and more truly to say secretum meum mihi, my secret is mine own; for no man, sure, that knows him, will offer to take it from him: his Religion will be a mystery whatsoever it be; yet even by this passage you may conceive how little need he hath of any rule but Scripture, who hath so special a talon in interpreting and applying it to any purpose, as though it were wax, or clay, as soft as himself, in the hands of the Potter, capable of any form, or use, — Argillâ quiduis imitaberis udâ: or a sword for every sheath; an Advocate for every cause. For by this Scripture with his comment, he might teach the jews, if need were, to argue against our Saviour, that this was an evident sign there was no truth in his cause, since he hide himself, when their forefather's made inquiry after him, surely to dispute with him, to pitch upon one point (at least they might pretend so, and be angry if they were not believed) Quousque tollis animam nostram, situ es Christus dic nobis palam: Lo the point which they would have pitched upon. But when, I say, he would not be found, (though at other times he had been) nor give them a fair meeting, they might have retorted, and beaten his own sword to his head, (a trick which this Advocate could have taught them) he who doth evil, hateth the light etc. They might likewise have concluded the weakness of the Christian cause, by the premises of the Apostles fear and hiding themselves propter metum judeorum, for fear of the jews.  
Well then, the Advocate, I will not say, is deceived, but would deceive; for not all that fly the light hate the light; 
Fallacy, Light Equivocal.  nay rather many fly the light because they hate darkness. For I hope it is not yet out of our memory, or the memory of our Fathers, that many by committing themselves to light have been committed to darkness.  
But howsoever, is this to fly the light, or trial of light, to deny you personal meeting? I would gladly know who more offer's himself to light, he who appears in presence of forty or twenty perhaps in some private Chamber; or he who cometh forth upon the stage of the world? For I would ask the man what is it he pretends by this provoking to personal appearance? Would he dispute with his adversary's body, his face, his eyes, his forehead? Grant that this Attorney hath the harder forehead; hath nor his adversary reason to eschew the encounter? Or would he commit with with wit, learning with learning? etc. If so, he cannot but know that the silent language of one Pen is louder and further hard than the clamorous dispute of twenty Coursers: and he who prefers a writing, before a speaking judge, should, me think's, in good coherence choose to be judged rather by his pen, then by his tongue. For though the Apostles tongue he grants, were as good a rule as Scripture, yet he who is no Apostle (at least of the last twelve) nor hath received their spirit, though a cloven tongue, must by virtue of his Principles, and doth acknowledge Scripture a better judge than speech.  
If he love the light indeed, he should more love the greater light; If in confidence of his cause he desire to manifest his doctrine, he doth best in making choice of such a light, as wherein he may appear not only to a few but to many; nor to the present in place alone, but to the absent too, nor only to the present but to future ages. For though he can speak lowed for a need, yet he will scant be heard over the Thames disputing in Holb●rne, nor in Westminster though in the vacancy: but the voice of his Pen may be hard as far the Sequana, and Po●, and Rhenus, and Tiber, and Beti●, Et Tagus & Ganges, forsan & Antipodes. And truly if he presume himself an equal match for so great undertake, what should he do else but manifest himself to the world, and disabuse it. Exalta in fortitudine vocem tuam, tu qui evangelizas Zion; you who evangelise Reformation to the Church of God, exalt your voice by the strength of your Pen; the voice of your tongue will prove too weak, were it the voice of ten Stentors. If verily he affect notice, and manifestation of a truth so presumed, why will he choose to print those his weighty disputes, rather in the air, then in written monuments, if he please, of brass, yea to outlive the life of brass or marble? The truth is, he wrongs his discretion by seeming to think otherwise, and so shall he who believes he doth; nor his love of light could not choose but be ambitious of this greater light; yet howsoever he shows the folly of his fallacy in twyting his Adversary's hate or fear of light, who hath chosen to encounter him in the greatest light; even in the eye of the world.   

The Application of this sentence of our Saviour, Qui malè agit etc. to the Socinians.  
SECT. II.  
THE Atheist, or the Embryo of Atheist, the new Academy, hateth the light indeed, and therefore dixit insipient in cord suo etc. he hath said it in the silence and secrecy of his own hart, where no body hears what he saith but they who are one heart with him. They lurk in silence and obscurity, although they walk at midday in open view, in the market place; yet still they fly the light; they whisper in corners, they will not speak plainly what they think, what they believe; they sculke in Allegories and false pretences, casting ever and anon clouds of doubtful questions, over the most clear and orthodox, and received Doctrines. Then they steal upon you in the darkness, until by little and little they leave you no light of any positive truth, no faith, no grace, no supernatural bliss; no Sun above the Moon; no God above the God of nature, and reason; confined within the necessity of the one, and the short and narrow marches of the other.  
Yet all this while this implicit or disguised Atheist holds fair intelligence with our Protestant, salutes him courteously, takes him familiarly by the beard, as though he would kiss him, mean while with a flash of his sword through his side, powre's out all his entralles of faith and charity. The poor Son of Abigail observed not the sword, hanging in a false sheath of counterfeit Religion, whence it could easily slip out; no more is this poisoned dagger of Socinians observed, hidden in the sheath of Protestancy, or pretended joining with them against the Roman; wherewith while he fleeces in the face of Protestancy, he gives it the deadly stab, even through the sides of Papacy.  
These are indeed those Lucifugae, those fly-lights, those rational Bats; that sana ratio; that sober mystery of iniquity, negotium perambulans in tenebris, the business that walks in darkness; in tenebris & in regione m●rtis, in the misty and darksome coast of sin and heresy. These not daring to appear unto the world in the light of print, in their own guise of doctrine & principles, lest so ugly Monsters should affright even heresy itself; in covert of his wing, and in his nest hatch forth those griping Harpies, Socinian problems, that ravish religion out of the world, defile and pollute all that's pure and holy in Christian Faith with their doctrine of Naturality, savouring of nothing but flesh and blood etc. 
Tristius haud illis monstrum, nec sauior ulla  
Pestis, & ira Deum stygys' seize extulit undis  
Virginei volucrum vultus, foedis●ima ventris  
Prolwies, uncaue manus etc.—  Would God would open the eyes of these our Countrymen, especially our Universities the two ey'sof this kingdom, who unwittingly and unwillingly (as I verily presume) are made the stalking-horses to this Godless Academy, this Progeny of viper's, this issue of Heresy; but which coming to light, will kill that too, and extinguish that little remnant spark of whatsoever belief or acknowledgement of a Christ, of a Saviour, of mankind: quaerunt extinguere scintillam meam, quae relicta est, ut non supersit viro meo nomen & reliquiae super terram; seek to abolish and raze out of all notice and memory the very name of Christ, & Christianity. So may the holy Church complain of this Gigantique race in behalf of his spouse, who died to redeem mankind, whom these men seek to murder again in his seed and offspring.  
It were again to be wished, that even this Antagonist would bring forth to light those works and workmen of darkness in their own likeness, (he can do it) that men might fly them as they would the Devil appearing in their shape. Mean while let him take notice that this Fallacy joined and convolued with the Calumny of flying the light, is detected; Calumny, I say, as objected to his Adversary, but, as retorted upon himself, a solid and grounded presumption; who if he be no Protestant (as I know no reason, why he should be rather believed, when he saith he is, then when he saith he is not) than what he is, or where to find him, what man can tell? 
Oro, si tibi fortè non molestum est,  
Demonstres ubi sint tuae tenebrae.  For if you say, he walks in the Ministerial habit of a Protestant; so hath he lately done in the lay-garment of a supposed Catholic. If you have seen him lately write and talk Protestant; so hath he not long since wrote and talked Catholic; but so also hath he talked Anti-trinitarian, and Anti-christian, not only Antiprotestant, and Anti-papist. When shall we see him in his likeness, that we may say, here, and this is he, while every one that doth evil bateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deed's should be reproved etc.   

Another Calumny of M. Ch. refuted.  
SECT. III.  
ANother calumny of the Advocate is this. Preface. That his adversary finding him proof, forsooth, against his batteries (his persuasions to surcease from writing) took up (saith he) the resolution of the furious Goddess in the Poet, madded with the unsuccessefulnes of her malice, Flectere si nequeo superes, Acherenta movebo. For certainly those indigne Contumelyes, that mass of portentous and execrable Calumnies wherewith in your Pamphlet to N. N. you loaded not only my person in particular, but all the learned and moderate Divines of the Church of England &c. could not proceed from any other fountain.  
Answ. But first, and by the way, how was he found of proof against those batteries? Certainly by his Answer to the reason of such surcease conveyed unto him (as he saith) by an acquaintance of both: which was this in effect, that he easily contemned those motives of his Adversary, which were very proper motives of the Devil and his instruments, 
Pref.  to tempt poor spirited men out of the way of conscience and honesty, but very incongruous for either teachers or lovers of truth. But if he were indeed desirous he should not answer Charity Maintained, one way there was, and but one, whereby to obtain his desire: which was, by a fare conference to be written down on both sides, convincing (saith he) my Understanding, that any one part thereof, nay any one argument in it, of moment and consequence to the cause, was indeed unanswerable. To which demand he received (as he saith) no other reply but this, that his Adversary would have no Conference with him but in Print.  
Ans. By which very words of the Advocate you see clearly intimated the very contradictory of what he objects against his Adversary, that he flies the trial of light; whereas, by his own confession, he appeals from a less to a greater light, from a private conference to a public manifestation in print. For which appeal, besides the forementioned, he might have other just causes; among the rest this one consideration, how the passages of such a Conference might be written, and afterward caused to be printed by this Challenger, with how great advantage to himself he might justly suspect, by the advantageous and unfincere proceed of some others of this Advocates quality, in some former like Conferences yet in fresh memory.  
Which fear and equity of Appeal to public testimony by print, is yet further confirmed even by this passage of his Preface, wherein this Complainant is not ashamed to publish to the world to his advantage what had privately passed between him and his Adversary by the intermise of a common friend to both, to whom it was with all secrecy entrusted; both for this reason wherein the Plaintiff is become his adversary's Apology, as you see, and those many others fitter to pass in silence, his refusal of Conference other then in print, was and is most reasonable, and will satisfy all discreet and unpartial men, whether this Advocate will or no.  
But now besides all this, the condition annexed to this so vehemently urged Conference is most ridiculous, and indeed so manifestly cutting off all hope of any fruit to be reaped by it, that any prudent man will easily understand, that all this instancy and importuning of a Conference, is nothing else but a fair flourish, a vain brag, an ostentation of valiance & confidence in the quarrel. Forsooth the effect of this Conference should be to convince his Understanding (in which word it pleaseth him to play as with a feather) who was resolved (quoth he) not to be a Recusant, if I were convicted. Verily like enough; he would fall off once more from Recusancy, rather than stand to the conviction. But what if his stout Will should prevail so much with his Understanding, as never to yield itself convinced, although it were? Again the argument might be of itself convincing, and yet not convince his Understanding, which might proceed from the weakness of his judgement, who would then say (as he is wont) that his Adversary walks in clowds, if his argument should conclude out of principles of Scholastic Divinity, invested also in terms of the Schools, such as he would not be able to see through them the strength of the argument; then would he glory in his ignorance, and employ some pretty Phrase or other whereby to gear at Schoole-termes; and what then? Soluuntur risu tabula.— And yet a simple conviction shall not suffice; but his understanding must be so convinced. How so? Forsooth, that some argument of his Adversary's book were indeed unanswerable; wherein is employed a condition, if you mark it, of a strange la●itude; for if he could not answer it to day, he might to morrow, if not to morrow, the next, or the next day, the next month, the next year etc. for all is indefinite here; or if he could not answer it at all, were it therefore unanswerable? Were there an understanding in the world, or could be, yea of Man or Angel, which could answer it, than it should not be unanswerable; unless he would be so good as to grant out of his bounty, that what he could not answer in this cause, neither man nor Angel could; so that it must of necessity stand or fall with him. What then should have been the issue of this so vehemently solicited conference? marry this: after a while should have issued forth Cum gratiâ & Privilegio, some worthy Treatise containing a relation of the Conference held betwixt the jesuite M. H. and W. Ch. Master of Arts of the University of Oxford etc. Wherein the jesuit had as certainly been discomfited, as Turnus was sure to be vanquished by Aeneas, Virgil writing the History.  
Now to return to the consideration of those indigne Contumelies and execrable Calumnies etc. 
Calumny.  Which I shall not doubt to note as a fallacious Calumny of this Advocate, who would make the world believe that to be Contumely and Calumny which is no such thing. For if the substance of what is written by his Adversary be a truth, at least in the sense of the writer, not in tended any way to traduce or disparage, but as a discourse and inference of a truth; where is then the Calumny? Besides, if there be nothing harsh, or insolent, or uncivil in the expression of this truth; where is the Contumely? where is the portentuosity, or execrability to be discerned? unless perhaps out of the exuberance of his spleeny Rhetoric he will needs phrase it portentous, execrable, indigne Contumely, whatsoever his queasy stomach cannot digest with patience?  
And how then could such a stomach digest these so crude Expostulations cooked with so much bitterness and gall of a Satirical Iwective? I make doubt whether any other could but he who can digest his own vomit. For I dare avouch, even in these few lines, wherein he expostulates this wrong, there is more of the portent, and Calumny &c. to be found, then in both those Treatises (as by him supposed) of this his Adversary. Nor was it a little gall, and rancour which went into the seasoning of those words of his, proper motives for the Devil, and his instruments to tempt etc. Upon whom he plays, with these instruments in consort with the Devil, is no hard riddle to read, nor work for an Oedipus: yet it had been fair dealing to have pointed out some one or more particulars, out of that mass of portentous and execrable Calumnies etc. But he was wiser than so; he knew whatsoever he should have pointed at particularly, would have appeared no such portent to any wise man; he thought it better, to hope his Reader would be either so curreous as to believe him upon his word; or so negligent, as not to examine him, or confer the places.   

A Calumny objected, retorted upon the Obiectour.  
SECT. iv  
IF that be one of those execrable Calumnies wherewith he complains that himself, together with the learned and moderate Divines of England are loaden, by his Adversary; who sticketh not (saith he) to fasten the imputation of Atheism and Irreligion upon all wise, 
Pref.  and gallant men, that are not of his own Religion.  
Ans. If his Adversary neither say so, nor can by any truth or candour of interpretation be understood to mean so, then is this objection of a Calumny, his Calumny who objecteth it; & surely he hath taken great pains to small purpose, to load himself and his friends so heavily; for unless he will needs pluck it from those shoulders whereon his Adversary imposed it, he hath no cause so to groan under the burden. For the words of his Adversary whence he forceth, and violently writeth this execrable Calumny are these: 
Direct. Chap. 1.  They are strangers to that wise and gallant nation, who imagine they can be of any religion, if they will not be Catholic. Out of which testimony concerning the Italian nation, to make it odious, he frameth this discourse as virtually included in it; A wise & gallant nation can be of no Religion, if not Catholic: The Italian is a wise and Gallant nation, Ergo the Italian can be of no Religion, if not Catholic. To which I answer; this universal proposition, a wise and gallant nation etc. is wonderfully strained, and indeed with no truth or ingenuity forced out of that particular, the Italian a wise and gallant nation, can be of no Religion if no Catholic. For he might, and should in good Logic and honesty, take this proposition specificatiuè, not reduplicatiuè, as thus, the Italian a wise and gallant nation etc. Not thus: The Italian, as it is a wise and gallant nation, or, because it is a wise and gallant nation, precisely so, that these words wise and gallant, may be taken as Epither's or adiections of propriety, supposed to be acknowledged in that Nation, at the least, according to some eminency in those kinds, as Homer so frequently applying that Epithet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, neatelybooted Greeks' never surely intended by that, to make their neat boots any cause of their sacking Troy, or any the like effect.  
Yet if in our case these attributes wise and gallant be supposed in the writer's intendment, to have some influence into that negative (the Italian a wise and gallant nation cannot be of any other religion) yet it should not follow, that wise and gallant, were the adequate, or the necessary cause of that negative. Whence it will not follow that every Nation wise and gallant, or all wise & gallant (yea as wise and gallant as the Italian, which equality not withstanding I believe might be denied to some other nation without any contumely, or disgrace, or any wrong done them) should be said to be either Catholic, or of no religion. For though wise and gallan●, be granted a great part of the cause why the Italian cannot be of any other religion, yet this being but the partial cause, some other wise and gallant men may be of some religion, or Sect, though not Catholic.  
But yet suppose, that wise and gallant, were (which cannot be granted) the adequate cause, and of necessity inducing such an effect, and of force to draw out the conclusion to whomsoever applied: as thus; That such and such are wise and gallant men, Ergo Catholics, or of no religion: Or thus; And they not Catholic, Ergo of no religion; where shall this Calumny light? For first you must subsume the minor, before you can determine the Calumny, for it can be no Calumny but where it falls.  
Well then, I will subsume it for him, make him some part of recompense for his pains taken in framing his Adversary's discourse, so very often into syllogisms, such as he pleaseth. But thus I do it for him, and thus he must subsume; otherwise, for aught I see, his Execrable Calumny etc. will prove but smoke: Wise and gallant men can be of no religion, if not Catholic; But I, together with the learned and moderate Divines of England, are wise and gallant men: Ergo I, with them, can be of no religion if not Catholic.  
Behold here the indigne Contumely, the Portentous and Execrable Calumny, squeezed out of his Adversary's words merely by racking them to the worst sense, and torturing them, forsooth, that M. C. or the learned Divines of England are not wise and Gallant men; this is now the worst he can make, yea and worse than he can truly make of those his Adversary's words, so Tragically inflamed. Now truly I may have been mistaken, but I should not easily have believed that M. Ch. would have taken it so very grievously, to be ranked with those wise and Gallant men. But such is now become his zeal of Religion (great pity, no man will believe it) that he had rather be esteemed not wise and Gallant, then of no Religion. But why, think you, hath he so misalleaged his Adversary's words? Instead of these, This wise and Gallant nation can be of no religion if not Catholic, he hath them thus; as though his Adversary said, wise and Gallant men can be of no religion, if not of his. O, he would not seem to grant his Adversary's religion, or that of the Italian nation, Catholic: for he would fain retain unto his cause, the name of Catholic; as both he and his associates are wont now of later day's to nickname themselves, Catholics, and laugh at one another, I suppose, for so doing. For this name (Catholic) can no more stick to their profession, than were it printed in wind or water: but either they are Catholics, or no: if no, why do they say they are? if yea, what is it to them, that they who are not Catholic, are of no religion?  
Again, either these men conceive of Catholic Religion as the Italian doth, or no. If no; then the Italians being of no religion if not Catholic concerns them nothing; if they conceive a like, then 'tis no disparaging imputation to say they are of no Religion if not Catholic. The Italian is supposed by this writer and others who know them, so wise and understanding, as to make this discourse; of all Societies of men who profess Christianity, this, the Roman Catholic, is most probably the true Religion; he is withal supposed so Gallant that he will not profess a religion which he judgeth none, or not true. Whence he concludeth thus: Either this is the true, or none; and then again, Either I will embrace this or none. Now if these men have the like conceit, if they make the same Antecedent, than the Consequent falls likewise upon them; if I say, they be alike wise and Gallant, without any disparagement at all; where is now the indigne Contumely, or Execrable Calumny? For what other thing is this to say, but that he who will not be of that religion, which he believeth the only true, will be of none. Otherwise this must needs proceed from some baseness, if having rejected the religion which he judgeth the only true, if any true; he embrace notwithstanding, or seem to embrace some other Sect, or Profession which he hath in his judgement à fortiori rejected, in rejecting the Catholic.  
And let this Advocate turn himself which way he list, & play his part in Tragical Rhetoric in the Eye of the world, to stir up Passion in the beholders, and so to blind them; neither he, nor any else who knows the Roman, and can compare it with any other, as now he can, shall ever be thought to be of any religion, if not Catholic: yea, and maugre himself, if he but dare enter into his soul, seriously and sincerely, all passion and affection whence partiality may arise, thrown aside, he shall not choose but acknowledge the Roman of all other, for aught he knows, the most probable.  
In th●mea●e time he will halt between God and Belial; sacrifice to neither; suspend his opinion; sustinere assensum, as the Academiques were wont to say, and consequently suspend and defer all service and worship of God; whom, where he is he knows not, with the Papist, or Protestant, or Greek, or Turk; no nor how he would, or should be served, under what notion or name of Deity. So what he serves and worships as God for aught he knows, is an Idol: as the Arrian God, to the Roman is an Idol, so must the Catholic 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be to the Arrian: and the God of Caluin, positive Author of sin no less then of grace, is an Idol to all Orthodox Christians: and so of the rest.  
Let the Samaritan erect as many Altars as he will, and accost Jerusalem by imitation of empty Ceremonies, as much as he list; all this notwithstanding, while he adores not in Jerusalem, 
joan. 4.  he adores he knows not what. Nos adoramus quod scimus, quia salus ex Iudais est: For the time is come long since when true Adorer's adore the Father, in spirit and truth; Whence it followeth that they who adore him not in spirit and truth, adore not God at all; for it is not enough to exhibit the external acts of adoration and religion, shooting them as it were at random, as you would say, let them fall where they are due, wheresoever that be, with the Catholics or Protestants, or Caluinistes, or Anabaptistes, or Arrians, or Donatists etc. for this must be a rational and voluntary Sacrifice, or worship, to love whom we adore, and know whom we love; for we cannot love whom we know not, and therefore our love of God must flow from true faith and belief in God, without which we cannot know him.  
From all which appeareth that this very objecting of a Calumny, and Contumely is itself both calumnious and contumelious, both in substance and quality. In substance, as being a false crime objected; and then in quality of expression, amplified with great bitterness of speech, in a studied invective, and Archylochian style. Strange intemperancy of a man, who had not so much power and command over himself, as to refrain from Calumny and Contumely, at the least, while he reprehended it.   

Several Calumnies of M. Ch.  
SECT. V  
HEnce now from this so bitter invective against one falsely supposed Calumny of his adversary, he floweth into a copious conglobation of true Calumnies of his own against his Adversary and his Cause, while he employeth, for the more enforcing of his arguments, or indeed  fancies and surmises, his figure Pretermission: as to pass by first; to say nothing secondly; not to object to you thirdly; nor to trouble you fourthly. In all which, first, secondly, thirdly etc. he doth nothing else indeed but trouble, entertaining his Reader with mere impertinencies; nor answering any thing directly to what his adversary writeth.  
Pref. To pass by first (saith he) that which Experience justifies, that where, and when your religion hath most absolutely commanded, three, and then Atheism hath most abounded.  
Answ. Now, this is a very Prevarication accompanied with a Calumny. For what could be said more against himself in confirmation of what his Adversary writeth, and he complaineth of; that the more wise and Gallant spirits can be of no religion if not Catholic? For every man knoweth where Catholic Religion hath most absolutely commanded, 
Calum. against Cath. Rel.  and yet commands, and which he himself sufficiently intimates in these very words, which is the very thing his Adversary avoucheth, saying, they are strangers to that wise and Gallant Nation etc. And this confirmeth furthermore, that those Eminent spirits conceived the Catholic of all other the most probably true; for could they have judged some other Sect to have more probability of truth in it, they would rather have embraced that, then have fallen flat into Atheism: therefore their falling thence immediately into Atheism, is an argument of that former discourse, which I have supposed probably to have passed in their secret discussions: or this, or none true.  
Add unto this, that in that Nation, where our Religion hath and doth most absolutely command, those wise and Gallant spirits, were best acquainted with the doctrine taught in it. Whereupon blinded with pride, or passion, or wicked life, being not able to discern the colour of truth, by the light of the sun, they despaired to discern it, by candlelight.  
And it is, I confess, an experience grounded upon great reason, both of nature and manners. Waight's which fall from higher places, force their descent through middle obstacles more strongly, and therefore fall lowest. None but a judas called to the eminency of Apostle-ship, could have plunged himself into such a depth of desperate treason, as to betway to death, the Author of life: whom when I consider how soon he fell from the spirit of his vocation to be a calumniator fratrum, a Devil, as our Saviour himself calls him, I am induced to think, he became an Apostle for no other purpose, but to know our Saviour and his doctrine, and then betray him.  
And verily I could easily believe, that of the number of those who profess Christianity, more turn Atheists of those who have been Catholics, then of those who never knew Catholic religion; as those who have been b●rne and bred in Lutheranism, Caluinisme, or the like; because from so low a place, they do not easily fall so fare; Qui iacet in terrâ, non habet unde cadat. Who lies on the ground, he falls no lower, unless perhaps they have taken these in their way from the Catholic: for if they have so, twenty to one, unless they be some duller spirits, they stay not there, howsoever they make show of such profession; but after some short space of entertainment, they go on their journey from thence, to Adiaphorisme in religion; where having spent some time in good fellowship with all professors, until they have consumed that little remnant stock of Christian, or whatsoever else belief of a God, they steal away after a while from thence too, keeping on directly in that road, until they arrive to the very next Inn, and the very last, adjoining to the Ferry upon the bankside of Death and Damnation, commonly called stylo veteri, Atheism; now of later years, the new Academy, or Socinianism.  
By this the Advocate may see what he hath gained to his Cause by this objected Calumny. Forsooth, that revolt from Catholic religion renders itself at last into Atheism, or Socinianism; where such revolters, I make no doubt, would be glad to meet him; for there (men say) this indifferent Traveller dwells; though they say again, he hath shift of habitations, and his judgement often changeth lodging, but that's his ordinary, and more constant rendezvous.   

Calumnies against Miracles.  
SECT. VI  
THe next Calumny and second in number of the Pretermissions strikes at Heaven, (and expect that he will have a fling at God himself afore he hath done) by moving jealousy and suspicion of all miracles, and histories, and records of Saints; whiles he would make men believe the Catholic Church approveth forging of Miracles, and lying Legends (so he writes) which is indeed a notorious Calumny: and had he not made so much haste in running back from the Catholic, as though he had come thither only to fetch fire of faction; he might have acquainted himself better, with the practice of the holy Church, in this very point of Miracles, and relations concerning Saints. He might have admired their exactness of scrutiny, and all the way's of industry to find out the truth; and to reject whatsoever hath the face or least show of counterfeit or unsound; Knowing well that neither truth can be of any durable consistency with falsehood; (they expel one another even naturally, as light and darkness,) but besides this, 
Non tali auxilio, nec defensoribus istis  
Roma caret.—  the Catholic Church needs no such subsidies; the pillar of truth craves no support of lies and forgeries: She hath in her Archives, records and evidences of this kind, so authentic, so authorized, so testified, that blindness itself by no other Exorcism but that of manifest truth, hath been compelled to see them, and confess them. No otherwise then those Ministers of Pharaoh, digitus Dei hic est. But give them leave to question Saints and miracles, who questionless had never yet any; no not when the time most required them, to countenance their extraordinary mission, when they ran out of the Church to reform it, or, as to cry fire, fire, when they carried it in their bosoms.   

Calumny against holy Ceremonies.  
SECT. VII.  
THe third pass, or figurative omission, in these word's Not to object to you thirdly, is a spurn'or kick, as he goes by, 
Pref.  at the weak and silly Ceremonies, and ridiculous observances (so he) of the Catholic Church.  
Ans. Indeed if they were only Ceremonies without the substance whereunto they relate, they were surely silly Ceremonies, but if every least Ceremony include a mystery, greater than hath ever entered into his little weak state, or understanding; who is then ridiculous but he who laughs at what he knows not, yea even therefore because he knows it not. Yet had the man but stayed to have learned his Catechism among us, he might have known the use and meaning of our Ceremonies: now having come into the Church, as Cato came unto the Theatre, only to go out again; what marvel if he return a ridiculous censurer, of what he only saw and understood not? Such posthaste were hardly tolerable in a Spy, much less in one who comes to see and censure. Of whom, if I should ask, what in particular were silly and ridiculous in those ceremonies, or whether the Church hath not authority to prescribe Ceremonies; if the Church of England allow of ceremonies, no whit more substantial than the Roman (to say no more) will he be strong enough, think you, to find out a disparity? Or, will he rebel against all? I believe, by these and many other the like passages of his book, the Chairs who have subscribed it, little observed how loud an Alarm is sounded to mutinies, and seditions, and rebellions, against all Church-government.  
But now, alas, even this may seem a thing ridiculous indeed in us, who reprehend his laughing and deriding the waiting Gentlewomen, or maids of Honour, who gears the Queen herself. For did he allow of any such thing as Religion Queen of virtues, he would not grudge her due attendance and observance of holy Ceremonies: nor would he (I think) be so unmannerly as to find fault with such, as please the Queen.   

Calumny against Ecclesiastical Persons.  
SECT. VIII.  
A Fourth Calumny, with which he will not trouble us, is: Pref. A great, part of your doctrine, specially in the points contested, makes apparently for the temporal ends of the teachers of it; which I fear, is a great scandal to many beaux Esprits among you.  
Answ. Surely the acknowledged doctrine of our Lord and Saviour makes in great part for the temporal end's of the teachers; and will these beaux Esprits, M. Ch. with the rest of the Session of wits, make Christian doctrine their scandal for that? Qui vos audit, me audit, he who obeys you, obeys me; if it be rightly understood and believed practically, is of force to subdue the world to the Governors and teachers of the Church and Christian doctrine, by a far more eminent obedience and command, than whatsoever dominion of temporal Sovereignty, or whatsoever subjection of men to men. And that Pasce oves meas, understood as it ought, not of feeding only but of ruling too, is a more large commission granted to S. Peter, by God himself (from whom all just Empire and Commission is derived) than Augustus Caesar ever enjoyed, even then when he styled himself Emperor of the world; as we may suppose by that Edict which issued forth by his order, ut describeretur Orbis, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all the inhabited, or known world; which may seem, to have been the language of that age, that made him equal sharer of Empire with jupiter, deviding the sceptre and sway of all nature betwixt them two. 
Tu secundo-Caesare regnes.  
Te minor latum reget aquus orbem.  
Tu gravi curru quaties Olympum etc.  And yet all that power and jurisdiction reaching from East to West, extended to the body only and exterior subjection, and commanding the subjects purses etc. For it is but a flattery of the Poet, 
— Victorue volentes  
Per populos dat iura.—  Whereas the Empire of the Apostles extends indeed, to the command of souls: yea from this East their kingdom begins, from thence they reign even unto the West of mortal bodies: which servile nature being subject to the soul, becomes his subject who commands the soul. Augustus could imprison, banish, or confine bodies; souls he could not. 
Illa per immonsas spaciatur libera terras,  
Caesar in hanc potuit iuris habere nihil.  He could lay bodies in fetters and chains; but the Apostles were endued with power to fetter, and enchain, or to enlarge souls from fetters of sin, quas Sathan alligavit, which Satan bound. And are our beaux Esprits of the new Academy scandalised at this? We will give them yet further matter of scandal, quite pluck out the ey'sof Envy, if she have any left.  
For of the Church, and of the Governors, and Doctors of the Church, we read the Prophecy of Esay fulfilled in the Catholic Church: Qui sunt istiqui ficut nubes volant, & sicut columbae ad fenestras suas? who are these that fly as Cloud's, and as Doves to their window's? Me expectant insulae & naves in maris principio, ut adducam filios tuos de longè. For the Iland's expect me, and the ship's of the sea, that I may bring thy sons from fare. But that which follow's maketh for the temporal end's of the teachers, those flying Cloud's etc. who bring to their nest's the spoils of their Convertites or Proselytes, together with them argentum eorum, & aurum eorum etc. their silver and their gold.  
Thus we read how the first Christians sold their whole estates; laid down the prices of all at the feet of the Apostles, that they might from thenceforth receive, as from God, by the hands of their Governor's, the supplies of their necessities. But was not this a gainful trading to the Apostles? And were not their fortunes fairly improved? Can they ever have so enriched themselves by fishing? 
Luc. 5.  Praeceptor per totam noctem laborantes nihil cepimus; labouring this whole night we have taken nothing. And were not those nets well sold? Nor were they content with part (O scandal of Socinians!) they would have all, and punished exemplarly some who reserved part of their money's to themselves for their private uses.  
But yet, let them hear further, to their greater scandal, Rumpatur, quisquis rumpitur invidiâ: Let him burst, who swells with envy. Et aedificabunt filij peregrinorum muros tuos; 
Jsa. Ibid.  & reges eorum ministrabunt tibi: and the Children of strangers shall build thy wall's; and their Kings shall minister to thee. Behold the fruit and harvest of their preaching; those 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, word-seeder's, Kings become their Vassals; yea and commanded under pain of perdition, to be so. Gens & regnum quod tibi non seruierit, peribit; the nation and kingdom that shall not serve thee, shall perish. Et venient ad te curui filij eorum qui humiliaverunt te, the posterity of those who have persequnted thee, shall come unto thee upon their knees. And yet more plainly and fully, & suges lac gentium, & mamillâ regum lactabere: and thou shalt suck the milk of the Gentiles, & thou shalt be nursed with the milk of Kings. Had these happy changes and fortunes appeared to this Advocate, as probably possible to be achieved by him, if he should become one of those teacher's of such doctrines, I am verily persuaded he would have made one, yea and a very busy one; and would have flow'ne as fast, as any of his fellow-pigeons, to a benefice. Howsoever, they who know him well, will not easily believe he disliked such points of Catholic doctrine, because they carry before them a face of gain, to accrue to the teachers of them; nor will they believe he is so very an enemy of gainful doctrines, who know how many Irons of thrift he hath in the fire at once, and some in the water.   

A further solution of this Calumny and Fallacy.  
SECT. IX.  
But now to show more plainly that this pretended scandal is but a fallacious Calumny, I deny, that points of doctrine are therefore to be disliked, much more to be reputed scandalous, because they make for the temporal end's of the teachers, if they be not made for those ends; if those temporals be only the material not formal ends, that is, not the ends intended by the author of those doctrines, but only shadow's or concomitants of the true and formal end. Otherwise these tender Socinian consciences might as well stumble at the choice of Solomon, who having the choice given him of what he would wish, made choice of wisdom: optavi, & datus est mihi sensus, invocavi & venit in me spiritus sapientiae. I wished and sense was given me, I inuoked and the spirit of wisdom came into me. O, but did he thrive by this gift? venerunt autem mihi omnia bona pariter cum illâ; all felicities, all good things came to me together with it.  
Nay to seek the kingdom of heaven makes for the temporal ends of the seekers: Primum quaerite regnum Dei etc. first seek the kingdom of heaven and all these other commodities shall be added as the over plus. Will he reprehend the seeking of the kingdom of God for this? or the forsaking temporal estates to follow Christ in a higher way of perfection, because the gain and return is a hundred fold in this life? and therefore makes for the temporal ends of such men? And are these our beaux Esprits? Are these the learned new Academy, that cannot make this distinction between making, and being made? or are they rather indeed, en bon François, in plain English, dull and earthly Spirits? and (which lest they would hear) not Wit's, but silly Fellows? Who if they could once resolve upon a God, or any such, not only omnipotent, but free agent, who could do and give what he pleased; should rather betake themselves with Solomon (who had, I think, as good a natural wit, as the best of the new Academy, and showed a much better in making such a choice, and in the acknowledgement of his own weakness and want) betake themselves, I say, to their prayers, that they might receive the spirit of Wisdom from heaven; without which spirit, no marvel if they have no palate of heaven, nor (as being indeed merely Animals) any relish of spiritual things: But neither indeed do they believe there is any such thing, as holy spirit; 
Et quem non invenit usquam  
Esse putat nusquam.    

Concerning different opinions among Catholics, the Advocates Fallacy and Calumny.  
SECT. X.  
AFter all these Rhetorical pretermissions of temptations into (so he writes) and principles of Irreligion and Atheism in Catholic doctrine, as considerations which he will seem to esteem of less moment, thereby to prepare your expectation to some more weighty: Only I should desire you (saith he) to consider attentively when you conclude so often from the differences of Protestants, 
Pref.  that they have no certainty of any part of their religion etc. Whether you do not that, which so magisteri ally you direct me not to do, that is, proceed a destructive way etc.  
Ans. Now this Pretermission is no figure, but a fraud & Fallacy; for his adversary directs him, not to proceed a mere destructive way. Now this restrictive particle (mere) fraudulently left out is no figure, but a fallacy of pretermission; and makes indeed a kind of Nonsense in his Adversary, where there is a good and plain sense. For whosoever will throw down the doctrine of another, must proceed a destructive way; but he who doth nothing else but throw down and builds nothing, as he who doth nothing but overthrew doctrines of religion, & holdeth nothing prositive in religion, at least in coherence of his doctrine, he proceeds a mere destructive way; and a mere Antimachus he is; an Ishmael, son of Agar, secundum carnem genitus, a child of the flesh; and therefore (as every Socinian doth) persecutes the freeborn child, the issue of the Spirit; but what saith the Scripture? Eijce ancillam, & filium eius, non enim erit haeres filius ancillaecum filio liberae; cast forth the handmaid, and her son, for the son of the handmaid, shall not coherit which the son of the freewoman: Indeed, one house could not hold them. Why? because Ishmael was terrae homo, a fierce conditioned man, manus eius contra omnes, & manus omniam contra eum; his hands against all men, and all men's hands against him; which is in effect to say, he proceeded a mere destructive way. And I pray you, is not a Socinian such an Ishmael? whose hands are up against all Professors of Christianity, since his reasons, & principles tend (as his Adversary chargeth him) to the overthrow of all Christian Profession, no less then of Catholic religion? And doth he not deserve that all Christian hands should be employed about his ears, with unanimous consent to extinguish such a Giant?  
But, doth the son of Sarai proceed a mere destructive way? he dares not say it, as bold as he is: therefore he only says, he proceeds a destructive way; wherein he doth well, and as every confutant must do, otherwise he doth nothing.  
Pref. But his adversary's Arguments (so he retorts) objected against the Protestant tend to the overthrow of all religion; because (saith he) as you argue, Protestants differ in many things, therefore they have no certainty of religion; so an Atheist, or a Sceptic may conclude as well; Christians and the Professors of all religions differ in many things, therefore they have no certainty of any thing.  
Ans. I know well, these are the ordinary Socinian Topickes, (which this man hath by hart), whence they are wont to argue themselves out of all religion. And it is a very Socinian and Atheistical argument indeed, that is, a foolish one; as foolish as this; Every man is a man, therefore no man is a Christian. For though every man be a man, and therefore subrect to error, some more, some less, some in one thing, some in another, whence difference of opinions ariseth, and uncertainty is concluded; yet some men are Christians, and as such, in matters defined to be of faith, not differing, nor uncertain.  
They should deduce thus if they would conclude to the purpose they intent: Christians in points of faith, defined by their Church to be such (the definition of which Church they hold as their rule of faith) disagree among themselves, therefore they have no certainty in points of religion; then the solution is ready: I deny that such Christians, who rely on that authority of the Church defining, as all Catholic Christians do, disagree in any point of religion so defined; therefore this inference of uncertainty from the differences of doctrines in points of faith falls heavy upon the backs of all Sectaries, nor can be shaken off; but toucheth not the Catholic. Whence they should conclude if they were indeed wise and gallant, either the Catholic, or none: Not as they are wont, there is difference of opinions and doctrines among Professors of Christianity, between Lutherans and Caluinists etc. and the Catholic from them all; therefore there is no certainty; therefore no religion at all; and therefore lastly, I will be an Atheist, or Socinian.  
Whereas if these sceptics would be feriously sceptic indeed, that is serious inquisitors of truth, and not make it their whole life and business ever to seek & never to find, like those silly and sinful women of whom S. Paul, semper discentes, & numquam ad scientiam veritatis pervenientes, always learning and never arriving to the knowledge of truth; nay if they did not set down for their last arrest, despair of ever knowing, with those foolists sceptics and Pyrhonians; lastly if they could be persuaded that they hear what they hear, or see what they see; certainly they might see & discern a vast disparity between these two kinds of differences; the differences of Sectaries among themselves in most substantial points of faith; and those of Catholics discepting and discussing difficulties occurring, as yet undecreed and undetermined by authority; as children of truth never ceasing to inquire after it where soever it be; and ready to embrace it when they find it, proposed unto them, either in the obscure light of infallible Authority, or that of vision in Eternity.   

