QVI NON CREDIT CONDEMNABITUR MARC. 16.  
OR A discourse proving, that a man who believeth in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. & yet believeth not all other inferior articles of Christian faith, cannot be saved.  
AND Consequently, that both the Catholic, and the Protestant (seeing the one necessarily wanteth true faith) cannot be saved.  
Written by WILLIAM SMITH, Priest.  
He that believeth not, shallbe condemned. Marc. 16.  
Without faith it is impossible to please God. Heb. 11.  
AT S. OMERS For john Heigham, with permission, Anno 1625.   

THE EPISTLE DEDICATORY TO THE READER.  
GOod Reader, such are the lamentable times, wherein we live, as that they not only bring forth men, who with great contention, and heat of dispute, do undertake to maintain particular Error, directly repugnant to the Scripture, and the judgement of Christ his Church; but also, they afford some others who (as if wickedness would strive to raise itself to its highest pitch) are not afraid to entertain all Religions with such a cold indifferency, as that they would, that salvation may be obtained in any Religion; so that the professors thereof do believe in the Trinity, the Incarnation, & other such fundamental points of Christianity, whether they be Papists, Protestants, Anabaptists, Brownists, or any other of these later Sects: They hereupon further do teach, that we are not obliged (under the pain of any spiritual loss) to embrace any one of these Religions before another, scornfully traducing in their conceits all others, who exact a more strict and articulate belief of our Christian mysteries: which later kind of men is far more dangerous and hurtful, than the former; since those our of a preposterous zeal (their understanding being blinded and misinformed) do only defend falsehoods for verityes, so running themselves upon that rock of Tertullian: Haeresis est, probata non credere, non probata praesumere. It is the propriety of Heresy, not to believe points proved, and to presume or take for granted, things not proved. Whereas these Adiaphorists (whose secret pulse doth indeed beat upon Atheism) disclaim from all necessity of truth, justifying the defence of errors even under the title of errors, and holding only this one main controversy in Christian Religion, to wit, that in Christian Religion there are no main controversies. Against these ambidexter Protestants (so to call them) who draw their soul's perdition in the ropes of a supine and careless security, I have thought good to undergo the writing of this short ensuing Treatise. The subject of which discourse I find most necessary even from my own experience, who for the space of thirty years and above (with infinite thankes to God) have been a Priest of the Catholic Roman Church, during which long compass of time, I have dealt with many souls here in England; and have found infinite of them openly professing Protestancy, yet inwardly persuaded (as is above touched) that men of most contrary faiths (so that in gross they believe in Christ) may be saved; as if salvation were a Centre, indifferently extending its lines, to the circumference of all Religions: yea diverse of these men were not ashamed to contest with me in the open defence of this wicked opinion; and fortifying themselves principally with this following reason.  
2. God (say they) is most merciful, and therefore it would be much repugnant to his infinite mercy, to dam for all eternity, any man that beleiueth in him, and in jesus Christ, as his Redeemer; so that withal he forbear doing of all wrong, but lead a virtuous (or at least, a moral) life, though in other articles of less importance he may err. To this I answer, with the Apostle. 
(a) Rom. cap. 11.  O altitudo divitiarum sapientiae & scientiae Dei! God's judgements are inscrutable, and to be admired, not to be overcuriously pried into. If it was his divine pleasure, for many ages to make choice only of the jewish Nation (a very handful to the whole earth) for his elected people, and to suffer all the rest of the world (generaly speaking) to lie drowned in Idolatry, and therefore to be damned. And if also after our Saviour's Incarnation, he vouchafed not, for the space of many ages, to enlighten whole Countries with the Gospel of Christ, but permitted them to continue (to their souls eternal perdition) in their former Idolatry & Heathenism; yea suffering even to this very day (and how long yet after, his divine Majesty only knoweth) diverse vast Countries to persevere in their foresaid Infidelity, if (I say) this proceeding in God is best liking to himself, and that for the same he cannot be truly charged with Injustice or cruelty, seeing he gave them sufficient means of salvation by the law of Nature, and did not withdraw from them grace sufficient leaving them thereby without excuse. Then much less can any man expostulate God of injustice or want of mercy (for his divine goodness is nothing but justice and mercy itself) if he suffer men to perish eternally, and damn them for want of an entire, complete, and perfect faith in all the articles of Christianity; especially in these times, when no Christian can pretend for excuse any invincible ignorance in matters of faith by reason that the true articles of Christian Religion, are sufficiently propounded and diuulged by God's Church, to all Christians whatsoever; therefore touching Gods secret judgements and disposales herein, we will conclude with 
(b) Cap. 30  Esay: Deus iudicij Dominus.  
3. This then being thus, from hence it appeareth, how much the Protestants wrong the Catholics in charging them with want of charity, for holding that Protestants dying Protestants, cannot be saved, whereas on the contrary part, diverse learned Protestants do (say they) grant the hope of salvation to Catholics or Papists, dying Papists. To this we reply, that here is no want of Charity, but rather a Seraphical and burning Charity; for what greater charity can there be, than (seeing it is an indisputable verity, that men dying in a false & heretical faith cannot be saved) to premonishe and forewarn withal convenient sedulity & endeavour, opportunè, importunè, their Christian Brethren of so great a danger, as the perdition of their souls cometh unto? No, the souls interminable and endless weal or woe, is not a matter of compliment, that so for ceremony sake it is to be forborn to be inculcated and often spoken of, especially where the most certanie truth of the matter insisted upon, & the charitable conscience of the speaker, do warrant the discourse. And if Catholics must be accounted uncharitable for these their admonitions, then by the same reason they must insimulate the Apostle of the said fault of want of Charity, who 
(c) Tit. c. 3. 2. Thessaly 3.  severely chargeth us to fly the company and society of an Heretic; and who rangeth 
(d) Gall. cap. 5. & Rom. 16.  schisms and heresies among those sins, the workers whereof shall not obtain the kingdom of God. But to return more particularly to the subject of this Treatise: I have thought good to entitle it with the words of our Saviour: Qui non credit, condemnabitur. 
(e) Marc. 16.  He that beleiueth not, shallbe condemned; as being a sentence, which best sorteth to the matter here handled, and which indeed really (though briefly) involueth in itself the truth here discussed. The source, from whence this Libertinism belief did take its first emanation and flowing, is the contempt of the authority of the Catholic Church: for thus reasoneth our Newtralist in Doctrine.  
4. Both Papists and Protestants do agree in believing the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Paession etc. but they mainly descent touching Purgatory, Praying to Saints, Freewill, the sacrifice of the Mass, justification etc. therefore I will embrace and follow that doctrine (meaning the doctrine of the Trinity, the Incarnation, Passion etc. and hold it necessary to salvation, in which all sides do agree. But since the dissensions and disagreements in Religion, are of these secondary & less principal points, to wit, Purgatory, Praying to Saints etc. and since it is impossible, that both the Papist and Protestant, should teach truly in the said articles, (for they teach mere contrary doctrines therein.) And further seeing I have no more reason to believe the one side then the other (and it is impossible for me to believe both) therefore my resolution is (contemning the authority of God's Church in its definitions of these articles) peremptorily to stand to neither, but will hold the doctrine of Purgatory, Praying to Saints, and all other controverted points of faith at this day, between Papists and Protestants, matters merely of indifferency, and of that nature, as that neither the true nor false belief of them, can either further or hinder a man's salvation. Thus disputeth our Newtralist. And thus whilst he willbe of all Religions, he willbe of no Religion. Then which (as if Religion were only, but an intentional, and no real name or word) what can be invented more impious and Atheistical in itself, more repugnant to sacred scriptures, more cross to the practice of all antiquity, and (as hereafter shallbe proved) more adveise to all natural reason? so dangerous it is for a Christian once to dismember himself by pertinacy of judgement from the Church of Christ; and so truly is verified of such a man, that sentence of Optatus: Deserta 
(f) Lib. contra Parmentan.  matre Catholica impij filij, dum foras excurrunt & se separant & errando rebelles abscedunt. Our mother the Catholic Church being once forsaken, her wicked children do go out and departed from her, and thus being become Rebels through erring, do hide themselves. Thus we see, how these all reconciling Omnifidians, do carry themselves, who through the pretended immensity of their pretended charity (forsooth) can promise salvations to all Religions, and who seek to introduce a peace into God's Church (by compounding all controversies of faith) fare more dangerous, then are the wars & contentions of Heretics.  
5. Now seeing all such men make no more account of diversity of Religions, than others do of wearing suits of apparel of different colours; and seeing by such their lukewamenes in matters of faith, they seem to be all Laodiceans, therefore we may azure ourselves, that the commination and threat denounced against the Church of Laodicea registered by the 
(g) Apoc. cap. 3.  Evangelist shall (without final repentance) fall upon them: Because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold, nor hot, I will vomit thee out of my mouth. But (good Reader) as unwilling to transgress the accustomed limits of a preface, I will detain thee no longer; only I have thought good to put thee in mind (and so to end) with the sentence and judgement of Saint Augustine passed upon the Pelagians (as for some delibation and taste of the subject hereafter handled) who believed in the Trinity, in Christ, and his Passion, were men of moral and honest conversation; yet for holding that only by the force of nature, without the assistance of God's grace, a man was able to exercise virtue and fly vice, (a point no more fundamental than most of the controversies between the Catholics and the Protestants) they are registered for Heretics by the said S. Augustine, & consequently not to be in state of Salvation: his words 
(h) Epist. 129. ●37.  are these: Nec tales sunt Pelagiani, quos facile contemnas, sed continenter viventes, atque in bonis operibus laudabiles; nec falsum Christum, sed unum verum equalemque patri & coeter num, veraciterque hominem factum, & venisse credentes, & venturum expectantes: sed tamen ignorantes Dei iustitiam, suam constituere volentes, Heretici sunt. In English thus: Neither are the Pelagians such men, as are easily to be contemned for they do live continently, and are laudable for their good works. They further do believe, not in a false Christ, but in one true Christ who is equal & coeternal with his father, and who was truly made man, They believe, that he is already come, and they expect him hereafter to come; yet because they are ignorant of the justice of God, and would make it their own justice, (meaning, because they taught it might be obtained by their own natural force) therefore they are Heretics. Thus fare Saint Augustine, with whom I end; leaving thee (Good Reader) to the deliberate and studious perusal of these ensuing leaves, and entreating most earnestly the prayers of all good Catholics for the remission of my manifold and infinite sins, and for an happy hour of the dissolution of my old and decayed body.  
Your souls well-wishing friend William Smith.   

QVI NON CREDIT CONDEMNABITUR MARC. 16.  

That a man, who believeth in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. and yet believeth not all other articles of Christian Faith, cannot be saved. And first of the definition of Heresy and an Heretic. CHAP. I.  
BEFORE we come (Good Reader) to dispute particularly of the subject of this discourse, I hold it most convenient, in place of a short Prologomenon, or Preface, to prefix and set down, the true definition of Heresy, or an Heretic; since this method will give light to the whole ensuing Treatise, and will best manifest, what opinions be Heresies, and what men Heretics; and consequently (seeing heresy is incompatible with salvation, & cannot stand with the purchase of heaven) will demonstrate, that not any one Religion professing the name of Christians, though it maintaineth but one heresy, can justly promise to itself, the hope of salvation or eternal life. Well then Heresy, or Heresis (as we term it in latin) is a greek word, signifying as much as Electio, Election or choice, coming of the greek Verb aireo, in latin Eligo, to choose or make choice of. So as this word Haeresis, originally and primatively, signifieth election or choice (as is said) in general; yet because they, who divide themselves by maintaining false opinions from the Church of Christ, do make choice of these their new opinions, and so thereby do separate themselves from the Church; therefore this word Haeresis (losing its former general signification) is restrained by the Apostles, and the ancient Fathers, through an Ecclesiastical use and acceptance (which course we find holden in diverse other words, as the words Apostolus, Christus, Baptisma, and many other now taken by the Church in a secondary acception) to signify any false and new opinion, or Religion, of which a man maketh choice, and pertinaciously defendeth it against the Church of God; & the maintainours thereof, are commonly stilled Heretics. Thus Heresy (in its true and Ecclesiastical definition) is any false opinion touching faith and Religion, contumaciously defended against God, and his Church. This definition (I mean in taking the word Haeresis and Haereticus, in this restrained sense) is warranted by the Apostle, by the ancient Fathers. And lastly (to omit the like acknowledgement of the Catholics) by the learned Protestants. By the Apostle; for thus we find him to say: There must be Heresies among you, that they which are approved among you, may be known 1. Cor. 11. As also: A man that is an Heretic, after the first and second admonition, avoid. Tit. 3. And finally: Those which were of the heresy of the Sadduces, laid hands upon the Apostles. Act. 5.  
2. By the ancient Fathers. For S. Hierome in cap. 3. ad Tit. showing the difference between heresy and schism, thus defineth heresy: Haeresis est, quae perversum dogma habet. Heresy is that which containeth a perverse and froward opinion. And S. Augustine in like manner lib. de fide & simbolo cap. 10. defineth heresy in these words: Haeretici sunt, qui de Deo falsa sentiendo fidem violant: Heretics are those, who do violate their faith by holding false opinions touching God. By the Protestants: for to name one or two among many, M. Ormerod (a most forward Protestant) thus defineth an Heretic: He is an Heretic, who so swerveth from the wholesome doctrine, as contemning the judgement of God and the Church, persisteth in his opinion, Dialog. 2. with whom conspireth D. Covell, saying: Heretics are they, who directly gainsay some article of our faith. Exam. p. 199.  
3. Now out of this former definition of heresy, I am to premonish thee good Reader of two points. first, that every heresy is maintained with obstinacy against the Church of God, and therefore the maintainours thereof are said by the Apostle, that they went out of us, 1. joan. 2. that is, out of God's Church; and for the same reason the Apostle pronounceth an Heretic to be condemned by his own judgement. Tit. 3. because he preferreth his judgement before the judgement of the whole Church; from which consideration it followeth, that what man soever holdeth any erroneous opinion touching faith, and being advertised thereof by God's Church, and not yielding his judgement in all humility thereto, is thereby become an Heretic. And such is the state of Catholics and Protestants, since the one doth ever reciprocally charge and condemn the other with false doctrine, & therefore seeing the church of Christ must be with one of them, it followeth, that the other not submitting their judgements to it, are proclaimed thereby Heretics. And thus it may sometimes fall out, that the first inventor of a false opinion may be no Heretic, as maintaining it before it be condemned by the church; whereas the Professors of it, after its condemnation, are become Heretics, according to that of Vincentius Lyrinensis, in his worthy book against the profane innovation of the heresies of his tyme. O admirable change of things, the authors of one and the same opinion are esteemed Catholics; and their followers Heretics! Thus we see that pertinacity of judgement, doth consummate an Heresy.  
4. The second is, that the aforesaid definition of heresy (being the only true definition, and acknowledged for such by all sides) is not restrained, either in itself, or by the meaning of the Apostle (as by his words set down in the next chapter following, may more easily appear) only to the most principal and (as they are called) fundamental points of christian faith, as of the Trinity, the Incarnation of Christ, his Passion, the Decalogue and the articles of the creed, but it is extended in its own Nature (considering to Logic the definition, and the thing defined, aught to be of an equal latitude or lardgnes) to any erroneous opinion whatsoever, frowardly defended by a man, and gainsayed by the Church of God: So as, it is as perfect an Heresy (and the believers thereof are as true Heretics) to deny, that there is a Purgatory, or to deny Freewill, Prayer to Saints, the doctrine of Indulgences, the necessity of Baptism, or any other article approved by the Catholic Church (granting the doctrine of the Catholics in these articles to be true) as to deny the Trinity, the Incarnation of Christ, his Death or Passion etc. And a man shallbe aswell damned in hell for denying these former, as for these other; though the denial of these later, do exceed the other in malice; since the Heresies of them are more wicked & blasphemous. And thus much touching the definition of Heresy, or an Heretic, which being justly premised, we will now come to the main controversy handled in this Treatise.   

