more then darkeâ an produce light since Truth himselfe ãâã taught vs (i) Luc. 6. That we cannot gather figges âornes nor grapes of bushes And hence by premises we are to vnderstand that we ân entyre perfect fayth that by the âh we belieue all supreme articles of the Trinitie Incarnation Passion c. anâ all the articles of the Creed expressely articulately in their true sense and do belieue all other inferiour articles at least implicitely that is that we haue a readie preparation of mind to belieue all other articles which the Church of Christ dotâ propound to be belieued so as that thougâ we do not belieue euery article of Chrâstian Religion with an explicite and expresse faith yet we are bound vnder painâ of damnation nor to belieue any doctrinâ contrary or repugnant to the said articleâ which the Church of Christ doth prâpound to be belieued from which it vnauoydably followeth that once grauntinâ that the Church of Christ propoundeth ãâã be belieued that there is a Purgatory â that we may pray to the Saints he incureth damnation who belieueth that theâ is no Purgatory or that we ought not ãâã pray to Saints Now in this third place we will toucâ that inseparable Attribute of true Chrâstian fayth which is Vnity in fayth ãâã doctrine This marke is so indissolubââ annexed to the true fayth of Christ as thâ we find his Apostles euer readie most ââriously to inculcate the same to their dâciples Thus accordingly the Aposââ exhorteth the Ephesians saying (k) Ephes 4. Be you carefull to keepe the vnity of the spirit in the bond of peace And immediately againe (l) Ephes vbi supra There is one Lord one fayth one Baptisme Where we see that Vnity in fayth is expressely set downe As also in another place (m) Ephes loc cit I beseech you that you speake all one thing be you kâit together in one mind and one iudgment And as this was the exhortation of the Apostle To we read that the first belieuers followed âhe same of whom S. Luke thus saith The (n) Act. 4. multitude that belieued were of one hart and âne soule And hence it proceedeth that the Church of Christ which comprehendeth the Professours of this vnanimous faith is âtyled by Gods holy writ (o) Rom. 12. One Bodie one (p) Cant. 6. Spouse (q) Ioan. 10. one flocke of sheepe A truth âo euident as that besides the frequent teâtimonies of the Faâhers (r) Athanasius orat 1. con Ani. Chrysost opere imperfecto in Mat. Hom. 20. Tertullian de praescript Irenaeus l r. c. 5. confirming the âame euer the Protestants subscribe in iudgâent heerto For thus (Å¿) Luther tom 3. Wittenberg in psal 5. fol. 166. Luther himselfe to omit (t) see herâââf the Deuines of Mansfeild against the Sacramentaries And the Deuines of Heidelberg against the Anabaptists others writeth A kingdome deuiâed in it selfe shall not stand neither haue any âeretikes at any tyme bine ouercome by force or âbtility but by mutuall dissention neither doth âhrist fight with them otherwise then with a spiâât of giddines and disagreement Now then this Vnitie of faith is so to be ânderstood as that it is not repugnant therto that one and the same point should at one time not be houlden as necessary to be belieued the which after it hath vndergone a definitiue sententionall decree of Gods Church is necessarily to be belieued As for example it was not necessary in the beginning of Christianity to belieue that the booke of the Machabees the Epistle of S. Iames S. Iude the second Epistle of S. Peter the second and third of S. Iohn to be Canonicall Scripture till they were defined so to be by the third Councell (u) Can. 47. of Carthage at which S. Augustine was present But after this Councell had by the assistance of the holy Ghost defined them to be Canonicall and this after confirmed by the consent of the whole Church then it was and is Heresy to deny them to be Canonicall And the reason of this disparity is because it is Gods good pleasure wisdome not to reueale to his Church all articles of faith in the beginning and at one time but at seuerall times and vpon seuerall occasions as to his diuine Maiesty best seemeth expedient Thus the fayth of a Christian is capable of dilatation and of a more large vnfoulding or exposition but not of any contrariety in beliefe chaunge or alteration Anâ thus to insist in the former example yâ may well stand with Christian faith in the âeginning not to accept the former bookes or Canonicall till the authority of the Church had pronounced them for such But it standeth not with sound faith that one man should positiuely belieue now after the Churches definition therof giuen as an article of fayth that the Machabees and the rest of the bookes aboue specified are not Canonicall Scripture but the prophane writings of man and another man should belieue as an article of Faith that they are Canonicall Scripture since the one of these contrary beleifes must be Hereticall This verity of the Vnity of faith being warranted by the word both of God and man as is aboue said we will take into our consideration the Catholike and Protestant Religions both which ioyntly do professe to belieue in generall in the Trinity in Christs Incarnation his Passion and the Creed of the Apostles and so we shall discerne whether the faith of all these seuerall Professours doth inioy the foresaid marke of vnity in doctrine or noe But seing this Subiect is most ample and large I will therfore sepose this ensuing chapter for the more full and exact discouery of the many and great disagreements betweene the Catholikes and the Protestants in their fayth and Religion THE SAME PROVED FROâ want of vnity in fayth betweene Catholikes anâ Protestants touching the Articles of the Creed CHAP. IIII. VNDERTAKING in this place tâ set downe the multiplicity of opinions betweene Catholikes anâ Protestants though they all iointly belieue in the Trinity the Incarnation oâ Christ his Passion and the like and consequently that this their general beliefe wanteth that true Vnity of fayth which out of thâ holy Scriptures Fathers the Protestants I haue aboue shewed to be most necessary to Saluation I will first examine how the Protestants and Catholikes doe differ touching the beliefe of the Creed made by the Apostles Next I will demonstrate that supposing all Professours of both Religions should agree in the true sense and meaning of the Creed yet there are diuers other dogmaticall points necessarily to be belieued and are at this instant belieued both by Protestants and Catholikes which are not expressed or mentioned in the Creed nor by any immediate inference can be drawne from thence Lastly I wil set down the great difference betweene Catholiks ProtestaÌts in other points of fayth of which the Creed makes no intimation or
against Gods Church shal be damned But here I will stay my selfe wading no further in the disquisition and search of the great dissentions betweene Catholikes and Protestants touching faith and beliefe only I will reflect a litle vpon the premises And heere it is made most euident first that the Catholikes and Protestants do mainly differ in the sense and construction of the Articles of the Creede and consequently seing the sense and not the words do make the Creed that they both do not belieue one and the same Creede but haue to themselues seuerall Creedes from which point is sufficiently discouered the want of Vnity in faith among them both which Vnitie is so necessarily required to mans saluation as in the precedent chapter is demonstrated Secondly that though by supposition they did belieue the Creede and the true sense therof with an vnanimous consent yet it is proued there are diuers other articles not contayned in the Creed which are indifferently belieued as necessary to saluation both by Catholike and Protestant Thirdly seing also there are sundry Controuersies in Religion as is aboue exemplified which immediatly concerne saluation being houlden as necessary meanes therof by Catholikes but disclaymed from and abaÌdoned by the Protestants as mayne errours and false doctrines Therfore from all the former premises I do auerre that it is a manifest errour to make the Creed the sole rule of Fayth and that he who maintaynes that both the Catholikes and Protestants notwithstanding their great disparitie of beliefe and fayth the one side necessarily belieuing maintayning Heresie can be saued or enioy one heauen is wholy depriued of all true iudgement reason and discourse and for want thereof may deseruedly be ranged among them of whome the psalmist speaketh (h) Psal 11. nolite fieri sicut equus mulus quibus non est intellectus THE SAME PROVED FROM the authority and priuiledge of the Church in not erring in her definitions and condemnation of Heresies and first of Councels CHAP. VI. FROM the inuiolable vnitie of faith we will next descend to the priuiledges of Gods true Church Of which priuiledges I will at this time take only one into my consideration that is that the Church of God is endued with a supreme priuiledge and prerogatiue of not erring in her definitions of fayth or condemnatioÌ of heresie This point is warranted by innumerable texts of holy Scripture as where it is sayd (i) Esay 72. Vpon thy wall ô Hierusalem I haue set watchmen all the day and all the night they shall not be silent But God did not set watchmen ouer his Church to teach errour And agayne The (a) 2. Tim. 3. Church of God is the pillar and foundation of the truth what more perspicuous And further whereas ech man âs commaunded to repayre in difficulties matters of small consequeÌces to the Church it is threatned by Christ himselfe that who wil not heare the Church shal be accompted âs an Heathen or Publican according to âhat his commination Si Ecclesiam non auâierit (b) Mat. 18. sit tibi sicut Ethnicus Publicanus where we find no restriction but that in all things we are to heare the Church Agayne Christ himselfe speaketh to his Apostles and in them to the whole Church He (c) Luc. 10. that heareth you heareth me But if the church could erre neither would Christ refer vs to the church especially vnder so great a penalty neither by hearing the church could we be iustly sayd to heare Christ Finally the Church is so gouerned by Christ as its head or spouse and by the holy Ghost as its soule as therefore we find the Apostle thus to write (d) Ephes 1. thereof God hath made him head speaking of Christ ouer all the Church which is his body And agayne (e) Ephes 4. One body and one spirit yet more The (f) Ephes 5. man is the head of the woman as Christ is head of the Church From which texts it followeth that if the church should erre in its definitioÌs or resolutions of fayth and condemnation of Heresy this erring might well be ascribed to Christ and to the holy Ghost and consequently it followeth that the Apostles in making the creed would haue omitted that Article I belieue in the Catholike Church For why should we be bound to belieue the church if the church could erre This truth I meane that the church of Christ cannot erre in her sententionall decrees is so illustrious and euident that Tertullian speaking of certaine Heretikes of his tyme obiecting the erring of the whole church thus figuratiuely or Ironically writeth Age Omnes (g) in l. de praescript c. 28. Ecclesiae errauerunt nullam respexit spiritus Sanctus vti eam in veritatem deduceret ad hoc missus à Christo ad hoc postulatus de Patre vt esset doctor veritatis c. That is Go to Belike all the Churches haue erred and the holy Ghost hath regarded no Church that be might lead it into truth being sent for this