Calumny concerning Transubstantiation, and the B. Trinity.  
SECT. XI.  
ANother main tentation and principle of Irreligion he hath taken pains to transport out of Arabia, this son of Agar; where he hath met with his fellow Atheist, or Socinian.  
Pref. Again, I should desire you to tell me (saith he) ingenuously, whether it be not probable, that your portentous doctrine of Transub stantiation ioyn'ed with your forementioned persuasian of, no Papist, no Christian, hath brought a great many others as well as himself to Auerröes his resolution; quandoquidem Christiani adorant quod comedunt, sit anima mea cum Philosophis: since Christians adore that which they eat, let my soul go with the Philosophers.  
Answ. I think his Adversary will not spare to tell him ingenuously, that he is persuaded, a very small matter may bring a Socinian to be as very an Atheist, or Infidel, as that Arabic leech Auerröes: and in phrasing the doctrine of Transubstantiation portentous, he showeth himself brought as near an Infidel, as a jew can be, with whose spirit he seemeth so ingenuously to sympathise; quomodo potest hic nobis carnem suam dare ad manducandum? how can this man give us his body ro eat? And yet even hence (by the way) out of this very testimony of Auerröes, you may perceive that this doctrine of Transubstantiation, or howsoever the real and corporal Presence of Christ's body in the Sacrament, so, as it was conceived to be truly eaten, was the common doctrine of Christians of those times, not only of the Roman Church.  
Concerning which doctrine, and those words of Christ, Nisi manducaveritis etc. it is probably thought that judas was one of those, who said, durus est hic sermo etc. This is a hard or harsh language etc. Yet furthermore those words of our Saviour at his last supper, when he instituted this Sacrament, accipite & manducate, hoc est enim corpus meum: take and eat, for this is my body, are so clear for Transubstantiation, that this very Advocate is known to have retorted, after his manner, upon occasion of some one pressing him to know his opinion concerning the Trinity, that there is no so clear testimony of Scripture for the Trinity, as for Transubstantiation. Which answer of his, joined with that which he avoucheth so often in this Pamphlet, that the Scripture, not the Church, is the rule whereby to determine points of faith, maketh the B. Trinity no less portentous, than Transubstantiation; since it is certain there is no mystery of faith more seemingly repugnant, and more apparently subverting the prime and most received axioms of natural Reason and Philosophy, than this of the B. Trinity.  
And is not this a portentous discourse of this Advocate, & a prodigious Calumny, trenching so deeply upon the Deity itself? And is not he, the author of this, a very Portent, & Prodigy, under the guise of Christian profession, worthy to be shipped for some unknown Land, where his breath may infect none but savage creatures? nor make the hair of Christian Professors stand stiff by hearing such blasphemies, from his mouth? as I have heard some one say, his hair did, who may one day write his Character, if he have not already done it, in his very wittily Symbolising Sceptic.  
Mean while, if this Auerreist have made the like Arabic resolution, to trust his soul with Philosophers rather than with such Christians; & if he make a proper choice of Philosophers, and suit himself fitly, he may then in very good consequence of doctrine & conformity to his principles, sing every month In nova fert animus. No man will expect his Pithagorique soul in one shape of Religion long: 
Fiet enim subitò Sus horridus, atraque Tigris,  
Squamosusque Drace, & fuluâ cervise Leana:  
Aut acrem flamma sonitum dabit, atue ita vinclis  
Excidet, aut in aquas tenues delapsus abibit.  And then, Quo teneam vultus mutantem Protea nodo? With what knot shall I hold fast this form-varying Proteus? Marry thus it followeth: 
Sed quanto ille magis formas se vertet in omnes  
Tanto, Nate, magis contende tenacia vincla,  
Donec talis erit mutato corpore, qualem  
Videris incepto tegeret cùm lumina somno.  For you shall have him one while Arian, another while Nestorian, now Pelagian, now Hussite, now Caluinian, than Arminian etc. But only hold him fast throughout all his changes, yea the more he transforms and transfigures draw the knot harder, until at length after many and many a Metamorphosis, he come about to the very same shape, wherein first you took him sleeping in Socinian security; only waking in his nimble fancy, wherein he shapes as many discoloured forms of Religion, as there are colours appearing in the Rainbow, or the Peacock's train; wherewith he plays according to the gaiety of his humour and frisk's from Religion to Religion, like a squirrel from bough to bough.   

His fallacious calumny concerning prudential motives.  
SECT. XII.  
HIs immediately ensuing demand, Whether our requiring men upon only probable and prudential motives to yield a most certain assent unto things in human reason impossible etc. 
Preface.  be not a likely way to make considering men scorn our Religion; is a fraudulent Calumny as he would have it understood; which is, that we exact this most certain assent out of Motives only probable and prudential, as the principal cause, or motive of such assent.  
Nor could he be ignorant, (if he deserve the opinion I have conceived of him) that these motives are proposed & understood by Catholics, as persuasive and inductive only, or as previous despositions to faith, which is the gratuite and supernatural gift of God; and therefore cannot flow from any humanely voluntary, or natural, or sublunary Cause: yet he who made all things ex nihilo sui, of nothing, or of no preexistent Being in themselves, and can therefore even in reason more probably make any thing of some thing; qui fecit medium fornacis quasi ventum roris flantem; who made thefiery furnace refrigerative to the martyrs, howsoever this were done; qui fecit lutum ex sputo etc. who contrived eye-light out of a plaster of dust and spittle; who made wine of water; and the like stupendious effects not contained in the natural force or efficiency of such causes; can likewise serve himself of inferior means and dispositions towards the producing of some supernatural effect, in the soul of man; or assume them, and join with them, or them with himself, to such effects.  
When therefore, these probable or prudential Motives attentively considered, have wrought in the souls of men first an opinion, that such a doctrine may be true; then perhaps a liking of the doctrine, out of such motives: after this, the spirit of God inwardly concurring & moving along with these motives, a kind of pious inclination or willingness to embrace such a doctrine, if they could be persuaded it were true; & this, notwithstanding all reasons and counterchecks of flesh and blood or whatsoever temporal regards to the contrary, through a desire to serve God, as he would be served; it is then the immediate work of God's grace, to endue, and as it were, to inform such a soul with divine faith; by heavenly endowment the understanding becomes elevate and raised to a height, above the sublunary sphere of natural reason, to a certain proportion with divine and supernatural objects; by this enabled, as it were, with undazeled eyes of Eagles, to look upon the sun.  
Now when they say, the assent to the Conclusion cannot be of greater firmity or certainty, then is the certainty, force, or firmity of the Premises, which are supposed only probable and prudential motives; they sever the Premises, and take them as considered in themselves alone, not as they are indeed, in their Elevation and Conjunction with the supernatural power of grace.  
For when they say, the Conclusion is qualified by the Premises, weak if the Premises be weak etc. nor only so, but even the weaker of the two, leads the way in this mark of reason and discourse, and the Conclusion followeth that, not the stronger, which it cannot follow passibus aequis, with equal stepp's, and which therefore must employ no more strength than the weaker, that the Conclusion may follow both. This is true when the Premises have only an univocal and natural influence into the Conclusion: that is; when they impart only that force or value to the Conclusion, which they hold of their own, and proper in right and title of nature or naturality: but where their influence is, as I may say, supernatural, dispositive to a highter form or Act, the tenure whereof is only arbitrary, and as it were at will of the Lord of Virtues, due upon no consideration of any natural exigence or Covenant; and is therefore an Equivocal influence, as of causes inflowing indeed not only by their own force but in virtue of their principal cause and agent, which is supernatural: then in all good reason they concnrre, by proeuring an effect proportionate to that principal and supernatural cause; nor improportioned to themselves, as considered in that conjunction and sublimation.  
Neither ought this to seem strange in supernatural influxions of causes; for even in the course of nature, and in good physiology, an accident which is a far inferior nature, may produce a substance, as heat (yea even then when it is separate from the substance of fire) produceth fire: the reason; because although as heat, or as an accident, it holds an inferior place in nature, yet as it is the naturally-joint instrument of fire, in virtute causae principalis, in, or by virtue of the fire, it produceth fire: so likewise those motives only probable, though as such unable of themselves, by reason of their improportion, yet in virtue of their principal agent, or prime mover (which is the holy Spirit operating and moving in the soul) & conjoined and sublimed by that prime mover or agent, they may, and do dispose to the producing of an infallible assent: but of this point he will offer a more proper occasion to speak hereafter.  
But now, this is some part of the Calumny, that we require things contradictory and impossible to be done: 
Pref.  and is this indeed an impossible requisite, that we require a most certain assent to beyielded to things in human reason impossible? for with this he chargeth us.  
Answ. To which I answer, it is falsely supposed by him, that those things whereunto we require a most certain assent, that is, an assent of divine faith, are in human reason impossible. For if they be true, they are not in human reason impossible, though they have the semblance or appearance of impossibility in humane reason. No truth is untruth to human reason; therefore no truth is impossible in human reason; for I suppose that distinction, of Truth Philosophical, and Truth Theologicall, many years since expulsed the University. For truth, in the whole latitude, being the object of reason and understanding, it cannot be that any truth should imply impossibility, or repugnance to human reason or understanding; no more than that any thing corporally visible, can involve contradiction or impossibility to be seen by a corporal eyesight. Therefore if they be vntruth's, let them be convinced to be vntruth's; if they hold those things to be impossible in human reason, which are above human reason, no marvel if this Advocate believe not the B. Trinity. He will say, perchance, now he believes it; but how? for I ask him; Doth he yield a most certaineassent, that is, an assent of divine faith, to the B. Trinity, as that God is one God in three really distinct persons? If he believe it not with certainty of divine faith, he believes it not as a Christian: If he do believe with that certainty of faith, than he yields a most certain assent to a thing as impossible in humane reason, as any other point of faith required to be believed with a most certain assent. But why do I ask him? It appears even by these words, as well as by his words of mouth; uttered upon the forementioned occasion, that he indeed believes not the B. Trinity, no nor Incarnation, nor Resurrection, nor any such thing impossible, in his style, to humane reason, with any such certainty of assent, as makes a Christian, and distinguishes him from an Infidel, or Socinian.  
It appears furthermore by what he writes in this place, that he would have it sufficient, to believe such mysteries, with a lower degree of Faith. Now either this lower degree of faith, is divine faith or no. If divine, than the assent arising from such faith, is a most certain assent; or an assent with certainty excluding all deliberate positive doubt concerning the object of faith. If that lower degree be not divine faith, than it is not only a jower degree of faith, as differing from some other divine faith, only in degree of certainty, or secundum magis & minus, according to more or less certainty, as heat differs from heat, and more white from less white; but it is different in the very species or kind of faith; as divine faith, from human faith, which differ even in definition and Essence of faith: Therefore the Catholic requiring divine faith, and teaching, not, this jower degree of faith, but this indeed, no divine faith to be insufficient for the acquiring Eternal salvation; requireth no more than the Apostle doth, where he saith, fine fide impossibile est placere Deo, without faith it is impossible to please, or serve God; meaning that faith, which in that very place is by him described to be, sperandarum subctantia rerum, argumentum non apparentium; the substance of things to be hoped, the argument of things not appearing, which no man can deny to be divine faith. Now to require such faith, (besides the necessity of it) cannot possibly move any scorn to religion, 
Pref.  but is rather most fit and congruous to beget a more honourable conceit, & due Veneration of divine mysteries in faithful souls. For those other, who out of an excess of an Hyperbolical Pride, will seem to scorn whatsoever stands without their sphere; or, because they are not, will suppose there are no Eagles; we can expect no less from them. For this indeed is that verbum crucis, pereuntibus stultitia; that word of the cross, folly and matter of scorn to those who perish; 
1. Cor. 1.  ijs autem qui salui fiunt, id est nobis (saith S. Paul) virtus Dei; but to them that are saved, that is to us, it is the Power of God. And he who tell's them (which this Advocate takes so heinously that he makes it some part of his Apology for Atheism) that they were as good not believe at all, as believe with a lower degrees of faith, 
Pref.  meaning human faith only; saith no more but true, that humane faith can never aspire to the purchase of supernatur all hopes; & that therefore, in regard of everlasting Salvation, if it grow no higher, it becomes fruitless and lost labour.  
As if a general pardon were proclaimed for all such who should make their personal appearance in such a Court or Palace before the king, upon such a day, or within such a space of time; a man should say, it were as good stay at home, as to go to the Court only, and never enter or appear in presence of the king; because the pardon was granted to such personal appearance made, not to such a journey made: for so likewise Salvation and pardon of sins is proclaimed and promised to such a faith as should enter those adita, those sacraries, or treasuries of divine hopes; not to such as cannot, and will not enter, but stand without, 
S. Leo, Serm. 7. de Nat.  in the mist of humane reasons, or in the smoke of worldly wisdom, unable to ascend into that presence of Majesty.  
And yet there (forsooth) will they stand by this Aduocat's advice, nor go one foot further, or higher, than they can see the way in that mist; and will yet (I think) contest with divine Wisdom, yea and quarrel too, if he vouchsafe not to come down a degree lower, and pardon them upon equal terms; or show them some convincing reason why it should be necessary to climb up those stairs of divine faith; or why they should not sufficiently deserve pardon by taking so much pains in coming as fare as they could upon the plain and even ground of reason; and why his Majesty should annex unto his pardon, such impossible and contradictory conditions, as to require a voluntary, and certain assent, to things in humane reason impossible, that many moderate and considering men, who would otherwise come readily, and sue forth their pardons, according to his Proclamation, hearing of these conditions, fly back, and believe that there is either no such pardon to be expected, and that, this is but some forged Proclamation; or that surely it is, or should be granted, upon reasonable terms, and such conditions, as may suit with men's abilities; that conditions of this impossible and contradictory nature are likely to make considering men scorn all pardons, and all religion. So they with their lower degree of faith; where I leave them disputing with God at the foot of the stairs, & proceed. For thus is followeth.   

The Church compared with Scripture.  
SECT. XIII.  
Pref. LAstly, I should desire you to consder, whether your pretence, that there is no good ground to believe Scripture, but your Church's infallibility, joined with your pretending no ground for this, but some texts of Scripture, be not a fair way to make them that understand themselves, believe neither Church nor Scripture?  
Answ. This Cavil or Calumny we might retort as he is wont, almost totidem verbis, as thus; Whether their pretence that there is no good ground or rule whereby to determine what is truth in doctrine of faith, but Scripture, joined with their pretending no ground for this, but some texts of Scriptures, together with every man's natural reason interpreting it, which is as errant a guide, and divers, as the head's of men; be not a fair way to make men that understand themselves, believe neither their doctrine, nor their Scripture? But what is this to him, who cares not how his argument reflects upon himself, so it wound the Catholic? who will be content like another Samson, or Eleazar to be crushed to death, under the ruin of his Adversaries: Trahere cùm pereas invat,— he is content that the ship be shot through and through, wherein he sails with the Catholic; nay, this would be his glory, Solus nequis occidere, nobiscum potes. But what, if we be deceived all this while? What if he be not the man, Achilles himself, but a Patroclus in his guise, and fight in his armour? while he, with his Socinian Myrmydons, stands aloof out of shot; or if he fight, and fall with Protestancy, he will revive and revenge himself in Socinianism? What, I say, if all this arguing for Protestancy against the Catholic, be nothing else but a cunning undermining to blow up both? Or what, if this Swisser in religion, fight only for pay? To day for Holland, to morrow perhaps for Spain? but if the war and service grow hot, he will serve neither, he will return home, and sleep safe, in the new Academy, and in a whole skin. Notwithstanding because this arrow howsoever flying from hart, or hand only, for Religion, or for Pay, being shot against a rock, not entering there, may chance to glance, and wound some slander by, who is neither rock, nor rocky; it will not be amiss to forearm such, by forewarning them.  
It is false then, which he presumeth Gratis, that we pretend no other ground, for the infallibility of the Church, but some texts of Scriptures; nor is our doctrine so incoherent to itself, but as before, and without Scripture, the Church could truly say, Visum est spiritui sancto & nobis, it hath seemed good to the holy Ghost and to us: So if no Scriptures were now, the same Church guided by the same holy Ghost, might truly say, Visum est spiritui sancte & nobis: yea and this very doctrine that the same holy Ghost, Spirit of truth, speaks in the Church, we are taught not only by this and those other texts of holy Scripture, but à priori, by the Church, upon whose credit and testimony we receive this Scripture.  
For thus I urge: Where was this Scripture, where the whole Gospel, before it was written? Was it not first in the Church, in the souls and spirits of the Apostles and disciples of Christ, wherein they were written by the fingar of the holy Ghost? nay the presence of the holy Ghost (saith S. Austin) was that Scripture, or Scriptures written in their hearts. 
De spir. & lit. c. 21.  Austin) was that Scripture, or Scriptures written in their hearts. Quid sunt leges Dei seriptae in cordibus, nisi ipsa prasentia spiritus sancti qui est digitus Dei? What are law's of God written in hearts of men, but the presence of the holy Ghost, who is the fingar of God? And this Scripture of heart's, was foretold by the Prophet Hieremy: 
Cap. 31.  Post dies illos (after those days, that is, in the time of the Gospel,) dabolegem meam in visceribus eorum, & in cord eorum scibam eam: I will give my law in their bowels, and write it in their hart. There was then the Scripture, the Word of God, the Gospel: There, I say, as in the Autographon, the authentic, the original instrument; out of that authentic and original, transcribed and copied out in parchment's or papers. If then, every transcript, or copy retain's the credit of a true copy or transcript, so far forth as it is found agreeing with the original; it followeth, that whatsoever we receive upon the authority of Scripture, we receive it first from, and upon the credit of the Church: And what we read, or understand as Scripture, is to be compared with that authentic, lest it may prove a false copy, which we presume to be Scripture, or the word of God.  
Since then the holy Ghost, even to the consummation of the world, resideth in the Church of Christ, according to his promise; it followeth evidently, that the word of God is in the Church, as in the Authentic and Original, but in writings of ink and paper, only as in Copies and Transcripts. What madness then, what gross absurdity is this, to believe the Copy rather than the Original? Or with what sense can any man pretend to understand this Copy or Transcript, as written with ink and paper, better than by the living voice of the Author himself of that anthentique & original, the Church? Since in the Church of Christ, and only there, resides the Author of holy Scriptures, perpetually and successinely writing them, and the verities contained in them, in the heart's and souls of Christians, members of that Church, as they are united by unity of one faith, and charity with their head Christ jesus.  
Whence it follows furthermore, that to say we receive the Scriptures from the Church, but not the sense and meaning of them, is to speak contradictories. For both the meaning and understanding of Scriptures is in the Church, and only there with certainty and infallibility of interpretation, where that spirit dwells, which alone can interpret infallibly, his own authentic. And beside, not the letter written, but the sense and meaning of the writing, or the Verities therein contained, are the Scripture or word of God. Therefore if they receive not these from the Church, they receive not the holy Scriptures thence; but a mute and dead writing, a riddle, to be read according to each man's fancy and conjecture.  
For as no man knoweth what is hidden in the hart and soul of man, but the spirit which is in man: so no man can probably presume to understand those hidden Verities, & that wisdom of God, occultat am in mysterio, hidden in mystery, howsoever appearing in words, but the spirit of God. First therefore Christians are to inquire where that spirit is the Author of Scripture, and the door by which we must enter into the Scripture; (for he that presumeth to enter another way, as by the way of human reason and discourse, Philosophy, or the like, as by a postern, is worthily suspected to be a thief in Religion;) it is he, who openeth the sense and understanding of men, extending it to a more large sphere of capacity, which natural reason shu●'s up and confines within the narrow bounds of natural principles, and discourse upon them.  
We are to inquire, I say, (if we are yet to seek) where this spirit resides● and since we treat this business with such as pretend to be vmpired by Scriptures, to them we say, as Christ to the jews, 
Joh. 5.  scrutamini scripturas, quia vos putatis in ipsis vitam aeternam habere; Search the Scripture, for there you think to have life eternal. Where that spirit of truth was promised to continue by our Saviour, there certainly it is to be sought, and found, and only there. There I say, where Christ would be nobiscum omnibus diebus usque ad consummationem saculi; to continue with us to the world's end, from that time, omnibus diebus, all the day's of posterity; not by times, or interspaces, or intermission of his presence, nor with them alone to whom he then personally directed his speech, who were not to continue all the day's of future ages, unto the world's end; (and which could not be understood of them, as after their death invested with immortality, and in possession of eternity, wherein there is neither plurality of days, nor consummation of time;) but with their progeny, and the offspring of their Faith, who were to believe in Christ by them: and whom he joined with his Apostles in his prayer for them, 
Joh. 17.  (and sure his prayer was heard) ut & ipsi unumsint etc. That they also may be one, by unity of faith and charity, ut credat mundus, that the world may believe; not this age of men alone, but in that sense wherein he commanded that the Gospel should be preached to every creature, and believe: What? quiae tu me misisti; that jesus Christ is the Son of God. Inquire then, what Society of men that is, who in succession to the Apostles, and from their times in all ages, have taught, and still do teach, that Christ is the son of God; who, even in this last age of us and our Fathers, have taught this, to the East and West of Indians etc. and when you have found that Society of Christian professor's, when you have found out the sun, in the clearest midday, know that you have found the Church of Christ, and with that the word of God, the Scriptures, the Gospel, together with the true and infallible interpretation of these.  
For this Society of men is indeed Epistola Christi, the Epistle, yea and Gospel of Christ, 
2. Cor. 3●  written non atramento sed spiritu Dei vivi, not with ink, but with the spirit of the living God; and this Scripture is that qua legitur ab omnibus hominibus, which all men read; not only such who can read the Scripture written in Hebrew, Grecke or Latin etc. but even such as cannot read at all. For as this Scripture is written not with ink, but with the spirit, in the hearts of Christians; so it appeareth not in the exterior traicts of Characters, but in the exterior profession, and lives, and Christian virtues of Christians: There, I say, it is read even by such, who know no letters.  
For as in the creation of Nature, that creating and conserving power of God omnipotent, his wisdom also, and goodness are imprinted in all the works of nature, and all creatures from time to time, together with their being, receive that stamp and impression, which they exhibit to be read by all intellectual natures, in one most legible language of nature, common to all nations; according as it is said, Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei etc. So in regeneration, and in the progeny of Grace the author of Grace Christ jesus, is read and understood in his work, and word of Grace, his creatures of grace, which is the Church of Christ; which by that spiritually and supernaturally creating power, receive the print and characters of Christ jesus, and his truth, in their heart's and soul's first, which afterward's they manifest in their lives and professions, and much more in the death's; whereby they proclaim him, and the truth of his doctrine to all ages, to all nations, with the last and loudest voice, of blood; like to that voice of our dying Lord, who crying with a loud voice gave up the Ghost. O tooto dull and deaf ears, which the singar of God hath never opened, which cannot hear a voice so loud; and those blind eyes, which read not those letters, that most legible Scripture of Catholic truth, written in the blood of all ages, since Christ redeemed the world with his; and those inominate, and unlucky birds of night, who flying the trial of the day shining in the Church, as in the Tabernacle of the Sun, run into covert, and obscurity of dark Scriptures, the common rendezvous, and retreat of all Heresies; which they do no less absurdly and preposterously, then as if in question of right and title grounded in law, they would appeal from the surviving lawmaker, to his written laws; as they would say, give us your Law's in writing, and then leave them to us, we will not learn of you the understanding of them: for so, this ever-suruiving Lawmaker is the holy Ghost, presiding in the Church in all judgements & questions of faith; from whom there never can be any just appeal; the Scriptures his laws which are written primarily & principally, in the souls and heart's and understandings of this Church. In which Scriptures, no Heretic, or Alien can pretend any right or title of interest at all, no authority nor ability of understanding them.  
Therefore although we debate right and truth by testimony of Scriptures, against the unjust usurpers of them, to take from them those stoln'e weapons, and recover them to the true titler's, as even in this claim of infallibility of the Church: yet this truth we learn not immediately of the Scripture written, but receive it à priori, from the original of the holy Ghost, written in that one, composed of many, homogenous by faith and charity; that one soul, I say, and unanimous spirit of the holy Church of all ages. For as in our natural body, one & the same in divisible soul, informeth, and enlifeneth the daily new acceding and aggenerate matter of nourishment: so this spirit of truth informeth, as it were, and animateth with the spirit of Grace and truth, not only the whole mystical body of Christ all at once, or once for all, but successively every acceding and newborn member of the Church.  
As therefore in process of natural growth, we do not properly learn that we are reasonable ereatures; but by the very having a reasonable soul, and the use thereof, we know it: so Catholics do not properly learn, that the Catholic Church is inerrant, or infallible, but by being Catholics we believe it. For of this truth I do not see, but in a true sense I might say; Est hac non scripta, sed natalex: quam non didicimus accepimus, legimus; verùm ex naturâ ipsâ arripuimus, hausimus, expressimus: ad quam non docti, sed facti; non instituti, sed imbuti sumus: A truth not written for us, but borne in us; which he have not learned, nor acquired, nor read in books; but by a second nature of Grace we are instantly possessed of, we have sucked it, and expressed it; for which we have been made, not taught; endued with it, not schooled to it. Therefore I should not doubt to avouch, though the whole rabble of flesh & blood, and heresy reclaim, that it is (understanding it in equality of proportion) no less innate and connatural to a Catholic man, as such to believe that the Catholic Church is endued with infallible authority, than it is natural to a reasonable man, as such, to know he is endued with a reasonable soul.  
Therefore as he should be thought an absurd and senseless man, who should go about to persuade a man by reason, that he hath not a reasonable soul: so is he worthily judged an impertinent, prattling Sophist, who endeavours to argue a Catholic out of his belief of a Catholic infallible Church: which stone notwithstanding, I know this Advocate never ceaseth to roll, and I could wish he would reflect, how he may have deserved that Sisyphian penance, howsoever thus I understand, Saxum sudat voluendo, neque proficit hilum. He rowles the stone, and sweats for his pains: not those text therefore of Scripture, which this Sisyphus presumes, but the visible Church, the spouse of Christ, his purchase of blood; not a lease for term of years according to the tenure of servile Agar, and her issue, which became void: but an everlasting in heritance, according to the tenure of Covenant made with the progeny of Sarai, the house of Israel, and the house of juda, an unabrogable and term'les decree, firm and durable as the constitutions of Nature, 
Hierem. 32. In quam traditi estis etc. Rom. 6.17.  as the course of sun and moon. This spouse, I say, hath delivered us this truth; or rather hath borne and bred us in it, we have sucked this milk from her breast, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, rational and fraudless milk, conformable to reason, though above it; and therefore consummating reason and extolling it; food for the Children of Obedience, ut in eo crescamus, that we may grow by that in stature of grace, and Christian perfection; from which breasts and milk of Christian simplicity, no errant Sophister shall be of power to remove us; though he attempt it never so confidently or impudently, by adjuring us, 
Thus he adjured a certain Catholic.  as we will answer at the last day, (arrainged, I trow, at the Socinian Bar, to be tried by certain select judges, or a grand jury of Pyrrhonian sceptics, or the new Academy, who will never pronounce any arrest, or sentence at all:) but what? to suspect the doctrine of the Catholic Church, to question her authority; to call those so many Doctors, the star's and light's of all Christian ages, who have always taught and supposed this truth, so many martyrs who have obsigned it with their blood; to call them all to their answer, forsooth, for their holding or teaching this doctrine; and to give this Swisser a meeting▪ and convincing, so that he leave prating; which done, they may return whence they came, & he to write the Conference, and pen his own Paan, with an i● triumph; tu moraris aureos curru●.   

Calumnies against Protestants in general, imputed to his Adversary, proved to be the Calumnies of this Advocate, objecting them.  
SECT. XIIII.  
HEnce now he undertakes to purge the Protestants in general from Calumnies, by which he pretends they are highly injured by his Adversary; in which purgative way, I will take the pains to go along with him, with hope to lead him after a while into the illuminative, wherein he may see his own Calumnies really and subiectively inexistent in himself, while he labours to show them in others, in whom they are imputatively only, or, as falsely fancied by him: but by this means, you shall have him perpetually in Calumnies and Fallacies; for where he finds them not, he makes them: which I will so note in the pursuit of his discourse, that I will make no choice, but take them up as they offer themselves in his own order of prosecution; to the end it may appear, that whensoever I shall cease to pursue him, I do it not for want of further matter of the like nature, in the remnant of his Volume; but rather for want of patience in myself, nor without cause, fearing it in the reader. For I confess a writer more pregnant in this kind of plenty, or lying more open to exceptions and reprehensions, I have never yet found any; notwithstanding if part of these which I shall note for Fallacies or Calumnies, may seem perchance not altogether so notorious as to deserve so black and foul a mark; yet he hath given me a Precedent in himself, to call a Calumny whatsoever I think untruely objected.  
But yet I will not range so wildly, nor indeed so far out-compasse the true notions and significations of words, as this Advocate every where doth; but I will call a Calumny a false crime objected, or a false reproach, especially amplified and exacerbated after a reproachful and Calumnious manner. As even this immediately following in his Preface, where he notes for Calumny these words of his Adversary; 
Cap. 2●  The very doctrine of Protestants, if it be followed closely, and with coherence to itself, must of necessity induce Socinianism. This, if it be a true charge, is no Calumny; it should therefore have been proved untrue, which this Champion neither doth, nor can do. But what he saith. 
Fallacy!  I will briefly gather up, if first I shall have given you notice, of one piece of Fallacy, of which he serves himself very often; which is to conceal and pass over in deep silence, what most concerns him to take notice of, as though there were no such thing.  
With whom therefore I would expostulate in few words, Tantumne est abs re tuâ otijtibi, aliena ut cures? do your own occasions permit you so much leisure, as you can take care of other men's affairs? Unless you will answer me, perhaps, since you are fallen back from the Catholic, Haeretici nihil à me alienum puto. As though you held yourself interessed, in every quarrel with the Catholic; for otherwise, what do those Calumnies against Protestants in general concern you, if you be none of those Protestant's with which your Adversary chargeth you more than once? and namely in his former Chapter, that you reject all supernatural infused Faith, that this you profess and endeavour to prove: which doctrine, without doubt, is your acquittance and exemption from all those Calumnies against Protestants, no less then from all Christianity. — Hoc ad te pertinet Ole. This concerns you; why do you not at the least deny it? But if you had a scruple to lie, I confess your silence is so much the more pardonable. But then withal your silence will be interpreted Confession; for if you be a Christian, and not ashamed of the Gospel of Christ, you are obliged to purge yourself so far forth, as by denial, to say you are no Infidel, no Atheist, no Socinian, when you are published in Print guilty of these crimes; which notwithstanding you cannot truly say, until you retract and recant that doctrine, of no supernatural infused faith.  
And now, men condemn you not, because you make a scruple to deny a truth, or to lie; but because you make no scruple to be a Socinian: not because, I say, you will not deny a truth, but because in truth you maintain a lie. Which makes me verily think, that the more wise and learned heads of your famous University, had no voice in choosing such a Proctor for Religion, as in a war against a Christian Nation, they would never approve the calling in the Turk to aid.   

His pretended Calumnies cleared, and retorted.  
SECT. XV.  
NOw return we to those general Calumnies, as pretended against Protestants, from which he will with all the power of his zeal, assoil them, and stand in their defence (with is more than he doth for himself) even then and there were he is assaulted most strongly; so faithful and true will he show himself to the service he hath undertaken; to vindicate the credit, of his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. his Rewarders, and Maintainers; for his own, he makes less reckoning, I would he did; it is not so far spent, but that it is recoverable both to health and strength again; but now, after he hath kissed the ground, thus he onset's.  
Pref. Your Calumnies in general are set down in thesewords: The very doctrine of Protestants if it be followed closely etc. This I say confidently, and evidently prove by instancing in one error, which may well be termed the capital and mother Heresy.  
Answ. And verily what he saith, he doth indeed evidently prove to any man who hath eyes, and opens them; for otherwise the blindman walking in the clearest sunshine, walks still in darkness. But his answer to this, forsooth:  
Pref. In all which discourse the only true word you speak is: This I say confidently.  
Answ. Thus said, he flings forthwith from the matter, his Adversary's proofs, quite out of the way? which I observe as his notorious Fallacy, reducible to that of Aristotle, an affected ignorance of the Elench, the true and Logical reproof of his Adversary's Argument; his perpetual Sophism; & as the very soul of his volume diffused throughout, — Et magno se corpore miscet. which otherwise had been as very a Pamplet in bulk, as now in substance.  
For what is it to the solution of his Adversary's Argument's to heap so many Calumnies upon the Pope, and those so many most false and inconsequent Consequences, what import they to that purpose? But these turning's and windings are very shifts; much like to those of the fearful Hare, but cunning; which pursued by the hound's, leaps in here, and out there, with a hundred traverses and doublings confounding the scent. Some one perhaps may be at leisure to tract him, and follow him, through all his Meander's, and Labyrinth's of discourse, until he find the Minotaur, Semibovemque virum, semivirumque bovem, that Amphibion, that riddle in Religion, and show him to the world: he is a copious Argument indeed, a wide field wherein a man may sooner lose him, then find any right way out. But his Calumnies and Sophisms are my task; and these yet, which way soever he takes, and in all his digressions and bypaths he is not unmindful to sow most plentifully: as even in this barren place, where he new-molds his Adversary's reasons into a Syllogism, as it pleaseth himself, such as he can most easily play upon, and such I dare say, as never came into his Adversary's dream; nor is indeed any probably deduction from his discourse.  
Pref. Who would not laugh at him (saith he) that should argue thus: Neither the Church of Rome, nor any other Church is infallible: Ergo the doctrine of Arrius, Pelagius, Eutyches, Manichaeus, was true doctrine?  
Answ. Thus he laughs at his own jest, and it is indeed ridiculous, and ridiculously patched ' up, out of his Adversary's words, where he saith, that from the formentioned capital Heresy all other heresies follow at ease. But thus indeed he might have collected, had it pleased him to be serious in amatter of such consequence, rather than to make it his disport.  
The perpetually Visible Church of Christ, according to Protestants, is not infallible: Ergo, for aught they know, or can convince, the doctrine of Pelagius, Manichaus etc. is true doctrine: and this will prove indeed a solid and strong Enthimeme; whence a manifest absurdity even in the doctrine of Protestants is concluded out of this their main principle, that the Church of God may ●rre in proposing things untrue to be believed as divinely revealed; and then further, if this absurdity fall directly, and in true consequence from that principle, it must necessarily follow according to the very elements of Logic, that the principle itself is absurd and untrue.  
For by that received Axiom, Nothing giveth what it hath not, though it may happen that some Premises or Principles may inflow some less absurdity into the Conclusion, then is contained in their proper notion and efficiency; because the absurdities hidden in the virtue or force of some principle, are not discerned in their whole latitude by every understanding, as being not able to penetrate and sound the Principle; yet a greater absurdity they can never in flow, be the understanding never so comprehending: it followeth then, that this main principle of Protestancy is as absurd and untrue, as this Consequent is, or perhaps much more; and this inference offering itself most readily, and evidently enough, resulting in his Adversary's discourse from that principle, this Advocate is so far from impugning it, that he seems to take no notice of it; but shapes his adversary's Argument in his own fancy, such as he can deal with all; combats an imaginary Foe,— Proque viro, nebulam; or like an Aiax in his raving fit, wreak's his fury upon a silly sheep instead of an Ulysses. Now in this mood, while he hath hay in his horns, he is an unfortunate man who comes near him; he lays about him like a Hercules furens; spares not his own Mother if she come in his way: & because no body comes, he falls most desperately upon his own Chimera●es; as Fornication to be legitimated hereafter by the Church, not improbable; and the whole Communion to be taken away from the Laity.  
Ah tender and compassionate Soul! how he zeal's for his brethren! And where was this pitiful zeal, or zealous pity, when together with Transubstantiation and real Presence, the whole Communion was taken away, not only from the Laity, but from the Clergy too: no more remaining in that Sacrament, than what you may call for at home. Now truly this is a ridiculous Calumny, not worthy enough to come from a joind-stoole, much less from a divinity Chair; to complain of taking the drink away from the Laity, when themselves have left neither meat nor drink, neither for Priest, nor Laity.  
Howsoever the Catholic Church gives the cup too, no less than the Protestant; for either in the Protestant cup there is something else then wine, or nothing else. If nothing but wine, this is also given to our Catholic Laity when they communicate; i● somewhat else, what else, the real Presence and Transubstantiation once denied? Some ingredient perhaps of a strong imagination, working with this, or the like spell, crede quod habes, & habes. And how can any man tell that our Laity cannot imagine as strongly, as they can? Or if they cannot, 'tis but a fancy difference; and if but a vain and idle fancy, what have they gotten more than the Catholic? A matter of nothing, to cool their wine withal.   