That every Christian, though believing in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. cannot be saved in his own Religion, proved from holy scripture. CHAP. II.  
NOw then to begin to fortify & warrant this undoubted truth, that every Christian, though believing in the Trinity etc. cannot be saved in his own Religion, I will draw my first kind of proofs, from the sacred words of holy scripture. And these testimonies shallbe of three sorts. One concerning Heretics, which texts are not restrained to any particular Heresies, but delivered of Heresy in general. The second branch of authorities shall touch Heretics even for certain particular Heresies, different from denying the Trinity, the Incarnation of our Saviour, the Passion, and other like principal and fundamental points & articles of Christian Religion. The third shall contain the necessity of faith, without any restriction, to the points or articles, which are to be believed.  
2. And first to begin with the first, we read the 
(a) Epist. ad Tit. c. 3.  Apostle thus to speak of an heretic in general: A man, that is an Heretic, after the first or second admonition avoid, knowing that he, that is such, is subverted, and sinneth, being condemned by his own judgement. Where the Apostle commandeth us to avoid an heretic, which he would not have done, if the said Heretic had been in state of salvation: the Apostle further adding this reason, in that (saith he) such a man (as being a pertinatious & wilful Heretic) is condemned by his own proper judgement: that is, because he advanceth his own judgement, above the judgement of God's Church, and because he needeth not that public condemnation of the Church, which upon other offenders by way of excommunication is inflicted. The Apostle in 2. Thess. cap. 3. coniureth (as it were) in the name of Christ, that all should avoid all false believers, in these words: We denounce unto you, Brethren, in the name of our Lord jesus christ, that you withdraw yourselves from every Brother walking inordinately, and not according to the tradition, which they have received of us. This place concerneth faith and doctrine (as the whole chapter showeth) but if these men here to be eschewed were in state of salvation, they ought not then to be eschewed: Again this text cannot have reference to those, who deny the Trinity, the Incarnation, and Passion, seeing the deniers of these high articles, are not Brethren in Christ; and yet the Apostle styleth them Brethren, whom he here reprehendeth.  
3. Again, the Apostle in another place thus forewarneth: The 
(b) Epist. ad Gall. cap. 5.  works of the flesh be manifest, which are fornication, uncleanness, impurity or dissensions, sects etc. They which do these things, shall not obtain the kingdom of God: Where we see is express mention made of Sects, and that maintainours of any sects in opinion of faith (much more of any Heresy, which is ever averred with greater contumacy and forwardness, and with neglect of the Church's authority shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven: from which Testimonies we may further conclude, that as one only act of fornication, barreth a man from the kingdom of God, so also one Heresy excludeth him from the same.  
4. A fourth place is this: I desire 
(c) Epist. ad Rom. cap. 16.  you Brethren to mark them, that make dissensions and scandals contrary to the doctrine which you have learned, and avoid them, for such do not serve Christ our Lord: But if such men be to be avoided, and do not serve Christ, than no doubt they continuing in that state, cannot be saved. Again 1. Tim. 1. the Apostle speaketh of certain men, and saith of them, that Quidam circa 
(d) 1. Timoth. 2.  fidem naufragaverunt: Certain men made shipwreck about the faith. Where the Apostle useth the metaphor of shipwreck, thereby to express more fully, that Heretics once falling out of the ship of Christ's church, are cast into the sea of eternal damnation. To conclude, the Evangelist Saint john speaketh of all Heretics in general, not embracing the doctrine of Christ (within which all secondary questions of christian Religion are contained) in this sort: If any man come 
(e) 2. joan.  unto you, and bring not the doctrine of Christ, receive him not into your house, nor say, God save you unto him. But a man is bound in charity to suffer any one, who is in state of salvation, to come into his house, and to salute him, or say: God save him.  
5. Now what can be replied against these former Texts? It cannot be said, that they are meant only of such Heretics, as deny the mysteries of the Trinity, the Incarnation of Christ, his Passion, and such like supreme and cardinal points of Christian Religion: this (I say) cannot be averred for these reasons following. First, because those, who in the Apostles times, denied these principal points of Christianity, could not be truly termed Heretics (seeing he is truly an Heretic, who was once a member of Christ's church by faith, but after ceaseth to be thereof) no more than all the jews or Gentiles could not be accounted or styled Heretics, because they never believed the foresaid mysteries of christianity. Secondly by reason, that according to the former definition of Heresy or Heretics above set down, the former Texts have a necessary reference, to all Heresy and heretics whatsoever, whether the subject of the said false opinion be small or great. Thirdly, because that in the former Texts of Scripture, there is no restriction of the word Haereticus or Haeresis, to the chief or highest points of Christian Religion, but it is extended to all kind of Heretics or Heresies whatsoever, even by the Apostle without exception, who (no doubt) if he had understood heresies, or Heretics only in the greatest points (at least in some one Text or other, among so many) would accordingly have restrained his words, only to those kind of Heretics; and the rather seeing the denial of those great points only (not of others) do in our Libertines opinion, make the deniers thereof Heretics. But not to leave the least show of refuge or evasion, heerin I will produce some passages of holy Scripture, in which the maintenours of particular errors, even in lesser points, than the highest articles of Christianity, are censured by Christ's Apostles, to be deprived of eternal salvation.  
6. And first we find S. Paul thus to prophecy. In 
(f) 1 Tim. c. 4.  the later times certain shall departed from the faith, attending to spirits of error, and doctrine of Devils, forbidding to marry, and to abstain from meats. Hear the Apostle prophesieth (according to the judgement of 
(g) Hom. 12. in Timot.  Saint chrysostom, 
(h) In hunc locum  Ambrose, 
(i) Lib. contra jovin. c. 7.  Hierome, and S. 
(k) Her. 25. & 40.  Augustine) of the Heretics, Eucratites, Marcionists, Ebionists, & such like, who denied Matrimony, as a thing altogether unlawful, and prohibited absolutely at all times, and the eating of certain meats, as creatures impure: Now these Heretics believed in the Trinity, and might in the Incarnation, etc. and yet even for these two former Heresies touching marriage, and eating of meats, and not for the Trinity, or Incarnation, they are said by the Apostle to depart from the faith of Christ, and to attend to the doctrine of Devils. But such, as leave the faith of Christ, and attend to the doctrine of Devils, are not in state of salvation. In my judgement this one authority alone is sufficient to overthrew this fantasy of our Newtralists; since the words are divine scripture, the heresies reprehended no fundamental points of Religion; but of as little or lesser consequence, than the Controversies between the Catholics and the Protestants; and yet the maintainers of them are accounted to departed from the faith of Christ, and to attend to the doctrine of Devils.  
7. A second place shallbe that of the former Apostle, who writing of certain Heretics erring touching the Resurrection of the body, saith thus: Their 
(l) 2. Timoth. 2.  speech spreadeth like a Canker, of whom is Hymenaeus and Philetus, who have erred from the truth, saying that the Resurrection is already past, and have subverted the faith of some. These men believed all the mysteries of the Trinity, Incarnation &c. (seeing otherwise the Apostle would have reprehended them for want or belief therein, as for the article of the Resurrection) yet for erring only touching the resurrection of the body, they are said to err from the truth, to subvert the faith of some: and that, as a Canker never leaveth the body, till by little and little it wasteth it away; so their speeches by degrees, poison and kill the souls of the hearers. From which it evidently followeth, that these Heretics continuing and dying in the foresaid heresy, could not be saved; since that faith, which erreth from the truth, and which subverteth the true faith of others, and which in killing and destroying the soul, resembleth a Canker, cannot afford salvation to its Professors.  
8. Another passage, which here I will urge, is that of S. john, who calleth certain Heretics, Anti-christs', saying: Now 
(m) 1. joan. c. 2.  there ate become many Anti-christs', who went out of us, but were not of us; for if they had been of us, they had remained with us. These Heretics believed in the Trinity, in the Incarnation of Christ, that he died for the salvation of the whole world, only they erred touching the person and natures of Christ, and yet they are figuratively styled Anti-christs', and are said to depart out of the church of Christ. But no salvation is reserved for Anti-christs, & such as depart from the Church of God. And thus much out of God's holy writ expressly touching Heretics in general, and in particular.  
9 To these Texts I will adjoin (though not immediately and directly ranged under the former head) a place in S. Peter in my judgement most unanswerable, and by necessary inference evicting the point here undertaken. The place is those words in the 2. epistle. of S. Peter, cap. 3. where he saith thus: In the Epistles of Paul there are certain things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable do pervert unto their own destruction. Now here I thus argue. But these things hard to be understood in S. Paul's epistle, do not concern the doctrine of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. and yet the misunderstanding of them doth cause (as the Text saith) the destruction, that is, the damnation of these, who misunderstand them; therefore fare lesser points, than the denial of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. do justly threaten to the false believers of them, damnation; and consequently that a bare belief of those supreme points, are not only necessary to salvation.  
10. That those difficulties in S. Paul's epistles, intimated by Saint Peter, do not concern the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, etc. I prove several ways: first because S. Peter maketh no such mention, which no doubt he would have done, if the subject of them had touched only those supreme mysteries, and were not to be extended to other inferior points.  
11. Secondly it is acknowledged by the commentaries and writings of all the fathers (besides that the epistles themselves show no less) that Saint Paul is most evident and clear in all his epistles touching the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. and therefore there is no reason, why the difficultyes in them should be applied to those articles, muchless restrained to them alone.  
12. Thirdly, the Fathers do understand those difficultyes in Saint Paul's epistles insinuated by Saint Peter, chiefly touching justification; as appeareth by the testimony even of S. Augustine himself in his book: de fide & operibus lib. 12. who particularly instanceth in that place 1. Cor. 3. If any man build upon this foundation, gold, silver etc. Which Text treateth of justification, and works, and expressly saith 
(n) Lib. de fide & operibus, cap. 15, & 16.  that this is one of the difficult passages intended and meant by Saint Peter. With whom Saint Hierome may seem well to agree, who in those word, Epistola ad Romanos: Nimijs 
(o) Epist. add Algasiain quest. 8. & in epist. ad Rom.  obscuritatibus involuta est. Intimateth no less; for it is found, that the epistle to the Romans most intreateth of justification and of faith and works. Fourthly and lastly, the Protestants themselves do understand the said obscurities of Saint Paul's epistles touching justification, as appeareth (to omit the testimonies of all others herein) from the words and comment of M. Doctor Fulke against the Rhemists' Testament upon the foresaid place of S. Peter: and thus far of this text; where we find by an inevitable deduction, that a false faith touching justification only cannot stand with salvation.  
13. The same is proved from the definition and propriety of faith. In this place we will take into our consideration, the definition of faith set down by S. Paul; secondly the dignity & worth of faith much celebrated by diverse of the Apostles; thirdly, the inseparable propriety of faith, which is unity; for so doth the Scripture delineate and describe faith: from all which it will inevitably follow, that the faith, which saveth man, is not to be restrained only to the Trinity, the Incarnation, and other such sublime points of Christian Religion (though in other points it be erroneous) but is extended to all other points whatsoever, which the Church of God propoundeth to be believed.  
14. And to begin with the definition of faith given by the Apostle, he then defineth faith thus: Faith 
(p) Heb. cap. 11.  is the substance of things to be hoped for, the argument of things not appearing: The sense whereof is this: first that faith through an infallible certainty causeth those things to subsist, and have a being in the mind of man, which things are yet to come, being but hoped and looked for: secondly, that faith causeth the understanding to give assent to those points, which it understandeth not, acknowledging them to be more certain, than any things whatsoever, according to those words of S. Thomas: Multo magis 
(q) ● 2. q. 4. a. 8.  homo certior est de eo, quod audivit a Deo, qui falli non potest, quam de eo, quod videt propria ratione, quae falli potest. Now here (I trust) no man will deny, but the Apostle defineth that faith of a Christian, which saveth him. This being granted (for to deny it, were both impious in the denier, and most injurious to the Apostle) we are to remember, the nature of every true definition set down by the Logicians, to wit (as is above mentioned) that the thing defined, and the definition, be of one and the same extent and latitude; so as whatsoever is comprehended under the definition, the same is also contained under the thing defined. This then being presupposed by force of all reason (for Logic is but an artificial and serviceable handmaid unto reason) we find that this definition of faith compriseth in itself, not only the doctrine of the Incarnation, the Trinity, and the like, and this not articulately, but only by way of deduction; but also it containeth all secondary points of Religion, seeing the former definition doth predicate, or may be said, of all the said secondary & less principal points of Religion, controverted between Christians at any tyme.  
15. Therefore the thing here defined, which is the saving faith of a Christian, is in like sort to extend itself to all the said secondary points of Religion, how indifferent soever they seem in man's judgement. This inference is so demonstrative (being taken from the former definition of faith) as that the Apostle himself presently after the former words, beginning to instance in the several objects of faith (among diverse other examples) setteth down, that to believe Noas' flood or the deluge of the world by water for sin, is an article of faith: for thus he saith: By faith Noah having received an answer concerning those things, which as yet were not seen, fearing, framed the Ark for the saving of his house.  
16. But to proceed further; if the articles of the Trinity, the Incarnation and the like, be the only essential points of a true Christian faith, it is more than wonderful, that the Apostle undertaking to set down the true definition of an available faith, and exemplifying it, in several objects, should wholly and silently omit the said articles of the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion, etc. he in that chapter not expressly speaking one word of them. And thus much touching the definition of faith given by the Apostle: from which definition we conclude, that who seeketh to have a true faith necessary to salvation, (besides the mysteries of the Trinity, the Incarnation etc.) must believe diverse other dogmatic articles of Christian Religion. And therefore answearably heerto, we assure ourselves, that when our Saviour said: He 
(q) Marc 16.  that believeth not, shallbe condemned. He did speak of the believing (at least implicitly) of the whole corpse of Christian faith and doctrine, and not only of any one part thereof; for so in this latter manner it would be both false & absurd. In like sort where our Blessed Saviour in the same chapter saith to his Apostles: Preach the Gospel to all Creatures. He did understand the whole Gospel; which containeth many other points besides the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion, etc.  
17. In this next place we will descend to those passages of holy Scripture, which do much magnify the efficacy and virtue of faith. And accordingly hereunto we find it is said: He 
(r) Mare ultimo.  that believeth and is baptised, shallbe saved, but he that believeth not shallbe condemned. Again our Saviour said to the blind men, praying to receive their sight: According 
(s) Mat. 9  to your faith, be it unto you. And further: Without 
(t) Heb. 11.  faith it is impossible to please God. And more: Our faith is the victory, which overcometh the world. 1. joan. 1.5. Now in these & many other such texts, for brevity omitted, I demand what faith is understood or meant? If it be answered a true, entire, and perfect faith, believing all points of Christian Religion proposed by God's Church, it is true, and that which I seek here to prove: if an unperfect and mongrel faith, believing some point of Christian Religion, and rejecting others; and so an erroneous faith, being partly false and partly true, I say, it can never deserve these praises given by the Evangelists, and Apostles, neither can it produce such supernatural effects above specified, no more than darkness can produce light; since Truth himself hath taught us, that 
(u) Luc. 6●  we cannot gather figs of thorns, nor grapes of bushes.  
18. Now in this third place, we will touch that inseparable attribute of true Christian faith, which is unity in faith and doctrine. This mark is so indissolubly annexed to the true faith of Christ, as that we find his Apostles ever ready most seriously, to inculcate the same to their disciples. Thus accordingly the Apostle exhorteth the Ephesians, saying: Be you 
(x) Ephe 4.  careful to keep the unity of the spirit, in the bond of peace. And immediately again: There (z) is one Lord, one faith, one Baptism. Where we see that unity in faith is expressly set down. As also in another place: I beseech 
(a) 1. Cor. ●.  you, that you all speak one thing: be you knit together in one mind, and one judgement: and as this was the exhortation of the Apostle, so we read that the first believers followed the same, of whom S. Luke. Acts c. 4. thus saith: The multitude, that believed, were of one hart & one soul. And hence it proceedeth, that the Church of Christ (which comprehendeth the professors of this unanimous faith) is styled by God's holy writ to be, one 
(b) Rom. 12. Cant. 6. joan. 10.  body, one spouse, and one flock of sheep, a truth so evident, as that (besides the frequent testimonies of 
(c) Atha. orat. 1. con. Aria. Chrys. op. imperf. in Mat. ho. 20. Tert. de prescript. Irenaeus d. 1. c. 5.  confirming the same) even the Protestants do subscribe in judgement hereunto. For thus Luther himself (to omit others) writteth. A 
(d) Tom. 3. Witten. in psal. 5. fol. 166.  kingdom divided in itself, shall not stand, neither have any Heretics at any time been overcome by force or subtlety, but by mutual dissension; neither doth Christ fight with them otherways, then with a spirit of giddiness and disagreement.  
19 Now than this unity of faith is so to be understood, as that it is not repugnant thereto, that one and the same point should at one time not be holden, as necessarily to be believed, the which, after it hath undergone a definitive and sententionall decree of God's Church, is necessarily to be believed: As for example, it was not necessary in the beginning of Christianity to believe, that the book of the Maccabees, the Epistle of S. james, S. jude, the second epistle of S. Peter, the 2. and 3. of S. john, to be Canonical Scripture, till they were defined so to be by the third Council of Carthage, Can. 47. at which S. Augustine was present. But after this Council had by the assistance of the holy Ghost, defined them to be Canonical, than it was, and is heresy to deny them to be Cononical. And the reason of this disparity is, because it is Gods good pleasure and wisdom, not to reveal to his Church all articles of faith in the beginning and at one time, but at several times, and upon several occasions, as to his divine majesty best seemeth expedient. Thus the faith of a Christian is capable of dilatation, and of a more large vnfoulding or exposition, but not of any contrariety in belief, change, or alteration. And thus (to insist in the former example) it may well stand with Christian faith in the beginning, not to accept the former books for canonical, till the authority of the Church had pronounced them for such; but it standeth not with true faith, that one man should positively believe as an articie of faith, that the Maccabees and the rest of the books above specified are not canonical Scripture, but the profane writings of man. And another man should at the same time believe, as an article of faith, that they are canonical Scripture; since the one of these contrary beliefs, must be Heretical.  
20. This verity then of the unity of faith, being warranted by the word, both of God, and man, as is above said, we will take into our consideration, the Catholic, and Protestants Religions, all who jointly do profess to believe in general, in the Trinity, in Christ his Incarnation, his Passion, and the creed of the Apostles; and so we shall discern, whether the faith of all these several professors, doth enjoy the foresaid mark of unity in doctrine or no. But seeing this subject is most ample and large, I will therefore sepose this ensuing Chapter, for the more full and exact discovery of the many and great disagreements between Catholics and the Protestants in their faith and Religion.   

The same proved from want of unity in Faith between Catholics and Protestants, touching the Articles of the Creed: and from that, that the Catholic & Protestant do agree in the belief of diverse articles necessarily to be believed, and yet not expressed in the Creed. CHAP. FOUR  
Undertaking in this place to set down, the multiplicity of doctrines between Catholics and Protestants, though they all jointly believe in the Trinity, the Incarnation of Christ, his Passion, and the like; & consequently to show, that this their general belief, wanteth that true unity of faith, which out of the holy Scriptures, Fathers, & the Protestants I have above showed, to be most necessary to salvation. I will first examine, how the Catholics and the Protestants, do differ touching their belief of the creed, made by the Apostles. Next I will demonstrate, that supposing all Professors of both Religions, should agree in the true sense and meaning of the creed; yet there are diverse other dogmatic points, necessarily to be believed, (& are at this instant believed both by Protestants and Catholics) which are not expressed or mentioned in the Creed at all; or by any immediate inference to be drawn from thence. Lastly I will set down the great difference between Catholics and Protestants in other points of faith, of which the Creed maketh no intimation or mention at all, and yet the belief of them is holden necessary to salvation, both by Catholic and Protestant: from all which it shall appear, how far distant the Catholic and Protestant Religion are from that unity in doctrine, so necessarily required to that faith, whereby a Christian is to be saved.  
2. I do here begin with the Apostles creed, first because the articles of the Trinity, the Incartion, the Passion etc. are included in the creed; Secondly, by reason there are many Adiaphorists in Religion (as I may term them) who seem to deal more lardgly and liberally herein, seeing they are content to extend the necessary object of faith, not only to the articles of the Trinity, the Incarnation, and Passion, but to all points set down in the creed, who assure themselves, that God exacteth not at our hands the belief of any other articles, then what are contained in the creed. Now here aforehand we are to conceive, that true faith resteth in that true sense and meaning of the words of the Creed, which was intended by the Apostles, and not in the words themselves, seeing both in the judgement of all learned Catholics and Protestants, to believe the words of the creed, in a sense different from the intended sense of the Apostles (and consequently in a false sense) is no better, than not to believe at all: And the reason hereof is, because a false construction drawn from the creed (no less than from the Scripture) is not the word of God, but the word of man, and consequently the said letter of the creed, so interpreted, is subject to the same censure, whereunto the word of man is liable; from whence it followeth, that whosoever believeth the words of the creed in another sense, than was intended by the holy Ghost, and the Apostles, doth not believe the creed at all, but only believeth the word of man, which ever standeth subject to error and mistaking. So as the sentence of Saint Hierome delivered only of the Scripture, may justly be applied of the creed: Scripturae 
(a) In ep. ad Paulinum.  non in legendo, sed in intelligendo consistunt. The Scripture (or Creed) doth not consist in the letter, but in the sense, and true understanding of the letter.  
3. This then being truly presupposed, let us begin to examine the articles of the creed, and see how we catholics and Protestants do differ in the construction and understanding thereof. And first touching the first article of our Belief in God, observe how different it is. The Catholics do believe, that their God no way cooperateth or willeth sin in man; that he hath but one simple & expressed will touching sin, & this in detesting and hating of it; that he will not punish us for not keeping of such precepts, the which is not in our power to keep; that he imputeth sins to every man, that committeth sin; briefly that he giveth to all men, ordinary and sufficient grace to save their souls, and desireth, that all men may be saved; whereas the Protestants believe the mere contrary to all these points: for they believe that their God 
(b) Beza in his display of popish practice pag. 202. saith: God exciteth the wicked will of one thief to kill another. See Zuinglius tom. 2 de provi. c. 6. fol. 365. Caluin instit. l. 2. c. 18. sect. 1.  cooperateth, forceth, and willeth a man to sin; that he hath a double 
(c) Luther tom. 2. Wittemburg. de cap. Babil. fol. 74. D. Whitakerus de Eccles. count. Bell. controversia 2. quest. 5. pag. 301.  will, (and therefore a dissembling will) the one expressed in Scripture, according to which he forbiddeth man to sin; the other concealed to himself, by the which he impelleth man to sin; that he will punish 
(d) Reynolds in his 2. conclusion annexed to his conference. pag. 697.  us transgressing the ten commandments, it not being in our power to keep the said commandments; that to the 
(e) Luth. tomo 2. Wittemb de captain. Babyl. fol 74. & Whitak. ut supra.  faithful sinning never so wickedly no sin shallbe imputed. Finally, that to certain 
(f) Cal. instit. l. 3. c. 23. saith, God doth ordain consilio nutuque, by his Council & pleasure, that among men some be borne to certain damnation from their mother's womb. See D. willet's synopsi p. 554. affirming the same.  men, he giveth not sufficient means of salvation, but purposeth and decreeth from all eternity, that some men (living in the eye of the world, and in their own conscience never so virtuously) shallbe damned and cast into sempiternal perdition. Thus we see how great a difference there is between the Catholics and Protestants, in believing the first article of the creed, and how inevitably it followeth, that either the Catholics or protestants, do stand subject and obnoxious to that saying of S. Augustine quest. 29. sup. joshua. who imagineth God such, as God is not, he carrieth every where another God, to wit a false God in his mind.  
4. Touching the 2. article, which is, And in jesus Christ his only Son: we 
(g) Con. Trident.  Catholics believe in Christ, who is God of God, and equal with his Father; a Saviour, who suffered death (quoad sufficentiam) for all mankind, and who accomplished the function of his Saviourship, only according to his humanity; a Saviour who died only in body, and not in soul; finally a Saviour, who from his first conception was endued with all knowledge, wisdom, & providence, and exempt from all ignorance, passion and perturbation: whereas the Protestants do believe in Christ, as their Saviour, who according to their faith, is God of 
(h) D. Whitak. approveth this opinion, alleging Caluin in proof thereof, count. Camp p. 121.  himself and 
(i) Melan. in loc. come. edit. 1561. p. 41.  inferior to the Father, who died only for the 
(k) D. Willet in his synops printed 1600. p. 780. as also Caluin and Beza in whole treatises.  elect; who performed his mediation not only according to his humanity, but also according to his 
(l) Melan. supra & D Fulk.  divinity (though in the judgement of all learned men, true divinity is impassable) who in the time of his Passion, besides the death of the body (as insufficient for our salvation) suffered in soul the 
(m) Cal. instit. l. 2. c. 16 sect 10. & D. Whitak. count. Duraeum l. 8. p. 556.  
(m) Beza in respon. ad acta Colloquij Montisb. part. 1. pag. 147. D. Willet in his synopsis p. 599. & 600. D. Sutliffe in his reveu of D. kellison's survey printed 1606. p. 55.  torments of hell: briefly, who laboured with (n) ignorance, passion, and even desperation itself.  
5. Touching the article of Christ's descending into hell, the Catholics do believe hereby, that Christ descended in soul after his passion, into that part of hell, which is called lymbus Patrum, to deliver from thence the souls of the just there detained, till his coming: of which judgement are also some learned 
(o) D. Bilson in his survey of Christ's sufferings and descent to hell p. 650. 651. 652. and the Lutherans are generally of the same opinion.  Protestant's; but the greatest part of Protestants do interpret this article, of Christ descending into his 
(p) D. Willet in lymbomastix. D. Fulke so alleged by Willet in synopsi pag. 605. 606.  grave, so by the word hell: understanding the grave: but 
(q) Lib. 2. instit. cap. 16. §. 20.  Caluin teacheth, that by Christ's descending into hell is understood, that Christ apprehended God to be most angry and offended with him for our sakes, and that thereupon Christ suffered great anxiety and grief of soul; and which is more, most blasphemously Caluin teacheth, that Christ uttered words of desperation in saying: my God, why hast thou forsaken me? Touching the article of Christ's ascending into heaven, we Catholics and the Caluinists do believe hereby, that Christ truly in body ascended up into heaven; whereas 
(r) Luth: l. de sacr. Coenae Domini tom. 2. f. 112. saying: credimus quod Christus iuxta humanitatem est ubique presence. Brentius in Apolog. pro cons. Wittem. Illyricus l. de ascen. Domini. and finally by all Lutherans  Lutherans do teach, that Christ's body is in all places, with the divinity; and that therefore it did not really after his passion, ascend up into heaven, it being there both before & after his passion; thus the Lutherans both in ours and the Protestants judgements do destroy by this their construction, the whole creed, and particularly Christ's incarnation, nativity, passion, death, ascending into heaven, and his coming to judgement; seeing, supposing Christ's body to be in all places, all these articles were but apparently or fantastically, and not truly or really performed.  
6. Touching the article of Christ's judging the quick and dead: we Catholics do believe, that Christ at his coming to judgement, will so judge man, as that his good works, receiving all their force from our Saviour's passion, shallbe rewarded; whereas the Protestants, denying all 
(s) Cal. l. 3. instit; c. 5. §. 2. Bucer. in acts collo quij Ratisb. Beza Zuingli. and most other Protestants.  merit of works (as injurious and derogatory to his death and passion) do hold, that Christ shall then reward only a bare and 
(t) Calu. in Antid. Concil. Trident. Kemnitius in exam. Con. Trid. and most other Protestants.  special faith.  
7. Concerning the Article: I believe in the Holy Ghost. Whereas all Catholics and many Protestants do believe, that the Holy Ghost is the third person in the most Blessed Trinity. Caluin (howsoever he was persuaded of the truth or falsehood thereof) much lamenteth notwithstanding, to avoid the force of arguments drawn from the chiefest places of Scripture, and usually alleged by all Antiquity in proof of the holy Ghost, being the third person in the Trinity. Thus we find that 
(u) Iust. l. 1. c. 13. §. 15.  Caluin will not have (contrary to all Antiquity) that passage of Scripture Psalm. 33. By the word of the Lord, the heavens were made, and all the host of them by the spirit of his mouth, to be understood of the divinity of the holy Ghost. In like sort he rejecteth the argument 
(x) See of this subject against the Trinity, Iluumus a Protestant in l. Caluin. judaizans  drawn from that other most remarkable Text, 1. joan. 5. There be three, that give testimony in Heaven, the Father, the Word, and the holy Ghost, and these three be one. Caluin upon this place thus saying (thereby to take away from thence the proof of the Holy Ghost) Quod dicit tres esse unum, ad essentiam non refertur, 
Luth. in l. contra jacobum Latomū●omo 2. Wittem, 〈…〉 di●● anno 1552.  sed ad consensum potius. Finally, Luther was so fare from acknowledging the Holy Ghost, to be the third person in the Trinity, or to acknowledge the Trinity itself, that thus he writteth: Anima mea odit hoc verbum, homoousion, vel consubstantialis. My very soul doth hate the word, homoousion, or consubstantial.  
8. Concerning the article: I believe the holy Catholic Church. The Catholics do believe this to be a visible company of men professing the present Roman Catholic faith, of which some are predestinated, others reprobated. The Protestant's do believe this Church to consist only of the elect and 
(y) Confess. Aug. act. 5. Luther l. de Concilijs & eccles. Cal. l. 4. inst. c. 1. §. 2.  predestinated.  
9 Touching the article: The Communion of Saints. The Catholics do hereby believe, such a communion to be between the Saints in Heaven, the souls in Purgatory, & men upon earth, that the one part doth help the other with their most available prayers, and intercessions. The Protestants deny all such intercourse of benefits between these several parts of the Church of Christ, accounting 
(z) Caluin l. 3. inst. c. 5. § 6. Conturiatore● Ce●●. 1. lib. 2. c. 4. col. 460. Brentius in conses. Wittenberg. c. de Purgatorio.  the Catholic doctrine herein superstitious and sacrilegious.  
10. Lastly touching the article of, Forgiveness of sins, we Catholics do believe, that this remission of sins is performed, when the soul by a true and inherent justice, and by infused gifts of God, enjoyeth a renovation of herself, and thereby becometh truly just in the sight of God: the Protestants disallowing all inherent justice, do only acknowledge an imputative 
(a) Kemnitius in exam. Concil. tried. Caluin l. 3. instit. c. 11.  justice or righteousness, which consisteth in that the justice of Christ is (as they teach) only imputed unto sinners; so as we remain still sinners, though sins be not imputed unto us through the justice of Christ: a doctrine most injurious to the most meritorious passion and death of Christ. Thus have we run over the articles of the creed, from whence we collect, that seeing (as is above intimated) he only believeth availeably & truly the creed, who believeth it in that sense, in which the Apostles did write it, & seeing there are mere different or rather contrary constructions of each article given by the Catholics and Protestants, so that if that construction of the Catholics be true, it followeth necessarily that the other of the Protestants befalse, or contrariwise; We may therefore inevitably conclude, that it is not sufficient to salvation for any one to say, that he believeth the creed, who believeth the words of it in general, without restraining them to any peculiar construction given either by the Catholics or Protestants, except he believe it in that one particular sense (and none other) which was intended by the holy Ghost, when it was first framed by the Apostles.  
11. Now in this next place, we are to demonstrate, that granting for a time, by an Hypotesis or supposal, that a man did believe the articles of the creed in their true sense or construction, yet followeth it not, that this belief (though it be necessary) were sufficient alone for a man to obtain his salvation thereby; and the reason hereof is, because it is most certain, that there are diverse points of Christian Religion, holden necessarily to be believed in the judgement both of Catholics and Protestants (& accordingly are believed jointly both by Catholics and Protestants) and yet the said points are not contained or expressed in the Creed. Among others, I will insist in these following.  
12. First, That there are certain divine wrytinges of infallible authority, penned by the holy Ghost, which we commonly call, the Scriptures of the old & new Testament, of which Testament we find no mention in the Creed, and yet all men are bound under pain of damnation to believe, that such wrytinges there are: since otherways (abstracting from the authority of the Church) there were not sufficient means left to believe, that it were a sin to break any of the ten Commandments, or (which is more) that Christ jesus was the true Saviour of the world.  
13. Secondly, That there are spiritual substances, which we call, Angels, which now enjoy the most happy sight of God, and that many thousands of them, did fall presently after their creation, and are become those malignant spirits, which usually are termed Devils.  
14. Thirdly, That there is any material place of Hell, where the wicked are tormented, of which we find nothing in the Creed in the judgement of Protestants; for although the word, Hell, be mentioned in that article: He descended into Hell: yet by the word Hell, the Grave is understood by most of the Protestants.  
15. Fourthly, That the pains of the damned, shallbe for all eternity, and not for a certain time only.  
16. Fifthly, That Adam did presently upon his creation fall from the grace of God, and thereby transferred Original sin upon all mankind: So as by reason of his fall, all men are borne in Original sin.  
17. Sixthly, That the world was once drowned for sin, which innundation is commonly called, Noës' flood.  
18. Seveanthly, That our Saviour whilst he conversed here upon earth, did many miracles.  
19 Eightly, That S. john Baptist was our Saviour's Precursor or forerunner, and that our Saviour did chose to him certain men for his Apostles, which did first preach and plant the Christian faith, through out the whole world.  
20. Ninthly, That Circomcision is now forbidden, as a thing most unlawful and .  
21. Tenthly, That there are any sacraments of the new Testament instituted by Christ, for the spiritual good of man's soul.  
22. Eleventh, That before the ending of the world, Antichrist shall come, who shallbe a designed enemy of Christ, so as he shall labour to subvert, and overthrew all Christian Religion.  
23. These points (besides some others) all Christians (aswell Protestants as Catholics) do believe, and do hold that the belief of these points is necessary to salvation, and yet not any one of all these articles, is expressed or set down in the Apostles Creed; whence I conclude, that the Apostles Creed, cannot be a sufficient boundary to contain and limit an available faith. For what hope can that man have of his salvation, who believeth, that there are neither any divine Scripture, nor any Decalogue commonly called the ten Commandments, nor that Christ did work any miracles, nor that he instituted any Sacraments, nor that there is any place of hell for the damned, nor finally (to omit the rest) that there is any eternity of punishment?  
24. And here I am to premonish the Reader, that it is no sufficient answer to reply, that most of all the foresaid points are expressed in the Scripture, and therefore are to be believed; this I say, availeth not, seeing here I dispute against those, who maintain with wonderful pertinacity of judgement, that it is sufficient to salvation, to believe only the articles (& nothing else) which are contained in the Creed; but not any of the former articles are contained therein. Again, seeing to believe, that there are any divine Scriptures, is not expressed in the Creed, it conduceth nothing to the answering of this our argument, to say that the forementioned articles are proved out of Scripture, and therefore are to be believed.  
25. Neither secondly, can the force of our said argument be avoided, in replying that all the former articles are implicitly comprehended in that article: I believe the holy Church: because the Church teacheth, that all these articles are to be believed: this is no warrantable answer, by reason, that as these may be reduced to this article of the Creed, so also may all other points controverted between the Catholics and the Protestants, be in like manner reduced to the said article, seeing the Church of God setteth down, what is the truth, & what is to be believed in the said Controversyes, binding her children under pain of damnation, aswell to believe the truth in the Controversyes of our days, as to believe the former articles mentioned, which are not expressed in the Creed. And yet these our Newtralists in Religion, who make the creed, the sole square of their faith, do not think, that those questions of Religion insisted upon between Catholics and the Protestants, are in believing or not believing of them, any way hurtful to their salvation.   

