them any way hurtefull to their saluation CHAP. V. The same proued from the want of vnity in fayth betweene Catholikes and Protestants in articles necessary to be beleeued and yet not expressed in the Creede IN this third and last place we will insist in certaine controuersyes of Religion so differently maintayned by Catholikes and Protestants as that graunting the maintaynours of the one side to hould the truth it followeth that the other party vphouldeth falsehood and heresy Now for the more dangerous wounding of our Newtralizing Protestants heerein I will omit here to speak of the Controuersies touching Purgatory Praying to Saints Free-will Monachisme and diuers others such like and will restraine my selfe only to these Controuersies the subiect of which Cōtrouersyes are taught by the one side to be vnder Christ the immediate meanes of our grace saluation and denyed by the other party to be of any such force and efficacy for the soules euerlasting good and consequently in regard of their subiect are one way necessarily to be beleeued So as if it be showed that the Protestants and the Catholiks do mainly dissent in the meanes of obtayning grace purchasing of saluation it must of necessity be inferred that both the Protestants and the Catholikes continuing in such their state cannot obtaine grace and saluation since not only Philosophy but euen naturall reason teacheth vs that he neuer shall attaine the end who vseth eyther not the same meanes which are only and necessarily instituted to the gayning of the sayd end 1. But to procced to these points First Concerning the sacraments in generall the Catholikes doe beleeue that all of them where no iust impediment is do conferre grace into the soule of man by the helpe and continuance of which grace the soule in the end obtayneth its saluation The Protestants do not ascribe any such supernaturall effect or operation of grace to them 2. And to come more particulerly to the Sacraments Touching Baptisme the Catholikes beleeue That children being borne in Originall sinne cannot be saued except they be baptized with water according to those wordes of S. Iohn 3. Vnlesse a man be borne againe of water and the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God The Protestants (a) Willet in his meditat in Psal 122. Calu. Beza frequently beleeue that infāts dying vnbaptised may be saued 3. Touching the Sacrament of Pennance or Confession the Catholikes beleeue That after a Christian hath committed any one mortall sinne that sinne cannot be forgiuen him but at least in voto by meanes of confessing the sayd sinne to a Priest of the new Testament and receauing absolution thereof from him answerably to that of S. Iohn 20. Whose sinnes you shall forgiue they are forgiuen them and whose sinnes you shall retayne they are retayned The Protestants beleeue that neyther the confession of sinnes to man nor the absolution of man is necessary for the remitting of them but that it is sufficient to confesse them only to God And thus according to the diuersity of doctrine either the Protestant for want of this sacrament after he hath mortally sinned cannot be saued or Catholiks for wrongfully imposing this yoak vpon Christiās do loose their saluation 4. Touching the most Blessed Eucharist the Catholikes beleeue That the very body and bloode doth lye ineffably and latently vnder the formes of bread and wine according to that This is my body This is my blood Math. 26. That vnlesse we eate his body and drinke his blood we shall not haue life euerlasting Iohn 6. Lastly That we are to adore Christ his body being accompanyed with his diuinity in the sayd Sacraments The Protestants do beleeue that Christs true body as neuer leauing heauen cannot possibly be truly and really vnder the forme of Bread and Wine and consequently they beleeue that the eating of his body and drinkinge of his blood is not necessary to saluation Finally they hould our adoration of the Sacrament to be open Idolatry and tearme Catholikes Idolaters for adoring of it And thus eyther the Protestāts as not feeding vpon this celestiall food shall not haue life euerlasting if the Catholikes doctrine heerein be true or els Catholikes suppose which God forbid they should erre for teaching and practising idolatry heerein should incurre damnation 5. Touching the meanes of our Iustification The Catholikes beleeue That not only fayth but workes also do iustify The Protestants reiect al workes from Iustification teachinge that only fayth doth iustify man yea they further proceed affirming that who once hath true fayth is most assured and certaine (b) Calu. in instit passim Kemnit in exam Conc. Tri of his saluation whereas the Catholikes reputing this as a meere presumption are willing according to the Apostle Phil. 2. To worke their saluation with feare and tremblinge To be short the Protestants do teach that a man by thinking himselfe to be iust is by this meanes become iust whereas the Catholikes do hould this doctrine not only to be phantasticall but also (c) Bella. l. 3. de Iustificatione in reason most absurd 6. Touching Grace without which a man cannot be saued the catholiks beleeue That God out of the Abysse and deapth of his infinite mercy