His Calumny concerning Worship of Angels, Traditions, Latin service etc.  
SECT. XVI.  
AFter this he strikes at the worship of Angels, to be revenged perhaps of the striking Angel that slew the firstborn in Egypt; then at Traditions, and teaching men's commaund's for doctrines, Latin-seruice, Images etc.  
Verily I can hardly believe that M. Ch. had a stomach strong enough to digest these many, and many times sodden Crambes, enough to kill forty masters; Occidit miseros crambe repetitae magistros. and I could easily suspect some other had a great hand in the cookery, and ingested a great part of these ingredients. And is all our expectation come to this? after his ingenuous acknowledgement, when time was, that Charity maintained could not be defeated by any forces of Protestancy; nor by any of those accustomary attempts and practices, and that notwithstanding he had a way, and had found where, and wherewith he could invade them strongly, and beat them from their former holds; which was to say in effect, 
Dicam infigne, recens adhuc—  
Indictum ore alio;—  Now, after all this to come forth in a threadbare suit, patched ' up with old shreds of a number of stolen Arguments, and Objections, Vilia vendentem tunicato scruta popello; such as in his first Protestancy he would not have stoopt' to take up. Well then I see, any disgrace is credible enough in him, who hath thrown away his Target: and see, I pray you, what the famine and penury of a starved cause may do; 
job.  Quae prius nolebat tangere anima mea, nunc prae angustiâ cibi mei sunt; what heretofore my soul loathed, now for very need, is become my food.  
The truth is, he was resolved upon other provision when he made this quarrel his enterprise; nor was he ignorant of these hard exigents, and these narrow passages whereunto the Protestant cause hath been, and is daily driven by the Catholic; therefore he had determined with himself to draw him forth into the wide Champion, and spacious plains of Socinianism. Now being crosed in his course (sic visum Superis, so the Gods would have it) he is fallen into the ordinary beaten way of his Anticatholique Ancestry, and (which I assure myself, not long since, he heartily disdained) now he can vouchsafe to glean after them. And howsoever, since Nonconformity is now become out of all way of profit and preferment, to say as they say, and think with himself; 
Pref.  therefore (to use his words) seeing we see these things done by him, which hardly any man who knew him, could believe he would do; what wonder, if he go forward still like to himself with as little modesty and moderation, as hitherto. For now he can call Catholic Honour, and Reverence towards the Images of our Saviour, or his Saints, Idolatry; and the legal proceeding of Catholic Countries against Heresies by them adjudged capital crimes, Murder: and forgets in what coast of the world he writeth this; and whose hart he wounds through the sides of Catholics: and how pretence of Heresy and pretence of Treason is laid by him to the charge of so many laws and statutes lately provided in such cases, which remain in force of unrepealed decrees. And may not this man write any thing, so he writ against Catholics? But can any man believe that M. Ch. his first defection from Protestancy was so blind and headlong that he considered not whither he went? Or that he knew not the Catholic doctrine concerning the use of Pictures, a Question so commonly vexed and ventilated among Protestants? Or is he the only Animal that in all spontaneous commigrations foreknow's only the whence, but not the whither? Or was he so wicked and irreligious, that he would make choice of Idolatry? Or conceived he so meanly of the Profession for which he is now become so desperate a Whiffler, that in his judgement he placed it behind Idolatry? Or is lastly the Catholic use of pictures become Idolatrous, since he recoiled secondly to Protestancy? And with his revolt from it, is the Catholic doctrine revolted from itself? And may we not then justly fear a general Apostasy in the course of nature, if M. Ch. should chance to turn once more?  Xanthe retro propera versaque recurrite lymphae.  

His Calumny, That Catholics execution of Heretics is Murder, discussed, and retorted.  
SECT. XVII.  
Pref. Devises have been invented (by Catholics) how men may worship Images without Idolatry, & kill innocent men, under pretence of Heresy without murder.  
Answ. This point was not to be slightly passed over, containing a notorious and fallacious Calumny; wherein also if you observe well, you shall espy the Socinian mole working underneath: Do but command your eyes a little patience.  
If Heresy be only the pretended cause, what is the latent & true Cause which is pretexed or veiled under the name of Heresy? What is that causa precatarchica, that chief & prineipally, though covertly moving cause, if this be the evident and apparent cause only? As when in the age of our Fathers, some lost their lives, under pretence of Treason, it was easy to assign the true cause, practice, or profession of ancient Religion made treagon by new Laws. Let him likewise declare unto the world the true cause, or causes pretenced and cloaked with the crime of Heresy, in the procedures of Catholics in those their capital sentences and executions upon Heretics, other than their wilful obstinacy in maintaining heretical opinions.  
I suppose now, that Heresy is punishable by death, even in the opinion and practice of chiefest Protestants Caluin, Beza, 
Bellarm. de laicis l. 3. c. 22:  and others; being also the known and received doctrine of Fathers and Counsels, grounded upon express testimonies of holy Scriptures. And this, a man would think to be the opinion of this Advocate; for even in that he terms the kill of innocent men, under pretence of Heresy, Murder; he should seem to intimate that death executed upon Heresy, not the pretended, but the true, and primely moving cause, is not Murder, nor killing of innocent men. As he who calleth Death for Treason only pretended, Murder, supposeth that Treason itself truly so named, is justly punishable by Death; will he then say, that those opinions were not indeed Heresies, but falsely supposed such? or only made criminal under the name of Heresy, and as such, or instead of such punished by death? Which being never yet proved, but rather the contrary convinced by all the Arguments and profess whereby any opinion can be convinced heretical, is in no wise now to be assumed.  
And yet further, if those opinions have been fore-iudged or foredamned for Heresies; Catholic posterity having those precedents, & according to those, sentencing alike the very same Heresies, cannot surely with any probability, be said to have proceeded to capital condemnation of such opinions, only under pretence of Heresy. And if, notwithstanding all those precedents of Antiquity, authorities of Fathers, Counsels &c. defining such opinions to be Heretical, what in after ages hath been done according to those precedent Decrees, and Definitions, may be yet traduced to a coulorable proceeding against such doctrines under pretence of heresy: why may not likewise, in the civil Government of all Christian Commonwealths throughout the world, capital proceed against many crimes in this present age, according to Precedents, & Laws of former times, be brought back into dispute, and judges of Assizes condemned for their pronouncing capital sentence against such delinquents, and such and such demeanours, under pretence of capital Crimes, being indeed (would these men say) no crimes at all, or not justly punished with death?  
And surely, I believe it will be hard for any Christian, in consonancy to Christian doctrine, to think that laycke and secular Precedents and Statutes, may not with as little scruple be recalled into question, as Ecclesiastic Decrees; or to give a reason. why the authority of a Nationall Synod, Senate of Parliament, should be more inviolable than the authority of an Occumenicall Council; especially if we consider and believe, that this later authority, both in regard of matter & form, the things decreed, and the manner of decreeing, is of a nearer approach and access to divine Law's, and Ordinances, than the former.  
If then, Sentences and judgements conformable to Senatory or Parlamentory Statutes must not be esteemed colours and pretences only; much more the sentences and executions of the Church, in conformity to Ecclesiastical orders and Constitutions, cannot but absurdly be presumed to be only pretensions, veiling and masking of some hidden mystery of malice or policy. For when the true cause is both apparent, and of itself sufficient to authorise the proceeding of the Magistrate; what need of masking and cloaking causes, when whatsoever hidden or concealed cause is less valid, and a less sufficient warrant for such proceed, than those public and noterious Decrees and Laws provided in such cases?   

His Fallacy discovered, his supposal of no Heresy, according to Socinianism.  
SECT. XVIII.  
Notwithstanding all this he hath yet an evasion, though a very secret and close one; somewhat like to the escapes of those amorously pursued rivers which Poet's fable, under the ground; whence, we simple men, while we think to follow him in open view, and above ground, after the vulgar sense and acceptation of words; run far wide, and short of his meaning, when we think we are at his heels. For if I be not much mistaken, he is even now closely lurking in Socinianism, while we follow him in the known way of Protestancy. Now in good Socinianism, or true Atheism, all Heresy as supposed criminal, and in the odious and ordinary acception of the word, is only a colour and pretence, having in itself no reality or substance of crime. For these Nullifidians, as they know no such virtue as Faith; so they acknowledge no such Vice as Heresy. For in their Sceptic or Pyrrhonian way, all assensions are but opinions, all Visa are but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, all Vision but Apparition.  
Will you have the Character of a Socinian? Take it in brief, and for this time in part. He is a thing, that neither see's, nor here's, nor smells, nor feels, nor tastes any thing, nor understands any thing; but is only so affected, as though he saw, heard, felt etc. He is therefore, a quasi animal, and a quasi man, and a quasi Christian; nothing without a quasi, or a quasi nothing, and a quasi any thing. He will give no judgement at all of any thing: he will not say the Crow is black to day, for fear he may say to morrow this a swan; nor that honey is sweet to day, lest it may seem gall to morrow. For all objects affect their senses, not by what they are in themselves, but as the senses are formerly affected; which affection or disposition may vary daily; which variance or mutation, because they foresee not, therefore they can promise you no opinion of theirs for to morrow, no more than the Weathercock can tell you which way it shall stand when the wind blows next.  
They deny as peremptorily as they can, that there are ten Predicaments; for whatsoever may fall under sense, or understanding belongs to one Predicament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, nothing but relation: So Faith then with such men is but a Fancy, as the object that begets it but a phantom, a thing not so, but only seeming so. Ask him then what he think's of any Christian, doctrine, whether he believe three persons one God, the Son of God Incarnate, or that he was borne of a Virgin & c? rather than he will seem headlong, or a spendthrift of his judgement; rather than he will be thought so unwise, he will (as a less disgrace) be thought no Christian: therefore he will answer you so very readily, as you shall see, he doth it easily, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ti's no more so, then so; Or neither so, nor so. With this brief sentence of absolution, they quit all Heresy; nor will it be profane in them, to whom nothing is holy, to say to Heresy, smiling sweetly upon her as she stands at the bar, mulier ubi sunt qui te accusant; nemo te condemnavit? woman where, or who are thy accuser's? and her to answer, nemo Domine, none but Papists, my Lord; no Socinian, my Lord: Neque ego te condemno, nor do I condemn thee; thou art as true to me as the most Orthodox opinion of Christianity, Vade in pace.   

Fallacy of Division.  
SECT. XIX.  
ANother Fallacy I meet with even in this place which we may rank with Fallacies of Division. For where his Adversary's discourse hath his Arguments or reasons of proof in joint connexion, and immediate subsecution of his Position; there this Sophister seuer's and divides the proof from the Position, disjointing and dismembering them into so many senerall and disparate propositions, without any relation or discursive consecution of the one from the other: which Fallacy though it may seem to fall naturally from the spring and spirit of Heresy, and Schism, which in their very Notion and Etymology import divison; yet I make no doubt, but it was voluntary here, and of choice, having in it the Author's ends, which were, I doubt not, to weaken his Adversary's discourse; as if he would untie the faggot, the more easily to break the single stick's, which in the whole faggot he could not do.  
His adversary's position was this: The doctrine of Protestants followed closely and coherently to itself, induceth Socinianism; and particularly their doctrine denying infallibility of the Visible Church of Christ. This proposition he proveth immediately: For if the infallibility of such a public authority be once impeached, what remaineth but that every man is given over to his own wit, and discourse etc. This reason he forth with declaring, and confirming by other reasons with close compacture, and consistency of discourse, because it was strong, (— Pede pes, iunctusque viro vir,) he fraudulently dissolves and discomposeth; hoping perchance by a semblable sleight and finesse, the like fortune and success of that one surviving Roman Champion, against the three Alban Curiaty, whom by a guileful flight, having divided by competent distances, he returns upon them so singled, & slew them one after another, whom in joint combat he durst not deal withal.  
Which hope notwithstanding hath frustrated this Champion; nor could he indeed in reason expect the happy success of the Roman combatant, who fight's against Rome, against whose Faith the power of hell shall not prevail. Do but cast your Eye, if you please, upon these reasons, even as they lie apart and loosely, and of purpose scattered by this Advocate, Inuenies etiam disiecti membra Quiritis; you shall find in every limb a Catholic verity, too strong for him to break though single. As where his Adversary saith; for if this infallibility be once impeached etc. he omits the connecting particle (for) importing a reason of the immediately preceding position, thus: You say again confidently, that if this infallibility etc. 
Pres.   
Again when his Adversary adjoineth in confirmation of this reason; For if the true Church may err etc. we are still devolved either upon the private spiret or else upon natural wit, for determining what Scriptures contatu●, true or false doctrine etc. He hath it thus: You say thirdly with sufficient cousidence, 
Pref.  that, i● the true Church may err etc. Where his Adversary addeth in further confirmation of this; And indeed take away the authority of God's Church, no man can be assured, that any book of Scripture was written by divine inspiration etc. this man thus: 
Pref.  You say fourthly with convenient boldness, that this infallible authority of your Church being de●yed, no man can be assured etc. Where you may also observe a false trick by the way, to make his Adversary's words carry a more odious sound to Protestant ears: for he saith not, take away the authority of our Church, but, take away the authority of the Church of God; which he therefore the rather saith (God's Church) then (our Church) because he takes not that here as granted by the Protestant, that our Church, is God's Church; but only shows here the necessity of an infallible Church, which soever that be.  
Nor will it help this Advocate, that soon after his Adversary as it were directing his speech to Catholics, calleth that Church, our Church; for to Catholics this needed no further proof, who believe it already. Whence with them he might presume it, as granted, according to that of S. Paul, sapientiam lequimurinter perfectos, we utter wisdom (divine truth) among those who believe it; reserving that doctrine (that our Catholic Roman Church is the true Church of God,) to the proper place, as to be proved against Protestants. But you shall take him very often faltering in this Fallacy. 
Fallacy:  ante-dating his Adversary's order, and therefore seldom answering to the subject in hand; whereof hereafter instances will occur very plentifully.  
He will say perhaps, he hath fore-inserted his Adversary's discourse entire, and as it lies in his own Book; but to this I say again, he answers is not as it lies there, but misordreth it, to his advantage, even as formerly ordered by himself. For according to fair play and ingenuous behaviour, although he might do well, in answering the whole discourse by retail, or by parts; yet he should have taken notice of the relation and connexion of one part with another; and so have answered reason's as reasons, positions as positions, and not have made every reason, a position. I know he hath learned to analize a Discourse better than so, and would esteem it poor Anatomy, only to dissect limb from limb, joint from joint, and never show the natural commissure and compacture of limb with limb, & joint with joint: nor distinguish them according to their true Nomenclature, and their several, both proper, absolute, & relative functions.  
But he, as though the dissected were only bellua multorum capitum, a beast with many head's; so he lectures upon legs, thighs, belly, eyes, ears, arms etc. all under one appellation of Head, as though all the parts and members were heads; for just so he hath anatomised his Adversaries context of speech, making every part, as it were a several head; and why? Because as in a natural body, by reason of that due order and composure of members, a certain mutual intelligence of influences and sympathies of the members between themselves is entertained; of which mutual intelligence and influence depends the life and vigour of every part, and joindy of the who●e body: so in the body of a rational discourse, there is the like influence of one part into another, and one part upholds & strengtheneth the other: and to take away this mutual correspondence and relation, is to take away the very harmony of discourse; & none who knows what he doth, will do it but he who intends to mar the music, or love's discords and jarrings better than harmony.  
For to this purpose which I have said (what other can be imagined) he hath divided those reasons and confirmations of his Adversary's position, into so many heads or propositions, distinguishing them not only by numbers, as, you say first, 
Pref.  and you say again; you say thirdly, then fourthly, then fifthly; but also by severally varying the odious phrase; as you say confidently enough; then, you say with sufficient confidence; thirdly, you say with convenient boldness; fourthly, you say with confidence in abundance, when all is indeed but one thing said, the Proposition with some few proofs adjoined. Yet the favourers of his cause and person, would easily pardon this poor piece of Sophistry, or wave it at the least, had he achieved his intent by this; but now Cuibone? what hath he got by this? 
— Nihil omnibus actum  
Tantorum Impensis operum.—  With so much ado, with so great expense of honesty and ingenuity laid out upon a miserably Fallacy, to do nothing, is intolerable: had he yet overthrown those scattered forces, or made something of his own dissections, more than a dissector of an ox can do; now for my part, I had no other drift, but only to note his Fallacies and Calumnies; and to do more in showing his weak attempts, upon these disranked and dissected parts, as they are singly encount'erd by him, would prove an enterprise, much more easy than needful. Yet because I have shown his insufficiency against his first Prosection, which is his Adversary's Position, whereof the ensuing members are (as I have said) the proofs; I will only employ a dash of pen upon what he hath against the rest, and the rather because I assure myself that even in these too, I shall meet with Calumnies, and Fallacies; these being indeed as the very soul, or the natural, and proper language of his pen, without which it cannot speak.   

His Answers to his Adversary's Arguments, Fallacious, or none.  
SECT. XX.  
Pref. YOu say (saith he) again, if this infallibility be once impeached, every one is given over to his own wit and discourse. To this he answers by a distinction: Given over to his own wit and discourse, not guiding itself by Scriptures, he denies this to be consequent to infallibility of the Church so impeached; given over to discourse, that is, right reason (sanaratio say the Socinians) grounded on divine revelation, and common notions, & consequent deductions from them, he denies this consequent to be inconnenient, though it follow of the infallibility of the Church denied.  
Answ. Now this evasion his Adversary foresaw, and therefore barred the passage, which bar this nimble Advocate slily skips over, taking no notice of it. The bar of prevention was this; And talk not here (so his Aduersatie) of Scripture, for if the true Church may err either in defining what Scripture is Canonical, or in delivering the sense and meaning thereof, we are still devolved either upon the private spirit, or esse upon natural wit, and judgement. What place then for discourse guided by divine revelation, in col●erence of their doctrine, who take away the means of knowing what revelation is divine? Either materially in regard of the Canonical Scripture; or formally in regard of the true sense and interpretation of such Scriptures, whereof neither the one nor the other can be afcertained without the infallible authority of the Church, the only means to arrive to this certainty.  
Wherefore if the man be in his wits, he will find out his guide, and know him to be a sure guide, before he put himself into his journey; otherwise both the guide and guided may fall into a ditch, whence neither his Logick-rules, nor all his consequent deductions, with twenty ropes to boot, will ever be strong enough to pluck him out. Now the only guide which guideth reason by Scripture is the holy Spirit, the only true and sure interpreter of holy Scriptures. This holy spirit is not promised to any private man, but to the Church it is promised; therefore in this Church is infallibly to be found: whence he that followeth this company of men, not only followeth not a company of beasts, 
Pref.  which this Advocate would insinuate the Church may be, but he followeth the holy Ghost, guiding the Church.  
But by this you may see the man miscrably tortured by unavoidable truth, even, maugre himself, forced to confess what his Adversary teacheth, and even here relapsed into his dilemma which he may seem to have laid of purpose to catch him; for he is fallen upon the Scripture as interpreted by every man's natural with and judgement, or the private spirit; By which touchstone, the Private spirit with his Logick-rules etc. he will also try every spirit, 
1. Joan. 4.  and by his ignorantly applying the words of the Apostle (Believe not every spirit) to this purpose, shows plainly, how sure an Interpreter he is of holy Scripture, together with his right reason, and common notions, and Logick-rules.  
For surely in good Logic the universal and distributive sign omnis, all, every, importeth number and multiplicity, therefore he saith, Believe not every spirit but try the spirits; as if he said, of many spirits believe not every spirit; because the holy spirit is but one spirit, from which one spirit, spirits and every one of spirits are participations and derived spirits. Now that one spirit (which is so one, that it cannot be a part of number, like as divine unity, or the unity of divine nature, is no part of number) that one spirit I say, is not to be tried; for it cannot be but a true spirit: otherwise no spirit could be known to be true, if that one spirit could befalse, which is the only rule whereby to try all spirits; but of the multitude of spirits, or partaking spirits some do, and all may, lie. Of which number of lying spirits, are the Apostate Angel's since their defection from the spirit of truth; and those false Prophets in whose mouth's those lying spirits were speakers. Such also were those Pseudoprophets, upon occasion of whom S. john forewarneth Christians not to believe every spirit, but to try spirits. And who were those false Prophets or Apostles, those lying spirits? They were those of whom he had said before, that they had been in the Church, and were gone out of the Church, and therefore became lying spirits, oftentimes actually lying, always inclined and prepared to lie, and so never to be believed.  
For as that first revolt from God, the spirit of truth, was the original cause why those mutinous spirits became lyars: so Apostasy from the Church of God, in whom the same spirit of truth presides, is the general origen, and extraction of all false Prophets and Heretics. As therefore that one prime spirit, is none of those spirits, every one of which is to be tried, but by which every numerable spirit is to be proved: so the spirit which guideth the Church, is not a spirit to be tried, but that by which every private spirit must be examined, and tried. In which sense also it is most truly said, Prima Sedes, the prime sea is judged by none: therefore it is true again, that the Church of Christ, the Catholic Church, is the only competent judge of itself, according to that received principle of natural reason, rectum est iudex sui, & obliqui: what is strait of itself, both shows itself to be strait, and what is crooked, to be so. He therefore who will presume to reform the Church in doctrine of faith, wherein the spirit of truth is her guide and teacher, 
Daviel 12.  he shall be the star, which would give light to the Sun, but none of those who shall shine in perpetuas aternitates.  
For I would ask any man, only sober, and in his wits, if the Church of God may have erred, either in determining Scriptures, or the true meaning of them, (which point concerning Scriptures I specify, to prevent all refuge to trial by Scriptures) by what other spirit shall this spirit of the Church be tried? And I would gladly look upon that face of Impudence, that would assume to itself, what it denyeth to the Church of God: and when I shall have found him, I shall know for certain, that he is one of those Antichrists, of whom the same Apostle, Et nunc Antichristi multi facti sunt. Ex nobis prodierunt: 
Joan. 2. & 4.  and even now many are turned Antichrists; they went out from us. Yea by this very brand, I will know them, this indelible character of antichrist, to go out of the Church, & then to question the spirit and doctrine of the Church.  
It would be worth their labour, yet once to show, when the Church of Rome went out of the Church of Christ, where she left it at her departure; as we show, what Church Arrius went out of, whence Pelagius, and Nestorius etc. whence of this later age, Luth●r, and Peter Martyr, and Caluin, and the rest. Yet besides this character of a false Prophet, which is his terminus à quo, the whence they go out, the Apostle hath given us another, their terminus ad quem, the whither they go, going out of the Church; Multi pseudoprophetae exierunt in mundum; many false Prophets are gone out into the world; and yet more plainly: Ipsi de mundo sunt, ide● de mundo loquntur▪ & mundus eos audit: They are of the world, they are become worldlings, the world is their talk, flesh & blood their discourse; intimating even by this, that Heretical doctrine; is carnal doctrine, the language of corrupt Nature, the discourse of flesh & blood, and therefore the world harken's to their doctrine, as being of a carnal spirit, symbolising with these teachers.  
Indeed, the Society of Christians, is not the world, nor any homogenous part of the world; of whom therefore our Saviour's words are truly understood, V●s de mund● nonesti●, se●●g●●ligi vo● de mundo; you are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world. Whence the whole mortal kind of man is sufficiently divided by these two names, the World, and Christendom; therefore, that going out of the Church, signified by those words, prodierunt ex nobis, they went out from us, could be no whither else, but into the world, there being no third place, or family of mortal men to go unto; therefore all Heretics are a part of that faction, the World; and therefore being endued & swayed, and guided by the spirit of the world, which is a lying spirit, they cannot be competent judges or Examiner's of the spirit of the Church, or any doctrine of faith, or interpretation of Scriptures. But as the Church Triumphant shall judge the world and condemn it, and shall not be judged by it; so the Church now Militant, is invested with the like authority and jurisdiction towards mortal men of this world, to judge and condemn the world, that is, all those who are severed from her Society, and not to be judged by them. Her doctrine therefore is the sole judicature both of itself, and all other crooked and obliqne opinions. Wherefore the counsel of S. john to try spirits, is to try them by the spirit and doctrine of the Church; for unless the spirit of the Church were supposed the spirit of truth, they could not have been judged false Prophets for going out of the Church, no nor for opposing the doctrine of the Church.  
Moreover, that by which another thing is tried, as by a rule, must needs be supposed more perfect in regard of judicature, than the thing tried: but it is absurd to think that the spirit of a private man is more perfect in nature of judicature, than the spirit of the Church; therefore S. john never advised private men to try the spirit of the Church.  
Lastly, this very command or advice, Try every spirit, is the advice of the Church itself, in the person of S. john a principal pillar of the Church; but no man can be so silly, as to think that the Church adviseth private men, to try her spirit (and least of all can Heretics challenge any such authority.) Heretics also are subjects of the Church, even in that, they are, at the least, characterically Christians, which character of subjection they can never wipe out wheresoever they run; they are ever subjects, though rebels; therefore their calling the Church to question and trial, is mere presumption, and an act of rebellion. No Catholic presumeth to try the spirit or doctrine of the Church; nay every Catholic trieth his own spirit and doctrine by that of the Church; therefore a Catholic, as such, hath no private opinion of faith, but all Catholic, that is, the same with the whole Catholic Church.  
The Catholic makes no choice of doctrines of faith but taketh such as are given him: he is God's beggar, and therefore no chooser. Ego autem mendicus sum & pauper, I am a beggar and poor. Thus every Catholic is taught both to say and believe. The Heretic makes choice of what he will hold with the Church, takes what he list's, and refuseth what he list's not take. And this is to be even Etimologically an Heretic, and an Heretic formally, no less in what he takes, then in what he refuses. For what he takes he chooseth to take upon his own discretion, not upon the credit of the Church, nor formally from the Church: therefore he is an Heretic in all, even in the points of divine faith, which he holdeth with the Church, not of the Church; and therefore holdeth nothing with divine faith, because he is still a chooser of what he holds, and so an Heretic.   

Another Text of S. john, by this Advocate corrupted, and misinterpreted.  
SECT. XXI.  
WHat this all-trying spirit can do of himself without the spirit of the Church, will appear by his singular talon in interpreting Scriptures; nor shall I swerve from my subject in this way, for I shall demonstrate that all his interpretations, are Sophisms, wily and fallacious detorsions of Scripture, from their true sense, to his own crooked ends.  
Pref. S. john (saith he) gives a rule to all Christians to make this trial by, to consider whether they confess jesus to be the Christ, that is, the guide of their faith, and Lord of their actions. So he.  
Answ. The words of S. john are these; In hoc cognoscitur spiritus Dei etc. In this the spirit of God is known; Every spirit that confesseth jesus Christ to have come in fleth, is of God; and every spirit that dissolveth jesus is not of God; and this is Antichrist. The affirmative part of which copulate sentence, as some other the like occurring in the Epistles of S. john, is to be understood in sensu formali, as thus. Every spirit which coufesseth jesus Christ to have taken flesh, as confessing this truth is of God, who is the author and warrant of this truth; therefore of him who confesseth this supernatural truth, it may be truly said, Caro & sanguis non revelavit hoc tibi, flesh and blood hath not revealed this unto thee, being a truth above the conceit of flesh and blood; which restriction to a formal sense, is both sufficient, and often times necessary for the verifying of many the like sentences of ●oly Scripture. Wherefore although the negative, to deny jesus Christ to have taken flesh, be a sufficient note whereby to discern a false spirit; yet the affirmative, to confess jesus Christ to have come in flesh, is but a part of the rule. The other part is the character of Christian Charity, as the same Apostle teacheth in the same Chapter; Omnis qui diligit, ex Deo natus est: Every one that loveth is borne of God; therefore these two rules we find conjoined in the precedent Chapter; hoc est mandatum ●ius, ut credanius in nomine silij eius jesu Christi, & diligamus alterutrum. This is his commandment that we believe in the name of his son jesus Christ, and that we love one another; for in these two virtues, indeed a Christian is consummate. For faith in jesus Christ, the son of God incarnate, includeth all points of faith, because it implieth the belief of all that jesus Christ hath taught, or teacheth, either by himself, or by his Church, according to that saying of of his, Qui vos audit, me audit: in which sense also the affirmative proposition of the Apostle, Every one who confesseth that jesus Christ came in flesh etc. hath a true construction, even without restriction: but than it is nothing to the purpose of this Advocate, who by this rule would exclude the necessity of belief of other points of faith proposed by the Church, to make this confession of Christ to have come in flesh, the rule whereby to try spirits. As therefore that other cognoisance of a Christian, mutual Charity, according to that of our Saviour, In hoc cognoscent omnes etc. all men shall know you to be my disciples by this ensign, or character of mutual love, excludeth not that of faith, or the confession of the son of God Incarnate, from being a rule whereby to discern spirits, and to know who are true Christians: So this rule of Faith in Christ, excludeth not that of Charity, and neither of them, nor both exclude a third, given by the same Apostle, Qui novit Deum audit nos; 
Cap. 4.  qui non est ex Deo, non audit nos: in hoc cognoscimus spiritum veritatis, & spiritum erroris. See here an express rule, to try spirits by: He who knows God, hears us, he who is not of God, heareth not us: in this we know the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error. Now it is most absurd to think, the force of that rule to be limited and confined with the age of the Apostles; therefore by that (us) is understood the Church: or if they were to be heard of posterity in their writings, we cannot hear them so without an interpreter; which interpreter as before hath been proved, can be no other of infallible authority, but the Church.  
Now that the Apostles were to continue in their posterity of Apostles, Evangelists etc. that is, Preachers and Teachers of Christ's Gospel, Doctors, and Pastors etc. ad consummationem Sanctorum, until the number of Saints were consummate, that is, to the end of the world, appeareth plain by the words of the Apostle to the Ephesians; 
Ephes. 4.  therefore to the hearing and believing those succeeding Apostles, Doctors etc. is extended the obligation of succeeding ages. For can we be so senseless, as to think, those succeeding Doctors have imposed upon them the obligation of teaching, and not other Christian subjects the obligation of hearing? Or was our Saviour so imprudent an Oeconomus, or dispenser of his gifts and talents, that he would furnish those, whom he had designed hearers and learners in his Christian school, with greater sufficiency for discerning spirits, or greater assurance of not erring, than those, quos dedit, whom he appointed to be their Masters and Teachers? Obedite prapositis vestris & subiacete ijs; obey your Prelates, and be subject to them. And wherein are they Praepositi, Prelates, or Governors? Certainly in those things, for which they must render account to God; which are things appertaing to their souls; for they are to render account for your souls, saith the Apostle in that place. To them therefore appertain spiritual instructions, and all spiritual directions; to them the trial and discretion of spirits. Or, shall the subjects first try their Prelate's spirits, yea the highest Prelature and authority on earth, before they obey? Is this to be directed, or to direct? Or, who is here, the Prelate, he who is tried, or he who tryeth? And, is not this gross Anarchy, and Confusion? Have these spirits any conceit of Ecclesiastical Hierarchy? Or do they believe there is any such thing, as Order and Subordination in the greatest Empire and kingdom upon earth, the Church of God?  
By what hath been said, it appeareth that S. john, by giving that rule of trial, the Confession of the son of God in flesh, never intended to exclude other rules. Therefore this is a miserable and fallacious consequence which this Advocate insinuates, saying; S. john gives this rule of trial, to consider whether men confess jesus to be the Christ, not whether they acknowledge the Pope to be his Vicar. Ergo, to examine whether they acknowledge, this is no part of trial. This consequence I say, is no better than this; We must try men's spirits by considering whether they confess jesus to be the Christ. Ergo, not whether they confess that Christ died for the sin's o● the world; or whether he rose from death or no &c. Now hath not this man good reason to rely so much upon his neverfailing rules of Logic, in matters of Faith, who makes such goodly consequences? I can in charity believe he hath more Logic than he makes show of in this work, otherwise I see no obligation he hath to rely upon it so confidently.  
You may likewise note his skill in Logic by this other consequence, 
Pref.  which he likewise insinuates. S. Paul saith, try all things, and hold fast that which is good: Ergo, we must try all things after this manner, which S. Paul teacheth not; we must try all things by our own spirit, or the Scripture interpreted by our own spirit, with the help of neverfailing rules of Logic. Or thus, Try all things: Ergo, try even that by which all things are to be tried. Try the spirit of the Church; try the spirit of God; for without this spirit of truth, which we know not where it is but in the Church, it is most certain that neither Scriptures can be understood, nor any other certain rule imagined by which we may try any spirit, or doctrine of faith: So the advice of the Apostle should be de impossibili, of a thing impossible, if he advised us to try all things, by any other rule. And as well might this Logician infer, out of this principle, try all things, thus; Try all things whether they be crooked or strait by that which is certainly strait: Ergo, try that which is certainly strait, by that which may be crooked. And as well he might infer thus: Season all things with salt: Ergo, season salt too; for with what other thing shall salt be seasoned? Si shall evanuerit, in quo s●lietur? So likewise, if that all-trying spirit may err, by what other spirit shall it be tried?   

His fallacious Interpretation of a text of S. Peter, 1.3. vers. 15.  
SECT. XXII.  
AFter he had abused the testimony of S. Paul, it was to be expected S. Peter should not escape. He would be their second Nero, join them in the execution of a moral death, much more tyrannical than that of Nero; which though it could divide their souls from their bodies, yet it could never sever their souls from Christian truth, and a truth which themselves had taught; the inseparability of truth, and divine authority from the pillar of truth.  
Pref. I say no more (saith this Advocate) then S. Peter saith, in commanding all Christians to give a reason of their Hope.  
Answ. But the truth is, S. Peter saith not so, nor is it probable he had any intent to engage Christians in a greater obligation than Christ himself had imposed, which was only to confess him upon due occasions, never to deny him, or the truth of his doctrine. S Peter's words are these, Dominum autem sanctificate in cordibus vestris, parati etc. Sanctify our Lord in your hearts, all way ready to give satisfaction, as the Latin version hath it, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, ready to exhibit your Apology to every man who requireth a reason of your Hope. Now, who seethe not a large difference between giving a reason, and requiring it; or between exhibiting an Apology, or other satisfaction to him who requireth a reason, and giving him a reason: There are other way's of satisfaction and Apology, besides giving a reason, at the least particular reasons for the several doctrines of faith, as this Advocate seems to require, who would have nothing believed, but after a particular trial and discussion of it. So he that answered only, Christianus sum. I am a Christian, was no way reprehensible by this advice, or precept of S. Peter. Is not he ready to Apologise, to defend his religion, who is ready to die for it? which a man may do without giving any other particular reason of his belief, by his only confessing, or professing it upon fit occasions.  
Or if he understand an obligation imposed by the Apostle upon all Christians to give a reason of their belief; what means he? That every Christian is bound to give, or be able to give a reason of every point of Christian belief? How is it credible, that such a moral impossibility should be of obligation? Or doth he indeed suppose, that no Christian is bound to believe more, then that whereof he can give a reason? Now then, shall he say with truth, I believe in God the Father, with the rest as followeth in the Apostles Creed? For surely he inbound not to say, he believes what he believes not; and as sure it is, he is not able to give a particular reason of every article of this Creed. The Socinian will say, he is bound to believe no more, What saith M●Ch. whom in this Treatise of his, we suppose a Christian, until he declare himself a little more expressly, & a very little will serve the turn?  
But let him form his discourse out of this text of S. Peter; Every man is bound to give a reason of his belief, or Hope: Ergo, Every man is bound to give a particular reason for every point of his belief, or Hope when will he make good this illation by his never failing rules of Logic? Again if every Christian were charged with this obligation, to give a reason to every one requiring it; what kind of reason should that be? Must it need's be a convincing reason, and satisfaction, not only in itself, but respectively in regard of the requirers understanding, or disposition? What if he be a jew, or Infidel, or Socinian? shall I believe no more than that whereof I can give a convincing & satisfactory reason to a jew, Infidel, or Socinian? Let him tell us, what kind of reason he requires, that we may know the obligation he lays upon us. In the mean time, I doubt not to aver and prove that the meanest Catholic is able to give a more satisfactory account, of every point of Catholic faith, than the most learned Protestant can, of any one. As thus, why do you believe three Persons one God? because, saith the Catholic, I believe the Catholic Church, which teacheth me so to believe. And so of the rest.  
Now because no Protestant gives, or can give this reason, in coherence with his Protestant principles, of necessity he gives a worse, if any. For whether his reason be his own, or any other humane discourse whatsoever, independent of this authority of the Church, or secluding it; or be it Scripture, yea Canonical Scripture, interpreted by himself or any private Spirit, he giveth no better an account, than an Arrius, Eutychius, Donatist etc. hath, or might have given, in defence of their Heresies. Thus much concerning the abused authority of S. Peter.   

Words of our Saviour fallaciously abused.  
SECT. XXIII.  
HEnce he proceedeth with some pretty Rhetoric & method of blasphemy (if you mark him,) as having first profaned the testimony of S. john, after him S. Paul, next S. Peter the Vicar and Viceroy of Christ in the Christian world, 
— jam proximus ardet  
Vcalegon,—  the very next house is a fire; it was not probable he could stay himself in this precipice. Lastly therefore he profaneth Christ himself: so truly may it be said of Heresy; Inclinata est ad mortem domus ●ius, & ad infer●s semitae eyes; 
Prou. 2.  Her house is hanging towards death, and her paths lead to hell.  
Our Saviour's words are these; 
Luc. 12.  When you see a cloud rising from the West, you say, we shall have rain, and so it happens. And when the Southwind blows you say the summer appreaches. Hypocrites, know you to discern the face of heaven and earth; and do you not discern this time (of my presence or coming?) But why also do you not discern what is just by yourselves? That is, as if he had said, you who are so skilful, as to read the prognostic signs of the heavens, and by them foretell future events of weather or seasons; why do you not by yourselves, that is, by those internal signs and tokens of your souls, remorse of conscience, secret inclinations, and other the like indicatures of what is just or unjust, why do you not by these discern what is just? And what affinity hath this discourse of our Saviour with this Advocates application, that therefore, every man must of himself examine and try by his own discourse, or Scriptures interpreted by himself, what is true doctrine in points of supernatural belief? What tokens or prognostics have men for these? What light of natural reason, or what indicature of inward motions, or natural inclinations, show the truth of supernatural mysteries?  
And not without some Fallacy hath this interpreter made choice to translate, 
Fallacy.  iustum, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, right, rather than just; why of yourselves judge you not what is right? because right, hath a more apparent reference to matter of doctrine in this positure of words (of which doctrine he would have every man to be his own judge) then just hath, which rather implieth a relation to moral actions.   

Another sentence of our Saviour abused.  
SECT. XXIIII.  
TO as little purpose, and with as much violence and irreverence, are those words of our Saviour. If the blind lead the blind etc. applied by him. For whether in probability follow the blind, they who follow the Church of God, as their guide, to which is promised the spirit of truth; or they, who follow either their own private spirit, or natural reason and discourse, or the Scripture interpreted by these, which is to them as blind, as the interpreters of it? But by these goodly expositions, and applications of Scriptures, you see how substantially they are furnished, for examining and trying spirits, and doctrines of faith by Scriptures, and natural discourse, and neverfailing rules of Logic. And, Good Sir, would a man ever wish, that any man should make himself more ridiculous, then to take neverfailing, or infallibility from the Church of God, and give it to Logick-rules? This is to rob Peter indeed, but sure it is not to pay Paul.   