CHAP. V The same proved from the want of unity in faith between Catholics and Protestants, in articles necessary to be believed, and yet not expressed in the Creed.  
IN this third and last place we will insist in certain controversyes of Religion, so differently maintained by Catholics and Protestants, as that granting the maintaynours of the one side, to hold the truth, it followeth, that the other party vphouldeth falsehood and heresy. Now for the more dangerous wounding of our Newtralizing Protestant's herein, I will omit here to speak of the Controversies, touching Purgatory, Praying to Saints, , Monachisme, and diverse others such like; and will restrain myself, only to these Controversies, the subject of which Controversyes, are taught by the one side, to be (under Christ) the immediate means, of our grace & salvation; and denied by the other party, to be of any such force and efficacy, for the souls everlasting good: and consequently in regard of their subject, are one way necessarily to be believed. So as if it be showed, that the Protestants and the Catholics do mainly descent in the means of obtaining grace, & purchasing of salvation; it must of necessity be inferred, that both the Protestants and the Catholics continuing in such their state, cannot obtain grace and salvation: since not only Philosophy, but even natural reason teacheth us, that he never shall attain the end, who useth either not the same means, which are only and necessarily instituted to the gaining of the said end.  
1. But to proceed to these points First, Concerning the sacraments in general; the Catholics do believe, that all of them (where no just impediment is) do confer grace into the soul of man, by the help and continuance of which grace, the soul in the end, obtaineth its salvation. The Protestants do not ascribe any such supernatural effect or operation of grace to them.  
2. And to come more particularly to the Sacraments. Touching Baptism: the Catholics believe, That children being borne in Original sin, cannot be saved, except they be baptised with water, according to those words of S. john. 3. Unless a man be borne again of water, and the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. The Protestants 
(a) Willet in his meditat, in Psal. 122. & Calu. & Beza frequently.  believe, that infants dying unbaptized, may be saved.  
3. Touching the Sacrament of Penance or Confession, the Catholics believe, That after a Christian hath committed any one mortal sin, that sin cannot be forgiven him, but (at least in voto) by means of confessing the said sin to a Priest, of the new Testament, and receiving absolution thereof from him: answerably to that of S. john. 20. Whose sins you shall forgive, they are forgiven them: and whose sins you shall retain, they are retained. The Protestants believe, that neither the confession of sins to man, nor the absolution of man, is necessary for the remitting of them; but that it is sufficient to confess them only to God. And thus according to the diversity of doctrine, either the Protestant for want of this sacrament (after he hath mortally sinned) cannot be saved, or Catholics for wrongfully imposing this yoke upon Christians, do lose their salvation.  
4. Touching the most Blessed Eucharist, the Catholics believe, That the very body and blood doth lie ineffably and latently, under the forms of bread and wine, according to that: This is my body, This is my blood. Math. 26. That unless we eat his body, and drink his blood, we shall not have life everlasting. john. 6. Lastly, That we are to adore Christ his body, being accompanied with his divinity in the said Sacraments. The Protestants do believe, that Christ's true body, as never leaving heaven, cannot possibly be truly and really under the form of Bread and Wine; and consequently they believe, that the eating of his body, and drinking of his blood, is not necessary to salvation. Finally they hold our adoration of the Sacrament to be open Idolatry; and term Catholics Idolaters, for adoring of it. And thus either the Protestant's, as not feeding upon this celestial food, shall not have life everlasting, if the Catholics doctrine herein be true; or else Catholics (suppose (which God forbidden) they should err) for teaching and practising idolatry herein, should incur damnation.  
5. Touching the means of our justification. The Catholics believe, That not only faith, but works also do justify. The Protestants reject all works from justification; teaching that only faith doth justify man: yea they further proceed, affirming that who once hath true faith, is most assured and certain 
(b) Calu. in instit. passim. Kemnit. in exam: Conc. Tri  of his salvation, whereas the Catholics reputing this as a mere presumption, are willing according to the Apostle, Phil. 2. To work their salvation with fear and trembling. To be short the Protestants do teach, that a man by thinking himself to be just, is by this means become just; whereas the Catholics do hold this doctrine not only to be fantastical, but also 
(c) Bella. l. 3. de justificatione.  in reason most absurd.  
6. Touching Grace, without which a man cannot be saved, the catholics' believe, That God out of the Abyss and depth of his infinite mercy, offereth to every Christian sufficient grace, whereby he may be saved, and therefore they do encourage every one to endeavour to seek their salvation. The 
(d) Calu. & Beza in whole treatises. D. Willet sinopsi 1600. p. 789.  Protestant's teach, that God giveth not this sufficiency of grace, to every one, but to certain men only; & that diverse there are, who notwithstanding all their endeavour to believe truly, and live virtuously, yet they cannot, nor shall not be saved.  
7. Touching the Decalogue, or ten Commandments, the Catholics believe, That except a Christian do keep them, he cannot be saved, according to our Saviour: If thou wilt enter into life, keep the Commandments. Math. 19 The 
(e) The impossibility of the commandments is taught by D. Reynolds 2. conclus. annexed to his conference p. 697. D. Willet in synopsi p. 564.  Protestants do absolutely teach an impossibility of keeping them. And thereupon Luther thus affirmeth: The ten Commandments 
(f) Ser. de Moyse.  appertain not unto us.  
8. Lastly, touching the Pope or Bishop of Rome, the Catholics do believe, That he is under Christ, the supreme Pastor upon earth; that who doth not communicate with him, in sacraments and doctrine, not yielding him all true obedience, in subiecting their judgements in matters of faith to his judgement and sentential definitions, cannot be saved. The Protestants do teach, that the Bishop of Rome is that Antichrist which is deciphred by the 
(g) 2 Thess. 2. Apoc. 13 & 17.  Apostle, and which is the designed enemy of Christ, and that whosoever embraceth his doctrine, or enthralleth (as they writ) their assents to his cathedral decrees, in points of Religion, cannot obtain salvation.  
9 Thus fare of these points, of which I have made particular choice to insist upon (omitting some others of like nature) because we see, that most or all of them, do immediately and principally (as is above said) touch the means of purchasing of grace, of remission of our sins, and obtaining of salvation, being maintained for such by the Catholics, but utterly denied & rejected by Protestants. And here I now urge two things. First, if these former doctrines, as they are believed by the Catholics, do immediately concern salvation, and become necessary means thereof, then cannot the Protestant's (as rejecting all such doctrines, and such means both in belief & practice) be saved. But if (by a supposal) they be not of that nature, but false in themselves, and the contrary doctrines true, then cannot the Catholics (as believing false doctrines immediately touching man's salvation, and accordingly practising them) be saved. From which forked argument, it may most demonstratively be inferred, that it is impossible, that both the Catholics and the Protestants (the one part believing, the other part not believing the foresaid doctrines) should both be saved; for who neglecteth necessary means, shall never attain to the designed end of the said means. Secondly, I urge, that a false belief, not only in these articles, but also in any other Controversyes, between the Catholics and the Protestants, is plain Heresy. And this, because every false belief, is comprehended within the definition of heresy, as being in itself an election & choice of a new or false doctrine, wilfully maintained against the Church of God; and therefore it followeth, that either the Catholics or Protestants for their persisting in this false belief, or heresy, shallbe damned.  
10. But here I will stay myself; wading no further in the disquisition and search of the great dissensions between Catholics and Protestants, touching Faith and belief; only I will reflect a little upon the premises of the two last Chapters. And here, since it is made most evident, first, that the Protestants and Catholics, do mainly differ in the sense and construction of the articles of the Creed, and consequently (seeing the sense and not the words make the creed) that they both do not believe one and the same Creed, but have to themselves several Creeds. From whence sufficiently is discovered, that want of unity in faith, among them both; which unity is so necessarily required to man's salvation, as in the precedent Chapter is demonstrated. Secondly, that though by supposition, they did believe the Creed, & the sense thereof with an unanimous consent, yet it is proved, that there are diverse other articles not contained in the Creed, which are indifferently believed (as necessary to salvation) both by Catholic and Protestant. Thirdly, seeing also there are sundry Controversies in Religion (as is above exemplifyed) which immediately concern salvation, being holden as necessary means thereof, by the catholics, but disclaimed from and abandoned by Protestants, as main errors and false doctrines, that therefore it is a manifest error to make the Creed, the sole rule of faith.  
11. Therefore from all the former premises, I do aver, that he, who maintaineth, that both Catholics & Protestants, and consequently men of any Religion (notwithstanding that the one side doth necessarily believe and maintain Heresy, can be saved, or that every Christian can obtain heaven, is wholly deprived of all true judgement, reason and discourse, and for want thereof, may deservedly be ranged among them, of whom the Psalmist speaketh: Nolite fieri sicut equus & mulus, quibus non est intellectus. Do not become as Horse and Mule, which have no understanding.   

CHAP. VI The same proved from the authority and privileges of the Church, in not erring in her definitions, and condemnation of Heresies; and first by Counsels.  
FROM the inviolable unity of Faith, we will next descend to the privileges of Gods true church, of which privileges, I will at this time take only one into my consideration; which, is that the church of God is endued with a supreme prerogative, in not erring in her definition of faith or condemnation of heresy. This point is warranted by innumerable texts of holy Scripture, as where it is said: Upon thy wales, O Jerusalem, I have set watchmen, all the day, and all the night they shall not be silent. Isai. 72. But God did not set watchmen over his Church to teach errors. And again, the 
(a) 1. Tim. 3.  Church of God, is the pillar and foundation of truth; what more perspicuous? And further, whereas each man is commanded to repair in difficulties, even of lesser consequences, to the Church, it is threatened by Christ himself, that who will not hear the Church, shallbe accounted, as an heathen or publican, according to that his condemnation: Si Ecclesiam non audierit, 
(b) Matt. 18.  sit tibi sicut Ethnicus & Publicanus: where we find no restriction, but that in all things we are to hear the Church. Again Christ himself speaketh to his Apostles, and in them to the whole Church: 
(c) Luc. 10.  He that heareth you, heareth me. But if the Church, could err, neither would Christ refer us to the Church (especially under so great a penalty) neither by hearing the Church, could we be justly said to hear Christ. Finally, the Church is so governed by Christ, as its head, or spouse, and by the holy Ghost as its soul, as therefore we find the Apostle thus to write 
(d) Ephes. ●.  thereof. God hath made him head. (speaking of Christ) over all the Church, which is his body: And again one 
(e) Ephes. 4.  body, and one spirit, and yet more: The 
(f) Ephes. 5.  man is the head of the Church. From which Texts it followeth, that if the Church should err in its definition, or resolution of Faith, and condemnation of Heresy, this erring must justly be ascribed to Christ and to the holy Ghost: and consequently it followeth, that the Apostles in making the Creed, would have omitted that Article. I believe the holy Catholic Church. For why should we be bound to believe the Church, if the Church could err?  
2. This truth, (I mean that the Church of Christ cannot err in her sententionall decrees) is so illustrious and evident, that Tertullian speaking of certain Heretics of his time, objecting the erring of the whole church, thus figuratively or Ironically writeth: Age 
(g) Lib. de preser.  omnes erraverunt, nullam respexit Spiritus sanctus: that is, go to, belike, all the Churches have erred; & the holy Ghost hath respected or looked upon no one Church. And S. Augustine. Disputare 
(h) Epist. 118.  contra id quod Ecclesia universa sentit, insolentissimae insaniae est: To dispute against any point, maintained by the whole Church, is extreme madness. To whose judgement herein most of the more sober and learned Protestants do indisputably subscribe; since diverse of 
(i) D. Bancroft in ser. 1588. Fox. act. Mon. 464 h. art. 4. the divines of Geneva in their propositions and principles, disputed pag. 141. & diverse others.  them do with all fervor and earnestness maintain, that the church of Christ cannot err, and that, what she defineth, for truth, is most true, or what for Heresy or falsehood, is heretical, and to be condemned.  
3. This basis or foundation of the Churches not erring, being thus firmly laid, we are hereupon to conclude, that what points of Religion, the Catholic Church of Christ hath condemned for heresies, the same are by us to be reputed for heresies (since the Church's condemnation or approbation is most infallible) & the maintainours of the said heresies, for heretics; and consequently that such heretics, as departing out of the Church of God, by their holding of the said heretical opinions, cannot be saved. Now because the judgement of the Church in matters of faith is (by the aknowledgment of all sides) discovered two ways; first by the sentence of general Counsels; secondly by the frequent attestations of the chief doctors of the Church in every age, in their particular writings, they not being contradicted therein, by any other orthodoxal Fathers, or doctors of the same age; I will therefore distributively handle both these ways, showing that both by general Counsels, and also by the particular judgement of the learned Fathers, many opinions, though not touching the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, or the express articles of the Apostles Creed, have been condemned for plain heresies, and the believers of them anathematised for Heretics.  
4. And first, to begin with Counsels, the infallible authority of which, even Christ himself, hath by his own words often ratifyed: as where he saith: Where 
(k) Math. 18.  two or three (much more when many hundred venerable Bishops) are gathered together in my name, I am in the midst of them. And again, speaking to his Church, and in it to the assembled Doctors and Pastors thereof: I am 
(l) Math. 28.  with you all days, even to the consummation of the world. Which counsels are ever directed, and governed by the holy Ghost: according to those words in the Acts: Visum est 
(m) c. 15  Spiritui sancto & nobis. It hath seemed good to the holy Ghost and us. And therefore are worthily received & admitted, for the supremest sentence of God's Church, not only by the ancient 
(n) Atha. epist ad Epictetum. Aug. epi. 162. Nazianz oratione in Athanasium. cyril l. de Trinitate etc.  Fathers, but even by the more learned Protestants; since to omit others, one of the most remarkable of them thus writeth: Synods 
(o) D. Bilson in his perpetual government pag. 370.  are an external judicial means to discern error; & the supremest means to decide doubts. But to proceed. The Council of Nice was celebrated (though principally for the repressing of the heresy of Arrius, denying the divinity of Christ) yet withal touching the Controversy of keeping the feast of Easter, as is apparent out of 
(p) D. Bilson supra pag. 374.  Eusebius, 
(q) Lib. 3. de vita Constantini.  Athanasius, and 
(r) De synodis Ariminis & Seleuciae.  Epiphanius. Now this Council pronounceth Anathema, to all those, who (besides their denying of the divinity of Christ) shall deny that the feast of Easter, was not to be kept according to the custom of the church, but according to the custom of the jews. And these heretics were called Quartodecimani, 
Heres. 70. Andianorun.  of whom see Tertul. l. de prescrip. Augustine heresis 29. And here we are to understand, that the word: Anathema, used and pronounced by this Council (which word is also almost every where used in all their general Counsels) signifieth as much, as accursed, and in this sense we find this word, Anathema, to be used by the Apostle, in several 
(t) Epist. ad Rom. 9.1. Cor. 12. etc.  places, so as when a Council pronounceth Anathema, to any for believing such and such heresies, or not believing such and such true doctrines, it intendeth to say, that those men so doing, are to be accursed and abandoned from God, But no man is to be accursed or abandoned from God, for believing, or not believing points of indifferency, but for believing of such errors, as cannot stand with his soul's salvation.  
5. Also you shall read Act. 15. of the Council assembled in the Apostles time, the occasion and reason thereof was, for that certain contentious men, maintaining that the Gentiles, converted to the Christian faith, might eat meats offered up to Idols, & blood and strangled beasts, contrary to the custom of the jews; the Apostles being assembled, & bearing with the weakness of the jews, in the infancy of the Church, decreed the prohibition of eating blood and strangled meats. After, which decree once established, it is certain, that it had been a mortal sin immediately to have eaten of blood, and strangled meats; so as before it being a point of indifferency, is now made necessary. This appeareth from the text: first from those words; Certain going forth from us, have troubled you with words, subverting your souls. But men do neither depart out of the Church, by maintaintng certain opinions, nor by their example therein can they subvert other men's souls, if their doctrine and practise thereof, do still remain, about things indifferent; Secondly from that other passage. It hath seemed good to the holy Ghost and us, to lay, no further burden upon you, than these necessary things: where we find, that the prohibition of such meats, is ranged by the Apostles, in regard of those times, amoung those things, which are necessary; Again neither would the Apostles have gathered themselves so solemnly, neither would they have ascribed, the decreeing of it to the work of the holy Ghost, if the subject of the question, and difficulty then discussed of by them, had concerned matters only of indifferency.  
6. Now from the example of this Council, I do gather, that if a Council by its own authority may decree, that the eating of certain meats (being otherways of their own nature indifferently to be eaten without sin) shallbe unlawful, and shall repute and hold the impugners thereof for men departed from out of the Church of Christ; then a fortiori, what doctrine soever a Council shall condemn of its own nature for heresy, the same is to be reputed, by all good Christians for heresy, and the defendours thereof for Heretics.  
7. The third Council of 
(u) Cau. 47.  Carthage (whereat S. Augustine was present) decreed, that the book of the Maccabees with some other books, should be acknowledged as canonical; and pronounceth an Anathema, and condemnation to all those, who should not believe them, as canonical scripture: from whence it may be concluded, that seeing the book of the Maccabees, teacheth prayer for the dead, that therefore this Council alloweth this doctrine, and condemneth the contrary doctrine for heresy.  
8. The doctrine of the Novatians (who taught, that there was not power in the Church, to reconcile men to God, but only by Baptism; excluding and denying thereby the sacrament of Penance) was condemned with the thunderbolt of Anathema. In the Council of Rome holden under Pope Cornelius, as 
(x) lib. 6. hist. c. 33.  Eusebius reporteth, was condemned for heresy, the error of Anabaptism, as the same 
(y) l. 7. hist. c. 2. 1.  Eusebius relateth.  
9 The Council of Chalcedon condemned the heresy of Eutiches, who taught, that there was but one 
(z) ut patet in act. 1. Conc.  Nature in Christ, after the Incarnation. In like sort the first Council of Ephesus, condemned the heresy of Nestorius, teaching two persons to be in Christ, as appeareth out of 
(a) In Chronico.  Prosper, and 
(b) Lib. 7. c. 3●.  Socrates. Now touching both these last heresies, we are to understand, that both Nestorius, and Eutiches, did believe in Christ jesus our Saviour, as the Redeemer of the world, yet they were registered & branded for heretics only for their pertinacious erring, touching the Person & Natures of Christ; as now the Protestants may be reputed Heretics, for their ascribing of ignorance, Passion, and desperation to Christ.  
10. The Council of Chalcedon also decreed, that vowed virgins and monks could not marry, condemning those with an Anathema, & for heretics, that should hold & maintain the contrary, as is to be seen out of the Council itself. The fourth Council of Carthage (whereat S. Augustine was present) pronounced, that the 
(c) Can. 79.  doctrine of prayer and Sacrifice for the dead, was according to the true faith of Christ's Church; and condemned the contrary opinion for heresy and the maintainers of them for Heretics. The Council of Constantinople, under Pope Vigilius, condemned Origen for his heresy, in which he taught that the devils should in the end be saved; as 
(d) In rita justiniani.  Zonaras and 
(e) Lib. 17. c. 27.  Nichephorus relate. Finally the seventh synod or 2. council of Nice, condemned all them for Heretics, who taught, that the Images of Christ, & of his Saints, were to be deprived of all due respect and reverence, and to be condemned and broken: of this point, see Paulus 
(f) Lib. 23. reri●● Roman.  Diaconus and 
(g) In compendiu historius.  Cedrenus.  
11. Thus fare concerning Counsels, condemning for heresy false opinions touching faith and Religion, where I have restrained myself, only to those Counsels (this last only excepted) which were within the first five hundred years, or little more, because those times are more prized, & esteemed, than the now later times. The like course was continued by Counsels, for condemning and resisting of Innovations, and false doctrines (though not concerning the Trinity, the Incarnation, or the Apostles Creed) in the succeeding Ages; which I purposely omit.  
12. But now I here demand, first how can it stand with the infallible authority of God's Church, in not erring in matters of faith (of which privilege I have entreated in the beginning of this Chapter) if so she shall define the former errors, for condemned heresies, and Anathematise, and curse the maintaynors of them, for branded Heretics, if the doctrines are but only, matters of indifferency; & such as may stand with salvation? Secondly, I ask, how both the deffendours & impugners of the said doctrines, can be freed from the brand of Heresy? seeing the true definition of Heresy, necessarily agreeth to the doctrines, maintained by the one side; for it is certain, that either the Catholics, or the Protestants, do make choice of new opinions herein, & do stubbornly maintain these their Innovations against the Church of God.   