offereth to euery Christian sufficient grace whereby he may be saued and therefore they do encourage euery one to endeauour to seeke their saluation The (d) Calu. Beza in whole treatises D. Willet sinopsi 1600. p. 789. Protestāts teach that God giueth not this sufficiency of grace to euery one but to certaine men only that diuers there are who notwithstanding al their endeauour to beleeue truly and liue vertuously yet they cannot nor shall not be saued 7. Touching the Decalogue or ten Commandements the Catholiks beleeue That except a Christian do keepe them he cannot be saued according to our Sauiour If thou wilt enter into lyfe keepe the Commandements Math. 19. The (e) The impossibility of the commandements is taught by D. Reynolds 2. conclus annexed to his conference p. 697. D. Willet in synopsi p. 564. Protestants do absolutly teach an impossibility of keeping them And thereupon Luther thus affirmeth The ten Commandements (f) Ser. de Moyse appertaine not vnto vs. 8. Lastly touching the Pope or Bishop of Rome the Catholikes do beleeue That he is vnder Christ the supreme Pastour vpon earth that who doth not communicate with him in sacraments and doctrine not yeelding him all true obedience in subiecting their iudgments in matters of fayth to his iudgment and sentential definitions cannot be saued The Protestants doe 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 ennemy of Christ and that whosoeuer embraceth his doctrine or enthralleth as they write their assents to his cathedrall decrees in points of Religion cannot obtayne saluation 9. Thus farre of these pointes of which I haue made
doe with all seruour and earnestnes maintaine that the church of Christ cannot erre and that what she defineth for truth is most true or what for Heresy or falsehood is hereticall and to be condemned 3. This basis or foundation of the Churches not erring being thus firmely layd we are herevpon to conclude that what points of Religion the Catholike Church of Christ hath condemned for heresies the same are by vs to be reputed for heresies since the Churches cōdemnation or approbation is most infallible the maintainours of the sayd heresies for heretikes and consequētly that such heretikes as departing out of the Church of God by their houlding of the sayd hereticall opinions cannot be saued Now because the iudgmēt of the Church in matters of fayth is by the aknowledgment of all sides discouered two wayes first by the sentence of generall Councells secondly by the frequent attestations of the chiefe doctors of the Church in euery age in their particuler writings they not being contradicted therein by any other orthodoxall Fathers or doctors of the same age I will therefore distributiuely handle both these wayes shewing that both by generall Councels and also by the particuler iudgment of the learned Fathers many opinions though not touching the Trinity the Incarnatiō the Passion or the expresse articles of the Apostles Creed haue bine condemned for plaine heresies and the belieuers of them anathematized for Heretikes 4. And first to begin with Councells the infallible authority of which euen Christ himself hath by his own words often ratifyed as where he sayth VVhere (k) Math. 18. two or three much more when many hūdred venerable Bishops are gathered together in my name I am in the midst of thē And againe speaking to his Church and in it to the assembled Doctours and Pastours thereof I am (l) Math. 28. with you all dayes euen to the consumation of the world Which councels are euer directed and gouerned by the holy Ghost according to those wordes in the Acts Visum est (m) c. 15 Spiritui sancto nobis It hath seemed good to the holy Ghost and vs. And therefore are worthily receaued admitted for the supremest sentence of Gods Church not only by the ancient (n) Atha epist ad Epictetū Aug. epi. 162. Nazianz oratione in Athanasium Cyrill l. de Trinitate c. Fathers but euen 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 gouermēt pag. 370. are an externall iudiciall meanes to discerne errour the supremest meanes to decyde doubts But to proceede The Councell of Nice was celebrated though principally for the repressing of the heresy of Arrius denying the diuinity of Christ yet withall touching the Controuersy 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 Councel pronounceth Anathema to al those who besides their denying of the diuinity of Christ shall deny that the feast of Easter was not to be kept according to the custome of the church but according to the custome of the Iewes And these heretikes were called Quartodecimani Heres 70. Andianorū of whom see Tertul. l. de prescrip Augustine heresis 29. And here we are to vnderstand that the worde Anathema vsed and pronounced by this Councell which word is also almost euery where vsed in all their general Coūcells signifyeth asmuch as accursed and in this sense we find this word Anathema to be vsed by the Apostle in seueral (t) Epist ad Rom. 9.1 Cor. 12. c. places so as when a Councel pronounceth Anathema to any for belieuing such and such heresies or not belieuing 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 belieuing or not belieuing points of indifferency but for belieuing