His false Logic, or misapplication of Logick-rules.  
SECT. XXV.  
Observe now forth with, in the close of misapplyed Scripture, his fallacious misapplication of Logic precepts, and Dialectique form of discourse. Great confidence, no doubt, he had in the ignorance, or negligence of his Reader. He hoped to lie hid in these brakes of thorny and intricate Paralogismes, to appear only in gay flowers of soft language, Mollit sermones suos extranea; 
Pron. 2.  so Heresy is wont to soften, and file her language. Howsoever he gives me a warrant by his example, to syllogise his lose Periods, & shape them into Logicall-formes. Which, for my part I profess to do, with much more fidelity than he doth; wherein I will appeal to the judgement of other men, yea and especially of those his more learned and more sober Co-academiques.  
Thus than he argueth: Discourse truly so called misguideth no man: Drawing conclusions out of Scriptures by good consequence, is discourse truly so called. Ergo, drawing Conclusions out of Scripture etc. misguideth no man. To this I answer, that although Discourse truly so called misguideth no man, ex vi formae, by that form of lawful discourse; yet ex vi materiae, in regard of the matter, it often doth: But, drawing of conclusions out of Scripture by good consequence is discourse truly so called; this I distinguish. Drawing them out of Scriptures formally taken, that is, truly understood, and this by good consequence, is discoursetruly so called, I yield; Out of the Scriptures taken only materially, that is, out of the words of Scripture falsely interpreted, I deny it. For it is only an apparent and fallacious discourse; therefore not discourse truly so called.  
Now, to his Confirmation: The principles whence we draw these conclusions, that is, the holy Scriptures are agreed on by all, to be infallibly true; what is that to the purpose, if it be not agreed, in what sense they are true? Therefore I say, the premises may be true, the consequence lawful and good, and so the conclusion true, according to some sense of the premises: but because that sense may be a false sense, though the premises of themselves be true; therefore the discourse, or whole Syllogifme may deceive and lead into error; yea even so much the more, because the consequence is good.  
But his Adversary hath told him, in the 4. Chap. of this Pamphlet (so he, still like to himself, nibbling, and detracting from his Directors credit) That from truth, no man can by good consequence infer falsehood. He tells him, what S. john hath told long since, Omne mendacium ex veritate non est: no lie is consequent from truth; which is most true, as understood formally, no lie is consequent of truth, as it is truth; but from a material truth, a lie may follow. The Scriptures are always materially true, that is, true in themselves, and from them as true, no falsehood can be consequent; but they may be, and are commonly falsely sensed and interpreted, and that purposely, by Heretics; therefore from them as falsely interpreted, falsehood may, and doth follow, even by good consequence.  
Well then, to open the Fallacy (Vlceris os) and so to let out the corruption: Scriptures falsely interpreted are not the Word of God, but the word of man, the false Interpreter; therefore they who are guided by Scriptures so interpreted (and now the word of man) may be misguided, and are so, even by those Scriptures (now not holy, but profaned by man.)   

His fallacious Answer, or Evasion to his Adversary's Arguments, convincing the necessity of an infallible Church.  
SECT. XXVI.  
Pref. YOu say thirdly with sufficient confidence. If the true Church may err in defining what Scriptures be canonical, or in delivering the sense thereof, we must follow either private spirit, or natural wit, & judgement, and by them examine what Scriptures contain true or false doctrine. Thus the Advocate: and what saith he to this? All this (faith he) is apparently untrue, neither can any proof of it be pretended.  
Answ. Just so, Bellarmine thou liest. Behold an Alexander losing the Gordian knot. What? can no proof be pretended? Surely a sufficient division or enumeration of parts, hath been esteemed a sufficient proof, as excluding out of the thing divided, whatsoever is not contained in some part or member of the division; as if Bachelor. Master Doctor, be a sufficient division, or enumeration of the Degrees given in the University, he who is proved to have taken no one of these degrees, is sufficiently proved, to have taken no degree in the University. His Adversary argues thus; The authority which must determine what Scripture is Canonical, or what is the true sense of such Scripture, is either the Church of God, or private spirit, or natural wit, and judgement. Not the Church, according to Protestants, therefore either the private spirit, or natural wit etc. If this division be good, than the inference is apparently true; if it be not good, let him show the insufficiency of the enumeration. Yes.  
Pref. Other direction we have (saith he) besides either of these three; and that is, the testimony of primitive Christians.  
Answ. Ridiculus mus! But do you mark the subtlety of the Logician, how slily he evades and shifts the necessity of being directed by a true Church, or by the spirit, or by natural wit? We have besides these, the testimony of primitive Christians. And do those primitive Christians make a fourth member in this division of direction, distinct from the other three? What difference between primitive Christians, and primitive Church? and then, what difference to our purpose, between the primitive Church, and the true Church? which is the Church, to which his Adversary challengeth this right of direction. So himself apparently granteth, what he so desperately avoucheth to be apparently untrue, and whereof no proof can be pretended. Wherein I also note a Fallacy of fact, 
Fallacy.  and fraudulent dealing; his endeavouring to make his Adversary's doctrine odicus to the ignorant Reader, by his confident or impudent rejection of his reason, and branding it with this Censure, all is apparently untrue etc. when afterwards he granteth in effect all. Surely he hopes his Adversary will be so blind as never to perceive this grant, while he saith not the same his Adversary doth, in the same words. For instead of his adversary's true Church, he hath Primitive Christians; and why not Primitive Church? as well might you ask the Devil, why not holy-water? The very word (Church) is Exorcism to all Heresy, as the name of JESUS to infernal fiends.  
Another pelting fallacy you may observe, 
Fallacy.  even in the same period. We have other direction (saith he) besides the private spirit, and the examination of the contents of Scripture. As though his Adversary had placed examination of the contents, in the number of directions, whereby to examine what is contained in Scripture: as though he had proposed the very same examination, the guide or director to itself. And why this? Because he had something which he could except against this examination, of contents, by showing how it may fail in direction. But what then? Who gives this examination the office of Director? Not his adversary. Nay rather, because it may fail, and may meet with many difficulties, hence his Adversary inferreth the necessity of a Director, by whose assistance Christians may make this examination of Scriptures, and be assu●●d what Scriptures are to be received, or rejected etc. Who, or what then, is this true guide or director? The true Church, saith his Adversary? What saith the Advocate? Not the true Church; no, by no means, nor can any proof of this be pretended. The Church? mera Chimaera; he will take heed of saying so. Well then, what other thing if not the true Church? No other thing, forsooth, but another Word. What? the Primitive Christians? Do you mark how near he came to the Church, and yet escaped it? Not the Church, not the true Church, not the Primitive Church, but primitive Christians. O Scotus! O subtlety of distinction! most true; the very name of Church overthroweth Protestancy. But why not again primitive Church, as well as Primitive Christians? He knew a primitive Church will infer a derivative Church; it carrieth in the very common notion and obvious signification of the word, the nature of a Body, a Society, a Society of Christians, the kingdom of Christ; in that Church and kingdom, order and subordination, command and subjection will by necessary sequel, force a necessity of perpetuity and visibility; in which propriety it must differ from the Synagogue. This is therefore a terrible hearing to Protestancy, a Church; Terribilis ut castrorum acies ordinata, terrible as an army in battaile-array.  
Now, for Primitive Christians, they imply no such order, no such coordination, or subordination, as of a body, and therefore as so many scattered sheep, they might wholly dye in their own ashes, not Phenix-like survive in their posterity; which to affirm of a Church of Christ, his established Commonwealth, or kingdom, purchased by right of Conquest, with the inestimable price of his blood, is not only Heretical, but most impious and profane; since neither the Synagogue and Law of Moses, became evacuate, or abrogate viâ corruptiuâ, by a corruptive desition; but past into a Church & Evangelicall Law via perfectiuâ, as Christ was the perficient, not the corruptive end of the Law: Non veni legem soluere, sed adimplere etc. I came not to dissolve, but to fulfil the Law etc.   

Some other fallacious Evasions, in answer to the same position of his Adversary.  
SECT. XXVII.  
IN the very next Paragraph I meet with another Fallacy which I have also touched before.  
Pref. You say with convenient boldness, that this infallible authority of your Church, being denied, no man can be assured, that any parcel of Scripture was written by divine inspiration; which is an Untruth, for which no proof is pretended, and beside void of modesty, & full of impiety.  
Answ. And I pray you observe his notorious method; his Censure is, for the most part, the preface to his Answer: when he hath first struck his Adversary on the head, or wounded his reputation, with some calumny, or contumely; then he will dispute the matter not only coolly, but very coldly, as you shall see. In the mean time, since he is so liberal of contumelious and reproachful language, if we spare him, it is mere gratuite grace, no merit of his, not so much as of congruity; nay it may seem much more congruous, to show the man his error, where he may see it better than in himself. For I believe it will appear to any understanding man, even by the Genius of his style, that he hath drunk more liberally of Narcissus Well, then of Aristotle's, as near as it springs. Whence I do not see, but his Precedent way be my Apology; and very Charity will require, that some sprinkling of salt be employed upon his so great insulsity. Now mark the Fallacy.  
His adversary saith, Take away the authority of God's Church, no man can be assured etc. For (God's Church) this Attorney changeth (your Church) as though his adversary preassumed, what is in question with Protestants. Which he purposely doth not, but only showeth the necessity of a Visible Church, and infallible authority shereof. The fallacy of this change hath this intent, to make his adversary more odious for his preassuming & antedating; as also, that he may impugn him more easily, where he contends not; which he doth almost every where; never strikes where his Adversary wards: So he seldom or never argues, or answers to the matter in hand.  
But why now is this an untruth void of modesty? Because saith he, the experience of innumerable Christians is against it; who are sufficiently assured that the Scripture is divinely inspired, and yet deny the infallibility of your Church, or any other.  
Answ. What? Even of God's Church? For this is the authority, this the Church which his adversary namely and only asserteth. And where is the immodesty? Is it immodesty in a Catholic to prove the infallibility of the Church of God? his Prime principle of Religion? and that, by an argument, which this (no Church) can no otherwise answer, but by railing at it, as with his Lucian's 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉! O execrable! For who are those innumerable Christians? Are they not the adversaries of the Roman Church, and only they? And is it immodesty in a Roman Catholic, to defend and prove the contrary to that which the Adversaries of that Church would prove, and do teach, whereby to overthrew that Church, and with that all Christianity? But to show him the weakness of his argument, I form the like: Innumerable Christians are sufficiently assured, that no man can be assured of any parcel of holy Scripture otherwise, then by the authority of the Church of God; Ergo, M. Ch. who denies them this assurance, is void of all modesty.  
And now again, why full of impiety? Pref. Because, saith he, if I cannot have ground to be assured of the divine authority of Scripture, unless I first believe your Church infallible, than I can have no ground at all to believe it.  
Answ. I expected he would say, than I willbe a Socinian. But still you see him in his Fallacy (Your Church, for, God's Church.) And why then hath he no ground at all, upon that supposal?  
Pref. Because, there is no ground, nor can any be pretended, why I should believe your Church infallible, unless I first believe the Scripture divine.  
Answ. Still, Your Church. Sure, we shall never bring him back to God's Church again. Now, quite contrary I say there is no sufficient ground (to omit pretences, and permit them to his Hyperbolical style) why men should believe the Scriptures divine, unless first they believe an infallible Church of God. For, to revolve to the first birth and parentage of holy Scriptures; whence have we them? who told us they were divine? have we not the new Testament (to instance in this part) from the Evangelists and Apostles? And were not they the Church of God? and hath any other told us they are divine, and of divine authority, but they primarily, and their posterity after them? Can any man expect a more certain testimony concerning his own, or any other man's birth, then from the mother who brought him forth into the world? Was not the holy Scripture conceived of the holy Ghost, as it were in the womb of the Church? Yea those souls and spirits of Prophets, Evangelists, Apostles, in which those Scriptures were conceived even formally as divine, together with the truth contained in them, were they not before those Scriptures were brought to light? And could any but they, or upon their credit believe those Scriptures were of divine issue; conceived, I say, in those spirits divinely inspired and illuminated? yea and from them flowing, as from a vital principle, actually, and actively inflowing into those conceptions, together with the holy spirit of truth?  
Whence also it followeth evidently, that those divine truth's cannot be the formal conceptions of any soul, or understanding, not endued and elevated by this spirit of truth; with which spirit since no man can assure himself to be endued, & yet every Christian ought to believe, as certain, that the Church of God is endued; therefore every Christian ought to receive those divine truths contained in Scriptures, together with the Scriptures themselves, from the Church of God, whose lawful issue, and offspring they are.  
Neither can this in reason seem to a Christian any whit derogatory, from the majesty of the divine word, to be conceived in the spirit of man; no more than it was, from the Majesty of the Son of God to be conceived in the womb of the B. Virgin Mary: and that, as there the Eternal Word was invested with humane flesh; so here in these spirits of men, as in the womb of the Church, the Word of God, sown by the holy Ghost, should be invested with humane notion, and brought forth to light of the world, in the guise of humane speech and voice. In which sense we may interpret that testimony of the holy Baptist, Ego vox clamantis, I am the voice of the crier; as his voice was the investure of that Word of the holy Ghost crying in the desert, by which it was conveyed to the ears of mortal men: so is the voice and declaration of the Church, the means by which the Word of God, and all Truth contained in it, is conveyed to our souls and understandings. And as that cry of the Holy Ghost was first conceived in the spirit of the Baptist, then uttered by his voice to the world: so these Scriptures were first conceived in the Church, those Apostolical spirits in which they were first imprinted, and invested (if I may so speak,) by the operation and Energy of that fire which appeared in tongues, afterwards uttered upon due occasions in words and writings. As therefore those of that time heard the voice of that crier in the desert, from the mouth of the Baptist; so all Christians hear, and must hear the word of God, and divine truth, by the mouth of the Church.  
Well then, what this man so confidently averreth, that there is no ground, yea that no ground can be pretended, why we should hold God's Church (for so he must say, if he say any thing against what his Adversary says,) infallible, unless we first believe the Scripture divine; I as confidently deny. And for as much as respects priority, or antecedency of belief, since the Scripture, as I have said, is no other word, but what the Church hath, and daily doth utter unto us, whether historical or dogmatic, or howsoever first conceived in the understanding and spirit of the Church; it followeth, that as we have received it upon her credit, telling and teaching us, that it is divine; so we must à Priori, believe the Church, as infallible witness or reporter, before we can believe the infallibility of Scripture which she reporteth: it followeth also, that we must believe the Church interpreting the Scripture; for it is incredible, that any other man should better understand what I speak according as I have conceived, or what I mean by the words I speak, than I myself, the speaker, who only intent to utter my conceit.  
It followeth yet further, that although there were no Scripture, and these Christian Verities had descended to us only by Tradition, and by the testimony of former ages, transmitting them successively from Christ, to this present age; we should be bound to believe the Church: that is, that continued succession of men, believing those Christian Verities; unless we will say, there was no obligation upon men, to believe in God, and to worship him according to that belief, before the time of Moses, before the Scriptures were. For, was not Circumcision obligatory before Moses? and was not the posterity of Abraham obliged to believe and practise that tradition, as of divine authority? of which our Saviour saith: Moses dedit rebis Circumcisionem non quia ex Moyse est, sed ex Patribus.  
He will say, You prove the Church infallible by Scriptures, your Scriptures must be first believed infallible. I answer we prove this out of Scriptures against such as profess to believe Scriptures, not the Church, as out of their own principles; it followeth not thence, that we first believe the Scriptures divine or infallible. For though in method of confuting such Adversaries, we begin with the Scriptures, yet in the method of believing, we begin from the Church, upon whose credit we believe the Scriptures to be divine; and according to this method, commencing from the Church, Christian faith was first propagated among nations, and embraced by Heathens.  
Nor will it be to the purpose to reply, that Heathens were induced to believe by reason of miracles. This I say, is not to the purpose, how the Church gained this credit; but hence it is inferred that in regard of Christian Belief, the Church had the Precedency before Scriptures; that is, the Church was believed before the Scriptures were believed. Wherefore, to conclude this point, if it be impiety, not to believe Scriptures, (as no doubt it is) yet it is an impiety no way deducible from this doctrine, that the belief of an infallible Church, is precedent to the belief of Scriptures. But it is not hard to conceive, by the very carriage of the business, as he handles it, what he drives at in all this discourse: which is indeed to evacuate all authority, both of Church and Scriptures, and upon the ruins of both, to build the Godless Socinianism. Therefore all inferences which may seem any way to perplex Christian doctrine, or force it into straits, are his advantages.  
It was the prudent industry of the Roman Consul, to provoke Catiline, whose secret practices and designs upon the Commonwealth he had understood, into open war and rebeilion; for he supposed, no Citizen would then appear in his defence, or make the oppression of a Tyrant his quarrel: As no man would approve the fyering of the house wherein himself were, or wracking the ship wherein he sailed himself. I suppose likewise, if this pretended Champion for Protestancy, were once discovered, and stripped to the naked truth of what he is indeed, that is, as I have said, a very Socinian Mole, underworking even Protestancy itself, and all Religion; no Protestant who hath any zeal of the Religion he professeth, would ever be seen in his patronage, nor willingly, I think, in his company: nor would he vouchsafe, the ordinary greeting or salutation, as good-morrow, 
Ep. 2. Joan.  to him who acknowledgeth neither day nor morning of Christian religion; or, God save you, to him, who doubts whether there be any such thing as God & Salvation: nor would they think him fit, to converse among Christians, who hath disputed himself out of all terms of Christian commerce, and conversation.   

His Calumny, concerning Protestants reputed Atheists etc. by Catholics.  
SECT. XXVIII.  
Pref. YOu say fifthly and lastly (saith this Advocate) with confidence in abundance, that none can deny the infallible authority of your Church, but he must abandon all infused faith, and true religion, if he de but understand himself.  
Answ. This Advocate himself, is no small part of proof of the truth of this Hypothetique, who since he hath relapsed from this doctrine of infallible authority of the Church; hath withal disclaimed all infused faith, as his Adversary hath charged him, upon information more than credible; wherein (that is in abandoning both) I confess he hath proceeded, no less consequently then irreligiously. But what of this?  
Pref. This is (saith he) agreeable to what you have said before, and what out of the abundance of your hart you speak very often, that all Christians besides you, are open Fools, or concealed Atheists.  
Answ. For my part, I have never known any Catholic use any such incivility of language. Neither do I think any harboureth any such conceit, of all other not Catholics, that they are either open Fools, or concealed Atheists: though I can easily believe, the common opinion of Catholics to be, that a Socinian is a concealed Atheist at the least; and so in consequence a fool: For the fool hath said in his hart, There is no God.  
Now, that which followeth in this Paragraph, I will only retort, & disoblige myself of a duty, 
— Mutato nomine de to  
Fabula narratur.—  All this, the Advocate writes with notable confidence, as the manner of Sophistes is (which manner he is very well acquainted with) to place their confidence of prevailing, in their confident manner of speaking: but then for the evidence wherewith he should maintain so great a confidence, it is as invisible, as the Religion he defends, from the time of Luther upward.   

His fallacious Recriminations.  
SECT. XXIX.  
HItherto we have seen, what this Advocate had done he tell's now what he could do; which we must suppose to be more than he hath, or will do. — O parce viribus usque tuis. As if he had a mind to recriminate and charge Papists, that they lead men into Socinianism, he could certainly make a much fairer show of evidence than his Adversary hath done.  
And truly, I believe he hath met with an Adversary, that will easily yield him the priority in making fair shows, without any show of repugnance at all. But now he falls into the puerility of a most trivial Rhetoric: you shall see him fight as like a Parthian as you would wish, doing most, what he makes show least to do; fight's, as he flies away, and will be found I believe,— Parthis mendacior. For thus he colours and florishe's his Sophism.  
Pref. If I had a mind to recriminate, I would not tell you, you deny the infallibility of the Church of England. Ergo, you lead to Socinianism. Which is altogether as good as this: Protestants deny the infallibility of the Roman Church. Ergo, they induce Socinianism.  
Answ. Yet because, this (I would not tell you) is no real pretermission, or passing over in silence, what he would say, but a saying it, after a more advantageous and Emphatique manner of speech, then if he had said it positively, and in plain terms; as the flight of warring Parthians is no serious and intended flight, but a more dangerous fight, under show and pretence of fear and flight: therefore we must understand these words according to the direct and positive sense; as though they were couched in this form. This argument, You deny the infallibility of the Church of England, Ergo, you lead to Socinianism, is as good as this; Protestants deny the infallibility of the Church of Rome, Ergo, they induce Socinianism. Wherein I note first, his most familiar Fallacy of wilful ignorance and mistake of his Adversary's Argument, and the Elench; who never inferred leading or inducing into Socinianism, out of the denial of infallibility of the Roman Church, but out of the denial of some infallibility of judgement, and authority of a Visible Church to determine of Scriptures and their interpretation etc. For he knew well, that if there were any other such infallible authority to determine such differences, it should not then follow that they who disclaim the authority of the Roman Church, should have their only remaining refuge, to the private spirit, or natural judgement etc. Wherefore having not yet excluded all other infallibility, no nor disputed it, he assumeth not infallibility of the Roman Church, or the denial of that, as inducing Socinianism, but the denial of all infallibility of whatsoever Church.  
Therefore if this Logician would have played fair, and not more like a Sophister then like a Scholar (which very appellation, in my judgement, carrieth with it a face and promise of ingenuity) he should have framed his Adversary's Argument as it lieth in him, or at least, so as it might appear the same in effect, and not seem to have his whole attention applied to shifts and advantages: thus than he should have form it, Protestants deny infallibility to the Church of God, Ergo, they induce Socinianism, and then have compared it with this his own recriminant, Papists deny the infallibility of the Church of England, Ergo, they induce Socinianism, and then, — Macte, O cum compare compar: Not a nut more like an apple; He had paralleled it fair indeed.  
Secondly in comparing the English with the Roman Church, 
Fallacy.  he seems, no doubt, to take the Roman as a particular Church; fraudulently affecting not to know, that by the Roman Church, Catholics understand all Christian Churches, making one with the Roman by obedience and subordination to it. Whence (by the way) Catholic Roman Church, is no Bull, as I have heard a Dux Gregis among them, was pleased sometime to say it is.  
And yet again, how long hath the English Church made a part separate from the Roman? Look back into her cradle of extraction, or distraction rather, and blush not. What was the original cause? and yet blush not. Well, say we what we list to all the Churches I know, there is none more Visible than the Protestant; some man yet alive may have seen her quite through from her first birth, or appearance, even to this age; but yet, what was the cause of the distraction? Causa mali tanti etc.— But I know this Advocate will easily shift all this; he will grant, for a need, True; the generation was Equivocal, yet it might be Honourable enough; Ex malis moribus bonae leges etc. of evil manners, good Laws etc. I know his common place. Howsoever, in my judgement, the comparison hath something of the odious.  
But what hath this Retrograde to do with the Infallibility of the Church of England? He hath profe'st the infallibility of it so fare, as to deny to subscribe the English Articles of faith and doctrine; wherein the authority of this Church may seem to appear, of as great force as wheresoever. He may have since been wrought into some other opinion, by the skill and industry of some such Artist, as knows well how to deal with so pliable a nature; (Vdum & molle lutum, nunc nunc properandus, & acri Fingendus sine fine rota;)— Or that other, (though no Doctor, yet a master of Art,— ingenique largitor,) 
Persius' proem.  one who can teach such towardly scholars, wit; yea thrifty wit (a precious lesson in this age of prodigality) may have persuaded him to conform. Howsoever now he will do her this honour by way of Restitution, as to say, she is no more Fallible than other Churches are, no then the Church of Rome.  
Yet let them have made of him what they can, or what they list, a Vessel of Honour, or Contumely, (since by their all-sufficient Canon of Scripture, they are unquestionable for what they do, or make, of such matter) yet I assure myself, he will never be able to make good this comparison, or parity; until he make it evident, when, and how that notorious change entered into the Roman Church, whence the Church of England received Christian Religion: how, and when, I say, the Roman Church Apostated from herself. For until then, we shall never cease to extol in comparison her first birth and entrance, first sown and planted by Apostolical evangelizing; then watered with the blood of two principal Apostles, as is extant upon record of irrefragable testimony: then, the entrance of the same Religion from thence propagated, into other nations, together with the entrers and founders of the same; all, men of known and eminent sanctity: to extol I say these entrances of the Roman Religion, in comparison with the infamous ingredientes of defection from that Church, into some of the same Nations, achieved by men, or monsters rather, of most celebrated infamy, and stigmatised Worders.  
Had the Church of Rome needed reformation, were these likely or probable instruments? a Friar with his dis-nuned and de-uirginated Concubine? Or a second branded, and inusted Institutor? Or that third Poet of his own bi-sexe, and heterogeneous Loves? 
— Felicia tempora, quae ves  
Moribus opponunt: habeat iam Roma pudorem.  Happy times that have such reformers: now Rome hath cause to blush.  
Most certainly, the wisdom of God never made choice of such Apostles, who saith, Qui mihiministrat me sequatur; he that doth my service, let him follow me. All, moral and Christian Virtues, especially contempt of the world, and of all interest & respect of flesh and blood, ushered and accompanied the entrance of the Roman Catholic Religion, wheresoever it entered. Many well known, and notorious vices paved the way to novel Heresies, and entered with them; yea, grew from the very root's and principles of them. Which very Parallel, and one point of comparison whosoever shall have duly considered, and seriously weighed, let him, in god's Name, dispute parities of the Church of England, with the Roman Church.  
The rest which followeth in this 16. Paragraph concerning the Pope's infallibility, is nothing else but raving language, the overflowing & exuberance of his pregnant passion. To which it is full enough to answer in this place, That the Pope never hath, nor ever shall define vice to be Virtue, or the contrary; nor oblige men to believe Antichristianity Christianisme, or Christianity Antichristian; nor lead men, by any such doctrine, into Socinianism, into Turkism, yea (these are the man's word's) unto the devil himself, if he have a mind to it.  
Yet I confess (give him his due) this was no ill ordered consecution, from Socinianism to Turkism, from Turkism to the Devil; though perhaps the progress might have been better gisted thus: From Turkism to Socinianism, from Socinianism to the Devil; at the very middle door of which three, I hear this Advocate dwells, if any chance to inquire of him,— Domui paries communis utrinque, divided from either with a common wall; so that his mutual intelligence with both, is both facile, and credible.   

His concealed Arguments for Socinianism.  
SECT. XXX.  
ALthough this Attorney of Protestants would seem to deserve of them his fee, yet he will not fail to advance his own cause, or his most, own Socinianism; which is, I doubt, his finis cui, his most intended affair. Wherefore as he laboureth in behalf of Protestants to weaken, yea to abolish all infallibility of the Church of Christ; so he endeavours out of the doctrines of some Catholics, to unnerue the testimony of Scriptures, upon the authority of which the whole fabric of Protestancy is pretended to rely.  
For who seethe not what advantage, he with his Socinian Academy will draw from hence? As thus; Doctrines of Christian faith, according to Protestants, cannot be proved by the Authority of the Church, for that authority with them is errant. Again, some of them, in the opinion of Papists, cannot be sufficiently proved by Scriptures, as that main point of their faith and hope, the mystery of the Trinity; therefore if we hearken to both, or believe both (since whether rather to believe we know not) it can no way be proved. Whence, with a Diagorus, the surnamed Atheos', or a Protagorus, concerning any such thing as Trinity, and soon after, as Deity, they will return a Non liquet, it is not certain.  
For me, who have enterprised the discovery of his Fallacies, together with some hidden drifts and mines alone, it shall not be necessary or requisite to pursue his several testimonies of Catholic Writers; they will do it, no doubt, at the least so far forth, as they shall deem it needful, who undertake the answer of this great Pamphlet; though, I verily think, it will prove magis operosum quàm operae pretium, the harvest will never render the seed, in so barren a field. And I do not know, but a man may suspect he had a mind to entertain his Adversary hastening after him, in examining his witnesses, were it but to slow his pursuit; like as Medea scattered her brother's bones in her flight from her Father, to retard their speed who eagerly pursued her, while they stayed to gather them up: Yet was she never sure so peevish a shrew, as to quarrel with them, for not gathering them up clean, as this Advocate doth in behalf of his Clients scattered bones; which notwithstanding I certainly think, his adversary either hath done or would have gathered to a bone, if he had thought them indeed his bones, and not rather some other watery, or airy substance.  
Only after a more short and general way, I answer, as concerning those Scriptures, out of which (as he saith) some of our Writers deny, that the Trinity can be convinced; ad hominem, thus: M. Ch. himself hath denied in the hearing of sufficient witnesses, that this point of Christian belief, can be proved out of Scripture, and said, that it can less be so proved, than the Catholic doctrine of Transubstantiation, which he with his Agonothe●'s the Protestants, constantly deny possible to be proved by Scriptures. Whence thus I argue: M. Ch. saith the B. Trinity cannot be proved by Scripture; he, the same denieth, that any point can be held as of divine faith, but what is proved out of Scripture; therefore he denieth that the Trinity is to be believed as of divine faith: Ergo, he believes not the B. Trinity as a Christian; therefore he is none. So by his own doctrine, he leads himself to Turkism, or Socinianism, or, to the devil himself, if he have a mind to it.  
Moreover I answer: those Catholic Writers, no doubt, from those less express and convincing authorities of holy Scriptures, less I say convincing of themselves, abstracting from the authority of the Church, applying them in confirmation of this mystery, gather a necessity of acknowledging the infallible authority of the Church, without which, notwithstanding holy Scriptures, we should be in doubt how to believe some principal point of Christian belief. The necessity of which authority, appeareth yet more evidently, even by what he quarrels concerning the doctrines of Eusebius, Origen, and those other questioned and controlled by the like authority of the Church. Against which authority no faculty of wit, and understanding, no eminency or glory of science and erudition could prevail; no not martyrdom itself could protect any error against orthodox belief, or escape the censure of this supreme judge on earth.  
What he saith of Cardinal Peron informing the world of some Errors of those Ancients; 
Calumny, against Peron.  if he mean the world knew them not before, discourers great plenty of ignorance in himself: if he knew it without his information, he saith nothing: for could not Socinians, who devour Christian Libraries to no other end, but to digest them into scandals, read the very same in others of far more ancient authority, than this most learned Cardinal?  
In that the Arrians would gladly be tried by the Fathers before the Council of Nice, they show their heretical spirit; which always flies from the authority of a Visible, Vocal, and living judge, to the mute copy of Gods, or man's word; as here, to defunct authors who left behind them their private opinions in things at that time not expressly defined; which is indeed to fly to their own interpretations, both of Fathers & Scriptures; from a public authority, to which a never failing assistance is divinely promised, to some particular or single opinions of private men, to whom no such assistance was promised. But whither will not a thief fly from the sentence of authority which can condemn him? And whither not, an Heretic from the Church? And who doubts, but the Church of Christ, is most representatively, and jointly, and unanimously in a general Council, as a kingdom in a Parliament or full senate; in which mystical body then, as ever, yea then more effectually and actively then ever, the holy Ghost, as the soul informing, moveth and directeth. Whither flies he then, who flies from this Church, but from the spirit of God? Quo ibo à spiritu tuo? Whether shall I fly from your spirit? True, he flieth from Christ, but escapes him not: from him a Saviour, to him a judge, from his Mercy to his justice; si desceudero in infeinum ades: if I go down to hell, you are there.  
And is this the Socinian scandal, or is this any way leading men into Socinianism, that the Church of God assembled together of purpose to examine or determine some question of faith, hath defined the contrary to some doctrine or opinion of some private Doctor, or Doctors? who as such, whatsoever they prejudged, could not say, as the Council could; Visum est spiritui sancto & nobis; it hath seemed good to the holy Ghost, and us? You see then the weakness of this Fallacious Calumny, yet strong enough to cast a mist before the eyes of the unlearned, or unpassioned Reader; the number of which sort, because it like to afford him most voices, their applause and approbation is the triumph he aims at.   

His Sophistical Calumny, concerning differences of Catholic Doctors, in questions undefined.  
SECT. XXXI.  
ANother occasion or inducement to Socinianism pretended by this Advocate, are those different opinions of Scholastic Divines in points of doctrine as yet undetermined by the Church: this is also one of those, a thousand times recoct Crambes; like some cold Service daily brought in, only to furnish up the table, until it grow mouldy, and meat for no body.  
But what is this towards the disabling or disparaging the authority of the Church in points now defined, and no longer disputed as doubtful? Will the Socinian hence argue thus; In some points of doctrine undecided some Catholic Doctors disagree among themselves: Ergo, in points decided they have no certainty? Who seethe not the inconsequence of this illation? If they differ concerning the modification of divine Prescience, and the different respect and habitude which it hath to future events, necessary or contingent, ablo●ute or conditional; will they out of this variance infer the uncertainty of divine prenotion, or conclude that God forseeth not at all? But yet, see how he concludes for the Socinians.  
Pref. The Dominicans, saith he, maintain on the one side, that God can foresee nothing, but what he decrees: The Iesuits on the otherside, that he doth not decree all things.  
Answ. jungentur iam Gryphes equis: he will make these one, and other sides to meet in one syllogism, and so be no more sides at all; and then no different doctrines at all; which is the quite contrary conclusion to what he assumeth: Reflect setiously upon these different propositions of the Dominicans and jesuits, and you shall find them contradictories, and so impossible to inflow into one Conclusion true or false, by any lawful consequence. For, ex nihilo nihil, and contradictories annihilate one the other.  
Now this proposition God foresees nothing but what be decrees, is in effect equivalent to this, God decrees all that he foresees. Again, God decrees not all things, as ratione materiae, equipollent to this, God decrees not something which be foresees; for the question being stated of things future, or which shallbe, both sides grant that God foresees them; the difference between them is, h●w he foresees them.  
Now let any man commit the two propositions as joint premises, and see whether from that complexion or commission the Socinian conclusion can any way result. Nay you shall find it generally true which I have said, That two Contradictions can never join in any such commission, to produce a third proposition, as truly consequent from them: but see them now committed, and observe how ready and obvious the Conclusion will be, which the Socinians draw from them. 
Dominicans. God forseeth nothing but what he decrees.  
jefuits. God doth not decree all things.  
Socin. Ergo, God doth not foresee all things.  In what mood and figure, Logician? But what Socinian syllogizing is this, to join two propositions of contrary doctrines and repugnant in themselves, in one formal complexion of premises; and out of those to infer the conclusion? Is it wonder if of so monstrous a conjunction of premises, a prodigious conclusion be brought forth, the conclusion being the natural issue of the premises? Might he not aswell conclude from two propositions, the one of Catholics, the other of Arrians, in like manner, thus? 
Cath. The Son is consubstantial with the Father.  
Arr. The Father is greater than the Son  
Socin. The Son is less, and equal to his Father.  An obvious conclusion, saith the Socinian; as though he would say, Fairly encountered, and kiss it. For out of this absurd conclusion, he will further question, whether there be any such thing, as Father & Son in God; and soon after deny it.  
But if the Advocate will go back upon every such occasion of encounter, he will show no more wit than his horse, that being in the way from the University, would needs be so courteous, as to return back with every horse he met. And I verily think as small an occasion, and as weak a motive, will draw this man back to Socinianism, as the horse to his manger; although perhaps the manger may have been the strongest motive to both retrogressions; and though perchance again, the Socinian horse knew better whither he returned, and did it with a stronger resolution, than his rider; howsoever he might pass, for a sufficient Hieroglyphique of a Socinian, who is ready to turn in his way of opinion every day, with whomesoever obvious, who shall give him a reason of change stronger in appearance, than the former that guided his journey.  
Again; if he will still float and swim in Socinianism, until all differences of schools be attoned, he may, for aught I know, die as he life's; and well may he deserve to swim after death too, sowed up into a lether-sacke, and so cast into the sea, to be deprived of all the elements at once. I need not tell him for what crime that punishment was decreed: But if he will not believe, there is any such thing as divine Predestination, until it be on all sides agreed, whether it be ex praevisis meritis, or no: or that there are any divinely Elct until he can be certified, why jacob rather than Esau: if he will buy no pots, until the Potter yield him a conumcing reason why he made some pots for base services, other for more honourable uses: nay if it will not satisfy him to say, there was use for both kinds, but will further urge; but why of this clay, of this very piece of clay, a pot of base service? since he knows by his own experience the Potter could have made it a pot of Honour, for so the Poet saith,— Argillâ quiduis imitaberis udâ; soft day will take any form: It, I say, he will stand stiff upon these terms of dispute, he will never fasten upon any opinion of Divinity, nor buy any pots; nor, had that pot been so stiff when it was clay, could the Potter ever have made it a pot of any service whatsoever.  
The truth is, Christian Religion was never brought into the world by coursing; and such Coursers, unless they change their course, are too clamorous and quarrelsome to expect admittance into the school of peace. S. Paul will tell them, in plain terms, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 etc. if any man seem ambitious of Victory, in contention of dispute, we have no such custom; he may do well to matriculate himself, in the new Academy, among those Pyrrhonian sceptics, whose life and religion is nothing else but dispute. Of whom S. Paul may seem to speak 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, they before, and fool their souls away in disputes. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, saith S. chrysostom there; in the darkness of discourse, and natural reasons: as they are called by S. Leo, Terrenarum caligo rationum, mists of human reasons; which is notwithstanding light, and the only light with Socinians. Against whom the Prophet Esay pronounceth a curse, Quiponunt tenebras lucem, & lucem t●nebras, who impose the name of darkness upon light, and call light darkness; as they, who esteem natural reason, light, and the doctrine of faith, darkness: Vaequi sapientes estis in oculis vestris: Woe to you who are wife in your own eyes, that is, the eyes of natural reason; who aspire to the knowledge of supernatural ●uth, by the light of nature; therefore every Socinian is a foolish Icarus, 
— ceratis ope Dedal●a  
Nititur pennis, vitree daturus  
Nomina Ponto.    