The same proved from the authority of the Church, condemning heresies, manifested by the writings of particular Fathers. CHAP. VII.  
NOW to come to the second way, of discovering the Church's sentence, in the foresaid point, which is by the particular judgement, of the ancient learned Fathers, which were in their several ages, the shining lamps of God's Church, whose authorities that all succeeding ages, are to reverence, is easily evicted from God's holy writ; for answearably heerto we read in Deutronom. 32. Remember the old days, think upon every generation, ask thy father, and he will declare unto thee, thy elders, and they will tell thee. And the Protestant confession of Bohemia conspireth thereunto, saying: The 
(a) Harmonia confess. p. 400.  ancient Church, is the true and best mistress of posterity, and going before leadeth us the way. Coming then to the Fathers, I will first insist in the particular errors (not touching either the Trinity, the Incarnation, & Passion of our Saviour, or the articles of the Creed, but points seeming of more indifferency) condemned by them, for open and damnable heresies. And here I have purposely made particular choice of diverse Controversies of this time, handled between the Catholics & the Protestants, to the end that our Adiaphorists (who maintain, that both Protestants & Catholics may be saved) may see, that the denial of those very articles of faith, were reputed by the Fathers of the primitive Church, for heresies, & the deniers of them for Heretics, and consequently in the Father's judgement, not capable of salvation. Next I will set down, diverse of the Father's sayings, & sentences, pronounced of heresy, and Heretics in general.  
2. But before we come to the condemnation of particular heresies, we must conceive, that reason itself, & reverence due to the chief Doctors & Fathers of the primative Church, must presuppose, that in those times, all those opinions, were generally acknowledged for damnable heresies, which are placed in the Catalogue of heresies, by Irenaeus, Hierome, Epiphanius, Philastrius, Augustine, Theodoret, and other approved Authors, of those days. This by drift of reason is to be acknowledged, for two respects: First, because we cannot find any Doctor, or Writer of the same ages, who contradicted the foresaid Fathers, for planting in their Catalogues, any opinion as heresy, which was not heresy. Secondly, in that the forenamed Fathers, and Authors of the Catalogues of heresies, were godly and learned men, and therefore neither would, nor durst, brand any opinion with the note and mark of heresy, which the whole Church of God did not then take as heresy. All this then justly & truly presupposed; let us proceed to the particular heresies, so registered for such, by some of the foresaid Fathers, where (for the fuller convincing of our Newtralists in Religion) my greatest choice (some few only excepted) shallbe of the Controversies, remaining still at this day, between the Catholics and Protestants.  
3. First then, That God was the author of sin, was maintained by Florinus, and condemned for heresy, or rather blasphemy by 
(b) Euseb l. 5. hist. cap. 20.  Irenieus, and 
(c) In commonitorio  Vincentius Lyrinensis.  
4. The opinion touching the impossibility of the Commandments, was maintained by certain Novelists of those times, & condemned for heresy by 
(d) In explan. simbol. ad Damas'.  S. Hierome in these words: Execramus etc. We do execrate, and abhor the blasphemy of those, who say that any impossible thing is commanded by God, to be kept and observed by man. See also the like condemnation hereof given by 
(e) Serm. de temp. cap. 101  S. Augustine.  
5. That man had not , is averred by the Manichees, and condemned for a manifest heresy by 
(f) In praesat. dial. count. Pelagia.  Hierome in these words: Manichaeorum est hominis damnare Naturam, & liberum auferre arbitrium. The Manichees do condemn man's nature, & do take away . As also by S. Augustine 
(g) Lib. de haeres. c. 46.  saying: Peccatorum originem non tribuunt Manichaei libero arbitrio. The Manichees doth not ascribe the beginning of sin to Freewill.  
6. That faith doth only justify, was condemned for an heresy in the Eunomians by 
(h) Lib. de haeres. c. 54.  S. Augustine, who further 
(i) Lib. de fide & operib. c. 14.  saith, that it first proceeded from the false understanding of S. Paul in his epistles.  
7. That prayer or sacrifice, could not be offered up for the dead, is maintained by Aerius, & his followers, who also taught, that set fasting-dais are not to be appointed by the Church: yet were these two opinions condemned for heresies by 
(k) Hares. 75.  Epiphanius, and 
(l) Lib. de heres. cap 33.  S. Austin, who thus writteth: Aeriani haeretici docent, non oportere orare, aut offerre sacrificium pro mortuis, nec statuta solemniter celebranda esse ieiunia, sed cum quisque voluerit ieiunandum, ne videatis esse sub lege. The Heretic Aerians do teach, that we ought not to pray or offer sacrifice for the dead: that solemn fasting days are not to be celebrated, but that every one is to fast, when it pleaseth himself, lest otherwise he might seem to live under the law. Thus fare S. Augustine.  
8. That Virgins might marry, was condemned in Vigilantius for heresy by S. Hierome, who against the same Vigilantius, thus writeth: Quid faciunt Orientis Ecclesiae? etc. What do the Churches of the East in this point? What the Church of Egypt? And the Apostolical Sea? They admit for Priests, men, who are either Virgins, or continent, or if they have wives, do cease to become husbands.  
9 That marriage and virginity was of equal dignity, was defended by jovinian, who also absolutely denied, all diversity of merits, yet was this his error condemned for heresy by 
(m) Lib. 1. aduer. jovin. c. 2  S. Hierome, and 
(n) De tempore ser. 191.  S. Augustine thus writing thereof: joviniani damnamus errorem, qui dicit nullam in futuro meritorum distantiam. We condemn the error of jovinian, who teacheth, that there is no disparity, or difference of merits in time to come.  
10. That the Church was not ever visible, was taught by the Donatists, but condemned for a most wicked heresy, by S. Augustine, who thus discourseth thereof: Donatistae 
(o) Lib. de unit. Ecc. c. 12. & epist. 170 ad Severum.  detorquent scripturas, in Ecclesiam Dei, ut tanquam defecisse, & perijsse de toto orbe videatis. The Donatists do detort the Scripture, and apply it against the Church of God, that the Church thereby may seem to have suffered defect, or perished out of the whole world.  
11. That Baptism of children was not necessary, was taught by the Pelagians, but condemned for a manifest heresy by 
(p) In rescripto ad Milevitanum Concil.  Innocentius, by 
(q) Haeres. 88  S. Augustine, and 
(r) In ep. 86. ad Episcopum Aquetletensem.  S. Leo.  
12. The Religious use of the images of Christ & his Saints, was sacrilegiously denied be Zenaias Persa, as Nicephorus (s) witnesseth, thus writing: Zenaias iste primus (o audacem animam & os impudens) vocem illam evomuit, Christi, & eorum qui illi placuerunt, imagines venerandas non esse, that is. This Zenayas was the first, that vomited forth this word (to bold soul, and impudent mouth) that the Images of Christ, and his Saints, were not to be worshipped.  
12. That we ought not to pray to Saints, or to worship their Relics, was maintained by Vigilantius, but condemned for heresy by 
(t) Lib. count. Vigilant. c. ●. & 3.  Saint Hierome, and by 
(v) Lib. de Eccles. ●og. c. ●3  S. Augustine, who of this later branch thus writeth. Sanctorum corporum, & praecipue Beatorum veliquias, a●si Christi membra, sincerissime honoranda credimus; si quis contra sententiam venerit, non Christianus, sed Eunomianus aut Vigilantianus creditur. We believe that the Relics of holy bodies (but especially of Martyrs) as the members of Christ, are to be honoured most sincerely: and who shall come to impugn this doctrine, is to be accounted no Christian, but either an Eunomian or a Vigilantian.  
13. The overthrowing of Altars, & casting away of holy Chrism, was taught & practised by the Donatists, yet was this their sacrilegious proceed condemned, & themselves branded for Heretics by 
(x) Lib. 2. contra Petilianun c. 52. & l. 3. c. 40 & epist. 163.  S. Augustine, and by Optatus, who speaking to the Donatists, discourseth thereof in this manner: Quid 
(y) Lib. 6. contra Donatist.  est tam sacrilegum, quam altaria Dei, in quibus & vos aliquando obtulistis, frangere, radere, removere? Quid enim est altar, nisi sedes corporis & sanguinis Christi? Quid vos offenderit Christus, cuius illic per certa momenta, corpus & sanguis habitabant? What is so sacrilegious (O you Donatists) as to break, deface, cast down the altars of God, whereupon yourselves have sometimes offered up sacrifice? What other thing is an Altar, than the seat of the body and blood of Christ? In what hath Christ so offended you, whose body and blood, for certain moments or short times, did dwell and remain upon the Altars?  
14. To be short, I pass over (as less pertinent to the Controversies of these times) how the error of Origen touching the salvation of Devils was condemned for heresy, by 
(z) Haer. 43. & de civet. Dei l. 21. cap. 17.  S. Augustine; the error of Tertullian denying 2. marriages, was in like sort mightily reprehended & condemned by 
(a) Haer. 86.  S. Augustine, though both these Doctors (I mean Tertullian, and Origen) had otherwise by their learned writings, deserved well of the Church of God.  
15. Thus fare touchnig the foresaid controversies condemned for heresies, by the Fathers of the primative Church; though the subject of the said heresies, was neither touching the Trinity, the Incarnation, the passion of our Saviour, or the articles of the Creed; appoint so evident, & confessed even by the Protestants, as that many of the foresaid examples, are collected out of the Fathers, and confessed so to be condemned, by learned Protestants, as by the Centurists in their first chapter of every several Century, by Osiander, in his several centuries, as also by Pantaleon in his Chronology. Besides which condemnation of the Church, either these doctrines, or the contrary to them, are necessarily proved to be heresies, even from the very definition of heresy above set down; and therefore it followeth, that both the Catholics and Protestants (the one believing them, the other not) cannot be saved, seeing Heretics, dying Heretics, cannot be saved.  
16. Now to come to the sentences of the Fathers poured out in great heat, and fervour of zeal against Heretics & Heresies in general. And to begin with S. John the Evangelist. S. Irenaeus 
(b) Lib. ● c. 3. & apud Euseb. l. 4. c. 13.  relateth (to set down Irenaeus own words) that Policarpus the martyr (who was scholar to the Apostles) was wont to tell, how that Saint john the Apostle of our Saviour, being at a certain time in Ephesus, and going into a public bath, & finding Cerinthus the Heretic to be within the bath, ran presently out of the bath, saying to them who were with him: Let us flee from hence, for fear lest the bath fall upon us, and kill us, in which the enemy of God Cerinthus abideth.  
17. The said author 
(c) Vbi supra.  Irenaeus, in like sort relateth in these words following, how that the foresaid Policarpus meeting at Rome by chance, Martion the Heretic, and being demanded of Policarpus, whether he knew him or not? answered: Yea, I know thee for the chief child of Satan. To conclude with the testimony of this Father, the said Irenaeus, writing to Florinus an heretic, who once was scholar to S. Policarpe with him, thus saith: These opinions 
(d) Iren. in epist. ad Flori.  of thine (O Florinus) to speak friendly, are not true nor wholesome. These opinions are repugnant to the Church etc. I may truly protest, that if the holy & Apostolical Priest Policarpus, had heard of such opinions, as thou defendest, be would have stopped his ears, & cried out (according to his fashion) O good God, unto what miserable times, hast thou reserved me, to hear these things? And presently would have run out of the place, where he had been standing or sitting, where such doctrine had been uttered. But now to reflect a little upon the premises: Cerinthus, Martion, and Florinus, did all believe in the Trinity, the Incarnation of our Saviour, and received the Apostles Creed; and erred only in lesser points, and yet we see what sharp reprehensions, were used towards them, by S. john, & S. Policarpe his scholar, As to fly out of their company, to acknowledge one of them to be the child of the Devil, to stop their own ears, for not hearing of their errors etc. All which speeches had been over much, aggravated, and transcended the bounds of Charity, if their errors had rested upon matters only of indifferency, and had been compatible with man's salvation.  
18. But to proceed to the sentences of other Fathers in this point. Athanasius saith in his creed (to use his words) Whosoever doth not hold the Catholic faith, whole and inviolable, he shall perish for ever. And S. Hierome expressly thus writteth. For 
(e) Lib. 3 Apol. count. Ruffinum.  one word or two, contrary to the faith, many have been cast out of the Church. Yea he proceedeth further thus writing: Haeretici 
(f) Dial. contra Lucif. c. 1  quicumque, Christiani non sunt. Whosoever are Heretics, these men are not Christians. S. Basil was wont to say, as Theodoret recordeth: Those 
(g) Lib. 4. hist. c. 17.  who are truly instructed in the divine doctrine, will not suffer any syllable of the divine decrees to be corrupted, but for the defence thereof (if necessity forceth them) will undergo any kind of death. Tertullian 
(h) Lib. de preser-  that ancient Father hath a sentence, not much different from that of the former Father. S. Augustine saith: Imagine a 
(i) Lib. 4. contra Donatist. c. 8.  man to be chaste, continent, not covetous, not serving Idols, ministering hospitality to the poor, enemy to none, malicing no body, sober, frugal etc. but yet if he be an Heretic, certainly no man doubteth, but for this alone, that he is an heretic, he shall not possess the kingdom of God. A dreadful saying of so learned and godly a Father. The Donatists for disagreeing from S. Augustine in some traditions, not specified in the Scripture (much less in the creed) are thus reprehended by him. In 
(k) In explicat. Psal. 54.  these points those Heretics were with me, and yet not altogether with me, in schism not with me, in heresy not with me, in many things with me, in few not with me. These few in which they were not with me, the many could not help them, in which they were with me. And yet these Donatists believed with S. Augustine, the Trinity, the Incarnation, & recited with him the Apostles Creed. Briefly S. Augustine in quest. 11. in Matth. thus defineth an Heretic: Haereticus est, qui de aliqua parte doctrinae falsum credit. He is an heretic, who believeth any false thing touching any point of Christian faith. Within which definition, it necessarily followeth, that either the Protestants for not believing Purgatory, Prayers to Saints, Freewill, Merit of works, or the Catholic for believing of them are to be included. S. Gregory Nazianzen in Oratione 37. Vnum uni cohoeret etc. One point of faith agreeth with another, so as of them altogether there is made a certain golden and wholesome chain; therefore if but one opinion or article be taken away, or made doubtful, the whole chain of faith will be come broken. And S. Cyprian: Cum 
(l) Lib. 1 epi. 6. ad Magnun.  Dominus noster Iesus Christus etc. When our Lord jesus Christ, did testify in the Gospel, that those were his enemies, who were not with him, he noted not any one heresy, but manifestly showeth, that all Heretics whosoever, are his enemies; saying: He that is not with me, is against me, and he that doth not gather with me, disperseth. Luc. 11. And S. Chrysostom: Quemadmodum 
(m) In ep ad Gal. c. 10.  in mone●a regia etc. Even as who pareth away a little of the King's silver, maketh the whole piece thereof, to be adulterate; Even so, who overthroweth, the least part or branch of true faith, may be said, to corrupt the whole; he proceeding from this small beginning to worse courses.  
19 To come to an end of the Father's judgement in this point, S. Ambrose 
(n) Lib. 6 in Luc. c. 9  shall conclude all, who thus plainly writeth thereof: Si unum horum retraxeris etc. If thou shalt recall or deny any of these points, thou hast retracted thy own salvation; for even Heretics seem to challenge Christ to them, for no man will deny the name of Christ; nevertheless, he indeed denyeth Christ, who doth not confess all points of faith, instituted by Christ. Thus fare of the Father's judgement in this matter, where I am to advertise the Reader. First (as above I have touched in the Counsels) that if all false doctrines whatsoever pertinaciously defended against the Church of God, be heresies, as the definition of heresy above explicated, proveth them to be, and as the Fathers of the Primitive Church, and in them the whole Church of God, have maintained, then either the Protestants or Catholics for their disentions & holding of contrary doctrines, touching freewill, Purgatory, Prayer to Saints, sacrifice etc. are to be accounted heretics; and consequently both cannot be saved in their Religion. For that Heretics, continuing Heretics, cannot be saved, is demonstrated; first, from those fearful threats & comminations of the Apostles thundered out against Heretics (of which point I have discoursed above) Secondly, from the authority of Christ's church, which excludeth all Heretics (as I have showed) from all hope of salvation: And lastly (to omit many other reasons) from that principle, That Heretics are no members of Christ's church, of which point we are to dispute in the next place. Now if the said false doctrines, be not heresies, then have the Fathers of the primitive church, generally erred in defyning them for heresies, and consequently the whole Church of God represented in the Fathers, as in her Pastors and Doctors, hath also therein erred, which is repugnant to the holy 
(o) Math 18. joan. 16. 3. Ephes. 1.  Scripture, and our Saviour's promise.  
20. The second thing to be advertised is, that of the former authorities of the Fathers against heresy, not any of them are restrained by them to be heresies, touching the Trinity, the Incarnation of Christ, his Passion, the Articles of the creed (for of these here is made no mention or intimation in their authorities) within which compass our Formalists in Religion, seek to contain their faith; but they are implicitly by the Fathers extended, to all heresies whatsoever, whether they concern the supreme and fundamental points of Christian Religion, or any other secondary, and less principal point of the same Religion.   