of such errours as cannot stand with his soules saluation 5. Also you shall reade Act. 15. of the Councell assembled in the Apostles time the occasion and reason thereof was for that certaine contentious men maintaining that the Gentiles cōuerted to the Christian fayth might eate meats offered vp to Idols blood and strangled beasts contrary to the custome of the Iewes the Apostles being assembled bearing with the weaknes of the Iewes in the infancy of the Church decreed the prohibition of eating blood and strangled meates After which decree once established it is certaine that it had bine a mortall sinne immediatly to haue eaten of blood and strangled meates so as before it being a point of indifferency is now made necessary This appeareth from the text first from those wordes Certaine going forth from vs haue troubled you with wordes subuerting your soules But men do neyther depart out of the Church by maintaintng certaine opinions nor by their example therein can they subuert other mens soules if their doctrine and practise thereof do stil remaine about things indifferent Secondly from that other passage It hath seemed good to the holy Ghost and vs to lay no further burthen vpon you then these necessary thinges where we find that the prohibition of such meates is ranged by the Apostles in regard of those tymes amoung those things which are necessary Againe neyther would the Apostles haue gathered themselues so solemly neither would they haue ascribed the decreeing of it to the worke of the holy Ghost if the subiect of the question and difficulty then discussed of by them had concerned matters only of indifferency 6. Now from the example of this Councell I do gather that if a Councell by its owne authority may decree that the eating of certaine meates being otherwayes of their owne nature indifferently to be eaten without sinne shal be vnlawful and shall repute and hould the impugners thereof for men departed from out of the Church of Christ then a fortiori what doctrine soeuer a Councell shall condemne of its owne nature for heresy the same is to be reputed by all good Christians for heresy and the defendours thereof for Heretikes 7. The third Councell of (u) Cau. 47. Carthage wherat S. Augustine was present decreed that the booke of the Maccabees with some other bookes should be acknowledged as canonicall and pronounceth an Anathema and condemnation to all those who should not belieue them as canonicall scripture from whence it may be concluded that seeing the booke of the Machabees teacheth prayer for the dead that therefore this Councell alloweth this doctrine and condemneth the contrary doctrine for heresy 8. The doctrine of the Nouatians who taught that there was not power in the Church to reconcile men to God but only by Baptisme excluding and denying thereby the sacrament of Pennance was condemned with the
condemnation heereof giuen by (e) Serm. de temp cap. 101 S. Augustine 5. That man had not Free-will is auerred by the Manichees and condemned for a manifest heresy by (f) In praesat dial cont Pelagia Hierome in these wordes ManichaeoruÌ„ est hominis damnare Naturam liberum auferre arbitrium The Manichees do condemne mans nature do take away Free-will 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 sinne to Freewill 6. That fayth doth only iustify 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. sayth that it first proceeded from the false vnderstanding of S. Paul in his epistles 7. That prayer or sacrifice could not be offered vp for the dead is maintained by Aerius his followers who also taught that set fasting-dayes are not to be appointed by the Church yet were these two opinions condemned for heresyes by (k) Hares 75. Epiphanius and (l) Lib. de heres cap 33. S. Austine who thus writteth Aeriani haeretici docent non oportere orare aut offerre sacrificium pro mortuis nec statuta solemniter celebranda esse ieiunia sed cum quisque voluerit ieiunaÌ„dum ne videatis esse sub lege The Heretike Aerians do teach that we ought not to pray or offer sacrifice for the dead that solemne fasting dayes are not to be celebrated but that every one is to fast when it pleaseth himselfe least otherwise he might seeme to liue vnder the law Thus farre 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 c. VVhat do the Churches of the East in this point VVhat the Church of Egipt And the Apostolicall Sea They admit for Priests men who are eyther Virgins or continent or if they haue wiues do cease to become husbands 9. That marriage and virginity was of equal dignity was defended by Iouinian who also absolutly denyed all diuersity of merits yet was this his errour coÌ„demned for heresy by (m) Lib. 1. aduer Iouin c. 2 S. Hierome and (n) De teÌ„pore ser 191. S. Augustine thus writing thereof Iouiniani damnamus errorem qui dicit nullam in futuro meritorum distantiam VVe condemne the errour of IouiniaÌ„ who teacheth that there is no disparity or difference of merits in tyme to come 10. That the Church was not euer visible was taught by the Donatists but condemned for a most wicked heresy by S. Augustine who thus discourseth therof Donatistae (o) Lib. de vnit Ecc. c. 12. epist 170 ad Seuerum detorquent scripturas in Ecclesiam