purpose by Christ and to the same end begged by Christ of the Father âhat it might be the teacher of truth And S. Augustine Disputare (h) Epist 118. contra id quod Ecclesia vniuersae sentit insolentissimae insaniae est To dispute agaynst any point maintayned by the whole Church is extreme madnes To whose iudgment herein most of the more sober and learned Protestants do indisputably subscribe since diuers of them doe with all feruour earnestnes maintayne that (i) D. Bancrost in his Sermon printed anno 1588. Fox Act. mon. fol. 464. b. art 4. The deuines of Geneua in their propositions and principles disputed c. p. 141. and diuers others the church of Christ cannot erre and that what she defineth for truth is most true or what for Heresy or âalshood is hereticall and to be condemned This Basis or foundatioÌ of the church not ârring being thus firmely layde we are heereupon 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 condemnation or approbation is most infallible and the maintayners of the sayd Heresies for Heretikes and consequently that such Heretikes as departing out of the Church of God by their houlding of the sayde Hereticall opinions cannot be saued Now because the iudgment of the Church in matters of fayth is discouered two wayes first by the sentence of generall Councells secondly by the frequent attestations of the sayd chiefe Doctours of the Church in euery age in their particuler wrytings they not being contradicted therin by any other Orthodoxall Fathers or Doctours of the same age I will therefore distributiuely handle both these wayes shewing that both in generall by Councels and also by the particuler iudgement of the learned Fathers many opinions though not touching the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion or the expresse Articles of
the Apostles creed haue byn condemned for playne Heresies and the belieuers of them anathematized for Heretikes And first to begin with councells the infallible authority of which euen Christ himselfe hath by his owne wordes often ratifyed as where he sayth Where (k) Mat. 18. two or three much more where many hundreds of venerable Bishops are gathered togeather in my name I am in the midst of them And againe speaking to the Church and in it to the assembled Doctours and Pastours thereof I am (l) Mat. 28. with you all dayes euen to the consummation of the world which councells are euer directed and gouerned by the holy Ghost according to those wordes in the Acts (*) c. 15. Visum est Spiritui Sancto nobis and therefore are worthily receaued and admitted for the supremest sentence of Gods church not only by the auncient (n) Atha Ep. ad Epictetum August in Epist 162. Greg. Nazian orat in Athan. Cyril l. de Trinit c. Fathers but euen by the more learned Protestants since to omit others one of the most remarkable of them thus writeth (o) D. Bilson in his perpetual gouernement p. 370. Synods are an externall Iudiciall meanes to discerne errour and (p) D. Bils vbi supra p. 374. the surest meanes to decide doubts But to proceed forward and to beginne with these And first with the councell of the Apostles This councell was assembled as we read in S. (1) Act. 15. Luke by reason of certayne contentious men maintayning that the Gentils conuerted to the christian Faith might eate meate offered vp to Idols bloud and strangled beasts coÌtrary to the custome of the Iewes The Apostles being assembled and bearing with the weakenes of the Iewes in the infancy of the church decreed all prohibition of eating bloud strangled meates After which decree once established it is certayne that it had byn a mortall sinne immediatly to haue eaten of bloud straÌgled meates so as before it being a point of indifferency is now made necessary This appeareth from the text First from those words Certayne going forth from vs haue troubled you with words subuerting your soules But men do neyther depart out of the Church by maintayning certaine opinions nor by their example therin can they subuert other mens soules if their doctrine and practice thereof doe still remayne about thinges 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 among those thinges which are necessary Againe neither would the Apostles haue gathered themselues togeather so solemnely neither would they haue ascribed the decreeing of it to the work of the holy Ghost if the Subiect of the question and difficulty then discussed by theÌ had concerned matters only of Indifferency after such their decree made Now from the example of this councell I doe gather That if a councell by it owne authority may decree that the eating of certayne meates being otherwayes of their owne nature indifferently to be eaten without sinne shal be vnlawfull and shall repute and hould the impugners thereof for men departed out of the Church of Christ then à fortiori what doctrine soeuer a councell shall condemne of it owne nature for Heresy the same is to be reputed by all good christians for Heresy and the defendours thereof for Heretikes Secondly the councell of Nice was ceâebrated though principally for the represâing of Arius his Heresy denying the Diuinity of Christ yet withall touching the controuersy of keeping the feast of Easter as ât is apparent out of (q) l. 3. de vit Const. Eusebius (r) in lib. de Synod Arim Seleuciae Athanasius (Å¿) Haeres 70. vz. Audianorum Epiphanius Now this councell pronounceth Anathema to al those who besides the denying of the Diuinity of Christ should 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 Quartadecimani of whom see Tertullian libro de praescript Augustine Haeresi 29. And heere we are to vnderstand that the word Anathema vsed and pronunced by this councell which word is also almost euery where vsed in all generall councells signifyeth as much as accursed and in this sense we find this word Anathema to be vsed by the Apostle in seuerall (t) Rom. 1. Cor. 12 places so as when a councell pronounceth Anathema to any for belieuing such or 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 The third Councell of Carthage wherat S. Augustine was present decreed that the booke of the Machabees with some other bookes should be acknowledged as canonicall and pronounceth 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 (*) 2. Macab c. 1. for the dead that therfore this councell alloweth that doctrine condemning the contrary doctrine for Heresy 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 therby the Sacrament of Pennance was condemned with the brand of Anathema in the councell of Rome houlden vnder Pope Cornelius as (x) lib. 6. hist c. 33. Eusebius reporteth At which tyme also was condemned for Heresy the errour of Anabaptisme as the same (y) l. 7. hist cap. 2. Eusebius relateth The councell of Calcedon condemned the Heresy of Eutiches who taught that there was but only one (z) vt patet in act 1. Conc. Nature in Christ after his Incarnation In like sort the first councell of Ephesus condemned the heresy of Nestorius teaching two Persons to be in Christ as appeareth out of (a) in Chronico Prosper and (b) l. 7. c. 34. Socrates Now touching both these last Heresies we are to vnderstaÌd that both Nestorius Eutiches did belieue in Christ Iesus our Sauiour as the Redeemer of the world yet they were registred and branded for Heretikes only for their pertinacious erring touching the Person and Natures of Christ as now the Protestants may be reputed Heretikes for their ascribing of Ignorance Passion and Desperation to Christ The councell of Chalcedon also decreed that vowed Virgins and Monkes could not marry condemning those with an Anathema and for Heretikes that should hould and maintayne the Contrary as is to be seene out of the Councell it selfe The fourth (c) Can. 79. councell
of Carthage wherat S. Austine was present pronounced that the doctrine of prayer and Sacrifice for the dead was according to the true fayth of Christs Church and condemned the contrary opinion for Heresie and the maintainers therof for Heretikes The Councell of Constantinople vnder Pope Vigilius condemned Origen for his Heresy in which he taught that the Diuells should in the end be saued as (d) in vita Iustiniani Zonaras and (e) lib. 17. c. 27. Nicephorus relate Finally the seauenth Synod or Councell of Nice condemned all them for Heretikes who taught that the Images of Christ his Saints were to be depriued of all due respect and reuerence and to be contemned and broken Of this point see Paulus (f) l. 23. Rerum Românarum Diaconus and (g) in CoÌpendio Historiarum Cedrenus Thus far concerning Councells condemning for Heresies falsâ opinions touching fayth and Religion where I haue restrayned my selfe only to those Councels this last only excepted which were within the first fiue hundred yeares or little more because those times are more prized and esteemed then later tymes I haue also made choyce to exemplify some of the Controuersies of these dayes condemned in these Councels The like course was coÌtinued by Councels for condemning resisting of Innouations and false doctrines though not concerning the Trinitie the Incarnation or the Apostles Creede in the succeeding ages which I purposely omit But now I heare demaund First how can it stand with the infallible authoritie of Gods Church in not erring in matters of faith of which priuiledge I haue intreated in the beginning of this chapter if so she shall define the former Errours for condemned Heresies and anathematize curse the maintayners of them for wicked Heretikes though otherwyse they belieued in the Trinity Incarnation Passion c. if the Doctrines be but only matters of indifferencie and such as may stand with Saluation Secondly I aske how both the defenders impugners of the sayd Doctrines can be freed from the brand of Heresie seing the true definition of Heresy nessarily agreeth to the Doctrines maintayned by the one side for it is certaine that either the Catholikes or Protestants doe make choyce of new opinions heerin and do stubbornely maintaine these their Innouations against Gods Church THE SAME PROVED FROM the Authority of Gods Church condemning Heresies manifested by the writinges of particuler Fathers CHAP. VII NOw to come to the second way of discouering the Churches senteÌce in the foresaid points which by the particuler iudgment of the Auncient and learned Fathers who were in their seuerall ages the shining lampes of Gods Church and whose authorities all succeeding ages are to reuerence is easily euicted froÌ Gods holy writte for answereably heereto we read in (b) Ca. 32. Deuteronomie Remember the old dayes thinke vpon euery generatioÌ aske thy fathers and they will tell thee thy Elders and they will declare vnto thee And the Protestant ConfessioÌ of Bohemia conspireth thereunto saying The Auncient (i) In the Harmony of CoÌfessions p. 400. Church is the true and best mistresse of Posteritie and going before leadeth the way Comming then to the Fathers I will first insist in the particuler Errours not touching either the Trinity the Incarnation or Passion of our Sauiour or the Articles of the creed but points seeming of more indifferencie condemned by them for open and damnable Heresies Next I will set downe diuers of the Fathers sayings and sentences pronounced of Heresie and Heretiks in generall But before we come to the condemnation of particuler Heresies we must conceaue that reason it selfe and reuerence due to the cheife Doctors Fathers of the Primitiue 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 Ireneus Hierome Epiphanius Philastrius Augustine