The same proved from that principle, that neither Heretics nor Schismatics, are members of Christ's Church. CHAP. VIII.  
IN this last place concerning the Church, we will set down, another principle of Christian faith, and after will deduce from thence by way of most necessary inference, our conclusion here handled. The principle is this: That Heretics holding any heresies whatsoever, are no members of the church of Christ. The deduction is, that Heretics therefore cannot be saved; since none can be saved, but such as are members of Christ's church. This principle is proved (as above is intimated) out of God's holy word, as where it it 
(a) 1. Tim. 1.  said: Certain men made shipwreck touching faith, that is, they fell out of the ship of the Church by forging of Heresies. And again: They 
(b) 1. Io. 2.  went out of us, that is, as S. Augustine expoundeth, out of the Church, of which we are. The expositions of which texts are warranted, even by force of reason: for seeing the Church is an united multitude (for it is one Spouse, 
Cant. 6.  one Kingdom, and one Body) & this union chief consisteth in the profession of one faith; it is repugnant to reason, that they should be reputed as members of the body of the Church, who have no conjunction at all, in the chiefest matters with the said body.  
2. If we proceed to the testimonies of the ancient Fathers, we shall find them of an unanimous judgement herein, to wit, That Heretics are no members of the Church, and therefore cannot be saved. And first, occurreth S. Irenaeus 
(c) Lib. 3 Cap. 3.  who saith, that Policarpe did convert many Heretics unto the Church; therefore it may be concluded, that those Heretics before their conversion, were out of the Church. S. Cyprian 
(d) Epist. ad jubainum.  saith: Heretics, though they be out of the Church, do challenge to themselves the authority of the Church, after the manner of Apes, who not being men, yet would be accounted to be men. The same Father thus plainly writeth in another place. Cum 
(e) lib. de unitate Eccles.  Deo manner non possunt, qui in Ecclesia Dei unanimes esse noluerunt. They cannot remain with God, who descent in judgement from the church of God. And yet more fully in the same place: Non pervenit ad Christi praemia etc. He arriveth not to the rewards of Christ, who leaveth the church of Christ, he is an alien, he is profane, he is an enemy; for he cannot have God to his Father, who hath not the Church for his Mother. And S. Hierome saith: Quê non 
(f) In dialog. con. Lucifer.  à Domino jesu Christo, sed ab alio etc. Who take their denomination or name not from our Lord jesus Christ, but from some other (as the Marcionists, Valentinians, Montenses, etc.) are not the Church of God, but the synagogue of Antichrist. Finally S. Augustine (for I have already dwelled overlong, in the authority of the Fathers) pronounceth that: Nihil sic 
(g) Trae. 27. in joann.  formidare debet etc. A Christian ought to fear nothing so much, as to be separated, from the body of Christ, which is his Church, and which is one and Catholic; for if he be separated from the body of Christ, he is not a member of Christ; if no member of Christ, then is he not strengthened with his spirit. But who hath not this spirit of God, the same man is not of God. Thus fare S. Augustin; with whom even the Protestants do join here in judgement; for D. Dove in his book of persuasions thus saith: This proposition, that Heretics are not to be communicated withal, is undoubtedly true. And D. Sutcliffe in his Examen of petitions, pag. 9 allegeth the Laodicean Council can 31. 32. 33. in proof thereof, thus concluding: The Laodicean Council doth directly condemn, communion with Heretics, either in marriage or prayer.  
3. This already alleged may serve to prove that Heretics, are no members of the Church of Christ, & consequently cannot attain salvation; since it is agreed among all learned men, that only the members of the church of Christ can find salvation in Christ, we will in this place descend to Schismatics, who if they be neither of the Church of God, nor can justly expect any salvation (during such their state) than a fortiori, no Heretic, can expect any salvation; since a Schismatic believing all articles of Christian faith, doth only divide himself by disobedience, in not communicating with the Church in prayer & Sacraments. Whereas an Heretic (as is above said) wilfully & contumaciously maintaineth errors, & false opinions condemned by the Church. Now that a Schismatic is not a member of Christ's Church, is first proved from the Texts of Scripture (above in part touched) where the Church is called one fouled of sheep joan. 10. One body. Rome 12. One spouse, and one Dove Cant. 6. But now Schism according to its Etymology, deuideth that, which was one, into parts; for Schisma, being a greek word, cometh of the verb Schizo, which is scindere, therefore as a member being cut off from the body, is no longer a part of the body; so a Schismatic dividing himself by his own disobedience, from the communion of the Church, is no longer a member of the said Church.  
4. This verity, to wit, That Schismatics are not members of the Church of Christ, is (besides the former proofs) warranted with the authorities; & sentences of the ancient Fathers. And first S. Cyprian thus purposely writeth of Schismatics: Qui 
(h) Lib. 4. ep 9 ad Florem.  cum Episcopo non sunt, in Ecclesia non sunt. Those, who agree not with the Bishop (meaning the supreme Bishop of God's Church) are not in the Church. And again, the said 
(i) Lib. de unitate Ecclesiae.  Father most elegantly compareth Schismatics, to Beams divided from the sun, to Boughs cut off from the tree, & to Rivers wholly separated from their springs. Saint chrysostom discoursing of Schismatics thus saith: Schismatis 
(k) Hom 3. in ep. 1 ad Cor.  significantia satis eos arguit etc. The very signification of this word schism, is a sufficient and vehement condemnation of them etc. Which Father in another 
(l) Hom. 13. in ep. ad Ephes.  place, compareth a schismatic, to the hand cut off from the body, which thereupon ceaseth to be a member; and expressly affirmeth, that schismatics, though they consent with the Church of Christ, in doctrine, yet are not in the Church of Christ, but in altera Ecclesia, meaning in a Church different from the Church of Christ. S. Hierome distinguishing schism from heresy thus discourseth: Inter 
(m) In c. 3. ad Tit.  heresim & schisma hoc interesse arbitramur etc. We take this to be the difference between heresy & schism; that heresy maintaineth a perverse and false doctrine, whereas schism ab Ecclesia pariter separat, in like manner separateth a man from the Church in regard of dissension and disobedience towards our Bishop. S. Augustine thus woundeth a Schismatic: Haeretici 
(n) lib. de side & simbol. c. ●0.  & Schismatici congregationes suas Ecclesias vocant etc. Heretics and Schismatics, do call their congregations the churches. But Heretics do violate their faith, in believing falsely touching God, whereas Schismatics, though they believe the same points, which we believe, yet through their dissensions, they do not keep fraternal charity, wherefore we conclude, that neither an Heretic, belongeth to the Catholic church, because he loveth not God, nor a Schismatic, because he loveth not his Neighbour. To conclude, Fulgentius 
(o) lib. de fide ad Petrum cap. 38. & 39  agreeth with the former Rever. Father in this point, saying: Firmissime tene etc. Believe for certain, and doubt not that only Pagans, but also jews, Heretics, and Schismatics, who die out of the Catholic church, are to go to everlasting fire.  
5. And thus fare touching Schismatics, who because they be not of the Church of Christ, cannot obtain salvation; which point being made evident, by so many authorities both divine and human, then much more strongly may we conclude, that Heretics (as exceeding the Schismatics in pravity and malice, and being excluded in like sort with them out of the Church of Christ) cannot he saved. But before I end this Chapter, give me leave, good Reader, to expatiate a little, beyond my designed limits: O than you Schismatics here in our own country, whose souls are so wholly absorbed in earthy & muddy considerations, cast your eyes upon your own states, & use some small introversies upon yourselves. You see what a dangerous censure the ancient Church of Christ, by the mouths of its chief Pastors & Doctors, hath thundered against you. It saith: You are not of Christ's church, you are aliens and strangers thereto. It further pronounceth, That dying in such your state, you are all deprived of all hope of salvation. Good God, what stupor & dulness of yours is this? Are you Christians? Prefer then Christ before the world. Fear your God more than man. Give then to God, what is Gods, & to Caesar, what is Caesar's. Reflect upon these ensuing principles of the Catholic, & therefore your own Religion.  
6. The one that God ordinarily deriveth his grace unto man's soul, by the conduits of his sacraments, and giveth absolution of ones sins, particularly by the sacrament of Penance, and confession: you wilfully deprive yourselves, of the participation of the Sacraments, and thereby of grace & of the remission of your sins, & are you not then as dried branches, void of that heavenly grace, which giveth life to the soul? You want the grace & forgiveness of your sin, s where then is your hope of eternal life? Remember the Apostles words, & be afraid: Gratia Dei vita aeeterna, & do not disjoin those asunder, which S. Paul hath so inseparably united.  
7. The second, the uncertainty of any particular man's salvation, which point is able to strike you dead through fear; & the rather, since it is no small sign of man's future damnation, deliberately and wilfully, year after year, to divide himself from the Church of Christ, and from all the spiritual influences streaming from thence.  
8. The third, that there is a Purgatory, the pains whereof, though terminable, yet are insupportable. Suppose then the best, that is, that you finally dye with true repentance, and reconciled to God's Church (which yet is not in your power, but out of the main Ocean of God's mercy) nevertheless your own faith assureth you, that you must suffer in that place even insufferable torments for your former dissimulation, & that your continuance, in thus dissembling with God, serve but as bellowes the more to blow that dreadful fire. Oh how great interest then, are you to pay in the end, for the enjoying of this your misspent time? If you be Catholics (though but in hart) you believe all here said, and therefore may the more assuredly presage of your own future misery. If you do not believe these three former points of Catholic Religion, then are you less damned for want of true faith, then otherways by your unchaungeable schismatical lives, for want of due conformity to the Church of Christ; therefore I wish you to awake, out of that schismatical letargy of the soul, and daily meditate of that of the Apostle Rom. 10. Cord creditur ad iustitiam, o'er fit confessio ad salutem. With the hart we believe unto justice: but with the mouth confession is made to salvation. But I will stay here my pen, remembering my undertaken subject, and will proceed to the next head.   

The same proved by arguments drawn from reason. CHAP. VIIII.  
TO pass from the authority of God's sacred word, his holy Church, & the ancient Fathers the pillars thereof, touching the nature of heresy, and of Heretics, as also touching the unity and infallibility of the same Church, and the persons disincorporated and separated from it; from all which heads it hath been evidently evicted, that a man obstinately defending, any one error in faith and Religion, cannot expect salvation. It now remaineth, that the same be made evident by force of reason, that thereby all men, enjoying the faculty of reason, may the more easily subscribe to so undeniable a verity, & say with the Psalmist herein: 
Psal. 92.  Testimonia tua credebilia sunt nimis. Well then, the first and chiefest reason, is taken from the causes of true faith, where for the better conceiving thereof, we are to understand, that faith is a supernatural habit, not obtained by the force of Nature; and that who resteth doubtful or staggering of any one article, is charged by the Canon-law, with flat infidelity, according to that: Dubius 
(b) jure Canon. c. 10. de Heretic.  in fide, infidelis est. Therefore to the belief of any one article of faith, two things do concur: the one, is the first revealing verity (as the schoolmen speak) which is God himself: the second is the Church, propounding the article to be believed. Now when we believe any point of faith, God, who is the first revealing verity (as is said) revealeth it to the Church, and the Church propoundeth it so revealed, to us to believe; and thus we believe a point of faith, through the authority of God revealing, and the Church propounding. And this is most consonant, and agreeing, with that most admirable and infallible rule of faith, set down by the most ancient Vincentius Lyrinensis, in the beginning of his Commonitorium, deserving to be stamped in characters of gold: I 
(c) Initio commonitorij.  have demanded (saith this Author) very many things, of many men, excelling & renowned for learning, and sanctity of life, how, and by what way, I might fortify my faith, in time of heresies arising: and I ever received this answer of all, or in manner of all, that whether I, or any other, desirous to avoid the snares of Heretics, and to continue sound in the Catholic faith, he must by God's assistance, Fidem munire duplici ratione: fence his faith with a double reason; Sacrosancti Canonis authoritate; deinde Ecclesiae Catholicae traditione. First by authority of God's word: secondly, by tradition of the Catholic Church. Thus fare Vincentius. Thus we see, where we believe any thing, though it be materially true, and not through this former authority, this is not supernatural belief in us, but only an opinion grounded upon other reasons & inducements. Even as the Turk believeth, that there is one God, Creator of the world, yet this his belief is no true faith, but only an opinion of a thing, which is true; since this his belief, is grounded only upon his Alcoran, being otherwise a fabulous book, though of the being of one God, it speaketh truly.  
2. Now to apply this to my purpose. This first revealing verity, which is God (through whose authority we ought to believe every article of faith) doth with one and the like authority, reveal all articles of Christian Religion; so as it is as forcibly to be believed, that there is (for example) a Purgatory, or that we may pray to to Saints (suppose these articles to be true) as that there is a Trinity, or that Christ was incarnated. From whence it inevitably followeth, that who believeth in the Trinity, and yet doth not believe that there is a Purgatory, or that we may pray to Saints, hath no true and supernatural belief of the Trinity; but only believeth that there is a Trinity, because he is persuaded thereto, only by his own reason, or through some other humane authority. For if he did believe, that there is a Trinity, or that Christ was incarnate through the authority of God so revealing this truth, so to be believed, by the same authority he would have believed, that there is a Purgatory, and that we ought to pray to Saints, seeing both the articles of the Trinity, and of Purgatory, or praying to Saints, are equally, and indifferently alike propounded by God, and by his Church to be believed.  
3. And seeing to the same authority, ever the same reverence, affiance, and credit is to be given, thus we may demonstratively conclude, that what Protestant doth believe in the Trinity, and yet doth not believe, that there is Purgatory, Praying to Saints, Freewill, the Real presence (admitting them once to be true) or any other points controverted, between the Catholics and the Protestants, the same man hath no true faith of the Trinity, of the Incarnation, and consequently for want of a true, and supernatural faith cannot be saved, since we read: Qui non 
(d) Marc 16.  credit, condemnabitur. Who believeth not, shallbe condemned. And from this former ground it it proceedeth, that S. Thomas, 
(e) 2. 2. q 5. art. 3.  and all learned schoolmen teach, that who beleiueth not only for God's authority, so revealing any point whatsoever, great, or small, fundamental or not fundamental, the same man believeth not any other article at all, with a true and supernatural faith: And hereto accordeth those words of 
(f) Lib. de prescr.  Tertullian, against Valentinus an Heretic: Some things of the law and Prophets Valentinus approveth, some thing he disalloweth, that is, he disallowech all, whilst he disproveth some. Which sentence of Tertullian, must of necessity be true, since who rejecteth the authority of God, in not believing any one article, propounded by God to be believed, the same man begetteth a suspicion or doubt of God's authority, for the believing of any other article how fundamental soever.  
4. Another reason may be taken from a distinction of faith used by the learned, which faith is of two sorts: the one they call Explicite faith, the other Implicit. Explicite faith is that, which all men under pain of damnation, are bound expressly to believe, as the Trinity, the Incarnation of our Saviour, his passion, the Decalogue, or ten Commandments etc. Implicit faith is that which comprehendeth all those points, which a man is not bound expressly and distinctly to believe in particular (though he be expressly bound not to believe any thing contrary thereto) but is to rest in the judgement of the Church, concerning all such points, and what the Church of Christ holdeth therein, implicitly to believe. This distinction is warranted, not only in the judgement of all Catholic school men, but also in the judgement of the most learned 
(g) D. Baro. l. de fide & eius ortu p. 40. Hooker in Eccles. politia. in praefat. p. 28. by Maelanct. l. 1. epist. epist. ad Regem Angliae.  Protestant's (though they forbear the phrases, of Explicite and Implicit faith) and particularly of D. Field, who in these words following giveth the reason thereof, saying: For seeing 
(h) In his Treatise of the Church in his epist. dedicatory to the Archbishop.  the Controversies of Religion in our time, are grown in number so many, and in nature so intricate, that few have time, and leisure, fewer strength of understanding to examine them, what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence, but diligently to search out, which among all the societyes of men in the world, is that blessed company of holy ones, that househould of faith, that spouse of Christ, & Church of the living God, which is the pillar and ground of truth, that so they may embrace her communion, follow her directions, and rest in her judgements. Thus Doctor Field.  
5. Now this distinction being presupposed, I thus argue, both these kinds of faith, are necessary to salvation. Explicite faith, because it comprehendeth, all those fundamental and supreme points of Christian Religion, without the express and articulate knowledge of which a man cannot be saved. And these be those only, which Newtralists in Religion hold necessary to be believed: Implicit faith, of other points also is necessary to salvation, because otherwise then believing implicitly & inuoluedly what the Church teacheth therein, we cannot (according to the former Doctors words) find out that blessed company of holy ones, the househould of faith, the spouse of Christ, & Church of the living God. And seeing Implicit faith, is necessary to salvation, we must grant, that this Implicit faith hath some object; the object is not the article of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Decalogue etc. since these are the objects of Explicite faith (as is above intimated) therefore articles seeming of lesser importance, are the object of implicit faith; the which as a man is bound implicitly to believe in the faith of the Church, so is he bond not to believe any thing contrary to the said articles. Seeing then diverse controversies between the Catholics and the Protestants, are included under this implicit faith, and that the Church of God, holdeth but one way of them: it followeth that one side of the contrary beleivers of those points doth err in their belief, and consequently through want of this true & necessary implicit faith, cannot be saved.  
6. A third reason, may be this. It is proper, & peculiar to virtues infused (& such be Faith, Hope, & Charity) that every such virtue is wholly extinguished by any one act contrary to the said virtue. Thus for example, one mortal sin, taketh away all charity & grace, according that: He 
(i) jacob. cap. 2.  that offendeth in one, is made guilty of all. One act of despair, destroyeth the whole virtue of Hope; then by the same reason, one heresy wholly corrupteth & extinguisheth all true faith. Therefore seeing Faith is a Theological, and infused virtue, this faith is destroyed with one act of heresy, whether it be about Purgatory, Prayer to Saints, Freewill, or any other controversy between the Catholics & the Protestants; therefore whoseuer denyeth Purgatory, or any of the rest (granting their doctrines to be true) is deprived of all infused faith touching any article of Christian Religion, whether they concern the Trinity, or the Incarnation, or any other fundamental point, which he may seem to believe: but without faith (that is, without true, infused, and Theological faith) it is impossible to please God, as the 
(k) Heb. 11.  Apostle assureth us.  
4. Another reason may be this; These Newtralists in Religion, do not agree even in the general grounds of Christian faith, to wit, in the Articles of one God, of the Trinity, of Christ etc. with any other Christians. This is proved, because as all other Christians, do believe in these general heads; so doth each of them particularly agree, that these general principles are to be limited & bounded to every ones particular sect, as the Protestant (for example) believeth otherways in God, the Trinity, and Christ, than the Catholics do (as is else where demonstrated) But now these our Newtralists, do not limit the foresaid principles, to any particular sect, or in any particular manner; therefore it evidently followeth, that they have no true belief, even of those general and fundamental articles.  
5. A fift reason shallbe this. It is most certain, that what general propension, Nature (or rather God himself, by nature as his instrument) hath engrafted in all men, the same is in itself, most true, certain, and warrantable. As for example, Nature hath implanted in each man's soul, a secret remorse of Conscience for sins and transgressions committed, as also a fear of future punishment, to be inflicted for the said sins perpetrated: therefore from hence it may infallibly be concluded, that sin itself is to be avoided, & that after this life there is a retribution of punishment, for our offences done in this world; since otherways it would follow, that God should insert in the soul of man (idly, vainly and as directed to no end) certain natural impressions & instincts, which to affirm were most derogatory to his divine majesty and wisdom, & repugnant to that anciently received Axiom: God, & Nature worketh nothing in vain. Now to apply this, we find both by history, and by experience, that diverse zealous and fervent Professors of all Religions whatsoever (both true and false) have been most ready to expose their lives in defence of any impugned part, or branch of their Religion, from which undaunted resolution of theirs, we certainly collect, that this their constant determination of defending the least point of their Religion, proceedeth partly from a general instinct of God, impressed in man's soul, teaching each man, that death itself is rather to be suffered, than we are to deny any part of faith and Religion in general. And thus according hereto, we find that the Athenians, who were Heathens (though they did err touching the particular object herein, as worshipping false Gods) were most cautelous, that no one point should be infringed or violated touching the worshipping of their Gods. The like religious severity was practised by the jews, as josephus 
(l) Cont. Apion.  witnesseth. And God himself even in his own written word threatneth, that, Who 
(m) Apo. 22.  shall either add or diminish to the book of the Apocalypses, written by the Evangelist, from him he will take away his part out of the book of life. Now if such danger be threatened for adding to, or taking from more or less, than was set down by the Evangelist in this one book, how can then both the Catholics and Protestants have their names written in the book of life? Since it is certain and granted on all sides, that either the Catholic addeth more to the faith of Christ, then was by him instituted, or the Protestant taketh from the said faith diverse articles, which Christ & his Apostles did teach. But to return to our former reason: From all this, we deduce, that no points of true Religion, are of such cold indifferency, as that they are not much to be regarded, or that they may be maintained contrarywayes by contrary spirits, without any danger to man's salvation; but that they are of that nature, worth, & dignity, as a man is to undergo all torments, yea death itself, before he yield, or suffer the least relapse in denying any of the said verityes.  
6. The sixth and last reason, to prove that the maintaining of false doctrines now questioned between the Christians of these times, are most prejudicial & hurtful to the obtaining of our heavenly bliss, wherein at this time I will insist, may be taken from the consideration of the different effects, which the contrary doctrines between the Catholics & the Protestants produce in man's soul, touching the exercising of virtue or vice: since most undoubted it is, that the believing of such opinions which of their own nature do impel, & as it were violently draw the soul to vice, looseness, & impurity of manners & conversation, cannot stand with the hope of eternal happiness. And the chief reason hereof (besides others) is this, in that the will, which is the seat of virtue or vice, doth necessarily and irresistably work, as the understanding (in which reside faith & all false doctrines) doth dictate to the will: now than the understanding being infected with heresies, tending directly to the planting of vice eradicating of all virtue in the soul, it of necessity follweth, that the will must work and exercise itself according to those false principles, which the understanding suggesteth to the will for true, and that with the greater facility, in regard of the prones of man's nature (through our first Parents fall) inclined to liberty, pleasure, and sensuality. But because the subject of this reason is a large field wherein to walk, & the truth thereof is to appear by several instances, drawn from diverse particular doctrines, maintained at this present by the Protestants, and all breathing nothing, but vice, dissolution, and all turpitude in manners; therefore I will reserve the next ensuing chapter, for the fuller manifestation of the truth in this point.   