His Fallacious application of this his Adversary's Position, From truth no falsehood, in true consequence.  
SECT. XXXII.  
Pref. I Might lastly adjoin, saith he, that you fettle for a rule unquestionable, that no part of Religion can be repugnant to reason; that from truth no man can by good consequence infer falsehood, which is to say in effect, that reason can never lead any man to error.  
Answ. This is in effect, and really, a false gloss; but rather indeed it is in effect to say, that reason can never lead any man to error from a truth by good consequence: which is all one, as to say; no false Conclusion can flow by true consequence from true premises as such; which his Adversary said not unawares, as this Advocate would have you think, but advisedly and knowingly, and which the very walls of their Logic Schools proclaim.  
Pref. And after you have done, you proclaim to all the world, that if men follow their reason and discourse, they will (if they understand themselves) be led to Socinianism.  
Answ. This is indeed nodum in scirpo, to seek a knot in a bulrush: as though what his Adversary saith, were any prevarication against the former principle (from truth, no falsehood, by good consequence:) But this Advocate cannot touch a line of his Adversary's discourse, but he must sophisticate it one way or other. His Adversary saith indeed, that no man can deny the infallible authority of the Church, but he must be left to his own wit, and way's, & must abandon all infused faith, if be understand himself aright: Is this the same, as to say, that if men follow their reason and discourse they will be led into Socinianism? or rather, that if they follow reason, having rejected the authority of the Church, which is to follow reason, where reason cannot guide, or where reason is blind, they will at length be led away from all true religion, & thenceforward to Socinianism, or whither he list?  
The ground of which discourse, may be this, or the like: Natural reason, as such, apprehendeth not supernatural truth, because such truth is above reason, though not repugnant to reason; yea rather, every truth is reasonable, and conform to reason truly conceiving. For which cause Christian Doctrine is called by S. Peter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, rational milk: and according to true Metaphysicke, all truth hath consistence within the sphere of a reasonable Understanding, therefore no truth can be repugnant to reason: yet as the Moon, though otherwise light by the illumination which it hath from the Sun, by which we see by night; yet if it be opposed to the Sun, or interposed between the sun and our eyes, becomes both dark itself, and endarkneth the sun to us: so Reason standing in opposition to Faith, and that divine light of day whence it receives that little night-light which it hath, is both itself in darkness, and deprives our souls of the light of faith.  
Whence it comes to pass, that Reason thus endarkned, taketh Falsehood for Truth; or from a material Truth, divine revelation misconceaved, and so not Truth, inferreth an untruth even by good consequence. Hence now from misconceaving Reason, or Reason opposing supernatural Truth, springeth a mutual repugnance between true religion and false, or misconceaving Reason, not submitting itself to supernatural Faith. Nor yet doth it cease to be Reason and discourse truly so called, though misapplied; for to conclude consequently out of a false principle, is no less an act of discourse, then to infer truth out of true principles.  
Wherefore notwithstanding this Advocate his tooto early and antedating Triumph, these two Propositions of his Adversary may stand together peaceably; That no part of religion can be repugnant to Reason, as Reason undeluded, as containing itself within due limits, as in due subjection to that supreme light whence it is derived; as submitting itself where it is too weak; as suffering itself to be guided, where it is blind; to be enlightened, where it is dark; to be raised to a competent stature or proportion, where it creeps, unable to raise it sel●: all which conditions are conformable even to natural reason. This, I say, may stand with this other, That from Truth, as truly conceived, or formally Truth, no untruth can be inferred by good consequence; and lastly both these two may admit this third into society of coherence; That if men sollow Reason, where Reason is dark and blind, and weak, and in a word cannot guide, they may be led into error; and from error to error, until at length they fall into utter darkness of infidelity and Socinianism. Of Socinianism, I say, a most devilish, and perhaps of all other the most dangerous Idolatry; as being most nearly allied to the soul of man, borne as it were in his bowels; nursed and nourished by self-love; cherised and confirmed, and growing daily in greater strength, and equal stature with Pride and Self-conceipt.  
For this Supremacy, even in spiritual command, being once granted to natural Reason, with authority to direct and umpire in spiritual affairs (which authority and power God hath reserved to himself, that is, to the holy Ghost, whose kingdom is the Church) what followeth, but that the holy Ghost is deposed, Reason enthroned in his Chair, where it commands absolutely, without all dependence or subordination to God, from whom it never received any such authority. Thus Reason is made the God of such men; and because so made, a very Idol; and all Socinianism is Idolatry, yea the last, and lowest, and basest I dolatry; and whither Heretical Idolatry d●uolues at last; for every formal Heretic is an Idolater, and every Socintan a worse than he. A most proud Dwarf, a Pygmalion, wholly contracted and confined within himself; whose Reason is all his saith; and consequently his Hopes of no larger extent; and his Charity enspheared within the same compass, the objects or natural reason: Whose will is nothing else but self-love, referring all he doth, to his proper interest & regard, which is indeed, the highest place of pride: than which the first Precedent of pride, the creature that first shown it to the world; he, in whom pride was first ideated; from whose Pride, as from the original source, all the pride of temporal, or spiritual Ambition, all the pride of Schism, and Heresy, and Socinianism, and Idolatry are shares, and dimanations; ascended no higher, when he said, ascendam & ero similis Altissimo; I will ascend, and be like the most High.  
Thus you see (to return his own Epiphonema thither whence it came, to his due and proper place, that is upon himself) with what probable matter he might furnish out, and justify his accusation, if he should charge his Adversary with leading men to Socmianisme: yet observe I pray you, his pitiful condescendence in the close; the clemency and temper of his victory, in the much which he saith he could do, and the very little which he doth.  
Pref. Yet (notwithstanding all this) I do not conceive I have ground enough for this odious imputation: much less should you have charged Protestants with it, whom you confess to abhor and detest it.  
Answ. Now this is the misery, and indeed the point of difference between him and his Adversary: that he conceives he hath not ground enough for this odious imputation, & therefore imputes it not. His Adversary conceau's he hath; nor vainly conceau's, but knows and prou's it, and therefore chargeth them with it, that deserve it; to the end they may cease to deserve it, & abhor it, not only in itself, but in the necessary cause of it.  
Many a one loveth the Father, who love's not the child; yet that beloved Father, is the parent of that unlovely child. What if the Raven abhor her young ones; or the Bear perhaps her whelp's? yet both these are the natural issue of both effects, as they are the brood and progeny: so are they images and resemblances of their causes, wherein the face of causes may be seen as in a mirror. And for what other end are looking-glasses made, then to reflect, and show the face whereof they present the image?  
Let him first clear his maintainers from this imputation, that Socianisme is the effect of Protestancy; or let him show at least by solid arguments, that it is not the natural issue of Protestancy, but as a monstrous birth not intended (I do not say by Protestants, but by Protestancy, according to a Physical & necessary, though not a moral and expressly voluntary intention,) or last that the generation is merely casual and occasional: Then let them say, they detest and abhor it, otherwise their detestation is like theirs who detest the shame of sin, but love the sin.  
Nor is it indeed worth God a mercy to any man to abhor Socinianism; for it hath certainly a most uggly and deformed aspect to any eye that hath ever looked Christianity on the face; yea, I verily believe, if we could see a damned fiend without the sin of Socinianism which made him one, he would seem a much more tolerable Spectacle; yet this Champion is very confident that he can arm the Mother against the Child, & commit them in deadly Duel: he can do much in this kind, and so could she, of whom one said, Tu potes unanimes armare in proelia fratres: Thou canst set brothers together by th'ears. And if the Son chance to fall in the war, we have his epitaph at hand— Nati sepulchrum est ipsae Parens, the mother's womb his tomb. For I am assuredly persuaded their ends are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, confatall; he will die like a Samson, or like an Eleazar perhaps, suo sepultus triumpho, buried in his triumph.  
Pref. O. but Protestants will fight against Socinianism, her proud Imp, not with broken reeds (so this Advocate) and out of the paper foriresses of an imaginary infallibility.  
Answ. So I believe, but out of a paper fortress of real fallibility; which he hath raised them in this Volume, which I dare say will prove a doughty Fortress, while he maintains it, especially so armed, if not with broken reed's, a reed tho; and such a reed of resolution, as I trust a little wind may shake it, if it blow in the right corner, and often hath. But well then, with what weapon's shall we expect them in this more than Civil War, between mother and son?  
Pref. Marry they will fight, with the sword of Spirit, with the word of God?  
Answ, With the word of God Fight against Socinians with the word of God O rem ridiculam, Cato! I undertake this combat for the Socinians;— mecum erit iste labour, I will act this part for once,— Sedeant spectentque latini; let the Papists hold their peace and look on.  
Will you, a Protestant, prove to me a Socinian, that the son of God took flesh and became very man? very God, and very man? and this out of Scripture, the word of God? Convince my reason first, that this is infallibly the word of God, which you call Scripture. I say convince me this, as infallible. If you think to convince it by the testimony of Tradition, which is of men; and if that may be infallible, than the Papist Churches Tradition descending from age to age, may be infallible; which you with me deny. Therefore since the Conclusion can have no more certainty, then is derived into it from the Premises, it can be no more infallible, that this Scripture is the word of God, then that this testimony of Tradition is infallible.  
Now truly, I would go some miles on bare foot to hear such a dispute, wherein the Protestant should undertake to convince the Socinian, that their Bible is infallibly the word of God, especially all testimony of Tradition of the Church secluded; which if they would admit, they would deny infallibly. Yea should the Protestant convince it morally infallible, that this Bible were the word of God; yet such a moral infallibility should never be proved to the Socinian, to be greater, then that those Decades entitled of Livy, are indeed the works of Li●y; and consequently this infallibility could never amount to the irrefragable certainty of divine Faith. He would urge them further with differences of Translations, and those no petty differences, but very substantial, and concerning points of faith. How would they prove it infallible, that their Translation is authentic, and the word of God?  
Should I yet grant out of a Socinian supererogation, or superarrogance rather, or out of confidence and animosity, or an itch of dispute, or out of curiosity to try how well the Protestant can use this Goliah's sword, of which he so braveth, Non est sicut iste, None like this, 
Pref.  (and surely, were I of the Socinian humour, this very motto, non est ficut iste, would put a strange itch of glory into my fingers, to be at him, and either to spoil him of his Non est sicut iste, or to break it in pieces:) but should I grant, I say, for disputes sake, that the Protestant Bible were infallibly the word of God, yea and that infallibly rather than the Roman, how would the Protestant convince his interpretation to be the true sense and soul of that word? Why this Protestant-Interpretation infallibly rather, then that of some Arrian, or other Heretic, denying that point of doctrine in question? Most certainly should I hear of any such Protestant who would enter into such a Duel with a nimble Socinian, such as I know some, I should rather transfer the motto of the sword upon the swordman, Non est sicut iste; of all the Wise of Gotam, non est sicut iste, there is not such another, who goes about to hedge in a Socinian with the leaves of his Geneva Bible.  
You may please to observe by the way; that (Goliath supposed the Type of the Devil, as David of Christ; this sword, the word of God, taken from the Devil who profanes it) although this sword wherewith David kill's Goliath, be a non est sicut ist●, for good, in a David's hand, that is, in the hand of a true Christian, the spiritual issue of David; yet in the hand of a Goliath, a Philistin, an Heretic, it is a non est ficut iste, for bad: therefore all Heretics have made this weapon their choice, wherewith to fight against Catholics. Wherein this champion vaunting his confidence, boasteth nothing else but the customary glory of all Heretics: yet if he ●ight with a Socinian as very a Giant as himself, he will find this sword will do him little service.  
But thus now, having flourished a while with his Goliah's sword, and only shown the blade to the Socinian (who is nothing terrified with it) then fairly sheathing it again, as having done great fear's, he concludes with his wont acclamation, and a Plaudite to himself.  
●ref. Thus Protestants in general (saith he) I hope are sufficiently vindicated from your Calumny; I proceed now to do the same sernice for the Divines of England.  
Answ. But if his service for the Divines of England, prove no better, than it hath done for the Protestant's in general, in this his vindication; I do not see what great reward he can expect from either. But I rather believe, that had some D●uines in England, more difcreet and provident than others, had their heads in the consultation, he might have stood in the Fair until night with a Nemo nos conduxit. Nor can I doubt but many of them considering, how this Champion comes appointed into the field, how furnished with circumstances requisite for such a combatant, will often say, Non tali auxtlio etc.— Now the choice as it is made, in my judgement, Plus fellis quàm mellis habet, hath more of the Wasp then of the Bee, more Passion than Providence; yet I, for my part can excuse the indiscretion of the Elector's (if any censure it so) by the policy of the choice. I can suspect they were prudent to make use of this Neutral, already pres● for any service; to interpose him between them and their adversary, to receive the blow's; or like an outwork to intercept the batteries; who if he fell, yet he should have done them the service to have stood the assault for a while, and kept off the enemy from the City wall's while they fortified within: the loss could not be great of an already Perd●: Quod perit, peri●ss● duca●,— What's lost already, give it for lost, and there's an end. For their own reputes, they had foreseen an evasion whereby to assoil them.— He known you best.— He came lately from you.— His very abandoning, and reabandoning your cause, after a nearer acquaintance may take off something from the credit of it in the opinions of many men. Howsoever, he was a man of service:— he wanted employment to set him a work. If any man will say it was Charity Mistaken, the mistaker will descend it, they doubt not, with more credit, than ever it was impugned.  
Now the thing, wherein he professeth, or prostitutes his service to the Divines of England, is, his vindicating of them from the Calumny (as he saith) of his Adversary. What calumny? Forsooth, his imputing unto them insufficiency, or inability to deal with Socinians by way of argument. The reason of their insufficiency in this behalf given by his Adversary, is; that their studies and learning, lie another way. But hear it rather as alleged and glossed by this their Advocate.   

His falsely supposed Calumnies against English Divines, rejected; and the supposal proved calumnious.  
SECT. XXXIII.  
Pref. THeir learning (you say) consists only in some superficial Talon of Preaching, languages, and clocution, and not in any deep knowledge of Philosophy, especially of Metaphysics; and much less of that most solid profitable, subtle, and (O remridiculam, Cato, & iocosam!) succinct method of Schoole-divinity.  
Answ. Thus fare the Advocate, making himself merry upon that word (succinct) calling up the severity of Cato, to laugh with him at the ridiculous application. Yet he should have done better, in my judgement, to have summoned a Democritus, who would have laughed at any thing. For Cato, I dare answer for him, though he laughed to see an Ass eat thistles, he would never have laughed at this.  
But since neither of these are now at leisure to laugh, who together with godless Socinians, and other Infidell's experience long since in the eternity of their woe, the truth of that Prophetic commination, 
Luc. 6.  Vae vobis qui ridetis nunc, woe to you who laugh now, because they laughed when, and where they should have wept; I think it not amiss to call out some Grammarian from Eton, or Winchester School, to show the Logician his little skill in Grammar, leaving it behind through his too to hasty posting to Logic; who, I believe will make it manifest that the jester is the veriest jest, and the most pregnant Topique of ridiculous, — Captatorque; dabit risus Nasica Coran●. Well then, this Adjunct, or Epithet (succinct) as applied to Schoole-divinity, largely and voluminously treated by some Divines, is jeered by this Logician, as very incongruous. Be the question therefore thus stated; Whether, notwithstanding this diffusion of treating in large Volumes, the method of Schoole-divinity may be fitly enough phrazed succinct? The Logician denies. Against whom I exhibit my Grammarian Courser, though without his Hood, or Formalities of a Graduate: which ceremony (were he a Graduate) though laudable, yet I suppose to be obligatory only in the University; and who, though he hath not learned to conclude in dialectical form, in actu signato, as by rule of art; yet he shall speak reason, in Logical, that is, reasonable consequence, in actu exercit●, as by rote of nature. The method of Schoole-divinity may be fitly termed succinct, notwithstanding the foresaid diffusion, Ergo falleris.  
This he proves, commencing from the Quid nominis, as he hath learned in Tully's Offices. What is succinct? It is according to our classic authors and teachers of Latin speech, that which with us, girt, tuked up, gathered up, or the like. In this sense, a Giant may be succinct, if he be girded, as truly as the Pigmy; the widest Heaven is thus succinct, with all, or any of the five Zones: nor yet is either the Heaven more narrow, or the Giant of less bulk, because he is girded: nor had that Nymph,— ritu succincta Dianae; or that other— nodoque; sinus collecta fluentes, their garments any whit shrunk, or of jesse, or shorter measure, because they were tucked up, or close girt to their body: nor was she whom the Poet describes— succinctam Pharetr●, either she, or her Quiver less, by reason of her so girding it about her.  
Yet you must give me leave to call this kind of wearing, or arraying succinct, as well in English as in Latin, since the manner of wearing, is the same in either language. It is, I say, succinct in the manner, though not in the matter; as if Homer's Ilias may be so malignantly printed, that it may be shut up into a nutshell; in that case we may truly say it is succinct, in the manner of impression and compression, though as large in the matter. And a Nestor I hope, or a Glaucus shall be as prolix in their Haranges, and as tedious; and as many skirmishes about the body of Patroclus, or about the firing the Grecian ships etc. as if it were printed in a most large and legible Character, as yours M. Attorney, in folio. Ergo, succinctnes of method may very well stand with the large treatings of Schoole-devines, without any ridiculous incongruity at all. This much the Grammarian could say.  
Now to return to our own doctrines of faith, or explications of those doctrines which heretofore lay dispersed and lose, in the monuments of Holy Fathers, as they wrote upon several occasions of emergent Heresies in several ages, and never reduced into one body, by due order and method, could not then, and so scattered, be truly termed succinct: the same, now gathered together & engird (in one Pandect or Sum) by an orderly prescript of method, may be worthily & congruously called succinct; & the method likewise so comprising & summing, a succinct method: yea though those doctrines and explications thus methodically summed, be either in number or largeness of treating, even more ample and diffuse, in regard of matter, than they were in those Fathers; yet still the method is succinct in regard of the manner. As, if a hundred load of Hay, or (if that be fit for his purpose) straw, were laid up in one rick or barn, which laid before scattered in the fields or meadows in a thousand cocks, though the hay, or straw be the very same in quantity or number of load's, yea though it were jayd together which some other load's that never grew in those fields or meadow's; yet no man will deny, but that hay, or straw so ricked, or housed, lies now in a more close manner, and a narrower room, then as scattered in the fields or meadow's: which more narrow and close compression, and collection, is in effect the same with our succinctnes of method in School-divinity. Would Cato laugh at this? No, Cato would be more wise than so. The Socinian may very properly, and in good consequence of his Philosophy, laugh at his own jest, whose religion is nothing else but the adoration of his own conceit.  
You have hard part of the Calumny against the Divines of England, their want of Schoole-divinity, which being by this Advocate only laughed at, and so rather confessed then confuted, becomes the Calumny of the charger. Hear now his gloss, or comment upon this supposed Calumny.   

The second part of the Calumny, concerning the studies, and learning of the English Universities.  
SECT. XXXIV.  
THe Protestant Attorney pursueth his charge of Calumny in these words:  
Pref. Wherein you have discovered in yourself, the true Genius, and spirit of deiraction.  
Answ. See how knowingly, and expertly he speaks of this Genius of detraction, as though it were his familiar. But his reason.  
Pref. For taking advantage from that, wherein Envy itself cannot deny, but they are very eminent, and which requires great sufficiency of substantial learning, you disparage them, as insufficient in all things else.  
Answ. Now truly I make no doubt, but very many of either University have these talents in great eminency: and no marvel, if we consider either so many and choyee wits, as in so great a multitude of Pretenders; or those excellent means, wherewith they are endowed for all kind of good literature. Wherein, I dare presume to say, they are incomparable with any other University of Europe; and only comparable between themselves, as one eye with another in the same face, without disparagement to either. Which Excellency would be in these kinds far more apparent and testified to the world, that neither Envy nor Truth might deny it; especially in those yearly confluences of hearers and witnesses, summoned by the celebrity of report, as it were to the Olympic Games, and spectacles of learned Arts (so that it might be said of them, as some●) me it was of ancient Rome, Famam Rome tuae non pudet historiae,) if the care and industry of the Electors, were rather to grace those public Exercises, by the Excellency of the men, than the men by those Exercises.  
As for their talon in preaching, let them before they boast, be sure whether Envy do meddle with it, at least foreign Envy, if domestic do; and then show us their commission for preaching: Quomodo pradicabunt nisi mittautur; how shall they preach unless they be sent? Sicut scriptum est, quam spec●osi pedes etc. how fair are the feet of those who preach those good tidings, who preach peace; signifying by this sequel and connexion, that the speciosity, neatness, or cleanness of feet, that is, of affections requisite in such a Preacher, must proceed from the grace and spirit of that divine mission and commission. The quite contrary of which effects, hath been manifestly seen and observed, and notoriously known to the world, in the preaching of a Luther, of a Caluin, and the like: their preaching was without mission, therefore were their feet so foul as the impressions of their footsteps, extant upon record, do clearly testify.  
Therefore also the aim and scope of their preaching was not peace, but mutiny and rebellion, and defection from their Mother-Church, and from spiritual obedience; from Samuel to Saul; in whose abjection, and excussion of whose authority, they withal abjected and shaken off God himself, and in Saul, and with Saul f●ll to Idolatry. For he who shaketh of that obedience, which God hath established in his Church, enthroneth another God; that is, the power, or the creature, upon which he transferreth his obedience which he oweth to God, which is Idolatry. Upon which breach and defection, followed forthwith that deluge of all mischief, and inundation of Vices, overflowing those nations, wherein Religion had been in greatest flourish. Lo, the effect of their mission-Iesse preaching.  
Upon these grounds the examine must go, whether it were or no, detraction to say, their learning consists in a superficial talon of preaching; or whether he might not have denied it to be preaching at all, according to the ordinary acceptation of the word, as by Christian use it is consecrated and dedicated, to signify Evangelicall Annunciation, or the Embassy of God to men: unless perhaps in attributing a superficial talon of preaching, he implicitly meant to deny the substance; as indeed, that kind of preaching can have nothing else but superficiality, being devoid of the substance, which is divine truth and spirit. It were therefore to be wished rather, then disliked by this Advocate, or his client's, that they were envied, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) 
Pindar. Pyth. ●d. 1.  and not pitied, that so goodly a superficies, so much exterior grace of wit, should want the body and interior worth, and substance of divine truth wherein to subsist.  
Well Sir, after all this bravery and presumed excellency of preaching etc. if this prove a true imputation of insufficiency in those Divines, when they are pressed by Socinian Arguments, who are therefore either caught themselves by their illaqueations, or give occasion to the Socinians of their greater obfirmation; or to others to be drawn into the same infidelity: If this, I say, be truth, yea, and a known and testified truth, and so neither Calumny nor detraction; how will he excuse that insufficiency, or at the least, deny it to be a great cause of the propagating of that contagion? Or lastly (which be pretends to do) vindicate his Maintainers from this aspersion? Hear how substantially he doth it.  
Pref. As if, forsooth, because they dispute not eternally, Vtrum Chymaera bombinans in vacuo possit comedere secundas intentiones; or, Whether a million of Angels may not sit upon a needle's point; because they fill not their brains with notions that signify nothing, to the utter extermination of all reason and common sense, and spend not an age in weaving, and unweaning subtle webb's, fit to catch flies, than souls; therefore they have no deep knowledge in the acroamatical part of learning.  
Answ. This is his answer. Whence you may suspect, that Brasmus was his last Acroama, from whom he eme to write this with his pen, full of salt, and sarcasme, to cast upon the faces of all Schoole-devines: and you may note, as in passing by, how, even here, as every where, what he blame's in his Adversary, he out-doe's it himself; and by this very passage of many, you may observe how familiar he is with the Genius of Detraction, which comes from him so easily, that I durst almost excuse him, and say he takes no notice of it, (— Vsque adeo à teneris assuescere magnum est:) as some Orpheus play's and sing's by the rules of art which he reflect's not on. As for this question of a Chimaera, it is, no doubt, wholly Chymerique: and whether it may have been the subject of some quadragesimal coursing, I cannot tell. I have known as mad a question canuased there in my day's (as concerning a Pridian, and a Postridian) which some Divinity-chaire may yet remember. And yet, me think's, I could propose this question to be maintained by some witty Inceptor, or Commencer, affirmatively thus:— Virum Chimaera bombi●ans in vacuo, debeat comedere secundas intentiones?— Affirm.  
Then for the more luculent and fraudless process in this grave problem, I would first clear the terms from ambiguity. I would understand by Chimaera, a Socinian; and him (that you might be able to look upon the monster, with less fright and horror, masked or vizared in Protestantisme) than bombinans in vacu●, that is, busy in disputing to no purpose; nor with hope or intent to determine any truth; or, bombinans in vacu●, buzzing his imposture in some idle and vacant ear; or again, bombinans in vacu●, buzzing and disputing against all principles of Divinity, and Philosophy, that there is vacuum in nature, that God is not every where, or that it is not certain whether be be any where.  
And then, whether this Chimaera, aught to feed only upon second Intentions? whether he ought in conformity to his Principles to be content with such Commons? or whether he ought to take commons in any College of the University? The two former he should hold affirmative, the third negative. For according to all those who truly believe there is a God, all food and nourishment of bodies hath subsistence and being from him; nay rather, it is God that feedeth and nourisheth in all sorts of viands: but in the way of Socinians God himself hath no subsistence, according to whose principles, all that concerneth God or Deity, is doubtful and uncertain, or only appearance and imagination: But in this doubtfulness, imagination etc. there is no reality or subsistence of truth; what remaineth then of God, and consequently what feeding remaineth but only upon second Incentions, unreall notions & c? And certainly, he may seem very insatiable, whom all, that God is, with him, cannot satiate; therefore he ought to be satisfied with second Intentions; therefore he cannot in equity complain if his College send him to the Logic or Metaphysic Schools, to take up his Commons in Notions, and second Intentions.  
Add unto this, that it is directly against the first intention of the Founders of Colleges, that any Socinian should have Commons there; therefore he must feed upon second Intentions. The Antecedent I prove; for those Founders endowed their Colleges with means and maintenance only for such who believe in God, yea and in Christ too, as themselves all believed: therefore it is contrary to their intentions, which were real intentions, that Socinians should have any Commons there at all: Ergo— Chymara bombinans in vacu● debet comedere secundas intentiones.   

His jeering of Schoole-termes, and Angels upon the needle's point.  
SECT. XXXV.  
COncerning the place of Angels, or the coexistency of more Angels in the same material place; though much m●ght be said in a more high way of Theory & Acroamatique abstractions, and tenuity of Notions, and sublimity of Speculation, whereby I could show that the man only raves, and gears his own Ignorance: yet both because I seem now to know his diet, that he feeds more grossly; and also because he insinuates some weakness of brain; lest I should be accessary to the utter exterminating of his reason (though it seems to me a strange matter to exterminate, or banish that which dwells no where, as a Socinians reason hath no residence, nor can indeed be resident any where; a shroud property, and adangerous obstacle to be interposed between any such pretendent, and a Bishopric, or a Chair;) yet I will not venture to perplex him in such mazes and labyrinths of intricate subtleties. Yet here I could not choose but wonder at the inconstancy of the man, that he who professeth so much honour to Logic, who relies upon it with such confidence, that he attributes more infallibility to Logick-rules, then to the Church of God, should so slight, and avile second Intentions, and Notions, which either, as mental or vocal, are the very style, and idiom, and mother-tongue of Logic. For what other thing are Predicables, and Predicaments, Syllogisms, and Enthememes, Categoriques', and Hypothetiques, and the like? Nay what one of all the seven liberal Sciences, can subsist, or uphold itself in due honour, or disuulgar itself without those proper and several notions and terms of art? And are the notions of Scholastic Divinity, the only notions that signify nothing? What if they signify nothing to him that understands them not? do they cease by that, to be significant? If the Sun in the clearest shine, discover no colours to the blind; is it not therefore retective of colours, to those that use eyes?  
I would gladly know of him those notions, or any of those in common use of Catholic Schools, that signify nothing. If he have met with any such, or rather any by him supposed such, he might have done well, before he threw his Censure head long, to advice with the Doctor of the Chair, who would have instructed him in their true signification: whose patience, and modesty of condescendence to this Advocates Ignorance, I cannot but take notice of, who would dissemble such adisparagement of his faculty, in Schoole-divinity, and his use of such terms and notions proper to such schools. Howsoever these are not the webs wherewith we pretend to each souls: No. We rather employ S. Peter's nets to this end, to whom, and the rest of the Apostles it was said, Faciale ves fieri piscateres hominum, I will make you fishers of men; which nets are the doctrines of Christian faith and manners, tied to his chair; which are the nets indeed, wherein not flies, but birds, yea even Eagles have been, and are caught, in every Region under the sun.  
But the doctrines of Heretics, and disputes of Socinians, are indeed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thin, and weak cobwebs: wherein only flies, 
2. Pet. 2.  light and weak spirits, instabiles anima, irresolute souls, are entangled; and whom so taken in the web, the skulking spider, that all enuenoming spirit, suddenly invades & kill's with his poisonous doctrine. For they are Heretics and Socinians, who having sucked from the most fragrant and sovereign flowers of holy Scriptures, the honey which they convert to poison, spin it out of their own brains and bowels, their own natural reason and discourse; and wove it into nets wherewith to catch such souls. But such nets are cast in vain before the ey'sof birds, those Orthodox spirits who fly above, or even through them; carrying away together both the web and webster, dissipating both into the air, by discovering them.  
And truly though all Heretics, may be called Spiders & their doctrine Cobwebs; yet most of all Socinians, with their, not doctrines, but doubts. Upon whom therefore were the Goddess Minerva to pronounce again sentence of execution, she would not doom them to hang till they were dead; no, but as when she condemned her Emulatresse Arachne. Vive quidem, penned tamen improba, dixit. Live, but hang; for the life of a Socinian is wholly pendant in opinions, always hanging, and no better worth.  
You have seen his purgation, how effectually he hath vindicated his Divines from the pretended Calumny, even so, as I have related; but that in his very transition from this Paragraph, he hath left behind him the impression of a Socinian pride.  
Pref. But I have too much honoured (saith he) the poorness of this detractation to take notice of it. Answ. Whence also (as from many other the like traicts) you may conceive in what spring he hath washed his face, who thinks he honours wheresoever he daignes to take notice. If content be riches, he needs to purchase no more; rich already, and happy enough, who doth so easily please himself; only poor and unhappy in this, that he hath no rival in his Authadie.   

His Calumny and Fallacy concerning the declining of Protestancy, intimated by his Adversary.  
SECT. XXXVI.  
HEnce he passeth from a pretended Calumny, to not so much as a pretexible or colourable Accusation, but something which he fallaciously phrazeth Accusation, and is no such thing. For what fool can think any man accuseth, or blameth that thing, which no man can doubt, but he wisheth?  
Pref. Your other part (saith he) of your Accusation, strikes deeper, and is more considerable; and that tells us, that Protestancy waxeth weary of itself; that the Professors of it, they especially of greatest worth, love temper and moderation etc.  
Answ. Is this an Accusation? Can his Adversary possibly be conceived to blame this? Why then doth he so deprave the clear sense of his Adversary's words, but only to make him odious, even to them, whom he commends for their better inclination towards antiquity and truth, for their temper and moderation?  
Which simple relation of his Adversary, exhibited without all bitterness of speech, or any offensive style, see how he exulcerates? With what bitterness of a black Censure, as though he had dipped his pen— succo nigra loliginis,— or, in fell amaritudinis, in the gall of bitterness, as S. Peter said to Simon Magus an Apostata from the Church of God; and who after his Apostasy returning to his trade, deluded many by his encharmed wings of pride and imposture. Hear his own words after his Adversaries, even as related by himself: and (as you are a lover of truth & true judgement) take the pains to compare them.  
Pref. Which scurrilous libel (saith he) void of all truth, discretion, and honesty etc.  
Answ. And is not this indeed scurrilous railing? void of all truth, discretion, and honesty? For doth this man deserve to be speared? or to be treated calmly, who tempests so rudely? who rides with so lose a bridle of passion, or no bridle at all, that he outruns even himself, and self-knowne truth. And yet after this he enters into his Adversary's bosom, to ravish thence a concealed thought, contrary to what his words carry before them, and contrary to his very thought.  
Pref. For did you conceive (saith he) such inclination of men of worth and learning to your party; can any man imagine, you would proclaim it and bid men take heed of it?  
Answ. I answer, No: he would not, nor doth he any where bid them take heed of it, but take notice of the unsettled condition of all Heresy, which either falls further into Turkism, Socinianism, Atheism etc. as we see it hath in many part's of the world, which have lapsed from the Roman: or else floats for ever, & turns round as it were in an uncessant wheel of Error's, much like the wheel of Fortune, and not a little in conformity with that; until they return to the pillar of truth, and partake the firmity and weight thereof from the spirit of truth which resides there; whose special gift all stability and ballast of souls is; without which they are as light as that chaff which the unquenchable fire shall burn, or as that dust, quem proijcit ventus à facie terrae.  
But, what wonder (to return thither whence we have a little digressed) if he make a quite contrary construction of his Adversary's words, since he cannot believe himself, who hath so often belied himself.  
Pref. Sic notus Ulysses? do we know the Iesuits no better?  
Ans. Yes Aiax. you know them, and they you.  
Pref. Are they turned preuaricator's against their own cause?  
Ans. I am sure you are; Take which cause you will: and even here (good Sir) mark if he turn not prevaricator even against himself.  
Pref. Are they likely men to betray and expose their own Agent's & Instruments; and to awaken the eyes of jealousy, and to raise the clamour of the people against them? Certainly your zeal to the Sea of Eome, testified by your Fourth Vow of special Obedience to the Pope, proper to your Order, and your cunning carriage of all affairs for the greater advantage and advancement of that Sea, are clear demonstrations, that if you had thought thus, you would never have said so.  
Answ. Hear, before I pass any farther, it will not be absurd, I think, to give him a companion; to couple him with john Donne, whose words in his book which he hath entitled with his own Name, (Pseudomartyr) are so like these of the Advocate, as if they had been spit out of the same mouth. Hear some passages of the Deans, to this very purpose. 
Psendom. cap. 4.  But all your labour is to understand the present state of kingdoms, and where any overture is given for the Pope's advantage, or wherein any opposition or hindrance is interiected against his purposes. And again: If they be, as they say in their Constitutions but bacula senis, the old man's staffs, the old man is the Pope; they are bound to say once a week one mass to their Geverals' intention, though they know not what it is. And of this general intention the centre and basis is the advancement of that Sea, about which these Planetary monks have their course and revolutions. And yet more. But the Iesuits in this latter age, have found the use of the compass, which is the Pope's will etc. They are more severe maintainers and increaser's then any other of those doctrines of the Roman Church, which we noted to beget this inclination (that is, to Martyrdom.) Thus far the Dean.  
Answ. Now, would I know who exorcised these spirits? Who forced them by any torture to proclaim these so high praises of their adversaries? what have the Iesuits deserved of these men, that they should be so honoured by their testimonies above all other Orders or Professors of the Roman Catholic Church? For at least, to those who acknowledge subjection to the Roman Sea, whose approbation without doubt they covet more, then of any other, they testify their supreme praise and commendation. For what more highly commendable in the judgements of all such Catholic spirits, than their so vigilant service and obedience to him, whom they jointly believe to be the Vicar of Christ? What more admirably laudable, then to be the staff of Christ jesus, in the hand of his Deputy on earth; then to make the advancement of his Church, the Basis and Centre of their intentions?  
But then chief, by what so commemorable merit of their Order towards these men, mere aliens & strangers to them, can they have deserved those divine Eulogies & Enconiums, fit to be celebrated in the honour of the Apostles themselves, to whom indeed they are most due and proper? The Iesuits must needs blush to hear themselves so dignified, as to be called Planetary monks, or which is all one, Apostolical monks; for these Planetary monks wander no whither, but whither they are sent with the same commission of the Apostles, established by those words, Euntes in mundum universum etc. going into the whole world, preach this Gospel etc. And he was (sure) a Planetary monk, 
1. Cor. 4.  who said of himself and his Coapostles, & instabiles sumus, we have no settled habitation. Now for these Planets, to have their courses and revolutions about the same centre with the Apostles, the advancement of the Church and Gospel of Christ is so high a point of glory and dignity, that the Apostles themselves aspired to no higher.  
Now would I know, I say, again, who made these pen● their enemies trumpets? Or who blew them, or played them to what tune he listed? Are they not ashamed of such prevarication? But you may pardon them, they did it against their will's; they had no such interition; in a word, digitus Dei hic est; they were exorcised. Nor have we cause to glory, they will say: If we praised you with truth's; yet we peppered you with lies.  
Thus hath this couple prevaricated, as you see, unwittingly and unwillingly. True; which may be their Apology for any good they do for any Catholic Profession, at any time: A Comical, a Parmenian benevolence; 
Plus hodie boni, feci imprudens, quàm sciens anto  
hunc diem umquam.—  I have done more good to day unawares, then ever I did wittingly in my life. As for any prevarication of his Adversary, if his words offer a prevaricating sense, that is, disaduantagious to the writer's cause, it is an ordinary lapse, a very usual oversight, as not to observe all advantages in the speech or writing of other men; so not to foresee, or avoid all disadvantages in his own. I assure myself he pretends no exemption from the common condition of mortality, 
〈…〉  which is (incertae providentia nostra) failing of providence, and caution in many things, wherein natural sagacity of wit, or judgement carries the torch, if he have neither swerved from the prescript of Faith, nor Charity. If otherwise he have incurred some disadvantage, I verily think, he will be content, rather to seem less provident, then so cunning a dissembler, as this Adversary would make him. Notwithstanding, the ground of this prevarication laid by this Advocate, is indeed an untruth of his own, which is this: that.  
Pref. As the Samaritan's saw in the disciples countenance, that they meant to go to Jerusalem: so you pretend (saith he) that it is even legible in the forehead's of th●se men, that they are even going, nay making haste to Rome.  
Answ. This had been prevarication indeed; but they are the words which this shameless Attorney infoists, and masketh in a different Character, as continued in his Adversary's discourse, and as his words, who hath no such. Now for that latent, or pretexed meaning, or intention which this Advocate, this Politique-would-be would seem to have deciphered in his Adversary's writing, it is altogether as improbable, as the interpretation is malicious: whereby while he pretends to free him from one prevarication, much less he endeavours to wind him into a greater.  
For what greater Prevarication indeed, or what folly more disaduantagious to his cause, then to have gone about to seem angry, yea enraged (as this Interpreter intimates) against those, whose approaches to Catholic Religion in some exterior expressions, he describes?— Sic notus Ulysses? Was ever Aiax more mistaken in Vlys●es, even then, when he raved with madness? Was there any policy to endeavour to alienate such men of that temper and moderation, yea and learning too, to stave them off, to beat them from the doors, whose reentrance into the house, he covets above all things? O yes, forsooth.  
Pref. You foresaw your time of prevailing, or even subsisting, would be short, if other Adversaries gave you no more advantage, than these do.  
Answ. O Policy beyond the moon! We are more likely to prevail with such, or subsist by such, who wish us all extirpated, whose daily outcries for so many years, have by all means endeavoured to awake the Laws; who attempt daily to raze out all monuments and memory of Catholic Religion; who are so far from brooking the name of sesuit, that they are enemies to the name of jesus; all impressions of which they would deface both in print and picture. With these we can hope to prevail, by these subsist, rather than with men of temper and moderation; as though all advantages which gave us argument or matter to write, though we writ in our own blood, were our greatest booty and content. O gross Policy! but O witty discoveryl though to find it out where it lurked under a pretended folly of prevarication,— (Sic notus Ulysses?) as very a Ulysses as he was, this sly Advocate, this Palamedes hath detected him.  
Now all the wit of antique and modern discoveries (huic herbam porrigito, palmam date) yield primacy to this. Battus into an judex, or Touchstone, is a stolen and fabled metamorphosis. 
— sub illis  
Montibus, inquit, erant, & erant sub montibus illis.  They were there, under those hill's (quoth he) and so they were. Here is a Battus who hath discovered what was never hid; hath exposed to public view the invisible Eel. And hath not the man reason to glory in this discovery? judge you, whether he hath or no? And in further conformation of his own persuasion, that he hath indeed found out the Nilus-head, retected his Adversary's drifts and policy, and laid them open to the world, that no man can doubt, but it is the very meaning of the riddle which this Oedipus hath read; hear how convincingly he argues it, 
Pref.  out of the silliness and poorness of his Adversary's suggestions, and partly the apparent vanity and falsehood of them. So he.  
Answ. But he might have done well to have told us in particular what he charged with falsehood. But we must be content with what he can do. He can tell us, something is false; but what, he cannot tell: nor will he particularise, of purpose, that the Reader may apply this confuse and undetermined imputation, to any particular, as he pleaseth, and withal suspect all. Hear now his solid confutation of those silly suggestions.  
Pref. What if out of Devotion towards God; out of a desire that his should be worhipped, as in spirit and truth in the first place, so also in the beauty of holiness: what if out of fear, that too much simplicity and nakedness in the public service of God may beget in the ordinary sort of men a dull and stupid irreverence etc. I say, what if out of these considerations, the governors of our Church, more of late then formerly, have set themselues to adorn and beautisy the places where God's honour dwells, and to make them as heavenly as they can, with earthly ornaments; is this a sign they are warping towards Popery?  
Answ. To all which I answer, what if his Adversary blame none of all these either things or considerations, but rather like them well? What if he infer out of all this, no such matter as any real or intended approach to the Roman Church? No, it is manifest enough what he infers, which is that which writes, and expresseth in words plain enough, that Protestancy is subject to perpetual changes. And in a more general way he infers the powerful working of truth, which will infallibly, in time become victorious. The reason; because all truth hath existence and subsistence from, and in God; it is his Word: whereas error and falsehood spring originally either from the frailty and ignorance of man, or from the malice of the Devil, whose work all Heresy and Falsehood is. To dissolve which work of the Devil, the consubstantial Word of the Eternal Father became man, that man in him might become victorious over all falsehood and Heresy, which is the doctrine of flesh & blood, the school and jesson of the world, which makes a party against Christian Religion.  
Pref. Again; What if (saith he) the names of Priests and Altars so frequent in ancient Fathers though not in the now Popish sense, be now resumed?  
Answ. I would fain know when he will be so good as to show us the different sense of these names in the use of ancient Fathers from the now Popish sense? Never. But at the least by this nominal Conformity, the Church of England is put in a state, by this regard, more justifiable against Bapists then before, being hereby enabled to say to Papists, (whensoever these names are objected) we also use the names of Priest and Altars, and yet believe neither the corporal presence, 
Pref.  nor any proper, or propitiatory Sacrifice.  
Answ. But to omit that the ancient Fathers most frequently mention a Proper sacrifice too, yea and a real and corporal presence of Christ his body and blood in, that sacrifice of the Altar, wherein the Priest is sacrificant; & that all these things & names are equally frequented by the use of ancient Fathers; it were well to consider whither this evasion will lead us? to wit, into the very Hell of Sonanianisme. Will you prove the Fathers believed the Trinity? Why? Because there is frequent mention in them of three Persons, Father, Son, and the Holy Ghost. We Socinians also use these names, and yet we believe not the Trinity, in the now Popish sense: nay they might apply this evasion to whatsoever mystery of faith, now generally believed by Christians, and of frequent mention in the holy Fathers.  
Pref. Lastly (saith he) what if Protestants be now put in mind that for exposition of Scriptures they are bound by a Canon to follow the ancient Fathers, which whosoever doth with sincerity, it is utterly impossible he should be a Papist.  
Answ. There spoke a jewel: Behold the Phoenix newly hatched in his ashes, & already flush; now this was well flown surely; he was resolved to strike home. And an Hyperbole flies from him with as great facility as an even Truth; but I know his shift, that the Fathers had some private opinions, which the Church hath antiquated, and Catholics now hold not orthodox; therefore they, who follow them (will this Advocate say) cannot be Papists. But this consequence is not worth a rush; for those Fathers never held those opinions in opposition against the Church, but were alway's ready to follow what the Church would determine in those points of doctrine, as than undefined, like as they most readily embraced all her doctrines already defined. By which two Catholic properties their actual conspiring in things defined, and preparation to conspire in things to be defined, they were truly Papists; and whosoever follow's those Fathers in this, it is utterly impossible he should not be a Papist.  
The rest ensuing in his vindication of English Divines is partly nothingelse but animosity of denial, and offering as it were, to course sense with reason; to prove by reason that the eyes of men see not what they see, or see what they see not; partly mere impertinences, nothing to disprove that change and alteration which his Adversary describes, but neither censures, nor reprehends at all, as this Sophist would make men believe. which done; then after his solemn manner of conclusion, he triumphs, sicut exaltant victores captâ predâ quando dividunt spolia; as victor's are wont to exult having gotten some booty when they divide the spoils. For even so he divides his presumed victory amongst his friends, giving every man his share.  
Pref. And thus, my friends, I suppose, are clearly vindicated from your scandals and Calumnies.  
Answ. No doubt as clearly, as those were truly Calumnies and scandals; which were either none, or they were his, and of his own making, as I suppose I have clearly proved.   