Theodoret and other approued authours This by drift of all reason is to be acknowledged for two respects first because we cannot finde any Doctor or wyter of the same ages who contradicted the foresaid Fathers for placing in their Catalogues any opinion for Heresy which was not Heresy Secondly in that the forenamed Fathers and Authours of the Catalogues of Heresies were godly and learned men and therfore neither would nor durst brand any opinion with the note marke of Heresie which the whole church of God did not then take as Heresie All this then iustly and truly presupposed let vs proceed to the particuler Heresies so registred for such by some of the foresaid fathers where for the fuller coÌuincing of our Newtralists in Religion my greatest choyce some few only excepted shal be of the controuersies remayning still at this day betweene the Catholikes and Protestants 1. That God was the authour of sinne was maintayned by Florinus condemned for Heresy or rather Blasphemie by (k) as Eusebius relateth l. 5. Hist c. 20. Irenaeus and Vincentius (l) in suo Commonitorio Lyrinensis 2. The opinion touching the Impossibility of the Commaundments was maintained by certaine Nouellists of those tymes and condemned for Heresy by (m) in explanat Simbol ad Damasum Ierome in these words Execramur c. We do execrate and abhorre the blasphemy of those who say that any impossible thing is commaunded by God to be kept and obserued by man See also the like condemnation thereof giuen by (n) de tempore serm 101. Augustine 3. That man had not freewill is auerted by the Manichees and condemned for an explorate Heresy by (o) in prefat dial contra Pelag Ierome in these words Manichaeorum est hominum damnare naturam liberum auferre arbitrium The Manichees doe condemne mans nature doe take away freewill As also by S. (p) l. de haeres c. 46. Augustine saying Peccatorum originem non tribuunt Manichaei libero arbitrio The Manichees do not ascribe the beginning o sinne to Freewill 4. That Fayth doth only iustify was condemned for an Heresy in the Eunomians by Saint Augustine (q) l. de haeres c. 54. who further sayth (r) l. de fide operibus c. 14. That it first proceeded from the false vnderstanding of S. Paul in his Epistles 5. That Prayer or Sacrifice could not be offered vp for the dead is maintayned by Aërius his followers who also taught that no set fasting-dayes are to be appointed by the church yet were these two opinions condemned for Heresies by (s) haeres 75. Epiphanius and Saint (t) lib. de haeres c. 33. Augustine who thus wryteth Aëriani Haeretici docent non oportere orare aut offerre sacrificium pro mortuis nec statuta solemniter celebraÌda esse ieiunia sed cùm quisque voluerit ieiunandum ne videatur esse sub lege The Aërian Heretikes doe teach that we ought not to pray or offer sacrifice fo the dead that solemne fasting dayes are not to be celebrated but that euery
thine O Florinus to speake friendly are not true nor wholsome These opinions are repugnant to the Church c. I may truly protest that if the holy and Apostolicall Priest Policarpus had heard of such opinionâ as thou defendest he would haue stopped his eares cryed out according to his fashion o good God vnto what miserable tymes hast thou reserued me tâ heare these things and presently would haue runâ forth of the place where he had byn standing or sâting where such doctrine had byn vttered Buâ now to reflect a little vpon the premises Cerinthus Marcion Florinus did all belieue in the Trinity the Incarnation of oââ Sauiour and receaued the Apostles creed and erred only in lesser points For if the had erred in denying the Trinity Incarnation Passion c. they had not byn repute for Heretikes but rather for Iewes Pagans âor Infidells as aboue is noted and yet we âee what sharp reprehensions were vsed agaynst them by S. Iohn and S. Policarpe his âcholler as to flie out of their company to acknowledge them to be the Children of the Diuell to âtoppe their owne eares for not hearing of their Erâours c. all which speaches had byn ouer much aggrauated and transcended the bond of Charity if their Errours had rested only vpon matters of Indifferency and had byn âut such as had byn compatible with mans Saluation But to proceed to the sentences of other Fathers in this point S. Ierome expresly thus writeth (n) Lib. 3. Apolg. contr Ruffin For one word or two contrary to the âayth many haue byn cast out of the Church Yea âe pronounceth and proceedeth further exâressely thus wryting Haeretici quicuÌque Chriâtiani non sunt whosoeuer are Heretikes those men âre not Christians Basill was wont to say as (o) Lib. 4. hist c. 17. Theodoret recordeth Those who are truly ânstructed in the diuine doctrine will not suffer any âllable of the diuine decrees to be corrupted but for âs defence if necessity forceth them will vndergoe âny kind of death (p) Lib. de praescript Tertullian that Aunciânt Father hath a sentence not much diffeâing from that of the former Father (q) Lib. 4. contra Do. cap. 8. S. Augustine Imagine a man to be chast continent âât couetuous not seruing Idolls ministring hospitality to the poore enemy to none maligning no body sober frugall c. But yet if he be an Heretike certainly no man doubteth but for this alone that he iâ an Heretike he shall not possesse the Kingdome oâ God A dreadfull saying of so learned godly a Father The Donatists for disagreeing from S. Augustine in some Traditions not specifyed in the Scripture much lesse in the Creed are thus repreheÌded by him In (r) Aug. in explan psal 54. these points those Heretikes were with me in Heresy not witâ me in many thinges with me in a few not witâ me the many could not help theÌ in which they weââ with me And yet these Donatists belieued with Saint Augustine the Trinity the Incarnation and recited with him the Apostles creed Briefly S. Augustine in q. 11. in Matt. thus describeth an Heretike Hereticus est qui de aliqua parte doctrinae Christianae falsum credit He iâ an Heretike who belieueth any false thing touching any part of Christian fayth within which definition it necessarily followeth that eytheâ the Protestants for not belieuing Purgatory Prayer to Saints freewill merit of worke c. or the Catholikes for belieuing of them are to be included S. Gregory Nazianzeâ orat 37. Vnum vni coharet c. One point oâ fayth agreeth with another so as of them altogether there is made a certayne golden and wholesome chayne therfore if but one opinion or article be taken away or made doubtfull the whole chayne of fayth will become broken S. (s) Lib. 1. ad Mag. Cyprian Dominus noster Iesus Christus c. When our Lord Iesus Christ did testify in the Ghospell that those were his enemyes who were not with him he noted not any one Heresy but he manifestly sheweth that all Heretikes whatsoeuer are his enemyes saying He that is not with me is agaynst me and he that doth not gather with me disperseth S. (t) In Epist ad Galat c. 10. Chrysostome sayth Quemadmodum moneta Regia c. Euen as who pareth away a little of the Kings siluer maketh the whole peece to be adulterate EueÌ so who ouerthroweth the least branch or part of true Faith may be sayd to corrupt the whole he proceeding from these small beginnings to worser courses To come to an end of the Fathers iudgments in this poynt S. Ambrose shall (u) Lib. 6. in Luc. c. 9. conclude all who thus plainly writeth heereof Si vnum horum retraxeris c. If thou shalt recall or deny any of these points thou hast retracted thy owne Saluation for euen Heretikes seeme to challenge Christ to them for no man will deny the name of Christ neuerthelesse he indeed denyeth Christ who doth not confesse al points of sayth instituted by Christ Thus far of the Fathers iudgments in this matter where I am to aduertise the Reader first as aboue I haue touched in the Councells that if all false Doctrines whatsoeuer pertinaciously defended against the church of God be heresies as the definition of Heresy aboue explicated proueth them to be and as the Fathers of the Primitiuâ church and in them the whole church of God haue maintayned then either the Protestants or Catholikes for their different houlding of contrary Doctrines touching Freewill Purgatory Prayer to Saints Sacrifice c. are to be accoÌpted Heretikes coÌsequently both cannot be saued in their Religion For that Heretikes continuing Heretikes cannot be saued is demonstrated first from the fearfull threats and comminations of the Apostles thundred out against Heretikes of which point I haue discoursed aboue Secondly from the Authority of the church of Christ which excludeth all Heretikes as I haue shewed from all hope of saluation and lastly to omit many other reasons from that principle that Heretikes are no members of Christ his Church of which point we are to dispute in the next place The Second thinge to be aduertised is that not any of the former authorities of the fathers against Heresy are restrayned by them to Heresies touching the Trinitie the Incarnation of Christ hiâ Passion or the Articles of the creed supposing the denyall of them to be heresies aâ indeed they are not but rather blasphemyes Infidelity for of these there is made no mention or intimation in their authorities within which compasse our Formallists in Religion seeke to confine their fayth but they are implicitely extended by the fathers to all Heresies whatsoeuer whether they concerne the supreme and fundamentall pointes of Christian Religion or any other secondary and lesse principall points of the sayd Religion THE SAME PROVED FROM that Principle That neither Heretikes nor Schismatiks are members of Christs Church
originally primitiuely signiââeth Election or Choyce as is said in generalâ yet because they who deuide themseluââ by maintaining false opinions from tââ Church of Christ do make choyce ãâã these their new opinions and so therbâ do separate themselues from the Churcâ therfore this word Haeresis loosing it foâmer generall signification is restraynâ by the Apostles and the Ancient Fatheâ through an Ecclesiasticall vse acceptancâ and appropriation which course we finâ houlden in diuers other wordes noâ taken by the Church in a secondary aâception to signifie anie false or neâ opinion in Religion among Christian of which a man maketh choyce pertânaciously defendeth against the Churââ of God and the maintainers therof aâ commonly styled Heretikes Thus three things necessarily concurre to make any false opinion Heresy and the defendours âherof Heretikes First it must be some erâour touching the Faith of Christ And the âeason hereof is because he that neuer proâessed or imbraced the Christian Faith is not an Heretike though he erre but a Iew or a Pagan and Heathen This is the doctrine of S. (c) quast 11. art â Thomas of all learned men The second condition necessarily âoncurring to euery Heresy is that there âe an erreneous iudgment in the vnderâtanding of him who maintayneth the Heresie from whence it followeth that ân externall deniall of a mans Faith is not Heresy except it proceed from an interâall errour of the vnderstanding but is raâher to be accompted dissimulation or âchisme as S. Thomas (d) quaest 10. 2. 