The same proved from the different effects of virtue, and vice, which Catholic and Protestant Religion do cause in their Professors. CHAP. X.  
THE first doctrine of this nature, wherein we will insist, maintained by the Protestants, and denied by the Catholics, is the impossibility of keeping Gods commandments. According hereto Luther saith: The 
(a) Ser. de Moise.  ten commandments appertain not to Christians. With whom Fox conspireth in these words: The 
(b) Act. mon. pag. 1335.  ten Commandments were given not to do them, but to know our damnation, and to call for mercy to God. As also D. Willet, saying: The 
(c) In sinops. Papism. pag 564.  law remaineth still impossible to be kept by us, through the weakness of our flesh; neither doth God give us ability to keep it, but Christ hath fulfiled it for us. And finally D. Whitaker in that sentence of his: Qui 
(d) Cont. Camp. cat. 8. p. 153.  credunt, ij non sunt sub lege, sed sub gratia; Quid plura? Christiani execratione legis liberantur. They, who believe, are not under the law, but under grace. What more in this point is to be said? Christians are freed from the curse of the law. Now than if Christians be freed from the curse of keeping the law (wherein the ten commandments are contained) how can the breach of them be any way hurtful to the violatours of them? And if the comandments were neither given us to keep, nor we have power to keep them, why should the thief forbear to steal, or the homicide to commit murder? Who seethe not how this doctrine discourageth a man from living virtuously, by bridling his unruly and sensual desires?  
2. Secondly touching Chastity, the Protestants teach that Chastity is not in our power. And hence it is, that Luther thus writeth: It is 
(e) Tom. 5. Witten. serm. de matrim.  not in our power to be without a woman etc. It is not in our power, that it should be stayed or omitted, but it is as necessary, as to eat, drink, purge, make clean the nose etc. To whom (omitting all others for greater brevity) M. Perkins subscribeth saying: The vow 
(f) In his reformed Catholic pag. 161.  of continency, is not in the power of him, that voweth. Now this doctrine being embraced for true, how forcibly doth it invite (or rather impel) all people unmarried (either men or women) to satisfy their lust by their own incontinent lives? In like sort, what great encouragement doth it give to married persons to violate the band of matrimony, when either of the persons through absence, or long sickness, or some other sudden and accidental impotency, cannot render the debt of matrimony? And the parties thus sinning, either married or unmarried being expostulated & charged with their offence therein, may they not justly reply in excuse of themselves, that they are not to be blamed or rebuked for their incontinency, seeing by their own doctrine & Religion they are expresely taught that they have not the gift of Chastity, and that it is not in their power, to live chastely & continently.  
3. Thirdly, the Protestants doctrine of venial and mortal sin doth wonderfully extenuate and lessen the atrocity and malice of sin in the believers of that doctrine. For the Protestants do teach, that there is no such difference of sins in themselves, but that the most grievous sins whatsoever, being committed by any one, that hath true faith, are but venial; and their reason therefore is, because in their doctrine, no sins are imputed to such, who have true faith. 
(g) De eccl. contra Bellarm. contro. 2. q. 5. pag. 301.  Thus accordingly D. Whitakers teacheth: Si quis actum fidei habet, ei peccata non nocent. Sin is not hurtful to him, who actually believeth: who did learn this of his grand Master Luther, who writing of this point, saith: No 
(h) Luth. in his ser. englished & printed anno 1578. p. 176.  work is disallowed of God, unless the author thereof be disallowed before. All which being granted as true doctrine, it must needs follow, that who so shall take himself to be one of these faithful (as every Protestant is bound by his own Religion to believe of himself) shall make small account of omitting any sin; considering he is taught by the former doctrine to believe, that (to use the words of one of their own Masters:) Sin 
(i) Wotton in his answer to the late popish articles pag. 92.  is pardoned him, as soon as it is committed.  
4. The Protestants doctrine of Reprobation, and denial of Freewill, mightily disanimateth and discourageth the believers thereof, from embracing of virtue, and eschewing of sin; for if it be true (as this their doctrine suggesteth) that some men are borne, even from their mother's womb, without any reference to their works, reprobates, or thrall to eternal damnation, and cannot be saved, to what end should they seek their own salvation, by a true faith, avoiding of sin, and the practising of a penitential, and virtuous life? Or if we have not Freewill, with the concurrency of God's grace to do well (as the former doctrine instructeth us) why should we bend our best endeavours, to embrace virtue and to fly all vice; since it is not in our power (according to the Protestants faith) to exercise the one, and to fly the other?  
5. To this may be adjoined the Protestants like doctrine of Predestination, and their supposed certainty of salvation: for admit, that men be predestinated to heaven without any respect or reference to their works, or lives, and that do what wickedness they can imagine, yet certain it is, that they shallbe saved; is not this doctrine most potent and forcible, to dissuade all the believers thereof, from exercising an austere pious, and Religious life, and to engulfe themselves in all kinds of enormities and sins; and the rather, considering how precipitious and headlong man's nature is to sin, and to decline all rigorous and exemplar courses of virtue; especially if so the case stands, that man can neither advantage or hurt himself by any such different manners of life. Now that by the Protestants doctrine, no sin can endanger the predestinate, in regard of their certainty of salvation, appeareth. Answearably hereto we find Doctor Fulke to say of David's Adultery: David 
(k) In his tower dispute with Edmund Camp. the 2. days conference.  when he committed adultery, was, and remained the child of God. And Beza himself to the like purpose, thus writteth thereof: David 
(l) In respon ad colloq. Mon●●●. parte a●tera pag. 73.  by his Adultery and murder, did not lose the Holy Ghost. So powerfully do these their positions incline men, to satisfy their desires, in all vice, impiety, and sensuality.  
6. Touching the Protestants doctrine of justification by Faith only, which potentially includes diverse of the other points here set down, and which position of its own nature, excludeth from justification all works, how virtuous, meritorious and pious soever, we find the Protestants thus to say; Luther speaking hereof, bursteth forth with wonderful rashness, saying: Fides 
(m) Concione 4. in ca 21. Luc.  nisi sit sine etc. Unless faith be without the least good works, it doth not justify; nay it is no faith. That justification by faith only extinguisheth all exercise of virtue, is justified not only by experience of these days, but also by the acknowledgement even of some learnedst Protestants; for thus jacobus Andreas (a famous Protestant) complaining and disliking of this doctrine, writeth: A serious and Christian discipline is censured with us as a new Papacy, and a new Monachisme: they say we have now learned to be saved, by only faith in Christ etc. We cannot satisfy by our fasting, prayer, etc. therefore permit, that we may give over these, seeing we may be saved otherwise, by the only grace of God. And to the end (saith this Author further) that all the world may know they be no Papists, nor trust in good works, they take a course to put none in practice. With whose true judgement herein M. Stubbs an english Protestant seemeth to conspire, saying: The 
(n) In his motive to good works printed 1566 pag. 42.  Protestant trusteth to be saved by a bare & naked faith (deceiving himself) without good works, and therefore either careth not for them, or at least setteth little by them. And thus fare touching good works, wholly exiled and banished by the doctrine of justification by faith only. Now that this doctrine of justification by faith only doth incorporate (as it were) within itself, and admit all kind of sins, appeareth no less from the frequent acknowledgement of the learned Protestants. And first Luther thus writeth hereof: A 
(o) Tom. 2. Witten. de capt. babil. fol. 74.  Christian baptised is so rich, that 
(p) Vbi supra.  although he would, he cannot lose his salvation, by any sin, how great soever, unless he will not believe. And further in another place: As nothing 
(q) Luth. in loc. comm. class. 5. c. 27.  iustifyeth, but belief; so nothing sinneth but unbelief. To which doctrine D. Whitaker (as above is showed) accordeth saying. Sins 
(r) Vbi supra.  are not hurtful to him, that believeth. And thus much now touching the doctrine of justfication by faith, where we see even by the confession of the Protestants, that this doctrine prevaileth in the Professors of it, no less for committing of all sin and iniquity; then for the expelling and banishing away of all good works, virtue and devotion.  
7. Touching the Protestants particular doctrines of Fasting, Voluntary poverty, and Chastity or Virginity. And first of Fasting. M. Perkins teacheth thus: Fasting 
(s) In his reformed Catholic pag. 220  in itself, is but a thing indifferent, as is eating or drinking. With whom conspireth D. Willet in more full terms, saying: Neither 
(t) In synops. p. 243.  is God better worshipped by eating, or not eating.  
8. Voluntary poverty is so debased by the Protestants doctrine, as that the foresaid Doctor Willet thus teacheth hereof: He 
(v) In synops. pag. 245.  is an enemy to the glory of God, who changeth his rich estate, wherein he may serve God, for a poor: so contrary is he to the judgement of our Saviour, Matth, 10. saying: If (x) thou wilt be perfect, go sell thy substance, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven.  
9 Lastly, touching single life in comparison with marriage, Master Luther thus saith: We 
(y) Tom. 5. Witten. in exeg. ad cap. 7. 1. Cor. f. 107.  conclude, that marriage is as gold, and spiritual, or single life as dung. And Doctor Whitaker likewise teacheth thereof in this manner, saying: Virginity is not simply good, but after a certain manner; it is never better than 
(z) Cont. Campia. rat. 8.  marriage, but in regard of the circumstance, that is, of the troubles accompanying marriage. Now I here demand with what encouragement can any man go about to practise these foresaid virtues of fasting, voluntary poverty, and perpetual virginity, if he be firmly and inwardly persuaded, that the Protestants former positions, and doctrines touching the said virtues, be true, and agreeable to Christ's sacred institutions? But to hasten to an end in this matter, I will conclude with the Protestants doctrine touching Purgatory, and Confession of sins.  
10. Concerning Confession of sins, it is found by experience, that (besides the first institution thereof by Christ, Matth. 18. joan. 20.) a man is much deterred from sinning, through the shame that he is to endure, by confessing his most secret sins to a Priest; as on the contrary, it much enboldeneth one to sin, if he be fully persuaded by his own Religion, that confession of them unto God alone, is sufficient.  
11. Touching the doctrine of Purgatory, how doth the denial of this doctrine open the sluice to all liberty? And concerning justice, it taketh away all restitution of things wrongfully detained; since by the Protestants doctrine teaching, that no temporal punishment remaineth for sin once remitted, all satisfaction for wrongs, and for committing of former sins, and all mortification of body and soul, are needles; and finally, this doctrine freeth a man from all fear of suffering any punishment after this life; and this under colour, that Christ hath satisfied for the sins of the whole world: by which reason, we may as well say, that we need not to pray at all, since Christ in the time of his passion, prayed for al. But now to cast our eyes back upon the foresaid doctrines, if all the different opinions of faith in Controversies, between the Catholics & the Protestants, were merely speculative, without any reference to the virtuous or vicious working & operation of the will, derived from them, then with some show of reason, in a vulgar judgement, it might be averred, that (supposing they touch not the Christian faith) they might either affirmatively or negatively be holden without all danger of salvation: such were the heresies of 
(b) See hereafter S. Austin heres. 43.  Origen, teaching that the Devils in the end of the world should be saved, of S. Cyprian touching rebaptisation, and diverse such like; for the maintaining of which points either way, the will (in respect of any external working or operation drawn from thence) can suck no poison. But the case is fare different in the former doctrines set down, for we find, that the said doctrines, which breathe nothing but dissolution and all turpitude of manners even in speculation, must forcibly and immediately touch the pulse of the will; the will necessarily beating and indeed breaking out into outward actions of vice & liberty, according as it remains infected with the contagion and poison of the former doctrinal speculations; Well then, this upon necessary inference being granted, so as forcible working, effect, force, and operation of the said doctrines are in the will, nothing but liberty, dissolution of manners, improbity, sensuality, and sin, I refer to the judgement of any man, whether the said doctrines be but points of indiferency, or no, and may be defended and believed either way, without prejudice to the beleivers true faith, and danger to his Salvation, as our formalists do aver. For can it possibly be conceived, that these doctrines should be reputed indifferent to man's salvation, or in themselves true, which (as is proved) forcibly impel the will to all kind of vice, against which, God hath thundered out such dreadful threats, as where it is said: Psal. 91. All they that work iniquity shallbe confounded. And again Ecclesiast. 40 Death, blood, contention, edge of sword, oppression, hunger, contrition, which, are created for sinners. And further Psal. 9.10. God shall reign snares of fire upon sinners, brimstone, with tempestuous winds, shallbe the portion of their cup. And hereto I adjoin even the acknowledgement of Protestants themselves, who confess that the lives of the Catholics, are commonly of a more virtuous and better edification, than the lives of Protestants, who by their own confessions lie grovelling in all sensuality; for even Luther thus saith hereof: When 
(d) Dominica 26. post Trinitatem.  we were seduced by the Pope, every man did willingly follow good works, and now every man neither saith, nor knoweth any thing, but how to get all to himself, by exaction, pillage, theft, lying, usury etc. To which Confession (to omit diverse others) Musculus a forward Protestant subscribeth saying:  
(e) In loc. come. cap. de Decal. in expla. ●e●tij precepti.  verum est fateor etc. That I may confess the truth herein, they are become so unlike unto themselves, that whereas in the Papacy they were Religious in their errors and superstition, now in the light of the known truth, they are more profane etc. then the very sons of the world. Which disparity of lives and conversation, cannot be justly ascribed to any other cause, then in that the Protestant's were ready to put in practice, what afore they have learned by speculation of their own doctrines: Which point then being thus, I mean that the doctrines of the Protestants do depress virtue, and blandish, countenance, & elate vice, & that thereupon the lives of the Protestants (by confession of themselves) and to the disedifying of their followers, are become actually fare worse and less virtuous, than the lives of the Catholics, I here demand, how it can be warranted with any show of reason, that these doctrines of the Protestants begetting so great a change from virtue to vice in their professors, can be reputed, but as points of indifferency? Or that men believing them, practising them in their conversation, and finally dying in them, can be saved? so contrary it is to our Saviour's precept: 
Mat. 1●.  If thou wilt enter into life, keep the Commandments.   

The same proved from the fearful deaths of the first preachers of Protestancy. CHAP. XI.  
IN this next place we will briefly take a survey of the particular deaths of some few of the chiefest Protestants, who have been the first stampers & broachers of the Controversyes between the Catholics and the Protestants; and then we will leave to the judgement of others, whether those kinds of deaths do befall (in Gods accustomed proceeding) to men, who first did set on foot, and maintained such points & positions of Religion, as that either the believing, or not believing of them, may well comport & stand together with man's salvation.  
2. To begin then with Luther, omitting to speak either of his vicious life, or of the lives of others hereafter set down, though confessed, & displayed for such by many of their own brethren. 
(g) Cochlaeus in vita Lutheri.  It is certain, that Luther 
(h) Gualterus in Apologia pro Zuinglio.  died very suddenly; for when at supper being in good health, he had daintily fed upon great variety of meats, and entertained his guests then with him, with witty (but dissolute) discourses, the very same night he died. Zuinglius was slain in the wars in Germany undertaken for Religion only against the Catholics, in which Cars he died not as a preacher, but as a warrior, & died in the field; and yet in such sort, that Gualterus an earnest Protestant saith thus of him: Nostri 
(h) Gualterus in Apologia pro Zuinglio.  illi etc. divers of us are not ashamed to pronounce Zuinglius to have died in sin, and therefore to have died the son of hell. Oecolampadius 
(i) Cochlaeus in acts Lutheri.  (reputed Bishop of Basill, where he lieth buried) and a man most forward in spreading the points of Protestancy, went healtful to bedde, but was found by his wife in the morning dead in his bed. Andrea's Corolstadius, an 
(k) In ep. de morte Carolstadij.  eminent Protestant, and a great advancer of the supposed Gospel, was killed by the Devil, as certain Ministers even of Basill do justify: jacobus Andreas a famous Lutheran, & in other points an earnest Protestant, lived and died (as Hospinian 
(l) Hosp. in histor. sacram. part. 2. fol. 389.  the Protestant writeth) As if he had had no God, but Mammon, and Bacchus; he never praying, neither going to bed, nor rising from thence. And further saith, that in the residue of his life, he shown no godliness. To conclude Caluin (the refyner of all Protestancy, and chief supporter of all controverted points against Catholics) died being consumed with louse & worms, extremely blaspheming against God, of whose death, Conradus Schlussenburge (a famous Protestant) thus writteth. Deus 
(m) In Theolog. Caluinis. l. 1. f. 72.  manu sua potenti etc. God with his mighty hand, did visit Caluin, for he despaired of his salvation, called upon the Devils, and gave up his soul swearing and blaspheming: Caluin died being eaten away with louse; for they so bred about his privy members, that none about him could endure the stench, and smell. Thus fare the foresaid Protestant.  
3. Now then, seeing all these men believed all the fundamental points of Christian Religion as the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion etc. seeing also they were the most principal men, that first introduced and after disseminated Protestancy throughout the world, spending their whole lives in spreading & defending the same by their writings. Finally seeing God did cut them off by such most miserable, calamitous, and prodigious deaths (which is to be feared were but presages of the eternal deaths of their souls) who can otherways be persuaded, but that all this was wrought by the just hand of God? Not so much for their personal sins proceeding of humane frailty, (for there were, many others, as great sinners as they, who have escaped such dreadful ends) but for their first inventing maintaining, & preaching of the Protestant faith and Religion; & infecting all countries with such their false and sensual doctrines: which being granted, how then can it with any touch of reason be supposed, that the positions of Protestancy, impugned by the Catholics, should contain nothing but matters of indifferency? Or that a man, whether he believe them, or not believe them, may alike and indifferently be saved?   

The same proved from the doctrine of Recusancy, taught by Catholics and Protestants. CHAP. XII.  
I Have thought good to draw another argument from the common taught and approved doctrine of Recusancy in every Religion, though this head may seem to have a special reference, to the reason above touched, & in part be therein implicitly included, wherein is showed, that nature herself hath imprinted, in the professors of all Religions, a religious care punctually to keep & preserve every article of their Religion both in belief & practice. Now here we are to premonish, that if in the judgement of all learned men (both Catholics and Protestants) it is thought an action most wicked and unlawful, and not to be performed, but (without final repentance) under pain of eternal damnation, that a man should communicate only in going to the Church & to hear but a sermon, contrary to that Religion, which himself beleiueth to be true; though this may seem to be coloured under pretence of observing the Prince's commandments, and for fear of losing our temporal estates; I say, if this action be thought unlawful, wherein nevertheless the performers thereof do punctually undertake, not to maintain or to believe any one heretical or erroneous position; how then can it be reputed, as consonant to reason, that men believing different opinions of faith and promiscuously communicating in prayer, with a contrary Religion to their own, should neverthesse's all be saved? since the first fault consisteth (as some would interpret though falsely) only in an external and material (as the schoolmen speak) going to the Church of a different Religion, whereas the others do directly and openly sin in defending articles of Religion, contrary to the truth of Christian Religion; for such is the case herein, either of Catholics or protestants.  
2. Now that this kind of going to Church of a different Religion is wholly condemned, as most unlawful and wicked, I first prove from the judgements of the Protestants; secondly from the resolutions of the Catholics. And to begin with the Protestants, we find this kind of Recusancy (I mean to be present at the sermons or prayers of a different Religion) is taught by 
(a) De vitandis superstitio. extant in tract. Theolog. p. 584.  Caluin, by the 
(b) Alleged by Sleydan in come. englished l. 7. f. 87.  Divines of Germany, by 
(c) In council. Theol. p. 628.  Melancthon, by 
(d) In his discourse hereof recited in Melanct. treatise de council. Theolog. pa. 934. & 635.  Peter Martyr, and finally (to omit others) by D. Willet, 
(e) In synops. printed 1600. p. 612. & 613. etc.  who for the better fortifying and warranting of the said opinion, produceth his testimonies from the authorities of Latimer, Bradford, Philpot, Ridley, and others, diverse, of which according to this their doctrine, suffered death in Queen Mary's time, as appeareth out of Fox's acts and Monuments. And thus much for the Protestants. That the Catholics do with the like or greater fervour, teach, & practise this recusancy, is clear by the example in our own Country, where since Protestancy was first planted, many stores of venerable and learned Priests have chosen rather to suffer death, than they would change their Religion, or go once to the Protestants Church; their lives being commonly proffered them, if so they would conform themselves, and leave their recusancy. In like sort, many hundred of the laity pay yearly great sums of money for their recusancy; diverse of them enduring further oppressions, disgraces, and imprisonment only for the same cause, through the rigour, malice, and covetousness of subordinat Magistrates; his majesty (whose clemency is most remarkable, & whom God long preserve in his government over us) being herein mightily wronged, through the false and most injurious informations of their adversary's.  
3. Now that the doctrine of learned Catholics is answerable to the practice herein, appeareth from the frequent testimonies of diverse learned men of the Catholic Church of this time: yet for greater brevity I will insist in the authorities only of three, to wit, Cardinal Baronius, Cardinal Bellarmine (the two late lamps of God's Church) and of Mutius Vitellescus, then but Provincial, now General and head of the order of the jesuits dispersed throughout all Christendom. For some years past their judgements being demanded, whether the Catholics of England, for the saving of their goods, liuings, and liberty, might go to the Protestant Church, or not to hear a sermon, though otherways they did not communicate in prayers and sacraments with the Protestants, these three learned & holy men (besides diverse others most eminent Doctors and writers, whom I here omit) did give their negative sentence therein, whose particular words in latin, I have thought good here to set down.  
The judgement of Cardinal Baronius.  
Visis & consideratis, quae superius diligenti peruestigatione in utramque partem disputata, reiectis omnino & exsufflatis, quae pro parte affirmativa fuere proposita, quod scilicet liceret Catholicis adire Ecclesias Haereticorum, ut superius sunt proposita, inhaeremus saniori sententiae posteriori, ab Ecclesia Catholica antiquitus receptae, & usu probatae; quod scilicet ita facere pijs non liceat, quam rogo nostros Catholicos Anglos amplecti ex animo.  
Caesar Card. Baronius tituli SS. Nerei & Achillei Presb.  
I having seen and considered (meaning in the question of English catholics going to the Church) all these points which have been disputed of on both sides, but rejecting and wholly abandoning all the reasons alleged for the affirmative part (to wit, to prove, that it was lawful for Catholics, to go to the Church of Heretics) I do adhere to the more sound and later opinion, which anciently was received of the Catholic Church, and allowed by use and custom. That is, that it is not lawful for pious and godly men so to do, and I entreat & desire all our English Catholics, to embrace this my opinion and judgement.  
Caesar Cardinal Baronius Priest of the title of the Church of S. Nereus and Achilleus.  
The judgement of Cardinal Bellarmine.  
Consideratis rationibus pro utraque parte allatis, existimo non licere viris Catholicis in Anglia Haereticorum adire Ecclesias, multo minus concionibus ipsorum interest; minime autem omnium cum ipsis in praecibus vel psalmodia, alijsque ipsorum Ecclesiasticis ritibus convenire. Ideo propria manu subscripsi.  
Robertus Bellarminus Sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae Presbyter, Cardinal. tit. Sanctae Mariae in via.  
Thus in English: The reasons brought upon both sides considered (to wit, touching the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the English Catholics going to the Protestants church) I am persuaded, that it is not lawful for English Catholics to go to the Church of Heretics; much less to be present at their sermons, but least of all to communicate with them in prayers or singing of psalms, and other their Ecclesiastical rites and customs. And therefore this my judgement heerin, I have subscribed with my own hand.  
Robert Bellarmine Priest & Cardinal of the holy Roman Church of the title of Sanctae Mariae in via.  
The sentence of Mutius Vitellescus, then Provincial, now general and head of the order of the jesuits.  
Vidi rationes, quae in hoc scripto pro utraque parte afferunt, & existimo non licere viris Catholicis in Anglia, Ecclesias Haereticorum adire etc. & puto hoc debere esse extra conversiam.  
Mutius Vitellescus Provincialis Rom. Societatis jesus.  
In English: I have seen the reasons, which are alleged in this book or writing on both parts (touching the going, or not going to the Protestants church) and I am of opinion, that it is not lawful for Catholics in England to go to the churches of Heretics. And I am persuaded, that this point ought to be out of all controversy.  
Mutius Vitellescus Provincial of the Society of jesus in Rome.  
4. And thus fare touching the sentences of these three learned men, delivered in warranting the doctrine of recusancy in Catholics. Now to turn our eye upon the premises; if the going to the Church of another Religion, only for avoiding of temporal losses, & but to hear a sermon of the said Religion, be to be accounted a sin, not to be done under pain of damnation, as being presumed to be an external conformity to a false Religion (as by all the former testimonies above alleged is plentifully proved) though the party so offending, may perhaps believe all points truly of Christian Religion; with what reason then can it be warranted, that both Catholics & Protestants conspiring only in the fundamental points of the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion etc. but differing mainly in all other points of Religion, yet nevertheless promiscuously communicating one with another in prayers and the Sacraments, can all jointly be saved? And the rather, seeing that both sides teaching contrary and irreconciliable doctrines, touching Freewill, Purgatory, Praying to Saints etc. It must needs follow, that the one part defendeth not matters of indifferency (as is commonly supposed) but iniustifiable errors, or rather (to speak as the truth is) manifest and gross heresy.   

The same proved from the writings of Catholics and Protestants, wherein they reciprocally charge one another with heresy. As also from the Insurrections, wars, and Rebellions originally undertaken only for Religion. CHAP. XIII.  
IF there were no other reason to be alleged in disprouffe and confutation of this plurality of Religions (so to term it) than this following, it might seem fully prevailing in all clear judgements, not wholly darkened with the mist of earthly and temporal respects: First the wonderful and ireconcileable booke-warrs between Catholics and Protestants, wholly undertaken in defence of their several Religions: Secondly the pressures and calamities, with which diverse states & Countries do afflict other states, as also the Insurrection of subjects against their natural Princes, only for difference of Religion, not containing themselves, till they burst out into open hostility and arms, for defending their own Religion, and subverting of the others.  
2. Touching the first (good God) how many learned men on all sides, since the first Apostasy of Luther, have spent their whole time and all their serviceable years in writing, disputing, & preaching in defence of their own Religion, & impugning of the adversaries; accounting the maintainers and beleivers thereof as heretics, and pronouncing eternal damnation against their Religion? Witnesses hereof are the libraries of all the famous Universities of Christendom, the Stationer's shops in all great Cities, and lastly the yearly Mart of books returned these many years from Franckefort. And is it possible, that so much pains, travail, and labour of writing, & otherways accompanied with so great charges of printing, should be undertaken for questions only of indifferency, and such as it importeth nothing at all, touching the gaining of Heaven & avoiding of Hell, what a man beleiueth therein, or of what side he relieth.  
3. Concermig that second point, which is the afflictions, & wars with which one state, Country, or kingdom do persecute their neighbours, and all originally and primatively for matters of Religion, as also touching the open Rebellion of the subjects against their lawful Sovereigns, only for the said occasion. The last threescore years, as also these very times, do give over lamentable examples hereof. Witnesses of this matter (purposely to forbear the precedents of our own Country) is Scotland, into which Country Knox, Goodman, and Bocanan with other their Agents and confederates, first introduced Protestancy by force and arms; a point so acknowledged, that Doctor Bancroft, the late pretended Archbishop of Canterbury, as wholly inveighing against such violent courses, made a book entituling it: Of the proceeding of the Scottish Ministers according to the Genevian rules of reformation.  
4. Touching France, who knoweth not, that for this last fifty years, there have been always almost open wars between the Kings of France & the Huguenots (till the last King of France became Catholic) undertaken by the Huguenots only for Religion? And do not the Cities of Rochel, Mont-albons, Montpelliers with diverse others at this very day, stand out against their King under pretext of the defence of their Religion and Gospel? The occurences of this nature of the low Countries, and the Hollanders are no less remarkable; of whose first taking of arms against their lawful King only for Religion, Osiander an earnest Protestant thus confesseth: They 
(a) Osian. n Epito. cent. 16. pag. 94.  of the low Countries by public writings, renounced all subjection and obedience to Philippe their Lord and King. And again: When 
(b) Osian. uhi supra pag. 81.  four hundred of them of good respect have sued for liberty of Religion, and could not prevail, the impatient people stirred up with fury at Antwerp, and other places of Holland, Zealand, and Flanders, did throw & break down Images. But of the proceed and rebellions of the low Country men against their King, only for cause of Religion, it is needles to speak further, seeing it is to well known to all men of understanding, & that most worthy soldier, Spinola (another judas Machabaeus of these times) by his heroical exploits & endeavours even at this very day, seeking to reduce the low Countries to their former allegiance, doth sufficiently proclaim to the world the truth hereof.  
5. I pass over Geneva, which city (as the whole world knoweth) did first withdraw itself from the allegiance of their Leideg Lord the Duke of Savoy, only by reason that against his will and pleasure, they would profess the Protestant Religion, and so accordingly to this day, they have made themselves a state or commonwealth, wholly independent of Savoy, of which city Doctor Sutcliffe confessedly writeth: 
(b) in his answer to a certain libe supplicatory p. 194.  They of Geneva did depose their catholic liege Lord, and Prince from his temporal right; albeit he was by right of succession, the temporal Lord and owner of that city and Territory. In like sort, I pretermit the many like examples of the commons arising against their lawful Princes and Magistrates in 
(c) Chitraeus in chron. 1593. & 1594.  Sueveland, 
(d) See hereof Fulke his acknowledgement in his answer to Farnius declamation p. 35.  Denmark, 
(e) Osian. in epito. centur. 16. p. 115  Poland, 
(f) Touching Helvetia or Switherland, changing their Religion by war, see D. Bancroft in his survey of the holy pretended discipline p. 13. and Chrispinus of the state of the Church p. 509.  Germany, and 
(g) See the acknowledgement of D. Bilson in his true difference part. 3. p. 270. & 273.  Bohemia, & of this last Country, the late and fresh revolt of the subjects from the Emperor's obedience. All which rise, Insurrections, and Rebellions were originally undertaken only for Religion, and have no doubt since the first breach of Luther, cost the lives in all places of a million of men, at least, and have actually deposed and disthroned diverse Kings & Princes of their estates and territoryes.  
6. These things then for their evidency being acknowledged for true and undeniable, many of which remain as yet fresh in our own memory, of the nature of which Actions, I will not here dispute. Only I here urge, that it is more than incredible, that such rebellious devastation of Countries, beseiging of cities, deposing of Princes, slaughter of many hundred thousand of men, should be practised almost throughout all christendom within this last three score years, only for admitting, or not admitting the differences between the Protestant and Catholic religion, if both the contrary parties were not persuaded, that upon the true or false belief of these controversies in Religion, their soul's salvation or damnation for all eternity did depend. For it is certain, that these contrary parties did agree and conspire, in the general belief of the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion, death of our Saviour, and verbally reciting of the Apostles Creed.   