His Answer to some personal Imputations.  
SECT. XXXVII.  
Pref. IT remaineth now that in the last place I bring myself fairly off, from your foul aspersions.  
Answ. Thus the Advocate, now his own Client. But by his leave if this method can stand with the order of Charity, which (they say) gins at home; sure it doth not with the order of good Rhetoric, according to which order he should first have removed his personal preiudices, that he might be heard more favourably in the behalf of his Clients, or friends. God himself may seem to have prescribed this order: Peccatori autem dixit Deus, 
Psalm. 49.  quare tu enarras justitias meas? God said to the Sinner, why dost thou preach my righteousness? God himself would not be justified by a sinner. Which very words of the holy King, when that great Origen, after his lapse, moved by some entreaty of friends to say something out of the Chair, had chanced to fall upon them, at the first overture of the book, are reported by some, to have drawn tears from his repentant silence instead of speech of explication. By this rule then, he should not in the last, but rather in the first place have justified himself, that so, all rubs of exception against his own Person, being taken away, his justification of other men, might have found a smother way to the acceptance of indifferent judgements. But I can as easily pardon his failing in the rules of Rhetoric, as of Logic, of which he makes so loud profession, and which he hath taken for his Cynosure in Religion, in place of the Church of God: yet if he afford us but truth, in any method or order whatsoever, for my part, I can be satisfied.  
Let us now behold how he wipes off those foul aspersions. They are only a number of false and impious doctrines petty charges, which he saith, he will not name in particular, & in that professeth his own discretion and providence, not to assist his Adversary, in spreading of his own undeserved defamation. And yet, for all that, some man would think so many and mighty imputations, should deserve an Apology. Now in one word (and that a word which no Socinian cares for) he answers all.  
Pref. Whosoever teaches, or holds them, let him be Anathema: Again. The sum of all those charges cast up by yourself, is this: Nothing ought, or can be certainly believed, further than it may be proved, by evidence of natural reason; whosoever holds so, let him be Anathema.  
Answ. You have his Laconic Answer to all. Now, Sir, if the man be yet a Socinian (as the presumption that he is, is very grave and grounded) what hath he said, in saying, let him be Anathema? What weight hath this imprecation in the Socinian school? Truly as much as a feather blown to and fro by the wind, a fancy, an opinion, alterable with every change of imagination, nay with every alteration of affection. So, what is Anathema to day, 
Cell. lib. ●. c. 5.  in the worse sense, an imprecation or execration, may be to morrow Anathema in the better sense, that is, a consecration; what to day is a curse, way be a blessing to morrow. Nor is it easy to conceive, in whether sense he takes Anathema, by way of cursing, or blessing. For I vehemently suspect, he never meant to curse the fauourer's of those opinions, to whom, I doubt not, but he wishes, as to himself; yea and whose deferts towards himself, have gained no small interest & title to his well wish; wherefore what he saith, He who holds so, let him be Anathema, may in the Socinian intendment, be no more but this, he who holds so, long may he live.  
Yet for a more expesse discharging himself from all imputations of this nature, namely of such as charge him with denial of supernatural Verities, what saith he? marry, He believes all those book's of Scripture which the Church of England account's Canonical, 
Pref.  to be the infallible word of God.  
Answ. You see the Resolution of his Faith into the Authority of the Church of England. Where you may note, that he saith, not that he believes it infallibly, or that those books are infallibly the word of God, but that they are the infallible word of God; where that (infallible) is a mere fallacious Pleonasme, a redundant and superfluous accession to the word of God. Whence it followeth only, that he believes this with a fallible Faith, and therefore no divine Faith; which he doth consequently to his principles: for holding the motive of his belief, that is, the authority of the Church of England, as of all other Churches, to be but fallible and capable of error, his belief can have no greater assurance than that motive hath. But than it followeth, that he hath no infallible assurance of these Books, that they are the word of God: Ergo, he hath no assurance that the contents of these Books are supernatural Verities, or Verities at all: Ergo, with this may stand his denial of supernatural Verities.  
And that you may Understand that he believes the aforesaid Verities, with a Socinian faith only, he joineth in one and the same tenure of belief, things evidently contained in those Canonical Books, with things probably deducible from the same. Whence thus I argue. If he believes, as his words express, things evidently contained in those Books, with no more assurance, than he believes things even probably deducible thence; then he believes neither with assurance of divine faith: Ergo, he believes them not as supernatural Verities, to the belief of which, humane faith can never ascend, as being out of the reach and extent of all such Faith: therefore, as yet, and by this profession, he hath not cleared himself from the imputation of Socinianism, and Infidelity.   

An Act of Parliament, the motive of his belief. His fallacious refuge.  
SECT. XXXVIII.  
Pref. furthermore I acknowledge all that to be Heresy which by the Act of Parliament, primo Elizabethae, is declared to be so.  
Answ. With this acknowledgement may well consist the denial of all supernatural verities, according to my former deduction. And this is surely a strong presumption that he believes an act of Parliament, with no greater assurance, than the decrees of a General Council: yea, and that he believes the Parliament rather than a General Council, shows that such his belief is grounded upon his affection, not his judgement; for no poise of judicial motives can preponderate, or sway him rather towards a Parliament. Wherefore since none of these motives, or authorities yield him assurance, that such contents of Canonical Books, are supernatural verities, it followeth no way out of his belief of these, that he believes any supernatural verity, as such: Ergo, notwithstanding this profession, he is a Socinian still.  
Which, though it be so, yet I will not do him wrong, nor say he hath effected nothing by this his sincere profession and acknowledgement. But what hath he done? Forsooth, he hath cunningly put himself under the wings of the State; he hath retired himself into the sanctuary of Protestancy; by this means he hath engaged them in his quarrel, whose religion he professeth: so that whatsoever inconvenience, as irreligion, nullity of divine faith, lastly Socinianism itself, shall be deduced as consequent out of his disclaiming the authority of the Cath. Church, and acknowledging a Parliamentary religion, and authority in determining Canonical Scripture, & declaring Heresies, must fall first upon the English Protestants, and must be answered by them. Thus while he endeavours to bring himself off fairly from those foul aspersions, he draw's them on whom he pretends to vindicate: and thus he brings about his own ends, and covertly advanceth his own design, which is to ruin all Religion.   

His fallacious Hypocrisy.  
SECT. XXXIX.  
WHat he talks of retaining liberty in points which may be diversely held satuâ fides compage, the juncture or structure of faith remaining safe, is a ridiculous Hypocrisy in him, who endeavours by his doctrine and principles to demolish the very foundation of Christian Faith, which is the infallibility of divine Revelation; I mean, the infallibility of that authority which declares it to be such; and consequently, that unquestionable certainty upon which Christian Faith relieth being taken away, not to leave one stone upon another in this earthly or militant Jerusalem, in the building of Faith. And can you have further patience to hear any more of his Sophistique Hypocrisy? For he knows, that all Christians would spit defiance in his face, should he not seem to speak somewhat like a Christian.  
Pref. Yet thus much I can say (quoth he) which I hope will satisfy any man of reason that whatsoever hath been held necessary to salvation either by the Catholic Church of all ages, or by the consent of Fathers, measured by Vincentius Litinensis his rules; or is held necessary either by the Catholic Church of this age, or by the consent of Protestants etc. That, against the Socinians, and all others, I do verily belicue and embrace.  
Answ. Can any man believe he writes what he thinks, if he understand what he writes? For who doubts but the Catholic Church of all ages hath held the belief of an infallible Church, as a point of Christian Faith? For how could the Catholic Church gathered together in General Counsels, anathematise and condemn whosoever refused to subscribe to her decrees in points of faith, had not the same Church supposed herself to have infallible authority for all such decisions and decrees? Therefore he who believes what the Catholic Church holds necessary to be believed, believes this.  
Now observe in these very words (by the Catholic Church of this age, or, by the consent of Protestants) how he makes the Protestants a member of his division a part from the Catholics. Wherein also he prevaricates egregiously, granting to the Roman Church that attribute of Catholic, which hath ever distinguished the Church of God, from all Heretical Societies & Separatist's; and giving to his Protestant, the particular name of Separation, which hath ever been held a special character of Heresy. Now it is evident, that the Catholic Church of this age as distinguished from Protestants, holds this point as a point of faith, and necessary to salvation, That the Church of God is endued with infallible authority for determining questions or doctrines of Fayth● which very point he constantly denies. Therefore it is false, that he believes (if he believe as he writes) whatsoever the Catholic Church of all ages, or the Catholic Church of this age, holdeth necessary to be believed.   

His Purgation concerning temporal respects, as Motives to his change of Religion.  
SECT. XL.  
Pref. ANother great and manifest injury you have done me, in charging me to have for saken your Religion because it conduced not to my temporal ends etc. Whereof if you could convince me, by just & strong presumptions, I should then acknowledge myself to deserve that opinion etc. that I changed not your Religion for any other, but for none at all.  
Answ. His Adversary seems to charge him, that having forsaken the Catholic, he finally plunged himself into Socinianism: now this Advocate confesseth in these words, that Socinianism is no religion, which notwithstanding in the very same page he ranketh in the number of Christian professions. For now he grants, that if he can be convinced, to have changed the Catholic, for Socinianism, he hath changed it for no religion at all. It is true, that this his change for Socinianism can be proved no otherwise, but by his own words and actions, which if they have upon several occasions, before many witnesses proclaimed his judgement concerning points of Christian Religion, to harmonise with the doctrines and principles of known and professed Socinians; surely these are presumptions strong enough, at least as strong as can be expected, in question of judgement and opinions of men.  
But now, to the substance of the charge he saith nothing; only he attempts to disprove the motives: that is, to prove those temporal ends, to have been no motives of his change; which yet is more than he doth, or can do. Therefore in behalf of those presumed ends, and in confirmation of that presumption, thus I argue; only supposing first, that he was in his wits when he made the change, that it was voluntary; and then secondly that no man in his wits, and voluntarily maketh any change but for some end or ends; then thus: Whosoever may out of his own words and demeanours be convinced to have changed religion, for no religion, may be convinced to have changed for temporal ends: But M. Ch. may be convinced out of his own words etc. to have changed religion for no religion: Ergo, for temporal ends. That Catholic religion is Religion, or a Religion, himself grants; That Socinianism is no Religion he often seems to grant, and howsoever, it is easily proved: That he changed the Catholic for Socinianism, his own words, and actions, and written doctrines testify evidently enough. Now, that no man changeth religion for no religion but for temporal ends, is, I think, undeniable. For can any man be imagined to abandon all religion, for an everlasting end? What? to be the talk perhaps of posterity supposed never to end? As he who is said to have burnt Diana's Temple at Ephesus, to be defamed throughout the world, and after ages, for his villainy and irreligion? But let us ponder his reasons, by which he refutes this presumption of temporal end's.  
Pref. How is it possible, that I should have deserted your religion for end's, and our of desire of preferment; since I refused (which also you impute unto me) to subscribe the 39 Articles; that is, refused to enter at the Common door, which here in England leads to preferment.  
Answ. This is easily answered by saying; Some there are who enter, 
Joh. 10.  and not by the common door; no nor by the door. Again those temporal ends might be many other, besides Ecclesiastic preferments; from enjoying which, this refusal of subscription could not exclude him. But yet again (saith he) bow incredible is it, that you should believe, that I forsook your religion as not suiting with my desires and designs, 
Pref.  which yet reconciles the enjoying of the pleasures and profits of sin here, with the hope of happiness hereafter?  
Answ. This is manifestly false, that Catholic Religion reconcileth the enjoying of sinful pleasures, or profits of this life, with hope of eternal happiness: but rather professeth and protesteth with S. Paul. Neque fornicarij etc. 
1. Cor. 6.  neither Fornicators, nor I dolaters, nor advouterers, nor the effeminate etc. shall possess the kingdom of God. Yea further, the Catholic Church denounceth Anathema against all such, as Luther, Caluin, and the rest, who reconcile justification with deadly sin, either by non-imputation, or soli-fayth etc. therefore of the Church it may be truly said, Non enim qui operantur iniquitatem; in vijs eius ambulaverunt; for they who work iniquity have not walks in her ways (of doctrine.) Catholic doctrine denying all possibility of consistency to mortal sin with sanctifying grace, precludes all such sin from hope of enjoying eternal happiness: therefore he whose hopes aim at any such reconciliation, hath made a choice better suiting with his desires, by changing the Catholic for Protestancy.  
Pref. But the profession of Catholic Religion proposeth as great hopes of great temporal advancements to the capable servants of it, as any, nay more than any religion in the world.  
Answ. But what then, if it proposed no such hopes to him? If in so great a multitude of capable servants, and those of ancient and tried service and fidelity, who for that cause might very well expect to be preferred before him, a late Proselyte, nor sufficiently tried; what, I say, if by reason of this interposal of so many just pretenders, advancement from that profession stood aloof to him, and proposed to his hopes at a vast distance, with little probability of approach in any short space; which proposition so qualified, could be but a weak attractive to a spirit ambitious that way. And then, what if he saw a shorter way to such advancement, proposed to him at home, and extended towards him, even over the seas by a full and able hand: 
Valeria. Flaccus.  as when Glory appeared from the transmarine shore to that Grecian Prince jason, with a laurel in her hand; was it then incredible, that if the motives to his change were temporal ends, he would lay hands on the most likely means, and most conducing to those ends? If he will give us leave to believe he had such ends, since we cannot choose but believe it; sure he will give us leave to think he was no fool. Both which supposed, the presumption of his Adversary is just and strong enough, that he quit the Catholic for temporal ends.  
Pref. But it is incredible, that if he had such ends, or desires, he should make choice of Socinianism, Because (saith he) Socinianism explicates the law's of Christ, with more rigour, and less indulgence and condescendence, to the desires of flesh and blood than Catholic doctrine doth.  
Answ. How true this is I will not here dispute, but give it true. So did the Manichaans', so the Donatists, so the Tertullianists, so some other Heresies explicate some points of Christian doctrine, and some sentences of Scripture, more rigidly, and more repugnantly to flesh and blood, than the Catholic Church did; and therefore those Explicator's were Heretics, and their rigour of doctrine Heresy, because a man may be an Heretic us well, for the more, as for the less.  
But what is this to the surpose, that Sucinianisme explicates the Law's of Christ with greater rigour, if it bind no man to believe them, or to believe that they are the law's of Christ the Son of God, and therefore obligatory; but leaves every man free to his own reason, to believe so much of them as he thinks fit? where is then the rigour? So the doctrine of Caluin explicate's the laws of God, the Ten Commaundments not only hard, but impossible to be kept: Lo, the rigour of explication; 
Loe.  but therefore he binds no man to keep them: Lo, the indulgence of application.   

That Socinianism is the readiest way to temporal Advancements.  
SECT. XLI.  
ANother reason of incredibility, that if the Motive to abandon the Catholic Church, had been temporal respects or ends, he would have embraced Socinianism, is this as followeth.  
Pref. Socintanisme is a doctrine by which no man in his right mind, ●an hope for any honour or preferment, either in this Church, or state, or any other.  
Answ. This I deny, and avouch the quite contrary, which is this; that in any Protestant, or not Catholic State, a Socinian is most capable of advancement. My reason; because Socinianism bindeth no man to profess it publicly, nay, it imposeth no obligation to any exterior act whatsoever, which may yield the least sent, or suspicion of it; nay rather by the main principle of it, (sana ratio) right reason, such as they term right, which so appeareth to every man in particular, they are obliged to exhibit no sign or show at all, which may hinder or cross their designs: therefore Socinianism obligeth rather to all exterior conformity.  
Since therefore all Heresy is subject to change and alteration, alterable by the authority by which it stands; the Socinian of all other is most ready to change with it; and to conform himself to any Church, or state whatsoever; as the wax as yet unprinted is capable of any impression; and the Eye having in itself no colour, receives the forms or idols of all colours. Therefore in such a Church or State, no Sect is endued with so great advantages as Socinianism is, which can without any difficulty or demur put on the guise and livery of any profession. The Socinian can be a Puritan to day, to morrow a Protestant, the third day an Arminian, and the fourth an Arrian; and after, so, or so; or neither so, nor so.  
Nor can I doubt but this is indeed the very principal cause why so many make this choice. For the Socinian is the only He, who sails with every wind, whiles other professors, some out of tenderness or scruple, injected by the principles of their doctrine, dare not yield to the countermand of secular authority; others out of animosity of opposition, or, as it were, the pride of their choice, will not conform; others out of the extreme hate of what they fear (the hate, I say, of that truth which they fear will prevail) will not come in; and while all these, either by their not yielding, or by direct opposition, run hazard of their fortunes, yea lives and liberty; the smooth-faced Socinian arides every change; derides the folly of Nonconformants; swims aloft like a Cork; falls and rises with the waves; whatsoever storms against religion, or be the seas never so rough, he will never drown: in brief, he is the one Pamphylus and Eutrapelus of times and fortunes, the only State-humourer, and State-complyer. He might pass for a very wiseman in some heathen Philosophy; a very Atheist in Christianity. And tell me now, is not this man in the high rode-way of preferment, if (which he must, if he be true to his principles) he can but keep his own Counsel, or impart it only to his confidents?  
Add unto all this, that wheresoever rules of Policy or Reasons of State sway the Government, more than rules of Piety or Religion, the Socinian will be thought the fittest instrument for employment in State-affairs; who will be wrought to any circumstance of advantage; who will undertake, yea and make good way through all those difficulties which neither Religion nor Honesty would venture upon. For who can question the advantage which he hath over a Religion-bound Conscience, who himself hath either none, or a Socinian one, which is so flexible & changing with every turn of fancy or affection, varying with every variety of occasion? All which demonstrates (to use his word's) that this foul aspersion is no false one; or at the least not so cleanly wiped out, but that notwithstanding all his purgations and compurgations, it stick's as fast and deep as ever it did.   

The Advocates misconstructions of his Adversary's Direction, declared to be a just and charitable Admonition.  
SECT. XLII.  
AS for the fountain whence this Advocate supposeth these aspersions to have proceeded from a hart (saith he) abounding with the gall and bitterness of uncharitableness, 
Pref.  and even blind with malice towards him; I verily think whosoever knows both parties, will never believe this censure, neither as proceeding from the one, nor as against the other. The Censurer will never deserve so much credit as to be delieved; nor the Censured so much discredit as to be suspected of so much malice. Besides that (as I am informed) his Charity and courtesy extended to this plainant in time and place, have deserved a better construction, were he not grown now so forgetful of all that he learned among Catholics, that he hath forgotten to construe Charity in any Christian language, either words or deeds.  
He might have construed this foul aspersion, (which he so calls) no aspersion at all, but an Admonition, and a needful one, lest others might receive infection from his contagious pen. He might have interpreted it as proceeding from Zeal, not a perverse Zeal (as his words are) to his superstition, which himself, this Advocate, immediately after calls the Catholic Cause. Now to call the Catholic cause, or Religion, superstition, is indeed (to use the phrase of the Chair) a very Bull.  
And howsoever he construes it, out of his own not Zeal (which were a mere Solecism in Socinianism) but his over, and over, and many times perverted judgement; yet other more sober and understanding men, comparing this Admonition with the profession and function of the Admonisher, will interpret it a duty, or a necessary Charity.  
They I say, who shall consider, that the prudence of Almighty God over his Church, hath for all times deputed certain men to the charge and office of Guardian, of Watch, of Sentinel, according to that of the Prophet, 
Jsa. 62:  Super mures tues Hierusalem constitui custodes etc. Upon thy walls, Jerusalem, I have placed watchmen; will not only hold them worthy pardon but praise too, who discharge this office faithfully: which followeth in that place, Totâ die & nocte non tacebunt etc. Day nor night they shall not be silent. And if men of that charge and prefecture be worthily honoured with the appellation of Angels; to them most fitly may be applied what the other Prophet saith; Angelis suis Deus mandavit de te etc. God hath charged his angels to guard thee etc.  
Yea were the Incumbent of such a Ministry never so mean of quality, yet the obligation falls upon him with his function, to signify the approach of the thief or enemy: 
Ezech. 33.  and they who shall hear this sound of signification, are likewise bound to take notice, and stand upon their Guard.  
And yet if there be any who shall hold, either their own, or other the like watchments silence or connivency in these occasions of impendent dangers, their greater prudence or discretion; yet even this their prudhominy, or caution may be so much the more exensable, if their stillness be supplied by the barking of others. And for this cause, they will (I think) at the least excuse, if not cherish such, who by discharging them, undertake the whole burden of Envy and peril upon themselves.  
But to such a minister who hath apostated, and reapostated from Religion (take which you will) who hath delegated any such authority? Unless he will take it for his warrant, which is written in the Canticles, Posuerunt me custodem in vineis, 
Cant. ●  Vineam meam non custodivi: they have appointed me a keeper in the vineyards, my own Vineyard I have not kept: surely almighty God gave him no such keeping.  
And howsoever he thinks the prejudice of his Person so often false and faltering in Religion, should in equity be no disparagement to his doctrine, or disadvantage to his Plea; yet it is certainly so great and just a prejudice, that it dischargeth all men from giving ear or credit to his reasons, whatsoever they be; and whatsoever he argues to the contrary in this place, might as well Apologise for the Devil; who no doubt could urge as strong and pressing Reasons; against any profession of Religion, as this Adnocate hath either learned, or can learn of him; and yet I suppose no man is bound with indifference to hear Reason from the Devil; no, although he preach Gospel.  
Yea I dare presume to say, had Christ himself been prejudged in the opinions of indifferent and understanding men, by the like presumptions, so strongly and clearly made good against him, the not acceptance of the jews had been at the least excusable. Which he himself not obscurely fignified by his appeal to themselves, Quis ex vobis arguet me de peccate? Who of you can charge me with any sin? as supposing that a sufficient warrant of their recusancy, if they could justly charge him with any sin, much more if they could have charged him with so grievous a crime, as Infidelity, or Socinianism.  
For who can beliove him who is presumed not to believe himself? For be his reasons never so strong, yet he will be supposed able to answer them, since he believes not the doctrine built upon those reasons.  
No. Sir, it cannot, it must not be otherwise; this prejudice must in reason stave off all belief, until it be removed. And if either Bellarmine could have been proved a jew, or Peron an Atheist, as easily & as credibly, as this Minister-Aduocate (who by these base adiections, seeltes to fly-blow their worthily memories with suspicion) can be proved a Socinian, 
Calumny.  which is implicitly both jew, and Atheist; their works and writings would have as little credit and authority, as themselves faith and religion.  
Wherefore the Christian Reader (that the stream of this Ministers discourse turned another way, may serve to good use, 
 cursum muta●it iniquum fragibus amnis  
Doctus iter melies,—)  knowing that his Salvation, depends upon his impartial and fyncere judgement of these things (now to hearken to Orthodox and seriously Christian Doctors, rather than to Renegadoes and T●aitor● to all states of Religion, and to bend a more inclinable ear to Virtue then to Vice, is no partiality at all) will guard himself I hope from such impostors, and will regard the person also, not only his reasons; and who it is speaks to him, not only what he speaks; knowing that if the Devil utter some truths, even in those truths he conceals a false and devilish meaning: and after that he hath gained credit by the attractive splendour of some true doctrines, he will hope to be believed even when he lies; and so howsoever appearing first in the investure of light and truth, he will prove an Angel of darkness and Imposture.  
It hath been the usual Practice of all heretical writers, to embellish their discourses, with as many verities as they could possibly inculcate, without apparent contradiction or repugnancy. Even this devise begot not a little esteem, to the Answerer of Charity mistaken; he had employed his care to make his work popular and taking, by the intermeddling of many Catholic truth's; this was it, which so much commended it to the vulgar Reader, whose capacity could not sound the incoherence and inconsistency of those truth's with the fashood's, which he principally intended to bring into credit, by consorting them with those: therefore when he heard his work so popularly applauded, he might have said with great truth, and modesty, as she who hearing herself highly praised for the hair she wore, said Nescis quam pro melaudat nunc iste Sicambram.  
The rest which followeth in this Prefatory Answer to the Direction, and immediately precedeth his Conclusion, is a brief recollection (as it seems) of what is scattered in his ensuing Volume, trust up together with a number of points, fastened all to one chief point, and main head of Doctrine, which is indeed a most false Principle in the sense he pretendeth; That all things necessary to Salvation are evidently contained in Scriptures. Whence it will follow, that the belief of the B. Trinity is not necessary to Salvation, as which, in this Advocates opinion (as I have noted heretofore) is not evidently revealed in the Scriptures.  
And yet grant this principle true; it will follow, that the authority determining Controversies of faith, cannot be the Scripture, but the Church; for it is notorious that some Her eticall doctrines have been grounded upon some inevident passages of Scripture, and those vented as doctrines of faith, and therefore as necessarily to be believed, or at the least not rejected by an express misbelief.  
Again, some parts of Scripture may have an evident construction to one, which to another may be dark and obscure; then the doctrine inferred upon that evidence, will be of faith to him to whom it is evidently contained in Scripture; to another who will deny the evidence, because he see's it not, it will not be so: What authority then, other than the Church shall determine the true sense of this part of Scripture, evident and inevident, especially (which may often fall out) if no other more evident Scripture, can be brought in, as a witness of greater authority to clear the doubt?  
Hear then the doctrine of Fundamentals and not Fundamentals, will be good for nothing, but to bring in more Faiths, yea contradictory Faiths; since all points of Faith are Fundamental, so as necessarily to be believed by him to whom they are evidently contained in Scripture; and none fundamental to him, to whom they are not evidently contained in Scripture, and therefore not necessary to be believed.  
And if you say, that such points evidently contained in regard of some understanding, not evidently to another, are none of those which are commanded to be preached to all men (which evasion this Advocate may seem to have reserved,) how will this be proved? since our Saviour's command is in general terms this, Praedicate Euangelium hoc omnicreaturae. Preach this Gospel to all the world; he saith not, these, or these points of the Gospel, and no more. And yet again: Quod aeudistis in aurem praedicate super tectae, what you have heard in secret, preach it publicly.  
But especially when any controversy concerning doctrine of faith ariseth, and some Heresy is authorized by some supposed evidence of Scripture, than the contrary truth is to be preached and published to the whole Church, lest that Heresy should be embraced for a truth of Faith, or the word of God; yea God himself pretended the Author of that untruth, or Heresy, which pretence is a very high and lowed Blasphemy.  
By which may appear the gross and palpable absurdity of this Minister's doctrine, legitimating as it were all Adulterate and suprious Doctrines, and Heresies, by saying; Nothing that is obscure can be necessary, to be understood, or not mistaken. Which is indeed one of his capital Principles, and a chief support of his doctrine.  
For I ask, Is not the mistaking, or misinterpreting of some parts of Scripture the very source of some Heretical doctrines? and those Scriptures the greatest strength and colour, that giveth credit and countenance to such Heresies? Is not then, the not-mistaking of such Scriptures necessary, even as necessary, as it is that such doctrines should not prevail, or win credit by the authority of those Scriptures? For though the true understanding of some obscure parts of Scripture be not necessary, yet it is necessary that such obscure parts be not so mistaken as to warrant Heresy by their authority.  
If therefore out of that first principle, by this Minister presumed, a thousand other absurdities follow, such as those, by him deduced howsoever, (for I will not examine the regularity of those deductions) what is this to the matter in hand? For this was not the Direction or Caveat given him by his Adversary, that he should not answer out of this principle of Protestancy; but that he should not out of those other specified by his Director, those Socinian principles, which even Protestants abhor.   

The Conclusion of his Preface, with his fallacious Apology for himself.  
SECT. XLIII.  
HE concludes after his self-plauding manner, as I have often noted before.  
Pref. And thus your Venom against me, is in a manner spent.  
Answ. Which words I take notice of also here, that you may observe with me the spirit of his style perpetuate throughout his whole work; and with all, the difference between it and his Adversaries Pen; and then tell me whether this be not the spirit of a Spider indeed, which findeth venom even where none is; whom therefore (that is, Aduocare and Spider) I shall not doubt to join in one and the same Word; which mall be this, for the tyme.  
Inueniam, aut faciam.  
I will find it, or make it.  
Pref. Now only two little impertinenties remain: the first, that I refused to subscribe the Articles of the Church of England: the second, my mortues which first induced me to forsake Protestantis●●e.  
Answ. So he; and to the first he answers in effect this.  
Pref. That the doctrine of the Church of England is so pure and Orthodox, that whosoever believes it, and life's according to it, undoubtedly he shall be sau●d. That there is no error in it which may nocesutate, or warrant a man, to disturb the peace, or renounce the Communion of it. Which acknowledgement he is persuaded is the only thing intended by subscription.  
Answ. By this you see he hath now leveled his way to Ecclesiastical preferment; so that, if hereafter you hear he hath accepted any such commodity, you many know he did it upon better consideration. The scruple he had concerning subscription is vanished into the air, whither the rest of his scruples will follow in their turns. It may be that scruple was but a melancholic Dream, such as he conceives Luther's conference with the Devil might be. He is now Materia prima, for any benefice, Chair, Prebendary, Chanonry, or what ye will: you may conjecture who hath had the tempering, and working of this pliable clay; he was a Master in that feat you may assure yourself, if not a Doctor, and this his Masterpiece.  
To the second impertinency concerning his motives he answere's: 
Pref.  That it is more impertinent and frivolous than the former; Unless (saith he) it he a just exception against a Physician, that himself was sometimes in, and recener●d himself from that disease which he undertakes to cure; or against a Guide in a way, that at first, before he had experience himself mistook it, and afterwards so and his error, and 〈◊〉 it. That 〈…〉 Micha●● de Montaigne, wassurely of a fare different mind, for he will hardly allow any Physician competem, but only for such diseases, as himself had passed through; and a fare greater than Montaigne.  
Answ. (I pray you by the way take notice of this, as not spoken by chance, or without due reflection, lest any man should question whether authority were of greater weight in the Socinian balance, jesus Christ, or Michael de Montaigne.)  
Pref. Even he that said. Tu conversus confirma sratres tuos, thou being converted confimre thy brethren, gives us sufficiently to understand, that they which have themselves been in such a state, as to need conversion, are not thereby made incapable. of, but rather engaged, and obliged unto, and qualified for this charitable function.  
Answ. He might have added to this, that the Hollander's (men say) make special choice of such men, for Pilot's, and Masters of ships, who have formerly wracked many ships in the time of their Mastership.  
Now truly, this might pass for a pretty Problem or Imperrinent to be disputed in the Qu●dlibets; and I do not see but like a Boole it would run either way, or be shot like an Arrow at either But. Yet surely for the Physician he would grant him a very straight commission, and confine his practice within the compass of a very few cures: or else if his Patents were for both sides-Trent for example, he would make his body a very Apothecary's shop which had tried the Poisons of most kinds of drugs. And I do not know why a Physician so qualified, that is so generally infected and diseased, might not give a man a sickness, as soon as a cure.  
Howsoever (to run along with him in the same way) if his own diseases in a Physician; or mistaking the way in a Guide; or the many shipwracks of a Pilot, may make either Guide, or Pilot, or Physician more competent in their several professions; surely this Minister is the man who hath been sick of every Religion; and hath mistaken every Way; and hath ship wracked every ship he hath sailed in: Ergo, who can doubt but the choice of such a Guide, such a Pilot, such a Phyfician, is very proper and warrantable?  
For his Conversion, though some will perhaps deny, that face his first turn to the Catholic, he hath ever been in any such state, as to need conversion, who hath been ever since in motion: yet if Conversion may make a man, not incapable Of, but rather engaged and obliged Unto, and qualified For this charitable function, of converting his brethren; surely this man hath been converted to, and from every Religion, and so hath brethren on every side. For I believe he hath had more Conversions in one year, than the Sun hath Tropiques, yea perhaps as many more.  
Since therefore the special advantages of his Person for such an employment, are so paliable; he may seem to wrong him, who would go about to disable him from being a fit Advocate of the Protestant cause, even by that which most of all enables and qualifies him, for this charitable function.  
Nay, what will you say, if these very Motives themselves, which first drew him to Catholic Religion, now objected against him by his Adversary, as to disparage him, prove his advantages (so wonderfully do all things concur to advance his designs?) For let the Papist take them in the worst sense he can; as that these Motives were indeed divine immissions, or as embassies from God himself; will it not then follow in very good Logic, 
Gen. 32.  yea and Divinity too, Si contra Deum fortis fuisti, quantò magis contra homines praevalebis? If thou hast been strong, and invincible against God himself, how much more easily shalt thou prevail against Papists?    
FINIS.  