2. teacheth The third and last condition is that this ârrour be maintained with great obstinacie âgainst the authority of Christs Church âeaching the contrarie doctrine and that âhe defendour therof being admonished of âis errour will neuerthelesse openly resist âhe authority of the Church therin seeing âf he be admonished by the Church of his Errour and instantly therupon do forsake âis false opinion he is to be accompted only erroneous and his false doctrine only an Errour This agreeth to that of S. Augustine (e) l. 18. de ciuit Dei c. 51. Qui in Ecclesia Christi aliquid prauum sapiunt si correpti vt sanum rectumque sapiant resistant contumaciter suaque pestifera mortisera dogmata emendare nolunt sed defensare persistant Haereticiâ fiunt foraes exeuntes habentur in exercentibus Haereticis That is Who belieue any false or wrong opinion in the Church of Christ and being counsailed and admonished therof do contumaciously and stubbornly resist and will not recall their pestiferous and deadly opinions but do persist in defending of them they are therby become Heretikes and so departing out of the Church they are taken for such as vent forth open and willfull Heresies Thus S. Augustine This Construction both touching the foresaid definition of Heresy in taking the words Haeresis and Haereticus in an euill restrayned and appropriated sense is warranted by the Apostle by the Auncient Fathers and lastly to omit the like acknowledged iudgment of the Catholikes by the learned Protestants By the (f) 1. Cor. 21. Apostle for thus we find him to say There must be Heresies among you that they which are approoued among you may be knowne Againe (g) Galat. 5.19 vid e Testam nouum 1576. The workes of the flesh are manifest which are adulterie fornication c. seditions Heresies c. As also (h) Tit. 3. A man that is an Heretike after the first second admonition auoyde And (i) Act. 5. finally Those which were of the Heresie of the Sadduces c. laid hands vpon the Apostles By the Auncient Fathers For S. Ierome (k) in ca. 3. ad Titum shewing the difference betweene Heâesie and Schisme thus defineth Heresie âaeresis est quae peruersum dogma habet Heresie is âat which containeth a peruerse froward opiâon And S. Augustine (l) l. de fide simbolo ca. 10. defineth Hereâkes in these wordes Haeretici sunt qui de Deo ââsa sentiendo fidem violant Heretikes are those âho do violate their faith by houlding false opiâons touching God By the Protestants For to name one or wo among many M. (m) Dial. 2. Ormerod a most âorward Protestant thus defineth an Hereâike He is an Heretike who so swarueth from the âholesome doctrine as contemning the iudgment ââth of God and the Church persisteth in his opiâion c. With whom conspireth D. Couell ãâã saying Heretikes are they who directly gainâ some article of our faith Now out of this former definition of âeresie I am to promonish the Reader of âee pointes the which in the perusing of is Treatise I would haue him often to âll to remembrance first that euery Heây is maintained as is aboue taught ââth obstinacie against the authoritie of the Church of God and therfore the maintayners therof are said by the Apostle (o) Ioan. 2.29 that they went out of vs that is out of God Church and for the same reason the Apostle (p) Tit. 3. doth pronounce an Heretike to ãâã condemned by his owne iudgment because hâ preferreth his iudgment before the iudgment of the whole Church From whicâ consideration it followeth that what maâ soeuer houldeth an erroneous opinion â touching Christian Faith and being aduertized therof by Gods Church and nâ captiuating his iudgment in all humiliââ therto is therby become an Heretike Anâ such is the state of Catholikes and Protestants since the one doth euer reciprocall charge and condemne the other with falâ doctrine and therfore seing the Church ãâã Christ must be with the one of them it followeth that the other not submitting the iudgment to it are proclaymed therby Hâretikes And thus it may sometimes fall oââ that the first Inuentour of a false opiniââ may be no Heretike as maintayning it bâfore it be condemned by the Churcâ wheras the Professours of it after its coâdemnation are become Heretikes accâding to that of (q) l. aduersus Haeres Vincentius Lyrinenâ O admirable change of things the authours of ãâã and the same opinion are esteemed Catholikes ãâã their followers are iudged Heretikes Thus we see that pertinacity of iudgment doth euer consumate an Heresy The second that the denyall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. are not properly called Heresies but rather blasphemies the denyers of them not to be accouned Heretikes but Infidels Iewes or Pagans From whence it proceedeth that what places of Scripture or of the Faâhers are spoken of Heretiks the same cannot be truly applyed to the denyers of the Trinity the Incarnation Passion c. The third is that the forsayd definition âf Heresy being the only true definition ând acknowledged for such on all sides is âot restrayned eyther in it selfe or by the âeaning of the Apostle only to the most âupreme as they are called fundamental âoints of Christian Fayth as of the Trinity ââe Incarnation of Christ his passion the âecalogue and the
Articles of the Creed âât it is extended in it own nature consiâering that according to al Art the definitioÌââd the thing defined ought to be of an eâall latitude or extent to any erroneous ââinion whatsoeuer frowardly defended ãâã a man and impugned by the Church of âod So as it is as perfit an Heresy and âe belieuers therof are as true Heretikes to deny that there is a Purgatory or to deny Freewill praying to Saints the doctrine oâ Indulgences the necessity of Baptisme oâ any other Article affirmed by Catholikes granting the doctrine of Catholiks in thesâ Articles to be true as to deny the Trinity the IncarnatioÌ of Christ his death Passion c. supposing the denyall of these to bâ but Heresies And a man shal be aswell daÌned in Hell for denying these former as foâ these other though the denyall of these lâter do exceed the other in malice since thâ blasphemies of them are in themselues moâ wicked heynous And thus much toâching the definition of Heresy or an Heretikâ which being iustly premised we will conâ now to the mayne Controuersy handleâ in this Treatise THAT EVERY CHRISTIAN CANNOâ be saued in his owne Religion Proued from tâ holy Scripture CHAP. II. NOw then to beginne to fortify anâ warrant this vndoubted truth that euâry Christian cannot be saued in his owne Religioâ I will draw my first kind of Proofe froÌ tâ sacred wordes of holy Scripture And theâ testimonies shal be of three sorts One coÌceâning Heretikes textes which are not-restrâned to any particular Heresies but deliuered of Heresy in generall The second branch of authorities shall touch Heretikes euen for certaine particuler Heresies different from denying the Trinity the Incarnation of our Sauiour his Passion other like principall and fundamentall articles of Christian Religion The third shall containe the necessity and dignity of Fayth without any restriction to the pointes or articles which are to be belieued And first to beginne with the first We read the Apostle thus to speake of an Heretike in generall (a) Epist ad Tit. c. 3. A man that is an Heretike after the first or second admonition auoyd knowing that he that is such is subuerted and sinneth being condemned by his owne iudgment Where we see the Apostle commaundeth vs to auoid an Heretike which he would neuer haue done if the sayd Heretike had bin in state of Saluation The Apostle further adding this reason in that he sinneth and in that such a maÌ as being a pertinacious willfull Heretike is condemned by his owne proper iudgment that is because he aduaunceth his own iudgment aboue the iudgment of Gods Church and because he needeth not that publike coÌdemnation of the Church which vpon other offenders by way of Excommunication is inflicted Of which text of the Apostle Tertullian both pithily and excellently giueth his glosse saying (b) Lib. de praescript c. 6. Quia in quâ damnatur sibi elegit Moreouer the Apostle elsewhere coniureth as it were in the name of Christ thaâ we should auoyd all false belieuers in thesâ words (c) 2. Thess cap. 3. We denounce vnto yow Brethren iâ the name of our Lord Iesus Christ that you withdraw your selues from euery Brother walking in ordinatly and not according to the Tradition whicâ they haue receiued of vs. This place concernetâ Fayth and doctrine as the whole Chapteâ sheweth But if those men heere to be eschewed were in state of Saluation theâ ought not then to be eschewed Agayne this text cannot haue refereÌce to those whâ deny the Trinity Incarnation and PassioÌ seeing the denyers of those high Articleâ are not Brethren in Christ and yet the Apostle styleth them Brethren whom he heeâ reprehendeth The Apostle also in anothââ place thus forewarneth (d) Epist. ad Galat. c. 5. The workes of thâ flesh be manifest which are fornication vncleaneâ impurity c. dissentions (*) or Heresies according to the Testament of an 1576. Sects c. They whicâ do these things shal not obtayne the kingdom of Goâ where we see there is expresse mentioâ made of Sects and that the maintainers oâ any Sects in opinion of Fayth much morâ of any Heresy which is euer auerred witâ greater contumacy and frowardnes anâ with neglect to the Churches Authority shall not enter into the kingdome of Heauen From which testimony we may furâher conclude that as one only act of fornication barreth a man from the kingdome of God so also one Heresy excludeth him froÌ the same A fourth place is this (e) Epist. ad Rom. c. 16. I desire you Breâhren to marke them that make dissentions and scandalls contrary to the doctrine which you haue learned and auoyd them for such do not serue Christ our Lord. But if such men be to be auoyded and do not serue Christ then no doubt they continuing in that state cannot be saued Fiftly the Apostle speaketh of certaine men saying of them (f) 1. Tim. 1. Quidam circa fidem maufragauerunt Certaine men haue made shipwracke of their Fayth Where the Apostle vseth the Metaphore of shipwracke therby to expresse more fully that Heretikes once falling out of the shippe of the Church of Christ are cast into the sea of eternall damnation To conclude the EuaÌgelist S. Iohn speaketh of all Heretikes in generall not imbracing the Doctrine of Christ within which all secondary questions of Christian Religion are contayned in this sort If any (g) 2. Ioan. man come to you and bring not the doctrine of Christ receaue him not into your house nor sââ God saue you vnto him But a man is bound â charity to suffer any one which is in staâ of Saluation to come into his house and â salute him or say God saue him Now whâ can be replyed against these former texts â cannot be sayd that they are meant only â such Heretikes as deny the mysteries of tâ Trinity the Incarnation of Christ hâ Passion and such like supreme points â Christian Religion This I say cannot ãâã auerred for these reasons following Fiâ because those who in the Apostles tymâ denyed these principall points of Christiânity could not be truly termed Heretikeâ but rather Iewes or Heathens seeing he ãâã an Heretike truly as is aboue shewed whâ was once a member of Christs Church bâ Fayth ãâã 1 but after ceaseth to be therof by erring in some secondary points touchinâ Christian Fayth Secondly by reason thaâ according to the true definition of Heresââ or Heretikes aboue set downe the formeâ texts haue a necessary reference to all Heresies and Heretikes whatsoeuer whetheâ the subiect of the sayd false opinions be smaââ or great Thirdly because that in the former texts of Scripture there is no restriction of the word Haereticus or Haeresis to the chiefe or highest points of Christian Religion but it is extended to all kind of Hereâikes and Heresies whatsoeuer euen by the Apostle without exceptioÌ who no doubt âf he had vnderstood Heretikes or