The same proved from the Protestants mutually condemning one another of heresy & for Heretics. CHAP. XIIII.  
IF Protestants do maintain, that their different opinions severally holden among themselves be heresies, and that the believers of them are for such their false belief (if so they die therein) not capable of salvation; than à fortiori may we be bold to pronounce, that the Controversies of faith, between the Catholics & the Protestants, are not of that middle nature; but that the opinions and sentences of the one side, are to be reputed for manifest heresies, & such as cannot stand with man's salvation. This inference is most necessary, since on all sides it is acknowledged, that there is a fare greater disparity in Religion between the Catholics and the Protestant's, then there is between the Protestants among themselves.  
2. Now that the Protestants do hold one another for Heretics, it cannot be denied. For to insist first in the Controversies touching the real presence, maintained in their sense by the Lutherans, but denied by the Sacramentaries, we find that Luther thus writeth of the Sacramentaries: We 
(a) Luth. contr. articulos Lovanieses thes. 27. tom. 2.  censure in earnest the Zwinglians, and all the Sacramentaryes for Heretics, and alienated from the Church of God. And again the same Luther thus writteth: I do 
(b) Tom. 7. Witen. fol. 381.  protest before God and the world, that I do not agree with the Zwinglians, nor ever will whilst  world standeth, but will have my hands clean from the blood of those sheep, which these Heretics (mark his words) do drive from Christ, deceive and kill. And again in the former place: Cursed 
(c) Vbi supra.  be the charity and concord of the Sacramentaryes, for ever and ever to all eternity. But Heretics, and men alienated from the Church of God, and which do kill the sheep of Christ (during such their condition) are not in state of salvation.  
3. Now of Luther's doctrine we find this bitter recrimination used by the Tigurine Divines, who were Zuinglians or Caluinists: Nos 
(d) Tigurini tract. 3. contra supremam Lutheri confessionem.  condemnatam & execrabilem vocat sectam etc. Luther calleth us a damnable and execrable sect, but let him look, that he doth not declare himself an Archeretike, seeing he will not, nor cannot have society with those, that confess Christ. And Zuinglius thus writteth: Behold 
(e) Tom. 2. ad respon Lutheri.  how Satan endeavoureth to possess this man, meaning Luther. But to proceed to other points. Nicolaus Gallus (an eminent Protestant and superintendent at Ratisbone) thus writeth of the contentions between the Protestants themselves: Non 
(f) In thesibus & Hypothesibus.  sunt leaves etc. The dissensions, that are among us, are not light, nor of light matters, but of the greatest articles of Christian doctrine, of the law and the gospel, of justification and good works, of the Sacrament and use of Ceremonies. Conradus Slussenburg (another famous Protestant) allegeth Pappus a Protestant, thus complaining against the Caluinists: Etsi initio 
(g) In theologia Caluinist l. 1. art. 28.  de uno tantum articulo etc. Although in the beginning one only article was called into doubt, notwithstanding the Caluinists are now so fare gone, as they call in doubt, neither few, neither the least articles of Christian doctrine: for now we descent from them, touching the omnipotency of God, the personal union of two natures in Christ's etc.  
4. But to come nearer home; the 
(h) In their mild defence of the silenced ministers supplication to the court of parliament.  Puritans here of England thus complain of the Protestants: Do we vary from the sincere doctrine of the Scriptures? Nay rather many of them do much more swerve from the same &c And thus answerably we find, that the Puritans hold the Bishops of England for Antichristian, whereas the Protestants do teach, that of necessity Bishops ought to be in the Church of God. Doctor Willet speaking of diverse opinions taught by the more moderate Protestant, as M. Hooker, D. Covell and others, thus writeth: From 
(i) In medit. in psal. 122  this fountain hath sprung forth these and other such whirl pools and bubbles of new doctrine, as that Christ is not originally God etc. And then after he thus concludeth: Thus have some been bold to teach and write, who as some Schismatiks (meaning hereby the Puritans) have disturbed the peace of the Church, one way in external matters, concerning discipline, they have troubled the Church, another way in opposing themselves by new quirks and devices, to the soundness of doctrine among Protestants. M. Parks in his book dedicated to the then pretended Archbishop D. Bancroft, thus writeth of the proceed of some Puritans here in England: They 
(k) Epist dedic.  are headstronge and hardened in error, they strick at the main points of Faith, shaking the very foundation itself, Heaven and Hell, the divinity and humanity, yea the very soul and salvation of our Saviour himself. And again more plainly in the former place he saith thus: They have pestilent heresies. And yet more: They are heretical and sacrilegious.  
5. To conclude this point of their particular sayings and redargutions heerin, D. Covell repeating and registering the positions of the Puritans here in England, 
In his defence of Hooker ● 65. & 74. & 75  among other of their positions setteth down these following: The statute Congregations of England, are no true Church, And again: The Protestant church of England hath no form of a Church. Now that all these dissensions among English Protestants, cannot be interpreted only about ceremonies, or about government, as some Protestants do answer, 
(l) Vbi supra.  when they are charged herewith by the Catholics) the foresaid M. Parkes plainly and truly confesseth the contrary, saying: The Protestants deceive the world, and make men believe, there is agreement in all substantial points; They affirm that there is no questions among them of the truth. Now the former point is furthermore made evident by the reciprocal deportment and demeanour of Protestants among themselves. For first (besides the charging one another with flat heresy, as is above shown) they do not only prohibit the reading 
(m) So Hospinian a Protestant witnesseth in histor. sacrament. parte altera fol. 693.  of each others books; but they also set down articles of visitation for the inquiry 
(n) Hospinian ubi supra.  & apprehending of such their adversaries, and being apprehended do imprison 
(o) Hosp. ubi supra  them; yea further they proceed, not allowing the travellers 
(p) so relateth Osiander in Epitome.  of either party, common entertainment, due in all Nations to strangers. Finally their dissensions are so implacable among them (though all be Protestants) as that in defence of their several doctrine, they have with great hostility taken 
(q) This is showed & exemplifyed by Hospinian ubi supra fol 395. & 397. In like sort by Osiander in epitome. cent. 16. pag. 735.  arms, one against another, as appeareth by the late memorable example in Holland of the Arminians and Gomarists, who only for some difference touching Freewill and Predestination between them, did rise in hostile manner against their adversary's, and ceased not that course till Barnaville the chief of one side & faction, was beheaded. All which violences and extremityes, would never have been undertaken, if their diversity of doctrine (which is the cause of such and so great exhorbitancies) did consist only in articles indifferent of themselves, and such as did not concern the necessity of salvation.  
6. The foresaid point touching the Protestant's dissensions in essential points of faith, is most clearly manifested, by taking a view of their books, written one against another (though this method is partly involved in the displaying of their particular sentences and writings above alleged). The number hereof, amounteth to diverse hundreds; yet as desirous to be short and compendious, I will set down the titles only of twenty of them, even from which titles the indifferent Reader may judge, whether the authors of them (being all eminent Protestants) did maintain the subjects of the said books to be matters of indifferency, and such as may be either way holden without breach of that true faith, which is necessary to man's salvation. And here I will forbear to reckon within this number, any book written only either for, or against the real presence, maintained by the Lutherans, because herein they conspire partly with us Catholics, and consequently the controversy heerin resteth, not only between the Protestants themselves, but also between them and us.  
7. First then may be reckoned that book entitled: Oratio de incarnatione filij Dei, contra impios & blasphemos errores Zuinglianorum & Caluinistarum: printed Tubingae, Anno Domini 1586.  
Secondly, Alberti Graveri bellum Ioannis Caluini & jesu Christi, Brapiae 1598.  
Thirdly, Antipeus, hoc est, refutatio venenati scripti a Davide Pareo editi, in defensionem Stropharum & corruptelarum, quibus Ioannes Caluinus illustrissima scripturae testimonia de mysterio Trinitatis, nec non oracula Prophetarum de Christo detestandum in modum corrupit. Francofurti 1598.  
Fourth. Aegidij Hunnij, Caluinus judaizans, hoc est, judaicae glossae & corruptelae, quibus Ioannes Caluinus illustrissima scripturae sacrae loca & testimonia de gloriosa Trinitate, deitate Christi, & Spiritus Sancti, cum primis autem vaticinia Prophetarum de adventu Messiae, & nativitate eius, Passione, Resurrectione, Ascensione ad caelos, & sessione ad dexteram Dei, detestandum in modum corrumpere non abhorruerit. Wittenbergae. 1593.  
Fift, Conradi Schlussenburgij Theologiae Caluinisticae libri tres, in quibus, seu in tabula quadam, quasi ad oculum, plusquam ex ducentis viginti tribus sacramentariorum publicis scriptis, pagellis, verbis proprijs, & authorum nominibus indicatis demonstratur, eos de nullo fere Christianae fidei articulo recte sentire etc. Francofurtae 1594.  
sixth, Pia defensio adversus Ioannis Caluini, Petri Boquini, Theodori Bezae, Willelmi Clebitij etc. & similium calumnias; Item Refutatio Pelagiani seu, Anabaptistici, Caluinistarum erroris de baptismo & peccato originali. Adduntur collectanea plurimorum Caluini contra Deum, eiusque providentiam & praedestinationem. Effordiae 1583.  
Seaventh, Demonstratio imposturarum ac fraudun, quibus Aegidius Hunnius Ecclesiae orthodoxae doctrinam petulanter corrumpere pergit. Bremae 1592.  
Eight, Argumentorum & obiectorum, de precipuis articulis doctrinae christianae cum responsionibus, quae sunt collectae ex scriptis Philippi Melancthonis, additis scholijs illustrantibus usum singularum responsionum, parts septem. Neapoli 1578.  
Ninth, Gulielmi Zepperi Dillenbergensis Ecclesia Pastoris institutio, de tribus Religionis summis capitibus, quae inter Euangelicos in Controversiam vocantur. Hannoniae. 1596.  
Tenth, Responsio triplex ad fratres Tubingenses, & triplex eorum scriptum, de tribus gravissimis questionibus, de coena Domini, de maiestate hominis Christi, & de non damnandis Ecclesijs Dei, nec auditis nec vocatis: Genevae. 1582.  
Eleventh, Ad Ioannis Brentij argumenta, & jacobi Andreae theses, quibus carnis Christi omnipresentiam nituntur confirmare; id est adversum renovatos Nestorij & Eutichetis errores responsum. Genevae. 1570.  
twelfth, Apologia ad omnes Germaniae Ecclesias reformatas quae sub Zuingliani & Caluiniani nominis invidiae vim & iniuriam patiuntur, Tiguri 1578  
Thirteen, Christophori Pezelij Apologia verae doctrinae de definitione Euangelij, apposita thrasonicis praestigijs Ioannis Wigandi, Wittenbergae. 1572.  
Fourteen, Colloquij Montisbelgartensis inter jacobum Andreae & Theodorum Bezam, Acta Tubingae 1584.  
Fifteen, Veritatis victoria, & ruina papatus Saxonici. Losannae 1563.  
Sixteen, Hamelmannia, siue Aries Theologizans dialogus oppositus duabus narrationibus historicis. Hermani Hamelmanni, Neostadij 1582,  
Seventeen, Christiani Kittelmani decem graves & perniciosi errores Zuinglianorum in doctrina de peccatis, & Baptismo, ex proprijs ipsorum libris collecti & refutati, Madelburg. 1592.  
Eighteen, joannis Mosellani praeseruativa contra venenum Zuinglianorum, Tubingae 1586.  
Nineteen, Responsio ad scriptum, quod Theologi Bremenses adversus collectores Apologiae formulae concordiae publicarunt. Lipsiae 1585.  
Twenty, Hieremiae Victoris vera & dilucida demonstratio, quod Zuingliani & Caluinistae, numquam se subiecerunt confessioni Augustanae, exhibitae Carolo quinto, anno 1530. Germ. Francofurti 1591. And thus much of the titles of Protestants books, written one against another.  
8. Now from all the former premises above set down, I here conclude, that if the several opinions and doctrines among the Protestants themselves be not in their own judgments, matters of Indifferency; but are by themselves truly reputed for Heresies, and the maintainers of them not holden to be in state of Salvation, but accounted branded Heretics; then with much more reason may the same sentence be pronounced, touching the main irreconcitiable Controversies, differently believed and holden by the Catholics & Protestants; & the rather since (as it is above said) there is a fare greater difference of doctrine between the Catholic & the Protestant, then between the Protestant & the Protestant.   