HEAUTOMACHIA.  
M. Chillingworth against himself.  
AFTER so many Triumphs over foreign Adversaries, there remained only the last Compliment to a consummate Victory, to overcome himself. This he knew well to be the highest flight of Fortitude, the Nonplus-ultra, or Hercules-Pillars of true valour. 
Pindar.  
— 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  What lies beyond this, is unaccessible and imperuious, both to Wise men, and to Fools. Now if this Errant-Knight-Aduocate for Protestancy, this Hercules, or Ulysses (if he had rather so) this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (as he, Multorum mores hominum qui vidit & Vrbes,) no less travailed in Religions than Regions, if in this last Adventure he acquit himself bravely; he may prove a spectacle, I think, no less grateful to the God's, then that Cat●, cum ad●ersâ fortunâ compositus (as Seneca saith) matched with an adverse fortune, and at the length out of a true Stoique-valour, killing himself.  
And surely they who enjoy so much leisure in the long vacancy which Epicure hath granted them, should more laudably, a man would think, employ some part of their everlasting Holiday in beholding this Monomachy, or sole-fight, then in those petty Homerique skitmishes, wherein the Europe & Asia of Frog's and Mice were committed. Certainly, this is a warring of much greater admiration,— Periculosa plenum op●● alta, and of as doubtful, as dangerous a die; wherein, if it would please the Godd's, even as in that Batromyomachia, to divide themselves into factions; I believe it would appear a very dubious and perplexed election, since here, in the very same man, the left hand is matched with the right, whether of the dwellers to maintain. For it is considerable, in this place, that although several defiances, in the space perhaps ' of two years more or less have passed to and from between these Champions, and thereupon some private and clandestine depreliations, nor yet those without some noise of tumult, nor without some blood and sweat in the encounters; yet to the trial of an open combat, now at length they have condescended; urged unto it (I suppose) by the long and greedy expectation of many, who had certain knowledge of their intergrudges, and professed Enmities.  
And for that indeed the left hand had received some disgraceful affront from the right, which he might seem by his long connivance willing to pocket up and dissemble; and though the right taking the advantage of the first blow, might have struck more home; yea & have dealt the left such buffets that it should never have been able to hold up a fingar in the cause again: yet howsoever the right hand hath imposed such wounds, as the left, I am persuaded, will never cure with credit.  
And though the difference be now the business (as I hear) of another Court, wherein while it depends, it may seem preposterous for a private man to umpire it; yet since it is an affair of that grave consequence, that many heads & judgements may seem to be needfully entertained in it; & again a subject of that Pregnancy, that many hands may find therein both work and weariness enough: for both these causes, I have been moved to go something with the right; for the left, as running upon his own ground, and homewards, he will have Abettors ten for one. And no marvel, for even since the right hath been the right, and the world hath been the world; whensoever it hath had any difference with the left, it hath ever been cast by number of voices, though not by weight: yet because I verily believe the right will be the winner at the last, though long first, I will be content in the mean time to be another Cato, for the rights sake, and to say, 
Victrix causa placet Superis, sed victa Catoni.  
The conquering cause the God's approve,  
But Cato doth the conquered love.   

Of the number of M. Chillingworth his Motives.  
HIS Motives are in number Ten; nor can I think this casual, or unadvised, or that this very number of Motives was void of mystery. A less exactness and providence could not be expected from him, who doth all by line and level; of Logic natural, or artificial, and the Canonical Word. Therefore I hope I shall do him no wrong in thinking he had a purpose to consecrate his Motives, by a mystery of number. I shall also make bold to conceive him so learned, as to know the great virtue and efficiency, which not only the School of Pythagoras, but the retiring Cabalists, and learned Rabbius, yea the holy Fathers themselves attribute to numbers, and even namely to this number of Ten.  
Whence I will imagine he had here regard to the Decalogue of Divine Commandments, in conformity to which he proposed to himself his Decalogue of Motives. Perhaps he considered with all the reward of such man, whose integrity of observance and obedience to those Commaund's should receive singali denarium; which denarius diurnus Anagogically understood is life ever lasting, that one entire day of Eternity, uninterrupted by night, or intermission of happiness. And this Decalogist may have cause to fear (though other cares at this time, by land and water, divert his fear, or employ it otherwise) lest at the numbering and counting day, this very Decalogue may be objected against him, Nun ex denarie connenisti mecum? Was not your agreement with the Catholic Church, ex denari●? out of your own Decalogue of Motives? But now, he saith, he reputes the bargain.  
There was also to be considered in this number a mystery of congruity. Noen was the tenth Generation of man, & Noen signifieth Rest. So in the tenth Motive, it seems this Movable intended to rest, and move no further, as all motion's render themselves to some term of rest; unless you will except the Circular, and the motion of such men who move in a Circle, of whom the Prophet, 
Psal. 11. Jud.  in circuitu impij ambulant; Wicked men walk in a Circle: and as those cloud ', of which S. jude, nubes sine aquâ quae à ventis circumferuntur, dry cloud's without all moisture of divine Grace, as 
(*) Socinians.  those who have no Grace, so much as in their Catechism: what more dry and Graceless cloud's then they? & these are hurried round omni vente dectrinae, with every blast and change of doctrine; whose Religion hath no residence. 
Ephes. 4.  And such a one is he, who having arrived to the truth, by ten step's, or Motives, by ten I say, the pause and period of number, falls back, and begins a new account, Semper ad usque decem numero crescente venitur; Because, denarius est omnis numerus (saith the learned Mirandula) the tenth is all number: for, thus fare, his march and motion was as the progress of the just in the path of light; 
Prous●b. ●  justorum s●mitae quasilux splendens, procedit & crescit usque ad perfectum diem: the path of just men as a shining light proceeds & increase's still, until the noon or perfect day. This noonday, or perfect day is the term & period of this progress; this that denarius diurnus, the day of divine Truth, as obscurely revealed, to be believed in this life, to be enjoyed in the next in the clarity of blissifull vision. For this tenth of everlasting day, is the place and residence of the eternal Beatitude of mankind; of which S. Austin, Attend, 
Serm. de decimit.  quod creatura decima inter intellectuales creature as est homo; quia Angeli in novem ordinibus consistunt, decimus verò ordo est hominum. Observe, that man is the tenth in number of intellectual creatures; for there are nine orders of Angels, the tenth order is of men.  
Now, this unhappy man, after much study (I doubt not) and pains taken in the search of truth and Religion, having now happily advanced his progress & Motives to this number of Perfection, and to the hope of communion with Angelical Hierarchies; even there, and then, like unto Lot's wife, or the fabulous Orpheus, transgre'st the covenant and looked back, 
— ibi omnis  
effusus labour:—  There all the labour was lost; or as the Greek proverb hath it, Hydria in foribus, the pitchard broken in the very entry or threshold. And now the mystery of the sacred number foully betrayed, of those ten goodly Motives, nothing remains to him the Mover, but the number; the soul and spirit now departed they move no more than a carcase, and may therefore not unfitly carry before them in their title. Nos numerus sumus. (We are a number.) Yet even these, though unnaturally massacr'ed by him who gave them light, (Natis sepulchrum) Notwithstanding may perhaps, revived to life, be Motives again, and move others, who will entertain them, though their pitiless Parent hath cast them off. And because I conceive this resurrection may be achieved without a miracle, I will presume to attempt it, though weakly; a stronger spirit will perform it more effectually.   

1. Motives. 2. Remotives. 3. Promotives, or Replicants.  

I. Motive. BEcause perpetual visible profession, which could never be wanting to the Religion of Christ, nor any part of it, is apparently wanting to Protestant Religion, so fare as concerns the points in contestation.  
I. Remotive. God hath mayther deo●eed, nor foretold, that his true doctrine should de facto, be always visibly professed, without any mixture of falsehood.  
I. Promotive, or Replicant. If by this restrictive (de facto) you understand, that such visible profession of unmixed, or pure Truth, was only so decreed or foretold, that, de iure, it should be so, that is, of right there ought to be always visible profession, of true doctrine, without any mixture of falsehood; but that de facto such unmixed doctrine to be so professed indeed, was neither decreed nor foretold.  
Against this, I reply in behalf of your Motive. This were no Privilege at all of the Christian Church; for de iure, of right, not only the Church, but the Synagogue too, was so make profession of true doctrine, without mixture of falsehood. Nay, de iure, even the Gentiles should have worshi'pt God according to truth, without falsehood; and those Philosophers should have taught the truth which they understood concerning God, without mixture of untruth, for the contrary of which they are condemned by S. Paul. 
Rom. 1.  What, was then the effect and intent of the spirit of truth, so sent, as to continue to the end of the world, in the Church of Christ? Was it only to impose a duty, and obligation upon the Church, to teach truth, without falsehood? And was the Church to be Columna veritaetis, the pillar of 〈◊〉 de iure only, not the fa●●o? Who can safely leave, or rely upon that Pillar which only should stand, but may as well fall, as stand?  
Was this the purchase that cost the dearest blood of the Son of God, a duty only, and a deeper damnation of the Church not corresponding with this duty? Was this the love of Christ jesus, 
Ephes. 5.  towards his dearest spouse so great, that he would die for her, to the end he might sanctify her, and wash her in the laver of water in his word, that he might exhibit to himself a glorious Church, having neither spot, nor wrinkle, nor any such thing? And is all this come at length to a de iure, not the facto, to a what should be only, not a what is?  
And is this that state of beauty no less permanent than spotless? wherein time, which withers and wrinkles all the beauty of fields ' and flowers ' (aruit foenum & cecidit flos) should cause no fading or impairing, because, 
1. Pet. 1.  Verbum Domini manet in aeternum, that word of truth is everlasting, which as the form and soul of beauty, in this glorious spouse, should never abandon her?  
Now, doth Christ jesus thus sanctify his Spouse, or no? hath he purchased her this permanent Beauty, or no? If no; then is he frustrate of his design, which was to espouse unto himself, a Church which should de facto, indeed, not deiure, of duty only, be ever Holy; for though it be placed in the particular choice of every single man, to be holy, or no, thus, and in such sort, that no man is, or shall be holy, or virtuous of force, or against his will, or not freely; yet it is not in the particular choice or power of any particular man, or men, no nor in the malice of Hell itself, to effect, that Christ jesus shall not have a holy Church on earth, even to the world's end.  
For this was the intent of his precious death, & bloodshed, ut sanctificaret, that he might de facto fanctify his Spouse; that he might acquire unto her a perpetuity of beauty, not a duty only, to preserve it. And this intent can never be frustrate: and yet it should be, if the spouse of Christ, should only, of duty, always be holy, but were not so indeed.  
Or, tell me, is she spotless, who should have no spots, but hath them? Is that a fair face, which should be so, and is not? hath she no wrinkles, who should have none?  
Rem. But God hath neither decreed nor foretold that his true doctrine should de facto be always visibly professed, without any mixture of falsehood.  
Prom. What? because he hath not foretold it to you, who have lost your ears of hearing, or have stopped them with humane reason? or dwell too near the Catadupa, and the noise of waters? or converse with bleating or bellowing cattle? in fine, have your attention taken up in the traffic, care, and tumult of earthly commodities, that you cannot hear the music of the Sphear's, or the harmony of heavenly Truth? And have all men forfeited their ears, since you have been deaf on the left ear, or forgotten what you have heard heretofore with the right?  
But to other men, it hath been told, and foretold in all the languages of the world; they have heard it foretold in those words of Esay: 
Esay. 35.  Eterit ibi semita & via, & via Sanctorum vocabitur; & hae erit vobisvia directa etc. and this shall be a direct or strait way, so that fools shall not mistake it: But Socinians are no simple fools, they may mistake it. Now if this way be humane reason (humanum est errare) nothing human, as such, is exempt from error. If the Scripture be this way, the wisest may err in interpreting it, and then it is no way; or at least not the way of Saints, nor the true and strait way when a false interpretation hath distorted it. But the doctrine of the Church is that Via Sanctorum, the way of Saints, wherein the spirit of truth residing according to promise, interprets holy Scriptures, which then becomes a way, and a strait way, wherein a Fool shall not err; 
1. Cor. 3. Ibid.  a Fool, I say, who hath made himself a fool, that he may be made wise by Christian wisdom, which is folly to the world, and to Socinianism, as the wisdom of the world, and Socinian Reason, is madness and folly to God, and Christian Religion.  
Again they have heard foretold in those words of our Saviour, 
Math. 28. & 16.  Ecce ego vobiscum sum etc. and those other. Et portae tuferi non pravalebunt adversus eam, the power of hell shall not prevail against it, the preservation of the Church of God from error of doctrine, from all falsehood of heresy. They understand it decreed by God, 
Ephes.  and foretold by S. Paul: Et ipse dedit quosdam Apostoles, alios prophet as etc. ad consummationem sanctorum, in opus ministerij, which work of ministry, necessarily supposeth visibility of the Ministers and ministered, in adificationem corporis Christi, for the edifying, or building up the body of Christ, which is his Church; the members whereof being to accede throughout all ages to this mystical body by the Visible ministry of those Visible ministers, Prelates, Teachers, and Governors, infer a necessity of true doctrine, visibly taught, or to be taught them, by those their Prelates; without which truth of doctrine, they could not be the regenerate issue of the spirit of Truth.  
They have likewise heard the Church of God called by S. Paul; 
1. Tim. 1.  Domus Deivivi, columna & firmam●ntum Veritatis, the house of the living God, the pillar and prop of truth. Of the house of God it is said, Domum tuam decet sanctitudo Domine, 
Psalm. 92.  in longitudinem dierum; sanctitude becomes thy house O Lord, for ever; which fanctitude consists in the rectitude of the understanding and will of man, rectified by truth of doctrine, both in faith and manners. 
Ibid.  And this is sure that visible house wherein S. Timothy was to be wary, and to know how to converse, for the edification and example of others, who should be eye-witnesses and eare-witnesses of his doings and sayings.  
This Church is also the pillar and prop of Truth; which prop or pillar surely shall stand, while truth hath need of a prop, which shall be in order to mankind, while man is mortal, obnoxious to error, and lapse in question of divine truth. To this pillar of Truth, 
Isa. 59 Johan. 14.16. Johan. 16.13.  the spirit of God is by special Covenant tied, to the world's end; or is himself this pillar of Truth; and that spirit of truth, which shall teach the Church, and by the Church, omnem veritatem, all truth, that is, all necessary truth; which necessary truth, certainly, excludes all falsehood in doctrine of faith and manners, which are the points in contestation between the Catholics and Protestants.  
All this, and much more the Fathers and Doctors of the Catholic Church, have heard and believed, as foretold and decreed by God, concerning the Visible profession of true doctrine in the Church of Christ, without any mixture of falsehood, and the continuance of such Visible Profession de facto, not the iure only. Nor, if you can gloss these Scriptures to anothersense, shall they cease for that, to tell us this truth, to whom the Catholic Church doth so interpret them; and who, as sons of obedience have learned to turn the deaf ear to all exotique interpretation, yea and to all natural reason and discourse, when it impugns this authority: as you Socinians are deaf to supernatural truth, when it sounds a note above the reach of your reason.  
Wherefore, since this your answer is in effect no otherwise a confutation of your first Motive but by a flat denial; I do not see but it may move still, with as much force as ever; yea and live again, to fight against the Father, and that with more equity, than he fights against his Mother. And all this I have said, supposing he means by his (de facto) as I understand him, and as I have some reason, more than every man knows, to think he mean's: If he mean otherwise, when he shall vouchsafe to come out of the Clouds, and appear in his true meaning, he shall be answered otherwise.   

II. Motive. Because Luther & his followers separating from the Church of Rome, separated also from all Churches, pure or impure, true or false then being in the world; upon which ground I conclude, that either God's promises did fail of performance, if there were then no Church in the world, which held all things necessary, and nothing repugnant to Salvation; or else that Luther and his Sectaries, separating from all Churches then in the world, and so from the true, if there were any true, were damnable Schismatics.  
II. Remotive. To the second. God hath neither decreed, nor foretold, that there shallbe always a company of men free from all error in itself damnable: Neither is it always of necessity Schismatical, to separate from the external communion of a Church, though wanting nothing necessary. For if this Church supposed to want nothing necessary, require me to profess against my conscience, that I believe some error though never so small and innocent, which I do not believe, and will not allow me her communion but upon this condition: In this case the Church, for requiring this condition, is Schismatical, and not I for separating from the Church.  
III. Promotive. God's decree concerning the perpetuity of a Visible and infallible Church on earth, to the end of the world, hath been foretold many ways, as hath been declared in part in the former Promotive, and more fully and plainly by many Catholic writers: and the contrary is here assumed with too to great boldness, but without all proof, or possibility of proof.  
That such separation from the Church is schismatical, is evident; for schism being the breach of union in Charity, as Heresy violates the unity of faith; to separate from the external communion of this Church, is to show you are fallen out with the Church, with which you refuse to converse in Ecclesiastical conversation; as he who flieth the company of a man with whom he hath been formerly familiar in way of civil conversation, is supposed to be fallen out with him. Then again, this separation is very scandalous, as yielding a just presumption that such a Separant is in his judgement an Heretic. Now, to scandalise wittingly and knowingly (as such a Separate cannot be ignorant that this is a true cause of scandal, or if he be, he is wilfully ignorant) is to violate the law of Charity, and this especially when you separate from a Church wherein nothing necessary to Salvation is wanting, as you make the supposition: But if this Church wanting nothing necessary (as you suppose) require you to profess against your conscience that you believe some error; then (say you) your Separation is lawful.  
But either this error required by the Church to be believed, is in your conscience an error of doctrine concerning faith or manners, or no: If yea; then in your conscience somewhat necessary is wanting to that Church, that is, the contrary doctrine of truth. If it be no error of doctrine concerning either of these, but only some opinion held or practised as indifferent; then certainly the Church will never urge you to believe it: & then again you may choose whether you will believe it or no: and then lastly you should have no cause for this, to break with the Church, or divide yourself from her Communion. If you say, in the judgement of the Church it may perhaps be held indifferent, yea perhaps a necessary point of doctrine; but to my conscience it is an error in faith or manners: Now this I expected, and this I knew you said in your hart: so than I say again, in your judgement and conscience the Church is wanting in some necessary point of true doctrine.  
And here now I appeal to the sentence of any sober and indifferent Christian, what greater pride can be imagined, then that any private or single man should have a conscience repugnant and refragatory to the conference of the Church of God? What sober Christian. I say, reflecting duly upon such a conscience will not doom it mere insolency and arrogance? True it is, no pride of man can be a Paragon with the pride of formal Heresy: this is indeed that Pes superbiae, that foot of pride, by the length and bulk whereof you may conjecture how Gigantique a monster an Heretic is. For which cause all Orthodox Spirits have learned to pray with the Church, 
Psal. 35.  Non ●eniat mi●ipes superbiae, & manus peccatoris non moucat me: this foot of pride, this suggestion of Satan, may it have no access unto my soul, and the hand or pen of such a sinner let it have no power to move or draw me from an humble belief: Ibi ceciderunt qui operantur iniquitatem, expulsi sunt, nec potuerunt flare, there, and in that pride Apostat-Angels fell, & with them Apostat-Christians fall from the Church, expulsed and ejected thence; or, by reason of their pride they could stay no longer there.  
For after this pride growing daily more in an Heretical conscience, hath at length extinguished the spirit of God, stifled all his Inspirations, and Motives; then the same spirit of God expulseth that Satanical, and mutinous spirit out of his family which is the Church of Christ: bandites, & throws him forth into the open field of professed Heresy, 
1. john. 2.  ut manifesti fiant, that they may be known for Heretics, and warred against, as open rebels; that their conversation may be eschewed by weaker Christians; their Herefies laid open and beaten down, by the more learned; to be buried at last, in the ignominy and oblivion of their infamous Ancestry, 
2. Thess. 2.  whom our Lord jesus from age to age hath, and will kill with the spirit of his mouth.  
And now after their eiectmens' and expulsion, they pretend the equity of their separation; when it is indeed their Iniquity which hath separated and expelled them; qui operantur iniquitatem, expulsi sunt etc. As when God and the Apostate Angels, by reason of their pride, became two factions, (if I may so say) the immensity of heaven was too straight to contain both. 
Quaemare, quae terras, quae totum possidet Orbem  
Non caepit fortuna duos.—  So an Heretic when he makes two with the Catholic, they cannot stand together under one roof of the Church; expulsi sunt nec potueruntstare; the Spirit of God, as being the predominant spirit in the Church, and in right of possession, expels the other incompatible spirit of Pride.  
But yet, Good Sir Remover, is it possible so gross a folly should escape your reflection, as you manifest in the close of this your answer? for thus you writ; That if this Church (wherein nothing necessary to Salvation is wanting) will not allow you her Communion but upon condition etc. in this case the Church for requiring such a condition, is schismatical, not you for separating.  
Now for my part, I truly should have had a very great Scruple, to have imprinted upon your reputation such a character of a prodigious pride, as you have here displayed with your own hand and pen. For as I have intimated before it is certain (yea, and to surmise the contrary, or draw it within suspicion or jealousy, is mere litigious cavilling) that the Church will never require the belief of so small and innocent an error, as includeth no prejudice or falsehood against Catholic faith, or manners; and if it include any such, it cannot be small or innocent. Yet put the case, that the Church should require of any single or private Christian, that he would for peace sake condescend with the whole Catholic Church, to the profession of some point of doctrine, which even in his judgement were but a small and innocent error, but in her judgement an Orthodox truth though not yet defined; and would advice him to depose his single conscience, in this point, wherein he could not possibly be supposed to have any convincing evidence, especially against the torrent and unanimous consent of the whole Church; and that finally in case he would not submit, he should be excommunicate & held an alien from the Church: were it not a strange pride in such a man, to say: No, he could not, and so would not depose his conscience; that he knows he is in the right, and the whole Church in an error, (for thus we must suppose according to the sense of this Motive, that Luther stood out single against the whole Church) and that therefore unless the Church will allow him her Communion upon his own terms and conditions, that is, without obligation on his part to any such profession of doctrine, or practise of the whole Church, he would disclaim her communion and proclaim her schismatical, for requiring from him any such concurrence with her, in any such practice, or exterior conformity.  
Although (by the way) Luther, for whom he apologizeth, opposed the whole Church, in points of faith then already defined; when those errors (if errors) were neither small nor innocent, being now imposed upon Christians to be believed, even as they would believe God himself: I say, no error so imposed, or so authorized could be small or innocent; but if an error at all, a most grievous and damnable imposture. Or if they were true doctrines, and then also defined by the Church, than Luther and his sectaries, by not believing them, and for separating (according to your former discourse) from that Church, & all the Churches of the world, and so from the true, (if there were any true) were damnable Schismatics. Therefore this part concerning Luther's Apostasy, as urged in your Motive, remains yet unanswered.  
And yet further let us consider your Apology for this Apostata, personated in yourself. In this case the Church not allowing me her communion is schismatical, not I for separating. Reflect seriously upon this discourse, whether it be, not only , but incongruous and illiterate, nor worthy to have dropped from a Grammarians Pen, much less from a master of Art's, or of a Chair. For if Luther, or any such, whom you act in this defence, were ever in the Church, from which he separates, he was in it, as a limb, or member in the whole body; for example, as an arm, or leg, or thigh etc. Now in case of separation or division between the body and any member, do we say the body is divided from the leg, or arm, or the leg or arm from the body? Schism is division or separation; the Church, say you, is Schismatical for requiring the aforesaid condition. From whom, or what, schismatical? from whom, or what divided? Is the Church divided or separated from you? What? the body from the leg? as, if you suppose it incurably gangrained, and then, 
— Immedicabile vuluns  
E●se re●idendum est, ne pars syncera trahatur;  But shall the body in this case be cut from the leg? quis ita l●quitur? is not this very language schismatical, & separate from all Catholic use of common sense & speech? Doth the Church separate from you in not condescending to your single opinion; or you from her, in not submitting to her Catholic doctrine? The Church held the same doctrine, for which you separate from her, before you came to her: you found her possessed of this doctrine, you leave her so possessed ', and standing where you found her; Who, separates in this case? You stood for a while joined to a pillar; you fly from the pillar: what, is the Pillar gone from you, or you from the Pillar?  
Nay I say more, were it indeed an error, which the Church should urge you to profess, and which because you refuse to profess, you forsake the Church; yet not the Church, (if we speak properly) but you are the schismatic, or Separant, schismatic or Separate alway's denominates the inferior, or subjected part: for who are now the Separatist's in England? They who exact conformity, that is, the Governors of the English Church, or they who refuse to conform? Do you not see that by the very like discourse, the Non-conformant's may conclude the Conformant's to be Schismatics? Nay might not the Heretics of all ages, even those who opposed the doctrine of the primitive Church, have returned the Schismatical upon that Church? Yea upon the College of the Apostles themselves, for requiring the belief of some doctrine, which those Heretics believed not, and which in their deluded conscience was error? For could not every Nicholait say as much; You require of me to profess against my conscience, that I believe some error which I believe not, otherwise you allow me not your communion: you for requiring this are Schismatical, not I for separating from you, rather than to condescend to this your condition?  
Nor truly do I see, why a private subject might not aswell stand out against the King and Parliament, refusing to subscribe, or obey some decree or order established by full consent and authority of both Houses; pleading in defence of such his recusancy, that the order or decree is an error in the State; and alleging perhaps to that purpose some old Charter or record, misapplyed by his own private interpretation, disagreeing from the common intendment and declaration of the Lawyer's and judges of the Land; and then being for such his contumacy censured, proscribed, declared rebel or Traitor to the State, unless he would come in, and acknowledge his obedience & conformity to that order, or Law; still pretend, that such a Law is no Law, but an abuse of authority; and say, that if they will not allow him the Name and privilege of a true subject, but upon such condition, that by his subscription he profess against his conscience, his consent to an error in government, to which he consent's not, or acknowledges for law what he believes not to be law; in this case they for requiring such a condition are rebel's and traitors to the state, not he for disclaiming it.  
And I believe the disparity will not easily be assigned; neither will it ever be proved, that the Temporal & Laic authority of any State or Commonwealth, in order to civil Government or Command, is more sacred and inviolable, than the authority of the Church of God, in regard of determining doctrines of faith, or in order to Ecclesiastical Laws & Constitutions. Whence it may seem a matter worthy the consideration, that this spirit of doctrine hath in the very bowells of it, the very Embryo of all seditions and rebellions: such, as if it live to growth, and strength of age, may prove such a monster as may import in time, the confusion, and Anarchy of all State and Government. Verily it will appear, as I think, very manifest, that any refractory or rebellious subject may accommodate this discourse to the maintenance and defence of his rebellion, with very good congruity; yea and finally retort the Traitor, or Rebel upon the Prince, or Authority which proscrib●s or censures him.   

III. Motive. Because, if any credit may be given to as creditable records as any are extant, the Doctrine of the Catholics hath been frequently confirmed; and the opposite doctrine of Protestants, confounded with supernatural, and divine miracles.  
III. Remotive. To the third. If any credit may be given to Records fare more creditable than these, the Doctrine of Protestants, that is, the Bible, hath been confirmed, and the Doctrine of Papists, which is in many points plainly opposite to it, confounded with supernatural and divine Miracles, which for number and glory outshine Popish pretended Miracles, as much as the Sun doth an ignis fatuus; those I mean which were wrought by our Saviour Christ and his Apost●●●. Now this book, by the confession of both ●●des, confirmed by innumerous miracles etc.  
III. Promotive. Before I move any further, I think it best to close with you here. I have already often said, and must say it often, that the Socinian judgement is no judgement at all, nor any arrest of sentence, but a very wave of a floating sancy, and giddy affection; which swelling now, and appearing big, soon after break's upon the shore; and another wave of opinion follows, grown from another fancy, which is the Trident that moves and commaund's in the Socinian Ocean. Not long since, when, I know not now, what wind moved your fantastic affection, towards the shore of Catholic truth; then, if any credit might be given to as creditable records as any are extant etc. after that, the wind changing, and another affection flowing from a new fancy, see how this Trident hath turned your judgement to the quite opposite shore; and now, if any credit may be given to records fare more creditable, than these. What? have you now found out records far more creditable than these, which are as creditable as any are extant? then it seems these records fare more creditable are not extant? and yet you have found them out. Or are they now extant, which seven or eight year's since, when your Motives were conceived, were not extant? Good Sir, put them out; to the print; to the stationer's; with all possible speed; London & Oxford will come together by the ●ares, for the commodity; but be not rash in promising to either, lest a more liberal offer make you resent. They will off, at any Price, you may compass another purchase by the gain of the commodity, especially coming forth with the recommendation of a most plausible title, as, Records for protestancy never extant in print before, set forth by M. Ch. lately Roman Catholic, now Attorney, or advocate for Protestants. The first edition etc.  
But now, in earnest, let us examine these Records of superlative credit, whereby the doctrine of Protestants, that i● the Bible (do you mean the bible itself, or the doctrine of the Bible, for there is great difference between ●●ese two?) and ●othaps you will not easily find, out of your Records, how the Bible itself hath been so miraculously confirmed, that is, declared by miracles, that this Bible is the word of God; and yet you say, This book confirmed by innumerous miracles. I suspect you meant to be obscure, and yet willing to have it so understood, that the Book itself hath been so confirmed, that your appeal to it might appear more specious. But then, I dare be bold to say, that the Bible, that is, the Scriptures translated by Protestants, shall never be proved to have received any confirmation at all, by any one piece of a miracle; therefore in this sense what you say, is a mere vaunt void of all truth: whereas again, if as translated, and set forth by authority of the Catholic Church, it hath ever been miraculously confirmed; this is a confirmation of Catholic authority, and a shame and confusion of all Sectaries who reject this authority.  
But I will be so favourable as to construe your meaning such, as you can make good with most ease: as that the Protestant-doctrine is the doctrine of the Bible, (which is no more than every Heretic would say of his doctrine, rather than submit it to the Censure of the Church;) which Protestant and Bible-doctrine hath been confirmed jointly by miracles, outshining all Popish miracles, as the Sun doth ignis fatuus. In which place, I will only specify one doctrine of Protestants, and insist upon that; which is, That the Church of God may err in definitions of faith, or that it is not endued with infallible authority in order to such definitions.  
Now, when will you be so good as to prove unto us, that this negative doctrine, hath been confirmed, and the contrary doctrine of Papists confounded, with supernatural and divine miracles? When will you show us, out of your more creditable records then any extant, that those miracles of our Saviour and his Apostles, were wrought in confirmation of those doctrines wherein you oppose the Catholic Roman Church? Nay when will you prove that any one of those miracles, were not so many testimonies, of some point of doctrine which the Roman Church professeth and teacheth at this day? Come; leave your braving; d● not always ●ly with a Simon Magus in the air of verbal ostenlation; 
— Quid cessas? An tibi Mavors  
Vent●●â in linguâ, p●dibusque fuga●ibus istis  
Semper erit?  Come down, and instance in one point of difference between us and you, which point held by you in opposition to the Roman Catholic, hath ever been countenanced by any least miracle of our Saviour or his Apostles? or the opposite doctrine of Catholics confounded by the like testimony. For if you make not this appear by your sun of Evidence, those divine and supernatural miracles; what will remain for your confirmation, but ignis fatuus?  
I know your Sanctuary; when you have tossed & turned all your creditable records and evidences, you will show us forsooth, that those points of faith which you have received, and hold of the Catholic Roman Church (though the tenure be merely Heretical, that is, of voluntary choice; because it pleaseth you to hold some such as import no restraint, or that some face of truth may appear, like the face, and song of Siren's, to draw men upon your rocks of pernicious Heresies,) those I say, you will prove to have been attested and confirmed by those miracles of our Saviour and his Apostles: which will help your cause nothing at all, but rather weaken it, when by such testimony of miracles you can confirm no other doctrine, but what you have received from us. Neither yet are those doctrines yours, which you can prove to have been so confitmed: I say, no otherwise yours, than those things which you have stolen, or keep by force, from the right owners; therefore they are with you as children ravished from their mother's bosom, and the company of their brethren, by the Turket or M●ret, with whom they remain so sequestered perforce, daily testifying by their sighs and groans, the tyranny of their restraint, and their desire to return to their Mother & brethren. After this violent manner are those Catholic doctrines with you; and thus are holy Scriptures in your, not custody, but captivity, both of them entertained by you to no other end, but to be slaves and servants to your own children, the peculiar doctrines of your Schism, to carry torches before them, to gain, ●ome reputation of light, to those works of darkness.  
Although for Scriptures, as I have said before, and say again, no Heretic hath them properly; that is, as they are the word of God, which they are not but as truly interpreted; for which truth of interpretation, he can pretend no warrant, or title at all. For the Scriptures are not only the word of God, but the word of the Church, which having first conceived them by the holy Ghost, the spirit of truth, brought them forth to light, and bequeathed them from age to age to the children of her obedience, made partakers of the same spirit; and therefore they only can discern them to be the word of God; which is only discernible to those, to whom it is spoken, or revealed by the same spirit; which is only in the Church of Christ, the one mystical body of Christ; which is also called the spirit of Christ: and therefore is not to be found in any other Body, or Society of men; for then, Christ should be the head, or heads of more bodies, which is absurd blasphemy.  
And as the Church of God alone, is endued with this spirit of discretion, whereby she discerns what Scripture is the word of God; so this Church alone hath the spirit of interpretation of Scriptures, and she alone can certainly say, this is the sense and meaning of this Scripture; who can truly say, this is Scripture: as only that Daniel could declare the interpretation and meaning of Nabuch●donozors dream, who could tell him what he had dreamt, which none of those Wizards, or Sorcerers, or Enchanters could do, who yet professed they would interpret the dream, so he would tell them what he had dreamt; But the wise King believed them not, qua sun● per Allegoriam dicta.  
But here, good Sir, I must tell you as a friend; I am ashamed to s●● a man of your expectation & hopeful promisings, to come forth in this threadbare livery of old Heretics; this appeal from Church to Scriptures. There was never so putide an Heretic which having once cast off the authority of the Church, could not find some refuge or sanctuary in the darkness of Scripture; having also together with that authority excussed, taken to himself the freedom of interpreting Scriptures. Belie us it, Syr. it is, and ever willbe a main presumption that you draw ●nder the same yoke with former Heretics, when you can not get out of the same Cart-rout, which they have tracked before you.  Et monstrata di● veteris trabis ●rbita ●ulpa. 
For first, you have gone out of the Roman Catholic Church; so they: from the authority of that Church you appeal to Scriptures; so they: than you interpret Scriptures according to your single understanding, without any other living guide or Vocal authority; so they: being gone out, you turn all your power of Pen-gall, against that Church, whence you went forth, so they. But neither you, nor your patrons, nor Apostles convert any nation to Christian faith; nor they. You reduce few sonles, from sinful courses, to better life; nor they. In the whole number of your patriarchs, you cannot name one Saint; nor they. I see how you have consociated yourself and your client's with the known Heretics of former times, I would gladly know someone distinctive sign, by which you discern and vindicate yourselves from the formal character or character's, marks, or brands of ancient Heretics. In the mean time let us examine the remnant of this Remoti●e.  Rem. 
This book etc. foretells me plainly that in after ages, great signs and wonders shall be wrought in confirmation of false doctrine.  Prom. 
But hath it fore told you, that in after ages no true miracle shall be wrought in confirmation of true doctrine? If not, it hath foretold you nothing to the purpose you pretend.  Rem. 
And that I am not to believe any doctrine, which seems to my understanding, repugnant to the first.  Prom. 
W●●ch seems repugnant etc. to your understanding? Most ridiculous 〈◊〉 no such thing was ever foretold you by the Book of God's Word; you dreamt it. But that doctrine is not to be believed, which to an infallible understanding (which is the understanding of the Church, which is guided by the spirit of truth) is not only seemingly, but really repugnant to Apostolical doctrine. But still you put us in mind of your Character; your appeal to your own understanding; you will not out of this Cart-rout.  Rem 
But that true doctrine should in allages have the testimony of miracles, that I am no where taught.  Prom. 
Are you any where taught the contrary? Or that the testimony of miracles promised by our Saviour, is confined within a certain compass or period of time? Hath the Church only a lease of miracles for term of year▪ and if it hath when expired that term or lease? Unless you can tell us this, for ought you know, it is yet in being. Now the promise of our Saviour being conceived and expressed in plain words, and those of an indefinite and interminate signification, without all limitation to time or place; by what authority presume you to confine it with in the malignant bounds of your understanding, or assignment? The words of our Saviour are these; Amen, 
joh. 14. Mar●. 16.  amen dic● vobis etc. Verily, verily, I say to you, he who believes in me, shall do the works which I do, yea greater than these. The very like hath S. Mark, and elsewhere.  Rem●t. 
Besides setting aside the Bible, and the tradition of it, there is as good story for miracles wrought by those, who lived and died in opposition to the Doctrine of the Roman Church (as by S. Cyprian etc.) as there is for th●se that are pretended to be wrought by the members of that Church.  Prom. 
It is false, that S. Cyprian died in opposition to any then defined doctrine of the Roman Church. Secondly prove, that any of those miracles were wrought in confirmation of any such doctrine, as opposed the doctrine of the Roman Church; otherwise you say nothing.  Remote. 
Lastly it seems to me no strange thing, that God in his justice should permit some true miracles to be wrought, to delude them who have forged so many etc.  Prom. 
Now certainly you are a strange Advocate, and will shame your Clients, do what we can. In truth, by what I have heard, blasphemies are no strange things with you who swallow them with as much ease, as Mithridates was wont to take poison, and as easily they come from you. Yet first, I note your illiterate manner of expression in saying, that God permits some true miracles; as though true miracles were wrought by God's permission only, not by his positive concourse and direct intention: by reason of which positive concourse it is truly said of every true miracle, digitus Dei his est, the fingar of God is here, as being his work alone: so his alone, that no power or force of nature, hath any natural influence into it; and whereunto nature may seem to afford nothing else but a certain non-repugnance, and submission to the prerogative power of God; & which therefore, rather Nature thou God may be said to permit.  
And tell me now, good Sir, seems it not strange to you that God should positively and directly work a true miracle in confirmation of a falsehood? (for if it be in confirmation of a truth, than it deludes not) that God should truly lie, in the language of fact and reality, saying by his miracle. This is true doctrine, which is false; or, this is Virtue, which is Vice, or the like? For although Almighty God may permit the abuse, and wicked application of some supernatural work, whereunto he concurreth positively, as when he concurs positively with the Priest, consecrating to some mischievous end (if we will imagine so great impiety,) yet it followeth not, that God can concur positively, to other miracles, with him who intends imposture or confirmation of false doctrine, by them. For the power of consecrating given to the Priest, is a permanent, resident, and consistent power, like unto the natural faculties of man, wherewith as by virtue of a former pact and law of nature, God concurreth positively, in order to the natural efficiency, or exercise of those faculties, and to the Physical entity of their effects, howsoever oftentimes morally, and formally sinful: which law and covenant supposed, the abuse of such natural power, is the sole work and attribute of man, only permitted by God.  
But the power of other miracles, not appropriated to function or Character, or such as to which God hath not obliged himself, by any former compact with any man, either to conserve that power in him, or to concur with it, to any miraculous effect, is in no man resident, but rather fluent, and errant, as holden of God by a free, arbitrary, and inobligatory tenure; therefore without breaking, or frustrating any preeedent Covenant, or decree, God may withdraw his concurrence to such miracles especially if at any time maliciously designed: and in this case since he may withdraw himself, me thinks it stands not with his justice and goodness, not to do so. And here may seem to have place, that saying of the ancient, Qui non vetat peccare, cùm potest, iubet. For to this kind of miracles, if God should concur positively, he should seem to concur directly to the abuse of the mischievous application, which God forbidden we should ever say or think with Caluin.  
But now, seems it not strange to you, that of a mere delusion and imposture, it should be truly said, digitus Dei hic est? Can any voice of mortal man reach to so high a note of blasphemy, but a Socinian, which reacheth even from Hell to Heaven? Though now again it seems to me no strange thing, that God in his justice and providence, should permit such blasphemies to fall from the pens of such Advocates, that the manifestation of them may disabuse the world, and awake their negligence and security, who suffer themselves to be guided in the affair of their Soule-saluation, by such godless and graceless Blasphemers.   

iv Motive. Because many points of Protestant doctrine, are the d●●ned opinions of Heretics, condemned by the Primitive Church.  
IU. Remotive. All these were not Heretics which by Philastrius, Epiphanius, or 2. Austin were put in the Catalogue of Heretics.  
IU. Promotive. What kind of answer is this? All those were not Heretics etc. Ergo, it is not true that many points of Protestant doctrine are the damned opinions of Heretics, that is, of some Heretics condemned by the primitive Church? Or thus: Some doctrines are not Heresies, which Philastrius numbereth with Heresies (for so Bellarmine hath noted,) 
De Script. Eccles.  Ergo, these doctrines of Protestants are not Heresies; or, no doctrines of Protestants are. Or thus: Ergo those doctrines of Protestants which you in your Motive observe to have been the damned opinions of old Heretics, or those very Heresies which Philastrius supposeth to be Heresies, and are not. Now is there any air, or relish of true Logic, either natural or Scholastical in these Paral●gicall consequences?   