Heresies only in the greatest points admitting such meÌ for Heretikes would accordingly haue restrayned his words at least in some one âext or other among so many only to these kind of Heretikes But not to leaue the least âhew of refuge or euasion herein I will produce some passage of holy Scripture in wchâhe mantayners of particuler errours euen ân lesser points then the highest articles of Christianity are censured by Christs Apoâtles to be depriued of eternall Saluation And first we find S. Paul thus to prophesie In the later (h) 1. Tim. cap. 4. times certaine shall depart from the Fayth attending to spirits of errour and doctrine of deuills and forbidding to marry and to abstaine from meates c. Heere the Apostle prophesieth according to the iudgment of (i) Hom. 12. in 1. Tim. S. Chrysostom (k) Vpon this place Ambrose (l) l. contra Iouin cap. 1. Ierom (m) Haer. 25. 40. Augustin of the Heretikes Encratites Marcionistes Ebionites c. who denyed matrimony as a thing altogeather vnlawfull prohibited absolutly and at all times the eating of certaine meates as creatures impure Now these Heretikes belieued in the Trinity the Incarnation c. yet euen for these two former Heresies touching mariage and eating of meates they are sayd bâ the Apostle to depart from the Fayth of Chrisâ and to attend to the doctrine of deuills But sucâ as leaue the Fayth of Christ and attenâ to the doctrine of Diuells are not iâ state of Saluation In my iudgement thâ one authority alone is sufficient to oueâthrow this phantasie of our Newtrallists ãâã since the words are diuine Scripture thâ Heresies reprehended no fundamentalâ points of Religion but of as little or lesseâ consequence then the Controuersies betwixt the Catholikes and the Protestants yet the maintainers of them are accompted to depart from the Fayth of Christ and to attend to the doctrine of deuills A second place shal be that of the former Apostle who writing of certayne Heretikes erring touching the Resurrection of the Body though the article of the Resurrection it selfe they belieued sayth thus (n) 2. Tim. cap. â Their speach spreadeth like a Canker of whome is Hymenaeus and Philetus who haue erred from the truth saying That the Resurrection is allready past and haue subuerted the Fayth of some These men belieued all the mysteries of the Trinity the IncarnatioÌ c. yet for erring only touching the Resurrection of the body they are sayd to erre from the truth to subuert the Fayth of some and that as Canker neuer leaueth the body till ây little and little it wasteth it away so âheir speaches by degrees poyson and kill âhe soules of the hearers From which it âuidently followeth that these Heretikes âontinuing and dying in the foresaid Hereâie could not be saued since that faith which ârreth from the truth which subuerteth the true âaith of Christ in others and which in killing and âestroying resembleth a Canker cannot affoard Saluation to its Professours Another passage which heere I will vrge âs that of S. Iohn who calleth certaine Heâetikes Antichrists saying (o) 1. Ioan. c. 2. Now there are beâome many Antichrists who went out of vs were not of vs for if they had byn of vs they would surely haue remayned with vs. These Heretikes belieued in the Trinity in the Incarnation of Christ that he dyed for the saluation of the whole world only they erred touching the Person Natures of Christ yet they are figuratiuely stiled Antichrists and are said to depart out of the Church of Christ but no saluation is reserued for Antichrists and Apostataes leauing the Church of Christ. And thus much out of Gods holy Writ expressely touching Heresie in generall particuler To these Texts I will adioyne though not immediately and directly raunged vnder the former head a place or two of Scripture in my iudgment most vnanswerable and by necessarie inference euicting the point heere vndertakeÌ The first place is those words of S. Peter where he saith (p) 2. Ep. c. 3. In the Epistles of S. Paul there are certaine things hard to be vnderstood which the vnlearned and vnstable do peruert vnto their owne destruction Now heere I thus argue But these thinges hard to be vnderstood in S. Paul his Epistles did not concerne the doctrine of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. and yet the misvnderstanding of them doth cause as the text saith the destruction that is the damnation of them who misunderstand them Therfore farre lesser points then the deniall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. doe iustly threaten to the false belieuers of them daÌnation and consequently it followeth that a bare beliefe of those supreme points is not sufficient to Saluation That those difficulties in S. Paules Epistles intimated by S. Peter did not concerne the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. I prooue seuerall wayes first because S. Peter maketh no such mention which no doubt he would haue done if the subiect of them had only touched those supreme mysteries and were not to be extended to other inferiour pointes Secondly it is acknowledged by the writings and âommentaries of all the Fathers besides âat the Epistles themselues shew no lesse âat S. Paul is most euident and cleere in ãâã his Epistles touching the Trinity the âcarnation the Passion c. and therfore âere is no reason why the difficulties of âhem should be applyed to those articles such lesse restrayned to them alone Thirdly the Fathers do vnderstand these ââfficulties in S. Paul his Epistles mentioâd by S. Peter chiefly touching IustificaâoÌ as appareth by the testimony euen of S. âgustine (q) l. de fide operibus c. 15. 16. himselfe who particulerly âtanceth in that place 1. Corinth 3. If â man build vpon this foundation gold siluer ãâã which text intreateth of Iustification ând workes and expresly saith that this is he of the difficult passages intended and âant by S. Peter With S. Augustine S. âome may seeme well to agree in these âords (r) Epist ad Algasiam quae 8. Epistola ad Romanos nimijs obscuriâbus inuoluta est The Epistle to the Roââns is inuolued with many obscurities or âake places for it is found that the Epiââle to the Romans most entreateth of Iuâfication and of faith and workes Fourâly and lastly the Protestants themselues ãâã vnderstand the said obscurities of S. Paul ãâã Epistles touching Iustification as appeareth to omit the testimonies of â others herein from the words and Coâment of Doctor Fulke against the Rhâmish Testament vpon the foresaid plaââ of S. Peter And this farre of this text wheâ we find by an ineuitable deduction that false Fayth touching Iustification only caânot stand with Saluation The second text of scripture is containâ in those words of the Apostle where thus sayth (c) c. 11. ad Hebraeos s Credere oportet accedentem ad Dâ quia
CHAP. VIII IN this last place concerning the church we will set downe another Principle of Christian fayth and after will deduce from thence by way of most necessary infereÌce our conclusion here handled The Principle is this That Heretikes houlding any Heresies whatsoeuer are no members of the Church of Christ the deduction is that Heretikes therfore cannot be saued since none can be saued but such as are members of Christs church This principle is proued as aboue is intimated out of Gods holy worde as where it is (a) 1. Tim. 1. sayd Certaine men made shippewracke touching fayth that is they fell out of the shippe of the church by forging of Heresies And againe (b) 1. Ioan. 2. They went out of vs that is as S. Augustine expounds it out of the church whereof we are The exposition of which texts are warranted euen by force of Reason for seing the church is an vnited multitude for it is one kingdome one people and one bodye and this vnion cheifly resteth in the profession of one fayth it is repugnant to reason that they should be reputed as members of the body of the church who haue no coniunction at all in the cheifest matters with the body If we proceed to the testimonie of the Auncient Fathers we shall finde them of an vnanimous iudgment heerein to wit that Heretikes are no members of Christs church therfore cannot be saued And first occurreth (c) Lib. 3. c. 3. S. Irenaeus who sayth that Policarpe did conuerte many Heretikes to the Church therfore it may be concluded that those Heretikes before their conuersion were not of the church S. (d) Epist ad Iubaianum Cyprian saith Heretikes though they be out of the Church do challenge to themselues the authoritie of the Church after the manner of Apes who not being men would be accounted to be men The same father thus in another place wryteth Cum (e) Lib. de vnitate Ecclesiae Deo manere non possunt qui in Ecclesia Dei vnanimes esse noluerunt They cannot remayne with God who dissent in iudgment from the Church of God And yet more fully in the same place Non peruenit ad Christi praemia c. He arriueth not to the rewards of Christ who leaueth the Church of Christ he is an alien he is profane he is an enemie he shall not haue God for his father who hath not the Church for his mother S. Ierome Qui non à Domino Iesu Christo sed ab alio (f) In dialogo coÌtra LuciferiaÌ c. Who take their denomination or name not from our Lord Iesus Christ but from some other as the Marcionists Valentinians Montanists c. are not the Church of God but the Synagoge of Antichrist Finally S. Augustine for I haue allready dwelled ouer longe in the authoritie of the fathers pronounceth that Nihil sic formidare debet c. (g) tract 27. in Ioannem A Christian ought to feare nothing so much as to be separated from the body of Christ which is his Church and which is one and Catholike for if he be separated from the body of Christ he is not a member of Christ then is he not strengthened with his spirit But who hath not the spirit of God the same man is not of God Thus far S. Augustine with whom euen the Protestants do ioyne heerein in iudgment for D. Doue thus saith This proposition that Heretikes are not to be communicated withall is vndoubtedly true And D. Sutcliffe in his examen p. 9. alleadgeth the Laodicean councell Can. 31.32.33 in proofe therof thus concluding The Laodicean Councell doth directly coÌdemne Communion with Heretikes either in Marriage or Prayer This allready alleadged may serue to proue that Heretiques are no members of the Church of Christ and consequently cannot attaine saluation since it is agreed amongst all learned men that only the members of the church of Christ can fynd Saluation in Christ Now heere by Heretikes we cannot vnderstand those who deny the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. seeing the denvers of these Articles are not Heretikes as is aboue shewed in the definition of Heresy but they are either Iewes Pagans or Infidels froÌ which it followeth that the fathers authorityes aboue set downe against Heretykes cannot be applyed to the denvers of the Trinity the Incarnation c. but they are to be limited to such Heretyks who maintayne lesser errours touching Christian fayth We will in this place descend to Schismatiks who if they be neyther of the church of God nor can iustlie expect any saluatioÌ during such their state then a fortiori no Heretike can expect anie saluation since a schismatike belieuing all articles of Christian fayth doth only in will diuide himselfe by disobedience in not communicating with the church in Prayers and Sacraments wheras an Heretike with greater malice as is aboue sayd willfully and contumaciously maintaineth in his iudgmeÌt Errours and false opinions condemned by the church Now that a Schismatike is not a member of Christs church is first proued from those texts of scripture aboue in part touched where the church is called one sould of sheepe Iohn 10. one Body Rom. 12. one spouse and one Doue Cant. 6. But now Schisme according to its Etymologie diuideth that which was one into parts for Schisma being a greeke word commeth of the verbe ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã ãâã which is scindere therfore as a member being cut from the body is no longer a part of the body so a schismatike diuiding himselfe by his owne disobedience from the communion of the church is no longer a member of the sayd church This verity to wit that Schismatiks are not members of Christs church is besides the former proofs warranted with the authoritie sentences of the Auncient fathers And first S. Cyprian thus purposely writeth of Schismatikes (h) Lib. 41 Epist â ad Florinum Qui cum Episcopo non sunt in Ecclesia non sunt Those who agree not with the Bishop meaning the supreme Bishop of Gods church are ãâã in the Church The sayd (i) Lib. de vnitate Ecclesiae Father most elegantly compareth Schismatikes to beames diuided froâ the sunne to boughes cut from the tree and to Ryuers wholly separated from theiâ springs S. Chrysostome discoursing of Schismatikes thus (k) Hom. 1. in Epist 1. ad Cor. sayth Schismatis significatio satiâ eos arguit c. The very signification of the woââ Schisme doth sufficiently reprehend them or rathââ the verie name of Schisme is a vehement condemnation of them c. which Father in anotheâ (l) Homil. 