Dei vt 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 seeme to haue suffered defect or perished out of the whole world 11. That Baptisme of children was not necessary was taught by the Pelagians but condeÌ„ned for a manifest heresy by (p) In rescripto ad Mileuitanum Concil Innocentius by (q) Haeres 88. S. Augustine and (r) In ep 86. ad Episcopum Aquetletensem S. Leo. 12. The Religious vse of the images of Christ his Saints was sacrilegiously denyed be Zenaias Persa as Nicephorus s witnesseth thus writing Zenaias iste primus o audacem animam os impudens voceÌ„ illam euomuit Christi eorum qui illi placueruÌ„t imagines venerandas non esse that is This Zenayas was the first that vomited forth this word to bould soule 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 worshippe their Relikes was maintained by Vigilantius but condemned for heresy by (t) Lib. cont Vigilant c. â— 3. Saint Hierome and by (v) Lib. de Eccles â—og c. â—3 S. Augustine who of this later branche thus writeth Sanctorum corporum praecipue Beatorum veliquias aâ—si Christi membra sincerissime honoranda credimus si quis contra sententiam venerit non Christianus sed Eunomianus aut VigilaÌ„tianus creditur VVe beleeue that the Reliques of holy bodyes but especially of Martyrs as the members of Christ are to be honoured most sincerely and who shall come to impugne this doctrine is to be accounted no Christian but eyther an Eunomian or a Vigilantian 13. The ouerthrowing of Altars casting away of holy Chrisme was taught practised by the Donatists yet was this their sacrilegious proceedings condemned themselues branded for Heretikes by (x) Lib. 2. contra PetilianuÌ„ c. 52. l. 3. c. 40 epist 163. S. Augustine and by Optatus who speaking to the Donatists discourseth therof in this manner Quid (y) Lib. 6. contra Donatist est tam sacrilegum quam altaria Dei in quibus vos aliquando obtulistis frangere radere remouere Quid enim est altare nisi sedes corporis sanguinis Christi Quid vos offenderit Christus cuius illic per certa momenta corpus sanguis habitabant VVhat is so sacrilegious O you Donatists as to breake deface cast downe the altars of God whervpon your selues haue sometymes offered vp sacrifice VVhat other thing is an Altar then the seat of the body and blood of Christ In what hath Christ so offended you whose body and blood for certaine moments or short tymes did dwell and remayne vpon the Altars 14. To be short I passe ouer as lesse pertinent to the Controuersies of these tymes how the errour of Origen touching the saluation of Diuells was condemned for heresy by (z) Haer. 43. de ciuit Dei l. 21. cap. 17. S. Augustine the error of Tertullian denying second marriages was in like sort mightily reprehended condemned by (a) Haer. 86. S. Augustine though both these Doctors I meane Tertullian and Origen had otherwise by their learned writinges deserued well of the Church of God 15. Thus farre touchnig the foresaid controuersies condemned for heresies by the Fathers of the primatiue Church though the subiect of the said heresies was neither touching the Trinity the Incarnation the passion of our Sauiour or the articles of the Creede a-point so euident confessed euen by the Protestants as that many of the foresayd 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 euery seuerall Century by Osiander in his seuerall centuries as also by Pantaleon in his Chronology Besides which condemnation of the Church eyther these doctrines or the contrary to them are necessarily proued to be heresyes euen from the very definition of heresy aboue set downe and therefore
stiling her the pillar and foundation of truth And further it should follow that the Church should thus insufferably erre both in generall Councells as also in the priuate authorities and sentences of all the learned Fathers in the firste times 11. And thus for example the Councell of the Apostles should haue erred (k) Act. 15. in decreeing it vnlawfull to eate in those times blood and strangled meates In like sort the first Councell of Nice (l) Euseb l. 6 hist c. 33. should haue erred in condemning the Quartodecimani for heretikes because they would not keepe Easter day according to the custome of the church The councell of Rome vnder Cornelius for condemning the heresie of the Nouatians who reiected the Sacrament of Pennance as also for condemning the errour of Anabaptisme The councell (m) Vt patet in act 2. of Calchedon for condemning the Heresie of Eutiches and for prohibiting the mariages of Monkes and Virgins and the first Councell of Ephesus (n) Socra l. 7. c. 34. for condemning the heresy of Nestorius both which Heretikes beleiued in the most holy Trinity and acknowledged Christ for their Redeemer The fourth councell of Carthage (o) Can. 79. for sententionally decreeing that prayer and sacrifice for the dead was according to the true faith of Chirst and for pronouncing the denyers therof for Heretikes And finally to omitt other Coūcels the councell of Constantinople (p) Zonaras in vita Constantini Nicephorus l. 17. c. 27 should haue erred for condemning the Heresie of Origen who taught that the Diuels in the end should be saued And thus farre of councels condemning points of seeming indifferency