The truth of the former doctrine proved from the many absurdityes, necessarily accompanying the contrary doctrine. CHAP. XV.  
SUCH is the sweet providence of the divine majesty in the disposal of things, as that he ever causeth truth to be warranted with many irrefragable reasons, & falsehood to be attended on with diverse gross absurdities; that so the judgement of men may the better be secured, for the embracing of truth, and remain the less excusable, if in place of truth it entertaineth falsehood and error. Of the reason's convincing the infallible truth of our doctrine maintained in this treatise, I have already discussed above in the ninth chapter: now here I will a little insist, in displaying the many and palpable absurdities accompanying the contrary doctrine, which point will chiefly rest (besides some other short insertions) in a recapitulation of most of the former heads or branches, above handled. For if this doctrine were true, that every one might be saved in his own Religion, or that the belief only of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion, and the Creed, were sufficient thereto, notwithstanding the belief of other erroneous opinions and heresies; then would it follow: first, that the holy scriptures of Christ & his Apostles, were most false, which have inveighed so much against heresies, and hath denounced the heavy judgement of damnation against the professors of them, as above is showed, which comminations and threats the scripture in some places, not only extendeth to all heresy and Heretics in general without any 
(a) Epist. ad Titum. cap 3. Galat ●. 5. Rom. c. 16.1. ad Tim. 1.  limitation; but also in some other texts, they are particularly restrained, even to certain heresies of fare smaller importance, than the denial of the Trinity, the Incarnation, the passion, the Creed are, as is evident, touching the denying of 
(b) 1. Tim c. 4. 2. ad Tim. c. 2. 1. joan. cap. 2  marriage, of eating certain meats, and touching the nature of Christ. Now that the denial of other inferior articls of faith then of the Trinity, Incarnation, etc. is plain Heresy, is demonstrated above, both from the definition of Heresy, and from the judgement of the primitive Church.  
2. Secondly, the foresaid doctrine of our Newtralists, impugneth 
(c) ut supra.  the definition of faith given by the Apostle, which definition of faith, comprehendeth a general belief of all articles of Christian Religion, 
(d) Heb. cap. 11.  and is not therefore to be restrained to any one kind of them.  
3. In like sort it destroyeth the privileges, and dignities of faith, set down by the foresaid Apostles, who 
(e) Matt. ultim. & Hebr. 11.  promiseth salvation to him, who hath faith, as also affirmeth, That without faith, we cannot please 
(f) Eph. 4. Act. 4. Rom. 12.  God; but such excellencyes cannot be ascribed to a mongrel faith, which believeth somethings true, other false: they are therefore to be given, to a true, entire, & perfect faith in all points, or else the Apostle grossly erred in assigning to faith the foresaid privileges; seeing a false faith is no better than no faith at all.  
4. Again it depriveth Christian faith of its true mark or Character of Unity, so much celebrated by the Apostle. Now than if unity of faith be necessary to Salvation, how can both Catholics and Protestants, expect salvation? Seeing there is no greater distance between the opposite parts of a Diameter, than there is repugnancy between both their beliefs. And thus if both them (though wanting this unity) can be saved, then hath the Apostle falsely and erroneously described and delineated the faith of a Christian. But to reflect upon the former passages; is any man so stupid, as to dream, that that doctrine should be true, which giveth so open a lie to so many unanswerable texts of Gods holy writ, touching the condemning of Heretics in general, as also touching the definition, excellency, and propriety of true faith? It is impossible, it is not to be imagined; God's word is like himself, most true, sacred, and inviolable, and therefore it justly witnesseth of itself, that Sriptura 
(g) Matt. 24.  non potest solui. And again: Coelum & terra transibunt, verba autem mea non transibunt. 
Math. 24  Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass.  
5. But to proceed further touching the foresaid want of unity & disagreements; if every Christian might be saved in his own Religion, then might those be saved, which believe the articles of the Creed in a most different sense & manner, than which, what can be more rashly & exorbitantly spoken? For seeing there is but one true intended sense by the Apostles of the Creed, which if we attain not, then do we believe, that which is false; but to believe the Creed in a false sense is no better, than not to believe it at all, as is above said, and therefore it would follow by way of inference, that he might be saved, who believed not any one article of the Creed at all. Now that the Catholics & Protestants do believe the articles of the Creed in different (or rather contrary) senses, (and consequently that the one side beleiueth it in a false and erroneous sense) is above proved in the fourth chapter.  
6. If it be here replied, that the maintainers of this doctrine do so fare yield, that they only are to be saved, which in a true sense believe the Creed; yet by this their restrainct they condemn all those others, which believe it in any other sense different from that, intended by the Holy Ghost and the Apostles; and consequently, they condemn in their judgement and deprive of salvation, either the Catholics or the Protestants; since of necessity, the one of these do believe the Creed, not in its true sense, but in a false and heretical sense and construction, different from that of the Apostles.  
7. But granting that the Catholics and Protestants believe the Creed, in one true sense intended by the holy Ghost; yet if our Newtralists would have the Creed the square or rule, thereby to measure our faith, then mark the absurdityes following: For by this doctrine one might be saved, who believed 1. Not that there were any Scriptures at all written by the Prophets & Apostles (since the Creed maketh no mention of any such divine writings.) 2. In like sort he might be saved, who did not believe, there were any Angels or Devils. 3. Or that there is a material place of Hell. 4. Or that the pains thereof are eternal. 5. Or that Adam did presently upon his creation fall from grace, and thereby transported original sin upon all his posterity. 6. Or that our Saviour whilst he conversed here upon earth, wrought any miracles. 7. Or made choice of certain men to be his Apostles, to preach the Christian faith throughout the whole world. 8. Or that Circumsition is now forbidden and antiquated. 9 Or that there are any Sacraments of the new testament, as Baptism, the Eucharist etc. 10. Or that finally before the dissolution of the world, a designed enemy of Christ shall come, who is termed Antichrist. I say by our Newtralists Religion, he should be saved, who believed none of the foresaid articles, seeing not any one of them is expressed or set down in the Apostles creed; and yet the belief of the said articles, is necessarily exacted & required to salvation both in the judgements of the Catholics & the Protestants, both which parties do with an unanimous consent, teach the necessity of believing the said articles.  
8. But to proceed further, & to come to the different articles of faith, differently believed by the Catholics & Protestants; and yet not expressed in the Creed, & articles of such nature, as that they are holden by the Catholics to be instituted by our Saviour, as subordinate (yet necessary) means of the grace of God, and of salvation; whereas the Protestants, as not believing at all the said articles, do wholly disclaim from acknowledging all such means. These articles I have recited above, to wit, 1. That Sacraments in general do confer grace. 2. That a child dying without baptism, cannot be saved. 3. That mortal sin is not remitted without the sacrament of Penance and confession. 4. That we are to adore with supreme honour the Blessed Sacrament. 5. That not only faith, but also works do justify man. 6. That a Christian, by thinking himself to be just, is not thereby become just. 7. That every Christian hath sufficient grace offered by God to save his soul, & that therefore God on his part would have all men saved. 8. That without keeping the ten commandments a man cannot be saved. 9 Finally, that all Christians, aught upon pain of eternal damnation to communicate in sacraments and doctrine with the church of Rome, and to submit themselves in all due obedience to the supreme pastor of God's church. In all which points the Protestants do believe directly the contrary, condemning us of heresy, superstition, yea idolatry, for our believing the foresaid points. Now I say, seeing the former articles do immediately touch & concern either remission of our sins, or grace of our soul, or our justification, or our due honour adoration to our Saviour's body being accompanied with his divinity, or lastly our communion with Christ his church, and the head thereof, in any of which (as concerning so nearly our eternal happiness) who erreth, cannot possibly be saved.  
9 And seeing the Protestants (as is said) do in all the said points maintain the just contrary to the Catholics, and thereby do abandon the Catholics acknowledged means of their salvation; I hear ask in all soberness of judgement, what can be reputed for a greater absurdity, then to affirm with our Newtralists, that the Catholics and Protestants (notwithstanding their so different and contrary belief, and answearble practise in the former articles, so nearly touching man's salvation) may both be saved? Seeing it must needs be, that either the Catholics shallbe damned for setting down certain means of our salvation, contrary to Christ's mind and institution (supposing the said means to be false) or that the Protestants shallbe damned for rejecting the former means of Salvation instituted by Christ, admitting them to be true.  
10. But to pass forward: If every Christian might be saved in his Religion, in believing only the fundamental points of the Trinity, the Incarnation, etc. then hath the Church of Christ even in her primitive days (at what time the Protestants themselves 
(h) See of this acknowledgement the defence of the Apology of England written by Doctor jewel, Kemnit. in exam. Concil. Trid. par. 1. p. 74. the confess. of Bohemia in the harmony of confess. pag. 400. besides diverse others.  do exempt her from error) most fond & intolerably erred in condemning certain opinions (which are not fundamental) for Heresies, and the maintainers for Heretics; and consequently the scripture, and Christ himself have deceived us, by ascribing unto the Church, an infallibility 
(i) Math. 18. Luc. 10.2. Tim. 3.  of erring in her definitions of Faith, and condemnation of heresies, and by commanding us to obey the church's authority and sentence, in all things, as styling her the pillar, and foundation of truth. And further it should follow, that the Church should thus insufferably err, both in general Counsels, as also in the private authorities and sentences of all the learned Fathers in the firste times.  
11. And thus for example, the Council of the Apostles should have erred, 
(k) Act. 15.  in decreeing it unlawful to eat in those time's blood and strangled meats. In like sort the first Council of Nice 
(l) Euseb. l. 6 hist. c. 33.  should have erred, in condemning the Quartodecimani for heretics, because they would not keep Easter day, according to the custom of the church. The council of Rome under Cornelius for condemning the heresy of the Novatians; who rejected the Sacrament of Penance, as also for condemning the error of Anabaptism. The council 
(m)  patet in act. 2.  of Calchedon, for condemning the Heresy of Eutiches, and for prohibiting the marriages of Monks, and Virgins; and the first Council of Ephesus 
(n) Socra. l. 7. c. 34.  for condemning the heresy of Nestorius; both which Heretics believed in the most holy Trinity, and acknowledged Christ for their Redeemer. The fourth council of Carthage 
(o) Can. 79.  for sententionally decreeing, that prayer and sacrifice for the dead, was according to the true faith of christ, and for pronouncing the deniers thereof for Heretics. And finally (to omit other Counsels) the council of Constantinople 
(p) Zonara's in vita Constantini & Nicephorus l. 17. c. 27  should have erred, for condemning the Heresy of Origen, who taught that the Devils in the end should be saved. And thus fare of counsels condemning points of seeming indifferency, for open & wicked heresies.  
12. But now granting that the said points as they were holden by the maintainers of them) were not Heresies, & that the beleivers of them might be saved, than two main absurdityes do inevitably follow. The first is, the erring of the whole Church of God in condemning them for heresies, they being not Heresies, but true doctrines, as is said. The second, the inconsiderate carriage of the church in these matters: For to what purpose or end, were all these counsels (consisting of many hundreds of the most grave and Reverend men of all christendom) celebrated with such labour and travail out of all countries, and infinite charges, if the doctrines (for the impugning, resisting, & condemning whereof they were gathered) might be indifferently maintained and defended on all sides, without breach of true faith, or danger of salvation? The erring of the Church is no less manifested in the sentences and condemnation given by many of the most ancient, famous, & learned Fathers in the primitive Church (not any one orthodoxal Father contradicting them therein) against diverse, maintaining opinions, that seem, in (regard or the Trinity, the Incarnation &c) of small importance; if so these opinions be not heresies, nor the beleivers of them Heretics, but men in state of salvation.  
13. And thus according hereto Florinus, though he taught God to be the author of sin, might be saved. In like sort the Heretics, who in S. Hieromes days, denied the possibility of the Commandments, the Manichees, who denied , the Eunomians, who taught that only faith did justify. The Aerians, who denied prayer and sacrifice for the dead, and took away all fasting-dais. Vigilantius, who taught that Priests might marry, & that we ought not pray to Saints. jovinian, who held marriage to be better than virginity; The Donatists, who taught the invisibility of the Church. And finally (to omit many others for brevity sake). The Pelagians, who denied the necessity of Baptism in Children. All these men (I say) might be saved, notwithstanding the former doctrines, if so every one might expect salvation in their Religion. And yet we find, that the foresaid men, were branded for wicked Heretics, & their doctrines for damnable Heresies (as in the seaventh chapter above is showed) by S. Irenaeus, S. Hierome, S. Epiphanius, Philastrius, S. Augustine, Theodoret, and others; diverse of these holy Fathers writing Catalogues of Heresies, did place the foresaid doctrines and their authors within the said Catalogues, and this they did without any reluctation or gainsaying of any other ancient and learned Father of their times.  
14. From which consideration I do gather, that if those opinions were not justly condemned for heresies, and their authors for Heretics; than not only the Church did fond err in so great a matter, but also the aforesaid alleged Fathers (to wit) S. Irenaeus, S. Hierome, Epiphanius, S. Augustine with many such others, should deservedly be reputed for Heretics, for their condemning of true doctrines for heresies, and the believers of them for heretics; and on the contrary side Florinus, the Manichees, the Eunomians, Vigilantius, jovinian, the Donatists, Pelagius, and many other such, should be accounted for their teaching of true doctrines, orthodoxal Fathers and authors, and might have justly complained of their insupportable wrongs, and indignities proceeding from the pens of the foresaid Fathers: an absurdity, which I think no man, enjoying the benefit of his five senses, will allow: And yet the admittance of our Newtralists paradox, inavoidably draweth on this inference.  
15. Another absurdity accompanying the former doctrine, is, that Heretics should be true members of Christ's church. This I deduce. For seeing by the consent of all learned men, none can be saved, but such as be members of Christ's Church (for otherways Turks and jews dying in that state might be saved) and seeing the foresaid registered doctrines, and the authors are condemned for heresies and Heretics, both by the authority of God's Church, and according to the true definition of heresy above set down (for the foresaid Heretics made choice of those their heresies, and did maintain them most frowardly against the whole Church of God, not submitting their judgements to it) it must of necessity follow, that if those men could be saved, than Heretics continuing Heretics, are members of Christ his Church; than which, what paradox in itself can be accounted more absurd, or in the judgement of learned men more incredible? Considering with what acerbity of comportement, the Apostles & all the orthodoxal, learned, & pious Fathers, both in their writings & otherwise, have in all ages entertained Heretics, as above I have manifested in the sixth Chapter.  
16. Again, supposing the truth of the doctrine of the Omnifidians (as I may term them) yet observe how repugnant it is to all reason, & otherwise absurd even in its own nature. I will here pass over diverse reasons alleged in the precedent chapter, and insist a little in some few of them. The first: It is certain, that that faith which believeth some articls, & yet believeth not others, which are no less true (& such is the faith of our Newtralists) is no true supernatural faith; seeing it believeth nothing through the authority of God & his Church, both which reveal and propound all articles alike & indifferently to all men to be believed. Now what more cross to reason, then that a bare opinion (not relying upon any supernatural grounds, as having neither God for its Revealer, nor the Church for its propounder) conceived only through moral inducements (& therefore ever standing obnoxious to error and mistaking) should be able to purchase eternal salvation to man's soul?  
17. Again how adverse is it to all true judgement, to aver, that it is no prejudice or hindrance to man's salvation, to believe those principle of Religion, which teach & advance all liberty & sensuality in conversation and manners, & do depress and disparage all chastity, fasting voluntary poverty, keeping of the commandments, all rigorous and painful works, and labours of virtue, piety, and mortification? For it is most contradictory in the very terms, and no less repugnant to God's sacred word, that that doctrine, which transferreth 
(x) Iud● vers. 4.  the grace of God into wantonness, should be accounted the 
(y) Mat. 7. Luc. 13.  strict way, which leadeth unto life.  
18. Furthermore, can it be conceived, as sorting to Gods most merciful proceeding with man, that he should cut off the lives of those men with most fearful, sudden, & prodigious deaths, who first broached the doctrines of Protestancy, if the said doctrines had either been true in themselues, or at least of that coldness or indifferency, as that they might stand with the soul's salvation? No, God is just, and withal merciful; & therefore never extraordinarily punisheth, but for extraordinary sins; poor men that these were, who compare (as it should seem) both in the diuulging of their mendacious and lying doctrines, as also in their unexpected and sudden death, with the false Prophets of 
(z) 3. Regum.  Achab.  
9 But to hasten to an end in the ennumeration of the Absurdities, following the foresaid paradox of salvation in every Religion, and to come to that which within its own lardgnes involueth many improbabilities. For if Catholics and Protestants (notwithstanding the disparity of their faith) can both attain to Heaven, in vain then is the doctrine of recusancy taught jointly on both sides, and in vain have so many sorts of Reverend and learned Priests & others of the laity in our own Country (whose blessed souls, I beseech to pray to God daily for the remission of my many sins) suffered cruel deaths in the late Queen's reign, only because they refused to present themselves to the sermons of the Protestants; but they are gone, & most happily gone, since: Clavis 
(a) Tert. de prescr.  Paradisi, sanguis Martyrum. In vain likewise, these later years have diverse lay persons endured (contrary to his Majesty's natural inclination, most prone to mercy and commiseration) great losses, disgraces, and imprisonements, only for the same cause. But who can think, that learned men should be so prodigal of their lives, and blood; and English Catholics, so insensible of their temporal states, children, and posterity, as that they would wilfully precipitate, and cast themselves into those miseries, only for not believing and exercising points of indifferency, & such as may stand with their souls eternal happiness? In vain also then have the learned men on both sides, spent out their whole lives, in defending (each man his own Religion) in their most painful and voluminous books & writings, if so they dissented one from another in matters of such supposed small importance. Finally in vain and without just cause (& therefore most cruelly) have many foreign states in Christendom, imposed proscriptions, bannishments, and other insupportable disgraces, to such of their own subjects, as will not embrace their own doctrine and Religion, though both sides did conspire and agree in the fundamental points of faith. In vain also both in former times, and at this present have there been & are such Insurrection of subjects against their Princes; such bloody & implacable wars between absolute Princes themselves; such devastation & depopulation of whole Countries, such main battles & fields fought with loss of diverse hundred thousands lives; and lastly such incessant & vninterrupted beseiging & taking of great Cities and towns with effusion (for the most part) of much innocent blood of women and children; and all this originally and principally for matter of Religion; I say in vain & most injuriously have all these attempts and actions been undertaken, if the disagreement in Religion (for which they are undertaken between Catholics & Protestants) were of that reconcileable nature, as that the professors on both sides (notwithstanding their diversity of faith) might jointly be saved.  
20. What can we now reply hereto in behalf of our Newtralists? Shall we say, that the most learned men of all Religions, the Kings, Princes, States, and all their subjects of all Christendom, were and still are actually mad, and out of their senses, in managing these their deplorable attempts for Religion; and that our all reconciling and peaceable Newtralists (who through his pliable stern of disposition in these spiritual matters, is become in kindred, as above is touched, of the half blood with the Atheist, and who is commonly deprehended to want learning grace, and virtue) is peculiarly enlightened by God in setting down what articles of faith are only necessary to man's salvation, and what are to be reputed, but as accessary, and of smaller importance? To such straits (we see) is the defence of the former doctrine driven unto. Seeing therefore this doctrine of our Omnifidians, or Nullifidians (for indeed while they seem to allow all Religions, they take away all Religion) is encompassed on all sides with so many notorious absurdityes (as are displayed in this Chapter) & seeing it cannot be true, except there be a retrogradation of all matters here on earth, and a turning of the world (as they say) upside down, that is, except the most learned become most mad, and the most ignorant, most wise. And except truth in doctrine be necessarily to be accompanied with infinite gross absurdityes, and error and falsehood fortified and countenanced with store of proofs both divine & humane, as if God did purposely lay traps to ensnare man's judgement. Therefore, since such comportement and carriage of things, is not suitable and correspondent to God's providence and charity towards mankind, let every man (who thinketh he hath a soul to save or lose) undoubtedly assure himself, that there is but one true faith or religion, wherein he may availably expect salvation, and that this faith of Christ, (wherewith the soul is clothed) is like to the inconsutible garment of Christ, both being incapable of division, renting, or partition.  
21. Now for the greater illustration of this point, by way of similitude, and as tending towards the closure of this treatise. Imagine that a man pretendeth right and title to certain lands, and taketh advice of all the learned Lawyers and Counsellors of the whole Realm, to whom he showeth all his evidences, of which some do carry a title only in gross and in general; others prove a more particular and more restrained right to the said lands; Imagine further, that upon the diligent perusal of the evidences, the joint consent & judgements of all the said Lawyers, should after their long and serious demurs, conspire in this one point, to wit, that for the recovering and obtaining of the said lands, the foreshowed evidences in general are not only sufficient; seeing diverse other men not having any true interest in the lands, may nevertheless insist and urge their like general claim; but that with the help of the said common evidences, he must more punctually rely (for the gaining of his presumed inheritance) upon other more particular and personal evidences, and assignments. Now all these learned Counsellors agreeing in this sentence, and fortifying their judgements herein with their own experience in the like case; with the new Reports warranting the same; with the authorities of all the ancient, learned, and reverend judges before them; and lastly with the comformity of reason confirming no less. If here now some one Empiric Attorney, or other (skilful only by a little experience, in making a Noverint universi etc. should step forth (armed only with impudence and ignorance) and should pronounce the foresaid sentence of all these learned sages to be false, and that the party pretending right to the said lands, were sure by his general title and evidences only to obtain the same; all other his more particular evidences, being but unnecessary & needless thereto, who might not justly contemn, & reject the censure of such a fellow? Or could not the party claiming the foresaid inheritance, be worthily reprehended, if by abandoning the grave counsel of the learned Lawyers, & following the advice of this ignorant man, he should finally lose all claim, title, and possibility to his said inheritance?  
22. Our case is here the same. We all pretend right to the inheritance of the Kingdom of heaven (for we read: Coronam vitae preparavit Dominus diligentibus se) Our title in general thereto, is our belief in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the Passion &c. (the belief whereof is necessary, but not sufficient) All eminent men for learning (both Catholics and Protestants) do prove from the Scriptures; from the authority of Gods Church; from the nature of heresy; from the definition of true faith, and from diverse other reasons and principles above expressed, that no man can attain to this heavenly inheritance, by believing only the former fundamental points of Christianity, if so he have not (at least implicitly) a true and particular faith of all other less principal points of Christian Religion. Now cometh here a dissolute, gamnelesse, and lefthanded fellow, not practised in any kind of good literature (for it is observed, that all our most forward Newtralists are men for the most part void of learning, virtue, & conscience) who peremptorily out of his Pithagorian chair (that is, without proof) teacheth, that a belief in general of the articles of the Trinity, Incarnation, Passion, etc. doth only necessarily conduce to man's salvation, and that the doctrines of Purgatory, , Real presence, and other contoversies between the Catholics and Protestants, are not in any sort necessary to the purchasing of our eternal inheritance and well far; but are to be reputed (with reference to that end) points indifferent, unavayleable, needless, and as the greek phrase is: Pareria, or by-matters. Who would not here commiserate the folly & ignorance of such a man, but especially pity the poor souls seduced by so blind a guide?   

THE CONCLUSION. CHAP. XVI.  
HITHERTO, good Reader it is sufficiently, I hope, demonstrated, that every Religion, though professing the name of Christ, and believing in the Trinity, the Incarnation, & the like fundamental points of Christian Faith, if their belief in other secondary and less principal points be erroneous, cannot promise to itself any security of salvation; and consequently that the controverted articles at this day between Catholics and Protestants touching Purgatory, Freewill, Praying to Saints, Sacrifice etc. are of that great importance, as that the professors of both sides (to use the phrase of a Blessed Martyr in the same case) Vnum caelum capere non potest. One heaven cannot contain. It now remaineth to show, that seeing at this day there are originally, but two different religions among Christians, to wit, the Catholic Religion and the Protestant, (within which is included all its branches & descendants) whether the Catholic or Protestant Religion is that wherein a man may be saved: But seeing this subject is most learnedly and painfully entreated of by many Catholic writers, who from all authorities both divine and humane, have irrefragably evicted the truth of their own religion, and falsehood of the Protestants profession; and consequently that in the Catholic, not in the Protestant faith, the souls eternal salvation is to be purchased: therefore I do remit the Reader for his greater satisfaction therein, to the perusal of the said books, and particularly to the studying (rather then to the reading) of that most elaborate, learned, unanswereable, and galling work of the protestants Apology of the Roman Church.  
2. Only before I here end, I must make bold to put him in remembrance, with what the Protestant Religion in this treatise (though but casually and incidently) is most truly charged; to wit, first with particular condemnations passed upon diverse of its chiefest articles, even by the several sentences and judgements of the primitive Church, and that therefore those doctrines so condemned, and yet after defended with all froward pertinacity against the Church of God, are not only thereby discovered for plain, and manifest heresies, but furthermore both implicitly by the testimony of holy scripture, as also by the definition of Heresy above expressed. Secondly, that the doctrinal speculations & positions of the Protestants faith do forceibly impel the wills of such as believe them, to all vice, liberty and sensuality. Thirdly, that God out of the infinite abyss of his justice, hath punished even in this world, (as earnest given of far greater punishment in the world to come) with most fearful, unnatural and prodigious deaths, the first inventors in our age and promulgatours of the said doctrines; and such deaths, as his divine majesty is accustomed to send to his professed enemies. Fourthly, that Protestancy is torn a sunder with intestine divisions, diverse professors of it, charging their brethren professors with Heresy, and despairing of their future salvation.  
25. From all which we may infallibly conclude, that except Heresy, dissolution of manners, most infamous & miserable deaths and disagreements in doctrine between one & the same sect, be good dispsitions and means to purchase heaven, the Protestant Religion can never bring her beleivers thereto. What then remaineth, but that, who will expect salvation, should seek it only in the Catholic Church? It being that Ark, erected by our second No within which who virtuously live, are exempted from that universal deluge of eternal damnation. For only in this Church is professed and taught that faith, to which by long prescription & a continued hand of time, is peculiarly ascribed the name Catholic: Catholicum 
(c) Pacianus epis. ad Sympronianun, quae est de nomine catholico.  istud nec Marcionem, nec Apellem, nec Montanum sumit anthores. That faith is, which was prophesied to be of that dilating and spreading nature, as that, to it all 
(d) Isa. 2. & expounded in the English bibles anno 1576 of the universality of the Church, or faith of Christ.  Nations shall flow, and which shall have the 
(e) Psal. 2. & expounded of the Church's universality by the foresaid English Bibles. 1576.  end of the earth for its possession from sea 
(f) Psal. 72.  to sea; beginning 
(g) Luc. 24.  at Jerusalem among all Nations. That faith, the Professors whereof shallbe a 
(h) Dan. 2. in which is included the continuance of the church without interruption.  Kingdom, that shall never be destroyed, but shall stand for ever, contrary to the short currents of all heresies. Of which S. Augustine thus writteth: Many heresies are already dead, they have continued their stream, as long as they were able; Now they are run out, and their rivers are dried up; The memory of them, that ever they were, is scarce extant: That faith, the members whereof in regard of their ever visible eminency, are styled by the holy Ghost, A 
(i) Psal. 57  mountain prepared in the top of mountains, and exalted above all Hills; with reference whereto (to wit, in respect of the Churches continual 
(k) Isa. 2. whereby is proved the churches ever visibility.  visibility) the aforesaid S. Augustine compareth it to a tabernacle placed in the sun. 
(l) Tom. 9 in ep. joan. tra. 2.  That faith, whose union in doctrine both among the members thereof, and with their head, is even celebrated by God's holy written; since the Church of God is therefore called, One 
(m) Rom. 17. Cant 6. joan. 10. which places ●o● prove the Church's unity.  body, one spouse, and one sheepefould: which previledge S. Hierome acknowledgeth by his own submission in these words: I 
(n) Epist. ad Damae sum.  do consotiate or unite myself in communion with the chair of Peter; I know the Church to be builded upon that Rock; whosoever doth eat the lamb out of this house, is become profane: That faith for the greater confirmation whereof, God hath vouchsafed to disjoint the settled course of nature, by working of diverse stupendious and astonishing miracles; according to those words of our Saviour: Go 
(o) Mat. 10. in which words our Saviour maketh miracls a mark of true faith or the Church.  preach you, cure the sick, raise the dead, cleanse the lepers, cast out Devils. A prerogative so powerful & efficacious with S. Augustine, that he expressly thus confesseth of himself: Miracles 
(p) Tom. 6. contra epist. Manich c. 4.  are amongst those other things, which most justly have holden me in the Church's bosom. To conclude (omitting diverse other characters (as I may term them) or signs of the true faith) that faith, which is of that force, as to extort testimony and warrant for itself, even from its capital and designed enemies, answerably to that: Our 
(q) Deut. 32. which words include the confession of the adversary to be a note of truth.  God is not as their Gods are, our enemies an even witnesses. Whereunto the Protestants herein seem to yield, since no less from their own 
(r) This is proved in that Protestants do not rebaptize infants or children of Catholic Parents afore baptised. Now these Infants are baptised, in the faith of their parents (as all children are by the doctrine of all learned Protestants) But if this faith of Catholic parents be sufficient, for the salvation of their children dying baptised therein; then much more is it sufficient for the salvation of the Parents themselves, since it is most absurd to say, that the Catholic faith of parents, should be available for their children or infants dying baptised therein, and yet not available for the Parents.  practice, then from their acknowledgement 
(s) See thereof D. Some in his defence against Penry pag. 182. and D. Covell in his defence of M. hooker's five books of Ecclesiastical policy pag. 77.  in words, they ascribe to our Roman faith, the hope of salvation. To this faith then, good Reader, with an indubious assent, adhere thou both living and dying. Fly Newtralisme in doctrine, as the bane of all Religion; Fly Protestancy, as the bane of Christ's true Religion, and say with 
(t) Epist. ad Symphronianum.  Pacianus: Christianus mihi nomen est, Catholicus vero cognomen: Illud me nuncupat, istud me ostendit. A Christian is my name, a Catholic my surname: that doth denominate me, this doth demonstrate me.    

The contents of the Chapters.  

THat a man, who beleiueth in the Trinity, the Incarnation, the passion etc. and yet beleiueth not all other articles of Christian faith, cannot be saved: And first of the definition of Heresy, and of an Heretic. Pag. 9  
2 The foresaid verity proved from the holy Scripture. p. 15  
3 The same proved from the definition, nature and propriety or unity of faith. pag. 29.  
4. The same proved from the want of unity in faith, between the Catholics and the Protestants, touching the Articles of the Creed. And from that, that the Catholic & Protestant, do agree in the belief of diverse articles necessarily to be believed, and yet not expressed in the creed. pag. 33.  
5. The same made evident from the like want of unity in faith between the Catholic and the Protestant, in articles necessary to be believed, and yet not expressed in the creed. pag. 48.  
6. The same proved from the authority or privilege of God's church in not erring, either in her definitions of faith, or condemnation of Heresies, and first by counsels. pag. 56.  
.7 The same proved from the like infallible authority of the church in not erring, mainfested from the testimonies of particular Fathers. pag. 67.  
8. The foresaid truth evicted from that principle, that neither Heretics, nor Schismatics, are members of the church of God. pag. 81.  
9 The same proved from arguments drawn from reason. pag. 90.  
10. The same proved from the different effects of catholic Religion and protestancy touching virtue and vice. pag. 102.  
11. The same verity proved from the fearful deaths of the first broachers of protestancy. pag. 115.  
12. The same confirmed from the doctrine of recusancy, taught by catholics and Protestants. pag. 118.  
13. The same manifested from the writings of the Catholics and Protestants, reciprocally charging one another with heresy. And from the insurrections, wars, and rebellions begun only for Religion. pag. 126.  
14. The same proved from the Protestants, mutually condemneth one another of heresy. pag. 13.  
15. Lastly the same demonstrated from the many absurdity▪ necessarily accompanying the contrary doctrine. pag. 142.  
16. The conclusion. pag. 165.   
FINIS.