13. in Epist ad Ephes place coÌpareth a Schismatike to the hanâ cut from the body which therupon ceasetâ to be a member and expressely affirmeth that Schismatikes though they consent with the Church of Christ in Doctrine yet anâ not in Christs church but in altera Ecclesia meaning in a Church differing from Christs
commauÌded by the church not to performe the publike lyturgy of the church if he did contrary therto he was adiudged by the church to sinne mortally In like sort a Bishop leauing his Fayth and maintayning any one Heresy did thereby loose all his authority of Iurisdiction and thereupon during such his state all his AbsolutioÌs censures punishments and sentences practiced by him towardes any Person were adiudged by the church of God to be of no force or validity To which practice of the church (a) In 3. p. q. 39. ar 3. Saint Thomas subscribeth in these words Haeretici non possunt absoluere nec excommunicare nec Indulgentias facere aut aliquid huiuscemodi quod si fecerint nihil actum est Heretikes speaking of Cleargy men cannot absolue any one nor excommunicate nor giue Indulgences nor exercise any such like point of spirituall Iurisdiction and if they attempt contrary heereto they do but practice in vayne Touching Politicall or ciuill censures or punishments anciently inflicted vpon Heretikes The first may be that such men were forbidden to contract any marriage with other Religious and faythfull Christians and such of the faythfull christians as did marry with them did sinne mortally This is proued out of the (b) Can. 31.32.33 Laodicean councell aboue touched prohibiting all such mariages also all praying and communicating in Sacraments with Heretiks of which point I will heerafter intreate more fully Another punishment was that Heretiks were wholy restrained by the church from all practice of their Religion This appeareth from the actions of Constantine the Great who was so farre from graunting liberty of Religion to the Arians as that he threatned banishment to all who would not subscribe to the Nicene councell The same is proued from the like iudgement of Iouinianus who being elected Emperour by the souldiers admitted the acceptance thereof with this condition and not otherwayes to wit that all the subiectes of the Empire would promise to keep an entire vnity of christian beliefe practice The like iudgment herein is of the Auncient Fathers And first S. (c) Epist. 33. ad Mar. cell soror Ambrose though sollicited therunto by the Emperor Valentinianus would not suffer the Arians to haue within his Iurisdiction any one Church for the practice of their Religion to be allotted for them (d) As appeareth out of Theodor. l. 5. c. 32. S. Chrysostome being mooued by the Emperor of his tyme to graunt a Church to one Gayn as a Duke for the practice of his Heresy with great Christian courage openly withstood the same (e) Ep. 76. S. Leo did much reprehend Anatholius Bishop of Constantinople for permitting Heretikes to liue promiscuously with Catholikes Finally (f) Ep. 29. S. Augustine did vehemently persuade one Olympius an Earle that he would diuulge and put in practice the lawes of the Emperour made against the Heretikes Donatists who taught the Inuisibility of the Church that so throgh force of the lawes they might not be suffered to make any profession of their Religion A third punishment concerneth thâ books of Heretikes which the Church ãâã God euer prohibited to be read indiffereÌtlâ of all but only by such learned men ãâã were able to refute the Errours and Heresie contained in the sayde books And hence ãâã is that we finde that the fourth Counceââ of (g) Ca. 18. Carthage admonished the Bishop that they would reade the bookes of Heretikes ãâã only for necessity In like sort the seauenth Câuncell prohibited the books of the I conoch Heretiks who did write virulent Treatises against the Religious vse of Images To proceed further there were diuers other chasticements appointed for Heretiks in the auncient Church (h) Wherof see L. Ariani ca. de Haereticis and by the auncient Christian Emperours in their lawes as Bannishment a pecuniary (i) L. Cuncti Haeretici mulct or fine the losse (k) L. Manichaeri of all their goods And lastly when the insolencie of Heretiks did grow insufferable euen death it selfe which punishment of death Valentinian and Marcian the Emperours did first decree of which point see the iudgment of the Councell (l) Act. 1. of Chalcedon of (m) In c. 5. ad Galat. Ierome and lastly of (n) Li. 2. contra literas Petiliaeni c. 83. Augustine who ex professo proueth that Magistrates haue power to punishe Heretikes euen which the sword Thus far touching the punishments auncieÌtly appointed by the church of God against Heretiks Now to apply this to our purpose I do heere wish the reader to take into his consideration two things first that here is no mention made in the former authorities what the Heresies were against which such seuere proceedings were put in execution neither is there any intimation in them of the deniall of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. but the sayd punishments were extended to all Heretiks indifferently and without any limitation of peculiar Heresies Now that these punishments were not ordayned for the denyers of the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion c. is euident for two reasons first because as is often aboue sayd the denyers of these supreme poynts are not Heretykes but Infidels or Iewes secondly because the punishment of death only and no inferiour punishment aboue mentioned was appoynted by the church for those who once were Christians but after did fall into Infidelity by denying those supreme poynts of Christian fayth Secondly the Reader is to obserue that seing Heretikes though not denying the Trinity the Incarnation the Passion the Decalogue c. did vndergoe the foresayd punishments the whole Church oâ God with is gouerned with the spirit of the holy Ghost would neuer haue inflicted vpon them erring only in lesser matter then about the Trinitie IncarnatioÌ Passioâ c. such seuere and rigorous punishments aâ are aboue meÌtioned if she had thought thaâ the defence of those errours how small soâuer they seemed could haue stood with thâ saluatioÌ of mans soule since otherwaies thâ church should haue discouered her selfe ãâã be a most cruell Tyrant and not an Induâgent mother to her Children members THE SAME PROVED FROM Arguments drawne from Reason CHAP. X. TO passe froÌ the authority of Gods sacred word his holy church the Auncient Fathers the pillars thereof touching the nature of Heresy and Heretiks as also touching the vnity and Infallibility of the same church and the persons disincorporated separated from it from all which heads it hath been euidently euicted that a man obstinatly defending any one Errour in faith and Religion cannot expect saluation It now remaynes that the same be made euident euen by force of reason that therby all men enioying the faculty of reason may the more easily subscribe to so vndeniable a veritie say with the Psalmist heerin (i) Psa 91. Testimonia tua credibilia facta sunt nimis Well then the first and cheifest reason is taken from the causes of true fayth
where for the better conceauing thereof we are to vnderstand that fayth is a supernaturall habit not obtayned by the force of nature Therfore to the beliefe of any one Article or point of fayth two things concurre the one is the first reuealing Verity as Scholemen speake which is God Himselfe the secoÌd is the Church propounding the article to be belieued Now when we belieue any point of fayth God who is the first reuealing Veritie as is sayd reuealeth it to the church and the church propounds it so reuealed to vs to be belieued And thus we belieue a point of fayth through the authority of God reuealing the church propounding and where we belieue any thing though it be true not through this authority this is not supernaturall beliefe in vs but only an opinion grounded vpon other reasons inducements Euen as the Turke belieueth that there is a God Creator of the worlde yet this his beliefe is no true fayth but only a meere opinion of a thing which is true since this his beliefe is grounded not vpon Gods authority reuealing this but only vpon his Alcaron being otherwayes a fabulous booke though of the being of one God it speaketh truly Now to apply this This first reuealing Verity which is God through whose authority we ought to belieue euery article doth with one the like authoritie reueale all Articles of Christian Religion to the church so as it is as forcibly reuealed to be belieued that there is for example a Purgatory or that we ought to pray to Saints graunting these articles to be true as that there is a Trinity or that Christ was Incarnate from whence it vnauoydably followeth that who belieueth in the Trinity and yet doth not belieue that there is a Purgatory or that we may pray to Saints hath no true and supernatural beliefe of the Trinity but only belieueth that there is a Trinity because he so vnderstandeth or is persuaded thereto only by his owne reason or through some other humane motiues according to that sentence of S. Augustine lib. de vtilitate credendi cap. 11. Quod intelligimus aliquid rationi debemus quod autem credimus authoritati For if he did belieue that there is a Trinity or that Christ was Incarnate through Gods authority so reuealing this truth to be belieued by the same authority he would haue belieued that there is a Purgatory or that we ought to pray to Saints seing both the Articles of the Trinity and Purgatory or praying to Saints are equally indifferently a like propounded by God and his Church to be belieued Thus we may demonstratiuely conclude that what ProtestaÌt doth belieue in the Trinity and yet doth not belieue that there is a Purgatory praying to Saints Freewill the Reall presence admitting them once to be true or any other point controuerted betweene Catholikes and Protestants the samâ man hath no true fayth at all of the Trinity or Incarnation and consequently for wanâ of a true and supernaturall fayth cannot bâ saued since we read (a) Marc. 16. Qui non credit condemnabitur Who belieueth not shal be condemned And from this former ground it proceedeth thaâ (b) 2. 