V Motive. Because the Prophecies of the Old Testament, touching the Conversion of Kings and Nations to the true Religion of Christ, have been accomplished in, and by the Catholic Roman Religion, and the Professors of it; and not by Protestant Religion, and the Professors of it.  
V Remotive. Kings and Nations have been, and may be converted by men of contrary Religions.  
V Promotive. Kings and Nations have been, and may be converted by men of contrary Religions. Ergo, it is not true, that the Prophecies touching the conversion of Kings etc. have been accomplished by the Catholic, and not by the Protestant Professors. This inference every Logician, or man of common sense sees, hath no force at all. But again, the force of the Motive consists in this: That those Prophecies concerning Conversions, have been actually fulfilled, in, and by the Catholic Roman Church; which is indeed a weighty inducement to believe that to be the true Church, foresignified by the spirit of God, wherein those signs wherewith God hath fore-marked and predesigned the true Church, are evident to be seen: then contrariwise, if those signs and marks of the true Church, are not to be found in the Protestant, this aught in reason to induce a man to believe that the Protestant is not the true Church. For where the connexion between the sign and the thing signed, is indivisible, there the inference is good, proceeding from the destruction of the sign, to the destruction, or denial of the thing signed or signified. As to say, here is not the indivisible sign: Ergo, here is not the thing signed. This I say, supposing such infallible Connexion, which in this case ought to be supposed such divine prediction, and the veracity of God being presupposed, which tieth the sign and the thing signed together by an inviolable and indissoluble knot. I say further; that it is false, that Nations have been converted to the true Religion of Christ, by men of contrary Religions; which thus I demonstrate. Those contrary Religions, or Professions of Religion though they might be both, or all false; yet both or all could not be true; as the Roman Orator saith well, pronouncing universally of dissenting opinions. Now, of the true Religion converting men to the true, there is no question; but of the contrary or repugnant to the true. Thus I argue: Either the Professors of a false Religion, taught and preached ' according to their false principles, or doctrine; and then by those, they never converted any to the true Religion; or else they taught true principles and true doctrine of Christian faith. If so; then, if by those true Principles etc. they converted men to Christian faith, though themselves were not true Christians, yet they converted, as agreeing and consenting with the true Religion, not as opposers, or as men of a contrary Religion. As if a heathen should baptise by applying the matter and form of baptism, with intention to do what Christians are wont to do, by the like application; than not Heathenism, but Christian Religion baptizeth by a Heathen.  
Nor can this Argument be retorted by the Protestant, for it will easily be made to appear that Catholics have converted Nations, to, and by those doctrines wherein they descent from protestants: whereas neither Protestants, nor any other oppugners of the Catholic, will ever be found to have converted Nations by preaching the doctrine wherein they disagree from the Catholic: but moreover as for the Protestants, they never converted any, neither by their disagreeing, nor agreeing doctrines.  
Nay even this confirms (if at any time it so fall out) the truth and efficacy of Christian Religion, and the accomplishment of those prophetic Predictions, when even the alien, or opposer of true Religion, who can achieve no one Conversion to Christianity by his own repugnant doctrine, can, and doth effect it, by virtue of Christian Truth: which, I say, this supposed, that any such Precedent may be cited out of antiquity of some Conversion to Christian Religion wrought by an alien Professor; though the entire Conversion of a nation, by any such separate instrument, I believe, hath no Precedent in ancient memory. For the reasons which I have touched heretofore, and, in a word, according to the ordinary and connatu●all course of divine proceed in such affairs, Non hos elegi● D●minus, 
See the Examples commonly alleged answered also in Authors.  God is not went to make choice of such men to be his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, (as S. Paul, and after him S. Denis speaks) his cooperators or coadjutors in the reduction of souls. This is too great an honour to be coserred upon an alion, or enemy of Religion.  
So then, your fifth Motive stands yet fast, and irremoved by you, like to some pillar which raised in the Church by some Architect, stands there fixed and firm, even when the workman is gone fare away, yea now perhaps dead and rotten; or as, while many a weary person leaning upon that pillar findeth case and rest, the drunken Artist receives no ease at all from it; but reels & stagger's in the wide field, until he fall dead drunk upon the ground, or into some ditch etc. Just so M. Advocate, — Hac à te non mult●m abludit imago, this is no bad picture of yourself.   

VI Motive. Because the Doctrine of the Church of Rome is conformable, and the doctrine of Protestants contrary, to the doctrine of the Fathers of the Primitive Church, even by the confession of the Protestants themselves; I mean those Fathers who lived within the compass of the first 600. years, to whom Protestants themselves do very frequently, and very confidently appeal.  
VI Remotive. The Doctrine of Papists, is confessed by Papists contrary to the Fathers in many points.  
VI Promotive. Nether will this Motive be removed with so weak a push, which thus I confirm. It is untrue, that any learned Papist confesseth, that the doctrine of faith of modern Papists, is contrary to the doctrine of the Fathers in any point of faith them defined by the Church. If from some they differ in some point now defined, than not defined; this is no formal contrariety in points of faith; that is, as they are points of faith obligatory to belief, which they are not before they be defined by the Church: which being the sole infallible interpreter of divine revelation, by propounding any point of doctrine as divinely revealed, makes it now formally the object of necessary belief, which was before only materially such.  
But neither again in regard of such differences is this contrariety of some opinions, between the modern Papists, and some of the ancient Fathers, any formal opposition. For since they so held those disserent doctrines then undefined, as being ready to let them go, when the Church should define the contrary; even in virtue of this readiness or preparation of mind, they held implicitly, and in a sort equivalently, the very same which we now hold, after the definition of the holy Church. But the Protestants Appeal to those Fathers of the first 600. years, is a very brag and imposture of a jewel, not worth one barley corn: 
Campian.  Neque hoc sibi, suisque vulnus inflictum Laurentius Humfredas' tacuit. For since in this uno tertio, in this middle term of submitting all our judgments & doctrines to the authority & decision of the Catholic Church, we join with the Fathers both of those 600. & all succeeding years, even to this present age; we cannot but meet in the conclusion of whatsoever doctrine of faith.  
As contrariwise, for want of this concurrence in one third, or middle term, all hopes of Protestants or any Sectary whatsoever, ever to join with those Orthodox Fathers, is spes Hypocritarum, a vain presumption, rather than any solid hope, as of such, who covet to make some show of agreement with those Peers of Christian Religion, thereby to procure applause, and approbation to their Heresies: being so fare indeed from any true agreement, or harmony with them, that they jar, even in what they hold with them; even in those very doctrines wherein they say the same which the Fathers say. The reason: because in all those doctrines of Fathers, this transcendent condition of a prepared and prompt submission, to whatsoever determination of the Church, is so permeant, and pertinent, and transfused throughout all their doctrines and sentences, as the very soul, and consistence of them; so that whatsoever doctrine of Heretics wanting this ingredient of a Catholic Submission, and Relation to the Church, can never be the same doctrine, nor agreeable with that of the Fathers, though it seem never so much the same in words: though invested, I say, in the same language and exterior signification; yet even so, they are but wolves in vestimentis ovium, in the skin and garments of sheep: which skin they put on, for no other end, nisi ut mactent & perdant, to kill & massacre the souls of such, who believe they are Orthodox, because they speak the language of the Fathers.  
This is then the distinctive sign, the spiritual mark and cognoisance, which infallibly proclaims them to be Heretics: this pertinacity in any single opinion of faith, yea in any one the least point of faith; this standing our against the authority of the Church, and refusal to submit, destroyeth the whole form, the very constitutive and distinctive Character of a Catholic subject. Howsoever he appear in all other points of Christian doctrine an Angel of light, by this you shall discern him, as by a cloven foot; with this submission no Heretical opinion, can make a man an Heretic: without, this, the whole Apostolic Creed cannot make him a Catholic, (si per impossibile) if it were possible, that such submission should be wanting in him who believes entirely the Apostolic Creed.   

VII. Motive. Because the first pretended reformers, had neither extraordinary commission from God, nor ordinary mission from the Church, to preach Protestant doctrine.  
VII. Remotive. The Pastors of a Church cannot but have authority from is, to preach against the abuses of it, whether in doctrine, or practise, if there be any in it etc.  
VII. Promotive. Extraordinary mission or commission is immediately from God: Ordinary mission or Commission is that which issueth immediately from man, placed in authority under God. Now to prove an ordinary mission or commission, is easily done by producing the testimony of that authority which sendeth, or granteth the commission. Extraordinary missions cannot be proved or manifested by ordinary manifestations; and being not proved, cannot oblige to acceptance, or belief. Now since to reform is an act of power and authority; and all power and authority is from God, whether mediately or immediately, hence it is, that no such act, can be legal or regular, and so effectual and valid of itself, without mission or commission, that is, without receiving such power or authority to reform, from him, who hath power to give it; that is, from God himself immediately, or mediately from his Officers.  
Since then those pretended Reformers had, or could prove no such mission or commission, neither immediately nor mediately from God, hence it followeth, that they had none at all: no authority. Psay, at all to reform the Church: Ergo their pretended Reformation, was an illegal, and irregular act of presumption.  
It is true, a Commission may be of two kinds respectively to circumstances: It may be either an express and formal commission, or interpretative only. The express and formal Commission is that, which I receive expressly granted by superior authority: Interpretatione I may call that, which though I have not expressly received from such authority; yet I prudently and undoubtingly suppose would be granted me in such circumstances of time, place etc. if the Superior had notice of them: upon which supposed and prudently presumed grant, yea and direct will of the Superior, I execute such an act of authority, as to reform, reprebend, teach, preach etc. Thus much premised: let us now consider this Remotive, or anti-Motine, what weight it hath in balance, with the Motive.  Remote. 
The Pastors of a Church cannot but have authority from it etc.  Promote. 
Beware of false dealing in the very entrance: A Church, denoteth a particular Church. The Catholic (which is the Universal Church, the whole mystical body whereof particular Churches, and every A Church are parts and members) is improperly styled A Church; but properly The Church: as The spouse of Christ, not A spouse, as though he had many spouse●● una est columba mea, perfecta mea; with which one Church, or perfect Spouse, particular Churches, yea particular souls are his Spouses, as they are one with her.  
Now it is true, that the Pastor of A Church, hath authority from The Church, to preach against the abuses of that particular Church when it swerveth either in doctrine or manners, from the law's or doctrine of the Catholic Church, to which it oweth Conformity. But then again the Pastor of A Church, is the sheep, not Pastor of The Church; therefore his preaching against The Church, is without all authority or commission, either from God or man; nay it is a prodigious presumption for any Christian subject to preach against the doctrine or practice of that Church, as against abuses, whose doctrine and practice, is his rule whereby to know what is abuse in either. For of the preposterous way of making the Scripture the Rule to discern such abuses by it, enough hath been already said, how absurd and groundless it is; especially when the point of doctrine which is imputed or traduced as abuse, is concerning the Scripture itself, or the true meaning or interpretation thereof, which no private Spirit or particular Pastor, hath authority do determine, against the Church.  Remote. 
Neither can any Christian want an ordinary commission from God, to do a necessary work of charity after a peaceable manner, when there is no body else that can, or will do it: In extraordinary cases, extraordinary courses are not to be disallowed.  Promote. 
Commission immediate from God, as granted to any subject with out all mediation, yea or approbation of his ordinary Superior, cannot be an ordinary commission; therefore it is not to be admitted or accepted, yea, or believed, without Precedent, proof, and manifestation, that it is from God, by extraordinary signs and testifications. Again; to undertake such a reformation, without any ordinary commission, or yet extraordinary, duly manifested to be such, and that in opposition against ordinary authority, cannot be peaceable; for peace cannot be where order and subordination is violated: therefore, non est pax impijs, dicit Dominus, wicked men enjoy not peace, because in, and by them as such, due order is subverted. For this cause also, this cannot be a work of Charity, being an act of dissension, and rebellion, and therefore of itself destructive, and subversive of Peace and Charity.  Remote. 
But when there is no body else, that can, or will do it etc.  Prom. 
When Martin Luther ran out of his Monastery, and ran into a Nunnery, made a strumpet of a Nun, and forthwith turned rebel, under the colour of reforming abuses in the Roman Church, there was not indeed another to be found, so very a miscreant, who could, and would do the like work of  Charity, although the breach now made, he was seconded by others: true; and most effectively, by that burnt Sacrifice of Geneva, who for his merit, might have been an holocaust. Him! Correctores! Behold the Reformers of the Roman Church with the true mark's and brand's of their extraordinary Mission, — Habeat iam Roma pudarem. blush Catholic Rome, for your abuses laid open to the world by these innocent Hieremies, these extraordinary Committees, or Missioners; For in extraordinary cases, extraordinary courses are not to be disallowed.  Remote. 
If some Christian Layman should come into a Country of Infidels, and had ability to persuade them to Christianity, who would say be might not use it for want of commission?  Prom. 
No man would say it, that I know: and as you M. Advocate put the case, you speak Law: for in this exigent, interpretative Commission from the Church to any Layman, (your self, for example) hath place; for the Church gives leave to any man to persuade Christianity, especially in such circumstances of necessity; yea and to make Christians too, by baptising. But now the application: What advantage hath your plea from this? Who can interpret, that any man hath a Commission from the Church to preach against the same Church? This can be no ordinary commission, as I have proved, nor extraordinary of any effect, or authority, until it be manifested by extraordinary testimony, which can be no other but true miracles.   

VIII. Motive. Because Luther to preach against the Mass, (which contains the most material points now in controversy) was persuaded by reasons suggested to him by the Devil himself disputing with him: so himself professeth in his Book de Missâ privata, that all men might take heed of following him, who professeth himself to follow the Devil.  
VIII. Remotive. ●●thers conference with the Devil might be, for aught I know, nothing but a melanchely dream etc.  
VIII. Promotive. — An qui amant ipsisibi somma fingunt? Surely 'tis you who dream that Luther dreamt, because you would have it so; otherwise you cannot choose but know by him, that he dreamt not, if you will believe him, who sutely knew whether he were waking or sleeping when the Devil courest him; otherwise you make the Devil a very dull and Phlegmatic courser. I have seen much coursing in my days, but never knew any man who slept while he was coursed; yet I cannot but admire your judgement, and discretion, that you rather believe Luther in what he teacheth against the Church, than what he testifieth of his own certain knowledge: but this was properly and providently added by you (for aught I know) for I think you were not present at the disputation; no, you were then but an Embrie of Protestantisme; no nor so much, but only existent in virtute causarum; so, for ought you know, it was nothing but a melancholy dream. Yea and perhaps, for ought you know, he wal'kt too in his sleep, when (as he confesseth of himself,) he oftentimes walked with the Devil in his bedchamber; that some of his Devils with whom he conversed so familiarly, were brave Devils, Doctors of divinity, Doctors of the Chair among the Devils; this he dreamed too. Now I verily suspect these were the disputant Devils, who disputed him out of the Mass: and being such great Doctors of Divinity, sure, they would scorn to take hold of such an advantage to dispute with him while he slept. For they, no doubt, intended a victory, which had been none if he had been a sleep while they disputed; therefore I verily think, he was broad-waking, as he himself teaches.  
But did he indeed, trow you M. Advocate, eat so much salt with the Devil, as he saith he did? It little appears by this▪ or did he but dream he eat salt, too? For surely, he was a very freshman in divinity, who would be driven out of his saith by a dream; or because he could not defend it against the Devil waking, he sleeping. But since you reserve so many evasions to escape this Devilish disputation with Luther, as not denying that he had such a Conference, even waking, with the waking Devil, but that it might be otherwise; & then again (for aught you know,) we will press you no further with this; yet when you made this Conference of Luther with the Devil your Motive, not to believe Luther's doctrine, authorized or suggested by the Devil, you then knew no more, than now you know, that is, for ought you knew, it might be but a melancholy dream: so this part of your Motive stands in the same force which then it had.  Remote. 
But if it were real, the Devil might persuade Luther from the mass, hoping by doing so, to keep him constant to it.  Prom. 
Certainly you have taught the Devil a lesson of Policy, for which he will think himself obliged to teach you many. In the mean time, this is a very transcendent answer, and appliable to many a solid blasphemy. If the Devil had persuaded Luther to preach against the Blessed Trinity, (as whosoever preacheth or teacheth against it, may be presumed, I think, to do it by his persuasion, and somewhat to this purpose I have heard whispered of a certain Socinian, who stickles for Protestancy) why might not a Socinian, or Antitrinitarian answer to this likewise, that the Devil persuaded him this, to keep him more constant to the belief of the Trinity? So likewise if Arius were said to have been persuaded by the Devil's arguments to preach, or write against the Equality, or Consubstantiality of the Son of God, with God the Father; why might not the Arian to whom this should be objected, answer, the Devil did it, to keep him more constant to the belief of Consubstantiality?  
Sir, I am sorry you are become so private and inward with the Devil, that you can dive into his intentions, and acquaint yourself with them, better, than he who had eat so much salt with him; who had his company at bed and board, as daily, and as nightly, as his own reveyled Catharine. But do you not see, what a gap you lay open to a most outrageous blasphemy, when you teach Heretics, to make the Devil a Gateghist, and an Apostle of Christian doctrine; and what he doth himself, he might do by others, his instruments? So then the offspring and posterity of those Heretics who denied, that the son of God suffered death upon the cross, might be said to have been persuaded by the Devil to preach that denial, to the end to keep them closer to the belief of Christ's Passion.  
Now, I see you so wholly taken up in your extraordinary missions, and extraordinary Courses, that I doubt you will reject, or deride what I shall propose concerning the Devil's ordinary missions: Otherwise I should hope to move you to believe, that the Devil's Apostles doindeed believe the Devil, and execute his charges and commands in preaching false Doctrines. And as S. Paul could say, S●io cui credidi, I know whom I have believed; so could Luther: & that he was not God whom he believed, may partly appear, by that his ingenuous acknowledgement so notoriously celebrated, Nec propter Deum incepi, nec propter Deundefinam; I began not for God, nor will I end for God. For as the spirit of God, yea and holy Angels, have their secret immissions, influxions, impulsions upon the souls of good Christians, and work them by degrees, to conformity of their understandings and wills, to theirs; in such sort, that those holy Conformists deserve themselves to be called Angels, as we read of S. Baptist, and others; by reason also of which Conformity, it is said in general terms, qui adharet Deo, unus spiritus fit cum eo; he who cleaveth to God, becomes one spirit with him: so hath the Devil his ordinary immissions, illusions, and suggestions into a foul, which, deadly sin wrought up at length to the ripeness of some desperate heresy, or infidelity, hath opened unto him, and delivered him the keys of the hart, and all the doors of senses; who forthwith takes possession, and revel's there, & commands as in his own; until at last by his daily and customary instigations, suggestions and illusions, he hath affected the like Conformity of judgement and affection; and bringeth such a man to so near a resemblance and similitude of himself, that he may worthily be called a Devil, as judas was by our Saviour: Non●e ego res elegi duodecim, & rnus exvobis diabolus est?  
I have read a sentence of Trism●gis●us to this purpose, Quand● damon in h●manam ins●uit animam, semina propria notiovis inspergit, when the Devil inflow's into the soul of a man, he spawn●● the seeds of his proper notion there; and who can expect from such seed, or spawn, any other but a Divellesh fry, which shall resemble the parent in notions and affections? and shall therefore execute his will, not as, aliud agentes, or, praeter intentionem, not intending it, as the Devil oftentimes executes God's will, but with the very same intention, and affection; as our Saviour not obscurely teacheth, Vos quae vidistis apud Patrem vestrum facitis, 
joan 8.  you do as you have seen, and learned of your father. And again, Vos facitis opera Patrisvestri, you do the works of your father: and that they do them willingly, purposely, & intendingly, he expresseth more plainly in the words following; Vos ex Patre Diabolo estis, & desideria Patris vestri vultis facere; the Devil is your father, and you will accomplish his desires.  
Now certainly if ever he had an obsequious child or servant with whom he might deal confidently and openly, not covertly, persuading one thing and intending another; Luther was the man in whom he might confide; 
Theolog. Tigur. Confessed. Germ. Hospinian. histor. Sacrament.  and who would run whither he would bid him go, and preach on the top of the house, what he had learned of him in his Closet; and that de facto he taught false and reprobate doctrines, the most learned Protestants testify.  
These things put together and considered; that the Devil is the author of lies; that he hath his false Prophets, by whom he preacheth them for truths; that he hath them at his command etc. we have reason to make the Devil's dissuading the Mass, and his persuading Luther to preach against it, some probable Motive (as you heretofore) to persist in the received doctrine of the Church, rather than to be persuaded by the Devil, to the contrary doctrine of Protestants.  Rem. 
Or the Devil might persuade Luther from the Mass, hoping that others would make his dissuasion from it, an argument for it, (as we see Papists do) and be afraid of following Luther, as confessing himself, to have been persuaded by the Devil.  Prom. 
You endear the Devil still more and more, by the honour you do him. First you have made him an Apostle, and preacher of true Christian doctrine (as you suppose it,) and now you make him also a true Prophet, who foresaw the Catholics would not believe his doctrine, and so would persist in their former belief. They do not believe him indeed; nor you, who teach the same doctrine which the Devil did. And I hope, Sir, you will pardon our scruple; our scruple, I say, to believe the Devil rather than the Catholic Church. If you do not pardon us this, indifferent men will think you unreasonable, who expect we should pardon you, who make a scruple to believe the Church, rather than the Devil. What would you have us do? You know, Sir, according to the principles of sceptics and Soctuians, opinions are carried to and fro upon the wheels of affections some men are more scrupulous than others; and some make a scruple of one thing, some of another, as they are diversely affected towards she matter of their scruples. Catholics (for this is a Catholic scruple, not flowing from any single, or particular fancy,) stand affected towards the judgement of the Catholic Church; therefore (according to the Sceptic way of Philosophers) they make a scruple to follow the devil's doctrine, and to fly from the doctrine of the Churchy you, out of a contrary affection, make a scruple to relinquish the Devil's doctrine, to follow the Church. 
— Quot capitum viwnt, totidem studiorum  
Millia.—  Well Sir, you may live to remember you had a fair warning given you by yourself, to take heed of following him, who professeth himself to follow the Devil. So this eight Motive stands yet in force, and may move others; yea, and will one day, I dare say, moon you too, at least to a Phrygian repentance.   

IX. Motive. Because the Protestant cause is now, and hath been from the beginning, maintained with gross falsifications, and calumnies, whereof their prime Controversy-writers, are noteriously, and in a high degree guilty.  
IX. Remotive.— Ilia●●s intra ●●tres peccatur & extra. Papist's are more guilty of this, than the Protestants. Even this very Author, in this very Pamphlet, hath not so many lea●es, at falsications and calumnias.  
IX. Promotive. To this ninth Remotive, I know some will say, — Iliac●s intra mures mentitur & extra: Within and without the Treian, or Roman wall's he doth the same thing; he deserves the whetstone, in his own judgement; and therefore he gives and takes it to himself, as is manifest by the Parallel of his Motives, and Remotives, in those, within; in these, without the wall's. Let us first declare what we understand by falsifications: the same, which you no doubt understood in your Motive, when it moved you, that is, testimonies or authorities of Scriptures, Fathers etc. falsely alleged; Sentences or doctrines of Scriptures, Fathers, or whosoever quoted and cited as theirs which are not to be found in them. Of which kind of falsifications our Catholic Writers from the beginning of Protestancy, have discovered almost innumerable, and those unanswerable, and unexcusable, whereof yourself, Sir, when you were intra mures, at least in inclination, or show, or I know not how, were a part of testimony, and an eye-witness, (or else you verified my Verse.) And even concerning this very Writer, whose sword and buckler you are now, there are who remember your observation, when you said, malum omen, having met with a manifest falsification, in the very beginning of his answer to Charity-Mistaken; though now, you are become, 
— Recantatis amicus  
Oppr●brijs;—  since he is in your books, and your commodity in his Cellar's — Vincunt & benefacta feras. Verily such false and fraudulent dealing in a bufines of this religious consequence, and therefore to be treated with all reverence and religiosity, aught to be a strong Motive, to lead any prudent and indifferent man, into jealousy and suspicion of such a cause, and the maintainers of it; that neither the cause is the cause of Truth, which needs the patronage and defence of lies; nor the maintainers, men of a conscientious spirit, who can take upon them, the impudence, to be the public Authors of such.  
Therefore the Catholic Writers have taken pains to manifest these falsities, not in gross, as you do here; but by retail, particularly, and namely, as hic & nu●●: here they falsify, in this sentence, in this very authority, misalleaged, where no probable mistake can be their apology: which if you could do, as they give you example, you would have done it; you, who have made calumnies, of sober Verities, sophisms, of plain and evident deductions, you would not have omitted to lay hold upon some of those so many falsifications, to have made your Adversary as odious, and faithless, as you could wish. But you have found none, you can object none, particularly, and namely, no not one. You know, you cannot do it, and even here you falsify your own testimony. I demonstrate you cannot do it, because you do it not; which in you, who attempt to do more than you can, to all advantage of your cause and disparagement of your Adversary, is indeed an evident demonstration; as many falsications etc. as leaves, and nor show one? O ridiculous Hyperbole, and most negligent Calumny! we see those leaves, we see your most, prying perusal of them: nor blame I that; but you who have the ey'sof an Eagle, or Aesculapian snake, by which you see the least mote in your Adversary's eye, could so great a beam have escaped your notice or discovery?  
And for the number of Calumnies which you object (and those jointly with falsifications) and this purposely, because you can easily by your wilful mistaking, and misinterpreting your adversary's words, make up some number of Calumnies, where there are truly none: (so that if pretended falsifications stand but as Cypher's, yet they will serve to double, or triple the number of both) yet I dare avouch, let any man compare this your Adversary's little Pamphlet, with your great Pamphlet, his falsifications and calumnies will stand like Cypher's with yours, to make yours numberless. Yet howsoever, you have not purged your prime Controversy-writers, whom in your Motive you censure as notoriously guilty of falsifications and calumnies: no, this aspersion stick's fast upon them still, nor will it be wiped of, by casting the like upon others: Clodius accusat Maches, Catilina Cetheges. Yet neither those Machi, nor Cethegi, are therefore guiltless, because Clodius, or Catilive are guilty of the same crimes; and this, were the accusation, or crime by you objected against protestant-Writers, by you the same, truly recriminated in Catholic Authors. And all men know by experience, that even in false crimes, it is much more easy to sprinkle any man's reputation with discredit, then to wipe it out again.  
X. Motive. Because by denying all humane authority, either of Pope, or Counsels, or Church, to determine controversies of saith, they have abolished all possible means, of suppressing Heresies, or restoring Unity to the Church.  
X. Remotive. Lot all men believe the Scripture, and that only; and endeavour to be●●eue is in the true sense, and require no more of others: and they shall find this, not only a better, but the only means, to suppress Heresy, and restore Unity etc.  
X. Promotive. ti's easy to perceive that you have tasted honey with Ion●tha●, since your return from Troy, your eyes are now so open, & illuminate: when you have eaten more fully, you will do marvels. Nor is this a petty marvel, that you have recovered, what was abolished, and have reduced not only to possibility, but to existence and actuality, the means of suppressing Heresies etc. without either Pope, or Church, or Councel●; which, before you had tasted honey, seemed impossible to your understanding.  
The secret forces and virtues of nature, say the Alchemist, & natural Magician, are discovered by vexation of Nature. After much vexation and toiling of your brain and body by your so many turns and returns to, and from Religion, you have found at length the Ariadne's thread, of a most manifest direction. Which thread of direction, so often offered to your hand's, spun out of the bowells of all Adversaries of the Catholic Church, as ordinary as cobwebb's, I wonder much how you saw it no sooner. It is evident, you have tasted honey.  
For what more ordinary Rendezvous of all Heretics than Provocation from the Church to Scripture? But, no; we are deceived; for in this way of discourse, wherein you reject all ordinary means of suppressing Heresies, you take a shorter course to abolish Heresy itself; yea to exterminate the very name and essence of it è rerum naturâ, out of the world, nay out of the understanding of man, that there shall not remain the very notion or definition of it; which is a more universal and total abolition and suppression, then if the whole world were regested and reconfounded into the first Chaos, or nothing, of it.  
For how can there be, or ever have been any such thing as Heresy in coherence with this discourse? For was there ever Heretic who could not pretend his endeavour to understand the Scripture in the true sense? yea, and sufficient endeavour, (excluding the authority of the Church, Counsels etc. by employing all the forces of his natural wit & personal abilities? & who can say he employed not his endeavour by all these? Then this endeavour only supposed, though he believed the Scriptures in a false sense, and upon that false sense grounded false doctrine, even repugnant to Christian faith, yet he was no Heretic by you; nay they did him wrong who would molest him any further, or require any other belief at his hands.  
Who can say now, that Arius was an Heretic? or Eutyches an Heretic? or Manichaus an Heretic? Who can say that any of those anciently condemned Heretics endeavoured not sufficiently, by all other means, within the compass of their abilities (Pope, Council, and Church excepted) to find out the true sense of the Scripture, or to believe it, in the true sense?  
Remote. For he that believes the Scripture sincerely, and endeavours to believe it in the true sense, cannot possibly be an Heretic.  
Promote. Who shall now be able to judge, or condemn any Heretic? After what manner shall he frame his indictment? Who shall be able to convince a sincere Professor, him or her, who professeth sufficiently his endeavour, to believe Scripture in the true sense, by his most daily versing and conversing with it, his most punctual citation of Book, Chapter, and Verse; who will hardly exchange an ordinary salutation, but in the Scripture-phrase; who I say shall be able to convince his want of endeavour to believe the Scripture in the true sense, especially being required to believe that only, and no man living, nor nothing else? who can condemn him for an Heretic, whatsoever he believe, or believe not?  
Tell me Advocate, is this the way whereby to meet in that one Rendezvous, 
Ephes. 4.  of which S. Paul, Denes occuramus omnes in unitatem fidei? these as many several beliefs, as several, or divers, or contrary understandings of the Scriptures? these so many ways, some on the left, some on the right hand, some forward, some quite backward, besides a thousand subdivisious of so many several ways of doctrines and interpretations? Where fall they into one way? Yes; you point me out the very place, where after many wynding, and Meanders, they fall as rivers into one Sea, that is the Scripture endeavoured to be believed in the true sense. But good Sir, Scripture in all those senses is not Scripture, is not the word of God; neither doth any man's endeavour to believe it in the true sense, make it the word of God, as it is understood, in a false.  
But it is the word of God, you will say, perhaps, to them who conceive it so. But so might Baal, and Astaroth, and jeroboam Calves be Gods to those who believed they were; so there is no Idolatry at all. And certainly as well no Idolatry, as no Heresy: and heresy itself is a spiritual Idolatry. So every falsehood as believed to be revealed by God, and warranted by holy Scripture is an I doll of the Understanding; and an I doll as such, is nothing, 
S. Paul.  hath no real subsistence, is a mere fancy or Chimaera. What an unity then of faith, will this be, consisting of so many divisions? what a strange harmony composed of so many jarring discords? may not a man dream as good a Faith, and as good an unity of religion as this is? 
— Cuius, velut agri somnia, vana  
Finguntur species, ut nec pes, nec caput rui  
Reddatur forma.  Furthermore it is manifest, that such an unity of faith, cannot stand with trne Unity of Charity. For even naturally affections of the will follow in proportion of sympathy, the judgements & dict a men's of the Understanding. So dissension of judgements hath ever been, and is, and will be the seed and parent of inter-warring, and hostile affections, as between the Lutherans and Caluinists.  
Moreover, Charity is candida and rubicunda, of a light and fiery constitution, Ignem veni mittere in mundum; and sent it was in fiery Tongues. Now, Candour and Heat are so natured and tempered according to physiology, and experience itself, that they sever, and disiect, and dissolve Heterogeneous copulations, which dark cold amasseth together: So divine Charity, where it groweth from the root of united faith, dissolveth not only contradictory doctrines in points of Faith, with which it cannot consist on both sides; and that by an instantaneous mutation, as the sunshine dispels darkness in a moment; but more and more as it increaseth, attoneth differences of less consequence, as interposed clouds, impeaching greater heat, and radiancy of Charity.  
Remote. And if no more than this were required of a man, to make him capable of the Church's Communion; then all men so qualified though they were different in opinion, yet notwithstanding any such difference, must be of necessity one in Communion.  
Prom. Lo, you the Man, who I foresaw would do marvels: and is not this a compelle intrare strangely interpreted? A great business hath been made in requiry after lost-sheep, such as had strayed from the flock of Christ; such as our Forefathers have always supposed Heretics to be; so much a do, so much weariness in labouring their reduction, so frequent and earnest prayer, and pealing heaven with sighs and groans of a Christian zeal and Charity; so much fasting and voluntary maceration, directed to that end; so many hazardous expeditions & adventures in this spiritual quest, of such as have attempted their recovery to the very loss of their blood and lives: Now all this is proclaimed folly and lost labour; our Forefathers silly Babes, and sons of Ignorance, compared with a late borne Doctor, dropped out of the skies, God knows how, to fetch back those lost sheep, though never so far straggling a sunder; never so opposite, and oppugnant; and even whether they will or no, to make them of necessity of one Communion and one Church: Nay, wheresoever they be, never so far from the fold, yet they must be within it of necessity; he hath found a means to encircle them with an Ocean, with an Amphitrite of Scripture, yea to ingird them with the very strings of a Geneva-bible.  
Nor will he fetch in those above ground only; he will rake Hell to find them out, and bring them into his Church's Communion, even maugre Hell, and maugre themselves, were it not only to be out of Hell for the tyme.  
For what sayest thou Arius? Hadst thou not Scriptures for for thy opinion? Yes; and didst thou not endeavour to believe them in the true sense? Yes. Come, thou art a good Christian; thou must be one in our Communion, thou hast been injured, furto sublatus es è terrâ Hebraeorum, 
Gen. 4.  & hic innocent in lacum missus es, the Papists ejected thee by a prevailing faction, and now hither they have sent thee, to be the Devil's Prisoner.  
And thou Donatus; thou couldst not abide the Pope no more than I. What sayest thou, didst thou believe the Scriptures? Yes; and didst thou not endeavour to believe them in the true sense? Yes. And hadst thou not Scripture for thy doctrine? Yes; very good Scripture: judica mihi etc. ubi pascas, ubi cubes in meridie; by this Scripture, and by the elevation of the Pole, and the meridian line, I believed the Church could not but be in afric, and if in afric, then surely in part Dovati. I promise you, a very good Christian; you have both Scripture, and right reason grounded upon Scripture, and your deduction is according to the never-failing-rules of Logic; at least you thought so, did you not? Yes M. Advocate. And that thought, or judgement of yours was never convinced with any argument, which in your judgement was unanswerable? No, I was never so silenced, but I had something to say. So, you remained still vnconuinced? To my dying day, Syr. Good Sir, neither do I go about to convince you, you are as good a Christian, as I am, for aught I know. Let me alone with the Papists; I'll presume to re-enter, and re-enrole you in Communion of Christians: let them do what they can, you shallbe postliminie restitutus: I'll break a hole in the Church wall, & bring you in that way; & if the worst come to the worst, and if the Papists will be unreasonably obstinate, you shall be one of our New Academy, and gear all Religions.  
Pardon me M. Advocate, if I seem to personate you in this Dialogue; if I make bold to entertain you in the behalf of those anciently styled Heretics: your Charity, as widely extending (I suppose) as your faith, hath created in me a just Presumption, that you will reject no Client so qualified, as yourself have described. Within the limit's and precincts of which description, I verily think, there never was so very a Terrae filius, so very a Giant, of so ignoble and obscure extraction, no man ever so outlawed, or bandited out of all Christian Communion, of all those foredamned Heretics, but he could make it appear, that he had lived and died, and consequently, a Diocesian of your Church.  
But even these are too narrow marches for your Charity, it will extend itself yet further: Turks, jews, Infidels, and Heathens too, so they believe a God, as shall appear hereafter; all which, no doubt, you will oblige unto you, no less than him, or those who gave you thanks, for showing them a way to heaven without Faith.  
Thus fare I have played the Promoter, (if any man will take this occasion to call me so) but then let him remember, that I am his Promoter, whom we may suppose to have been the first Mover in these Motives; which, as all moving Verities may truly say, in ipso vivimus, & movemur, & sumus. 
Act. 17.  Then let him who list, call me God's Promoter. Iglory in this name. I profess it nor will I be ashamed of my Profession.  
Thus even the Apostles, as they were his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, his cooperators, or coadjutors, so they were God's Promoters: N●me autem vestrum patiatur quasi homicida, 
1. Pet. 4.  aut fur, aut maleficus, aut alienorum explorator (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I think, we may interpret it an Informer.) Let no man suffer himself deservedly to be called such a Promoter, si autem ut Christianus, non crubescat, if as a Christian Promoter, let him hear it without blushing: For this is our comfort as daily as the crime, 
2. Cor. 6.  ut Seductores, & Veraces. This, by way of Prevention.    
FINIS.   

Gentle Reader.  
THE faults which have escaped in printing (by reason of the uncorrected copy, and employing of strangers not skilful in our language) I hope are not very many, nor yet such, as may not easily be corrected, by thy judicious Reading.