for open wicked heresyes 12. But now graunting that the sayd points as they were houlden by the maintainers of thē were not Heresies that the beleiuers of them might be saued then two maine absurdityes doe ineuitably 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 carriadge of the church in these matters For to what purpose or end were all these councells consisting of many hundreds of the most graue and Reuerend men of all christendome celebrated with such labour and trauaile out of all countries and infinite chardges if the doctrines for the impugning resisting condemning wherof they were gathered might be indifferently maintayned and defended on all sides without breach of true faith or danger of saluation The erring of the Church is no lesse manifested in the sentences and condemnation giuen by many of the most ancient famous learned Fathers in the primitiue Church not any one orthodoxall Father contradicting them therein against diuers maintayning opinions that seeme in regard or the Trinity the Incarnation c of small importance if so these opinions be not heresies nor the beleiuers of them Heretikes but men in state of saluation 13. And thus according hereto Florinus though he taught God to be the authour of sinne might be saued In like sort the Heretikes who in S. Hieromes dayes denyed the possibility of the Cōmandements the Manichees who denyed Free-will the Eunomians who taught that only faith did iustify The Aerians who denyed prayer and sacrifice for the dead and tooke away all fasting-dayes Vigilantius who taught that Priests might marry that we ought not pray to Saints Iouinian who helde mariadge to be better then virginity The Donatists who taught the inuisibility of the Church And finally to omit many others for breuity sake The Pelagians who denyed the necessity of Baptisme in Children All these men I say might be saued notwithstanding the former doctrines if so euery one might expect saluation in their Religion And yet we finde that the foresaid men were branded for wicked Heretikes their doctrines for damnable Heresies as in the seauenth chapter aboue is showed by S. Irenaeus S. Hierome S. Epiphanius Philastrius S. Augustine Theodoret and others diuers of these holy Fathers wryting Catalogues of Heresies did place the foresaid doctrines and their authours within the said Catalogues and this they did without any reluctation or gainesaying of any other ancient and learned Father of their tymes 14. From which consideration I do gather that if those opinions were not iustly condemned for heresies and their authours for Heretikes then not only the Church did fondly erre in so great a matter but also the aforesayd alleadged Fathers to wit S. Irenaeus S. Hierome Epiphanius S. Augustine with many such others should deseruedly be reputed for Heretikes for their condemning of true doctrines for heresies and the beleeuers of them for heretikes and on the contrary side Florinus the Maniches the Eunomians Vigilantius Iouinian the Donatists Pelagius and many other such should be accounted for their teaching of true doctrins orthodoxall Fathers and authours and might haue iustly complayned of their insupportable wronges and indignityes proceeding from the pennes of the foresayd Fathers an absurdity which I thinke no man enioying the benefit of his fiue senses will allow And yet the admittance of our Newtralists paradox inauoydably draweth on this inference 15. Another absurdity accompanying the former doctrine is that Heretikes should be true members of Christs church This I deduce For seeing by the consent of all learned men none can be saued but such as be members of Christs Church for otherwayes Turks and Iewes dying in that state might be saued and seeing the foresayd registred doctrines and the authours are condemned for heresies and Heretikes both by the authority of Gods Church and according to the true definitiō of heresy aboue set downe for the foresayd Heretikes made choyce of those their heresies and did maintaine them most frowardly against the whole Church of God not submitting their iudgments to it it must of necessity follow that if those men could be saued then Heretikes continuing Heretikes are members of Christ his Church then which what paradox in it selfe can be accounted more absurde or in the iudgment of learned men more incredible Considering with what acerbity of comportement the Apostles all the orthodoxall learned pious Fathers both in their writings otherwise haue in all ages entertained Heretikes as aboue I haue manifested in the sixth Chapter 16. Againe supposing the truth of the doctrine of the Omnifidians as I may tearme thē yet obserue how repugnant it is to all reason otherwise absurd euen in its owne nature I will heere passe ouer diuers reasons alleadged in the precedent chapter and insist a little in some few of them The first It is certaine that that faith which belieueth some articls yet belieueth not others which are no lesse true such is the faith of our Newtralists is no true supernatural fayth seeing it beleeueth nothing thorough the authority of God his Church both which reueale and propound all articles alike indifferently to al men to be beleeued Now what more crosse to