2. q. 5. ar 3. S. Thomas all other learned Schoolemen teach that who belieueth not only for Gods authority so reuealing any poinâ whatsoeuer great or small fundamentall or not fundamentall the same man belieueth not any other Article at all with a true and supernaturall fayth and heereto accord those wordes of (c) Lib. de praescript Tertullian against Valentinus the Heretike Some thinges of the law and Prophets Valentinus approueth some thinges he disalloweth That is he disalloweth all whilest he disproueth some Which sentence of Tertullian must of necessity be true since who reiecteth the authority of God in not belieuing any one article propounded by God to be belieued the same man begetteth a suspition or doubt of Gods authority for the belieuing of any other article how fundamentall soeuer Another reason may be taken from a distinction of fayth which according to the learned is of two sortes The one they call explicite fayth the other implicite Explicite fayth is that which all men vnder payne of damnation are bound to belieue As according to most of the Schoolemen the Trinity the Incarnation of our Sauiour his Passion the Decalogue or ten Commaundements the articles of the Creed Implicite fayth comprehendeth all those points which euery vnlearned man is not bound expressely distinctly to belieue and knowe in particuler though he be expressely bound not to beâieue any thing contrary thereto but is to âest in the iudgment of the church concerning all such points and what the church of Christ houldeth therein he is bounde âmplicitely to belieue This distinction is warranted not only in the iudgment of all Catholike Schoolemen but also of the most âearned (d) D. Bar. l. defide eius ortis p 40. Hooker in his Ecclesiast policy in the preface p. 28. by Melancton l. 1. Epist Epist ad RegeÌ Angliae Protestants though they commonly forbeare the phrase of explicite imâlicite fayth particulerly of D. Feild who ân these words following giueth the reason âhereof saying For (e) In his Treatise of the Church in his Epist Dedicat to the L. Arch-Bishop seeing the Controuersies of Religion in our time are growne in number so many ând in nature so intricate that few haue time and ââasure fewer strength of vnderstanding to exaâine them what remayneth for men desirous of saâisfaction in things of such consequeÌce but diligently â search out which amongst all the Societies of men âs the worlde is that blessed Company of holy ones ãâã at househould of fayth that spouse of Christ and Church of the lyuing God which is the Pillar and ground of truth that so they may imbrace her communion follow her directions rest in her iudgments Thus D. Feild Now this distinction being presupposed I thus argue Both these kinds of fayth are necessary to saluation Explicite fayth because it comprehendeth all those fundameÌtall and supreme points of Christian Religion without which and the expresse and articulate beliefe of which a man cannot be saued And these be those only which our Newtrallists in Religion hold necessary to be belieued Implicite fayth of other points also is necessary to saluation because otherwyse then belieuing implicitely inuoluedly what the church teacheth therein we cannot according to the former Doctours words range our selues to the blessed company of holy ones the househould of fayth the spouse of Christ and Church of the lyuing God Againe seing Implicite fayth is necessary to saluation we must graunt that this Implicite fayth hath some Obiect This Obiect is not the Articles of the Trinity the Incarnation the Decalogue c. according to the foresaid iudgment of the Schoolemen since these are thâ obiects of explicite fayth as is aboue mentioned therfore Articles of seeming lesser importance are the
or of preaching the doctrine of which Church we hould in our Conscience to be erroneous and false Now that this kind of going to the Church of a different Religion is wholly condemned as most vnlawfull and wicked I first proue from the iudgment of the Protestants secondly from the resolutions of the Catholiks And to beginne with the Protestants we find this kinde of Recusancy I meane to be present at the Sermons or prayers of a different Religion is taught by (a) De vitandis superstition extant in Caluini Tract Theolog. p. 584. Caluin the (b) Alledged by Sleydan Com. Englished l. 7. fol. 87. Deuines of Germany by (c) In Concil Theolog. p. 628. Melancton by Peter (*) In his discourse hereof recited by Melancton in his Treatise of Concil Theolog. p. 634. 635. Martyr finally to omit others by Doctour Willet (d) In his Synops printed 1600. p. 612. 613. c. who for the better fortifying and warranting of the sayd opinion produceth his Testimonies from the authorities of Latimer Bradford Philpot Ridley others diuers of which according to this their doctrine suffered death in Queene Maries tyme as appeareth out of the Acts and monuments of Iohn fox And thus much for the Protestants That the Catholikes doe with the like or greater feruour teach practise this Recusancie is cleare by the example of our owne Countrey where since Protestancy was first planted many scores of venerable learned Priests haue chosen rather to suffer death then that they would change their Religion or goe once to the Protestants Church their liues being commonly profered them if so they would coÌforme themselues and leaue their recusancy In like sort many hundreds of the Laity pay yearely great summes of money for their recusancy diuers of them enduring further oppressions disgraces and imprisonments only for the same cause through the malice rigour and couetuousnes of certaine subordinate Magistrates vnder his Maiesty whose clemency is most remarkable and whome God long preserue in a holy gouernement ouer vs being heerein mightily wronged through the false and most iniurious informations of their Aduersaries Now that the doctrine of learned Catholikes is answeareable to the practice âeerein appeareth from the frequent testimonies of diuers learned men of the Catholike Church of this tyme yet for greater breâity I will insist in the Authorities only of three to wit of Cardinall Baronius Cardinall Bellarmine the two late lampes of Gods Church and of Mutius Vitellescus then but Prouinciall now Generall and Head of the âesuites dispersed throughout Christendome For some yeares past their iudgment being demaunded whether the Catholikes of England for the sauing of their goods lyuings and liberty might goe to the Protestants Church or no to heare a sermoÌ only though otherwayes they did not communicate in Prayer Sacraments with the Protestants for the warranting or disallowing whereof there were seuerall reasons brought on either side all which reasons were proposed and expressed to these three worthy men These three learned holy men then besides diuers others eminent Doctors and wryters whom I heare omit did giue their negatiue sentence therein whose particuler words in Latin I haue thought good heere to set downe The Iudgment of Cardinall Baronius VISIS consideratis quae superiùs diligenâ peruestigatione in vtramque partem sunt disputata reiectis omnino exsufflatis quae pro parâ affirmatiua fuêre proposita quod scilicet liceret Catholicis adire Ecclesias Haereticorum vt superiùs suââ proposita inhaeremus saniori sententiae posteriori ãâã Ecclesia Catholica antiquitùs receptae vsu probâtae quod scilicet id facere pijs non liceat Quam rogâ nostros Catholicos Anglos amplecti ex animo C. Card. Baronius tit S. Nerei Achillei Presb. That is I hauing seene and considered meaning in the Question of English Catholike going to church all those points which haue byâ disputed of on both sides but reiecting and wholly abandoning all the reasons alleadged for the affirmatiue part to wit to prooue that it was lawfull fâ Catholikes to goe to the Heretikes Church I do ãâã hereto the more sound and later opinion which ââciently was receaued of the Catholike Church aâ allowed by vse and custome That is that it is ãâã lawfull for pious and godly men so to doe And I ãâã treate all our English Catholiks to imbrace this ãâã opinion and iudgement Caesar Cardinall Baronius Priest of the tiâ of the Church of SS Nereus Achilleâ The Iudgement of Cardinall Bellarmine CONSIDERATIS rationibus pro vtraque parte allatis existimo non licere viris Caâicis in Anglia Haereticorum Ecclesias adire mulminùs concionibus illorum interesse minimè auâ omnium cum ipsis in precibus psalmodia âsque ipsorum Ecclesiasticis ritibus conuenire Iâ me propria manu subscripsi R. Bellarminus S. R. L. Prew Card. Tit. S. Ma. in via Thus in English The reasons brought vpon âh sides considered meaning touching the lawfulâ or vnlawfulnes of English Catholiks going to the ââotestants Church I am persuaded that it is not âfull for English Catholikes to go to the Churches Heretikes much lesse to be present at their Serââns but least of all to communicate with them in âyers and singing of psalmes and other their Ecâsiasticall rites and customes And therfore this my âgment herein I haue subscribed with my owne ând Robert Bellarmyne Priest Cardinall of the holy Roman Church of the Title of the Church of S. Maria in via The Sentence of Mutius Vitelleseus then Prouinciall but now Generall Head of the Order ãâã the Iesuites VIDI rationes quae in hoc scripto pro vtraqâ parte afferuntur existimo non licere viâ Catholicis in Anglia Ecclesias Haereticorum adireâ puto hoc debere esse extra Controuersiam Mutius Vitellescus Prou. Rââ Soc. IESV In English I haue seene the reasons whiââ are alleadged in this booke or wryting for both parâ meaning for going or not going to the Protestaââ Church I am of opinion that it is not lawfull fââ Catholikes in England to goe to the Churches of Heretikes and I am persuaded that this point oughâ to be out of all Controuersy Mutius Vitellescus Prouinciall ãâã the Society of Iesus in Româ And thus far touching the sentences ãâã these three learned men deliuered in warranting the doctrine of Recusancy in Catholikes Now to reflect backe vpon the promiseâ If the going to the Church of another Religion for auoyding of temporall losses and only to heare a sermon of the said Religion be to be accounted a Sinne not be done vnder payne of damnation as being presumed to beare an externall conformity to a false Religion as by all the former testimonies aboue alleaged is plentifully proued though the party so offending may perhapps truly belieue all points of ChristiaÌ Religion with what reason then can it be warranted that both Catholiks and Protestants conspiring only in the
defence of the Apology KeÌnitius in exam Concil Trident. part 1. p. 74. diuers others Protestants themselues exempt her from errour most truly insufferably erred in condemning certayne opinions which are not fundamentall for Heresyes and their maintayners for Heretikes and consequently the Scripture and Christ himselfe haue deceaued vs by ascribing to the church an (m) Mat. 18. Luc. 10. 1. Tim. 3. c. infallibility of erring in her definitions of fayth and condemnation of Heresies and by commaunding vs to obey the churches 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 intollerably erre both in generall councells the highest Tribunalls heere vpon earth as also in the priuate Authorities and sentences of all the learned Fathers in those firster tymes And thus for example the councell of the (n) Act. 15. Apostles should haue erred in decreeing it vnlawfull to eate in those tymes bloud strangled meates In like sort the first councell of (o) Euseb l. 3. de vita Constant Epiphan haeres 70. Nice should haue erred in condemning the Quartadecimani for Heretiks because they would not keep Easter day according to the custome of the Church And to pretermit all the other Councells aboue alleadged the Councell (p) Euseb l. 6. Hist. cap. 33. of Rome vnder Cornelius for condemning the Heresy of the Nouatians who reiected the Sacrament of Pennance as also for condemning of Anabaptisme And thus farre of Councels condemning points of seeming Indifferency for open wicked Heresies But now heere graunting that the sayd points as they were houlden by the maintayning of them were not Heresyes that the belieuers of them be saued then two mayne absurdities doe immediatly follow the first as is sayd is the erring of the whole Church of God in coÌdemning them for Heresies they being not Heresies but true doctrines The second the inconsiderate cariage of the Church in these matters For to what end or purpose were all these Councells consisting of many hundreds of the most graue and Reuerend men of all Christendome celebrated with such labour trauayle out of all countreys infinite charges if the doctrines for the impugning resistng and condemning whereof they were gathered might be indifferently maintayned defended on all sides without breach of true fayth or daunger of Saluation The erring of the church is no lesse manifested in the sentences and condemnations giuen by many of the most auncient famous leârned Fathers in the Primitiue Church not any one Orthodoxall Father contradicting them therein agaynst diuers maintayning opinions that seemed in regard of the Trinity Incarnation c. of small importance âf so those opinions be not Heresies nor the belieuers of them Heretikes but men in state of SaluatioÌ And thus according heerto Floâinus though he taught God to be the Auâhour of sinne might be saued In like sort the Heretikes who in S. Ieâome his dayes denyed the possibility of the Commaundements The Manichees who âenyed freewill The Eunomians who âaught that only fayth doth iustify The Aeâians who denyed prayer sacrifice for the âead and tooke away all fasting dayes Vigilantius who taught that Priests might marry and that we ought not to pray to Saints Iouinian who held marriage 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 their former doctrines if so it be that euery man might expect Saluation in their Religion And yet we find that the foresaid men were branded for wicked Heretikes their doctrines for damnable Heresies as in the seauenth chapter aboue is shewed by Ireneus Ierome Epiphanius Philastrius Augustine Theodoret and others diuers of which holy Fathers writing catalogues oâ Heresies did place the foresayd doctrines their Authours within the sayd catalogues this they did without any reluctation oâ gain-saying of any other auncient and learned Father of their tymes From which consideration I doe gather if those opinions were not iustly condemned for Heresies and their Authouâ for Heretikes Then not only the churcâ did fouly erre in so great a matter but alâ euen the aforesaid alleadged Fathers to wiâ Ireneus Ierome Epiphanius Austine witâ many such others should deseruedly be reputed for Heretikes for their condemning of true Doctrines for Heresies and the belieuers of them for Heretikes and on the contrary syde Florinus the Manichees the Eunomians Vigilantius Iouinian the Donatists Pelagius many other such should be accompted for their teaching of true Doctrines Orthodoxall Authors and might haue iustly complayned of their insupportable wronges and indignities proceeding from the pens of the foresaid fathers An absurdity which I thinke no man enioying the benefit of his fiue senses wil allow And yet the admittance of our Newtrallists Paradoxe inanoidably draweth on this infereÌce Another Absurdity accompanying the former doctrine is this that Heretikes should be true members of Christs church This I thus deduce for seing by the consent of all learned men none can be saued but such as are true members of Christs church for otherwyse Turkes and Iewes dying in the state of Turcisme and Iudaisme might be saued and seing the foresaid registred Doctrines and their Authours are condemned for Heresies Heretiks both according to the Authority of Gods church according to the true definition of Heresy aboue in the beginning set downe for the said Heretikes haue made choyce of those their heresies and do maintaine them most frowardly against the whole church of God not submitting their iudgments to it must of necessity follow that if those men could be saued then Heretikes continuing Heretikes are members of Christs true church then which what Paradoxe can in it selfe be accompted more absurd or in the iudgment of learned men more incredible considering with what acerbity of comportement the Apostles and all the Orthodoxall learned pious Fathers both in their wrytings and otherwyse haue in all ages entertayned Heretikes as aboue I haue manifested Furthermore if an Heretike continuing an Heretike can be saued then hath the auncient church of Christ vsed great tyranny to diuers such Professours by vndeseruedly punishing such meÌ with losse of Goods Imprisonments Excommunication Banishment sometymes with death it selfe for such were the punishments appointed by the auncient church and Christian Emperours against Heretyks as I haue shewed in the nynth chapter Againe supposing the truth of the doctrine of these Omnifidians yet obserue how repugnant it is to all reason and otherwise absurde eueâ in it owne nature I will heere passe ouer diuers reasons alleadged in the precedent Chapters insist a little in some few of them The first It is certaine that that Faith which belieueth some articles and yet belieueth not other articles which are no lesse true and
Church it being that Arke erected by our second Noë within which who truly belieue and liue vertuously are exempted from that vniuersall deluge of eternall damnation For only in this Church is professed ãâã taught that Fayth to which by long presâiption a continued hand of tyme is peâliarly ascribed the name Catholike (a) Pacian Epist ad Symphron quae est de Nomine Catholico Caâolicum istud nec MarcioneÌ nec Apellem nec Monnum sonat nec Haereticos sumit autores That âyth which was prophesied to be of that âlating and spreading nature as that to it all (b) Esa 2. expouÌded in the English Bibles of the yeare 1566. Of the vniuersality of the Church or fayth of Christ Nations shall follow which shall haue the (c) Psal 2. expouÌded of the Churches vniuersality by the foresayd English Bibles of the yeare 1576. end of the earth for its posession from sea to sea (d) Psal 72. beginning (e) Luc. 4. at Hierusalem among all nations âhat Fayth the Professours whereof shal be (f) Dan. 2. in which is included the vninterrupted continuânce of the Church Kingdome that shall neuer be destroyed but âall stand for euer coÌtrary to the short curânts of all Heresyes of which S. Augustine âus wryteth (g) In psal 57. Many Heresies are already dead âey haue continued their streame as long as they âere able now they are runne out and their ryuers âe dryed vp the memory of then that euer they âere is now scarce extant That fayth the memâers whereof in regard of their euer visible âminency are stiled by the holy Ghost A (h) Esa 2. wherby is proued âhe Churches euer visibility mountayne prepared in the top of mountaynes âalted aboue Hills with reference wherto âo wit in respect of the Churches continuâl visibility the foresayd S. (i) Tom. 9. in Ep. Ioan. tract 2. Augustine âompareth it to a Tabernacle in the Sunne That âayth whose vnion in doctrine both among the professours thereof and with their head is euen celebrated by Gods holy writ sinâ the Church of God is therefore (k) Rom. 12. Cant. 6. Ioan. 10. which places prooue the Churches vnity called oâ Body one spouse and one sheepfould which prâuiledge S. (l) Epist ad Damasum Hierome acknowledgeth bâ his owne submission in these words I dâ consociate or vnite my selfe in Communion with thâ Chayre of Peter I know the Church to be buildeâ vpon that Rocke whosoeuer doth eate the Lamb out of this house is become prophane That fayth for the greater confirmatioâ whereof God hath vouchsafed to disioynâ the setled course of Nature by working dâuers stupendious astonishing (*) See examples hereof in Ierome in vita Hilarionis Athanasius in vita Antonij Theodoret hist l. 5. c. 21. Eusebius histor l. 7. c. 14. Zozomenus hist l. 3. c. 13. August l. de ciuit Dei 22. c. 8. l. 9. Confess c. 7. 8. miracleâ according to those wordes of our Sauiouâ (m) Mat. 10. in which wordes oâ Sauiour maketh miracles a signe of true fayth or of thâ Church Goe preach you cure the sicke rayse the dead cleanse the leapers cast out diuells c. A Prerogatiue so powerfull and efficacious with S Augustine as that he expresly thus confessetâ of himselfe (n) Tom. 6. contra Epist Manichaei cap. 4. Miracles are among those things which most iustly haue houlden me in the Churchâ bosome To conclude omitting diuers other Châracters as I may tearme them or signes oâ the true fayth That fayth which is of thâ force as to extort testimony and warraâ for it selfe euen from it most capitall and designed enemyes answereably to that (o) Deuteron 32. which words include the confession of the Aduersary to be a note of truth Our God is not as their Gods are our enemies are euen witnesses since the Protestants no lesse from their owne (p) This is proued in that Protestants doe not rebaptize Infants or children of Catholike PareÌts afore baptized now these Infants are baptized in the fayth of their Parents as all childreÌ are euen by the doctrine of all Protestants But if this faith of Catholike Parents be sufficient for the Saluation of their Children dying baptized therin then much more is it sufficient for the saluation of the Parents themselues since it is most absurd to say that the Catholike faith of Parents shold be auaylable for their Children or Infants dying baptized therin yet not auaylable for the Parents themselues practice then from their (q) According heerto to omit the lik testimonies of many other Protestants D. Some in his defence against Penry p. 182. thus writeth If you thinke that all the Popish sort which dyed in the Popish Church be damned you thinke absurdly dissent from the iudgment of all learned Protestants With whom D. Couell in his defence of M. Hookers fiue bookes of Ecclesiasticall Policy p. 77. thus conspireth saying VVe affirme that those who liue dye in the Church of Rome may be saued acknowledgment in words doe ascribe to our Roman fayth the hope of Saluation Of which subiect see most amply in the forsayd learned booke of the Protestants Apology Tract 1. Sect. 6. subdiuis 1. 2. 3. as also Tract 2. cap. 2. Sect. 14. To this Fayth then with an indubious assent adhere both liuing dying flye Newtrallisme in doctrine as the bane of all ReligioÌ flye Protestancy as the bane of Christs true Religion and say with (r) Pacian Ep. ad Symphron Pacianus Christianus mihi nomen est Catholicus verò cognomen illud me nuncupat istud me ostendit A Christian is my name a Catholike my Syrname that doth denominate me this doth demonstrate me FINIS