half that you now oppose and suffer me to answer Prooue by Christ and his Apostles or by any of the Fathers for the first 600 yeeres these present Tenets of the Romane Church viz. 1. That all power of order and Iurisdiction in respect of the Churches is to be deriued from the Church of Rome 2. That no Scripture sense or translation thereof is authenticall vnlesse the same were receiued from the Church of Rome 3. That the Romane Church onely was and is the authenticall Custos of vnwritten traditions 4. That all generall Councels were called by the sole authority of the Pope and that hee might ratify and disannuall whatsoeuer pleased him in them 5. That the Pope onely had power to canonize Saints 6. That the Pope had or hath power to depose Princes Prooue all or any of these and we will neither carp nor cauill about names but answer directly without all delayes euasions or tergiuersations M. Fisher. When you Doctor White or Doctor Featly haue prooued your Church to bee visible in all Ages and named visible Protestants then I promise you to prooue the Visibility of the Catholique Romane Church but that is not done by you yet D. Featly It had bin done but for your delayes and tergiuersations Answer briefly and directly to my former argument and I will descend to my Induction and produce the names of such eminent persons as in all Ages haue maintained the substantiall points of faith in which wee differ from your Romane Church That Church whose faith is the Catholique and Primitiue faith once giuen to the Saints without which none can bee saued is so visible that the names of the professors thereof in all Ages may bee shewed and prooued out of good Authors But the Protestant Church is that Church whose faith is the Catholique and Primitiue faith once giuen to the Saints without which none can be saued Therfore the Protestants Church is so visible that the names of the professors thereof may be shewed in all Ages c. The Maior is ex concessis What say you to the Minor M. Fisher. I distinguish the Minor D. Featly Vpon what tearme doe you distinguish M. Fisher. I distinguish of the proposition not of any tearme D. Featly Heere is againe another straine of new Logick to distinguish of a proposition and apply the distinction to no tearme howsoeuer I am glad to heare you distinguish and not simply to deny that the Protestant faith is the Catholique Primitiue faith Mark I beseech you you that are present that M. Fisher demurres vpon the proposition his conscience will not suffer him simply to deny that the Protestant faith is the Catholique Primitiue faith we simply and slatly and in down-right tearmes deny that your present Tridentine faith is the Catholique Primitiue faith M. Fisher. I answered you before that your Minor is false and impertinent D. Featly I have prooued already that it is pertinent what say you to the truth of it M. Fisher. This is to diuert from the question The question is not now Whether our faith or yours bee the Catholique Primitiue faith but the question now is of the effect to wit the Visibility of your Church which you ought to prooue out of good Authors D. Featly May not a man prooue the effect by the cause Is there no other meanes to proue the effect but by naming men and producing Authors for it M. Sweet An effect is posterius the question is about an effect therefore you ought to proue it à posteriori D. Featly What a reason is this May not an effect be proued by his cause Must an effect bee needs proued by an effect or à posteriori because an effect is posterius M. Sweet Leaue these Logick Disputes Bring the names of your Protestants that is it we expect D. Featly If I should relinquish my former argument to which yet you haue giuen no manner of answer you M. Fisher would report that I was non-plussed as you slandered D. White in a former conference who I tell you M. Fisher is able to teach vs both Whereto M. Fisher replied nothing To preuent all such mis-reports to the wrong of either it was mooued by the hearers that it should be written downe by the common Writer of the Conference that both the Disputants beeing willing to proceed D. Featly was desired by the company because it was late to produce the names of such Protestants as were extant before Luther in all Ages This beeing written and subscribed by them both D. Featly proceeded to his Induction D. Featly An induction is a forme of argument in which wee proceed from enumeration of particulars to conclude a generall after this manner It is so in this and this et sic de eaeteris and so in the rest Therefore it is so in all According to this forme of arguing thus I dispute The Protestant Church was so visible that the names of those who taught and beleeued the doctrine thereof may bee produced in the first hundred yeeres and second and third and fourth et sic de caeteris and so in the rest Therefore it was so in all Ages First I name those of the first Age and I begin with Him who is the beginning of all our Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ blessed for euer at whose name all knees must bow both in heauen earth and vnder the earth at which words all the company on both sides expressed an holy reuerence After Christ I name the twelue Apostles and Saint Paul and because there were few Writers in the first Age at least whose vndoubted works haue comne to our hands I name onely Ignatius after the twelue Apostles and Saint Paul yet not denying but that many others may be named M. Fisher. These are enow for the first Age Christ the twelue Apostles Saint Paul and Ignatitius Heere at the name of Ignatius some of M. Fishers side seemed very glad and confident saying We are sure enough Saint Ignatius is on our side D. Featly I meane not the new Ignatius Loyola but Ignatius the Martyr betweene whom there is more difference in quality then distance in time M. Fisher. Name of all the Ages or else you do nothing D. Featly I cannot name all at once will you haue mee name men of so many Ages with one breath Will you haue mee eat my whole dinner at a bit Can I name twelue seuerally but I must name first one then two then three and so forward I name as I said before in the first Age for our Religion our blessed Lord and Sauiour the Founder of all Religion the twelue Apostles and after them Saint Paul and Ignatius the Martyr For the second Age I name Iustin Martyr Clemens Alexandrinus and Saint Irenaeus and I beginne first with Christ and his Apostles M. Fisher. You shall not beginne with Christ and his Apostles D. Featly You are not to make my Induction I will begin with Christ and his Apostles where I should
some outward profession by which it is made visible or sensible doth not sufficiently make a man to be a member of the visible Church It is a true rule in Philosophy Vehemens sensibile corrumpit sensum the bright light of a Demonstration so buzzardeth you that you see not where you are nor knowe what you are about I am so farre from affirming that inward faith without outward profession maketh a visible member of Christs Church that from inward faith I inferre necessarily ex consequenti outward profession which as I sayd in the Conference makes a member of the visible Church Doo you grant the consequence or deny it If you grant it my Argument proceedeth if you deny it confirmabit pro me vester Aristoteles your great Clerke Cardinall Bellarmine makes good the consequence in this manner Qui non confitentur fidem sed eâ in corde retentâ exteriùs profitentur perfidiam et idololatriam non sunt boni nec saluantur cùm ad Roman 10. dicat Apostolus Corde creditur ad iustitiam ore autem fit confessio ad salutem et Mat. 10. Omnis qui negauerit me coram hominibus c. They are not good men nor shall bee saued who do not confesse the faith but keeping it in their hearts outwardly professe perfidiousnesse and idolatry For the Apostle Rom. 10. saith With the heart man beleeueth to righteousnes but with the tongue man confesseth to saluation And Mathew 10. Whosoeuer denieth me before men him wil I deny before my Father which is in heauen Let Master Fisher therefore looke back vpon my Argument and demonstrate to me though à posteriori what Academicall learning taught him to deny it to bee a demonstration à priori The Protestant Relation Paragraph the ninth touching a testimony alleaged by Master Fisher out of Doctor Field Doctor Featly That Church whose faith c. But the faith of the Protestant Church is the Primitiue Catholick faith once giuen to the Saints Ergo. M. Fisher. I answer the Minor If this Proposition bee taken simply in it selfe I absolutely deny it but if this proposition bee considered as it must bee as related to the first Question and the end thereof I further adde that it is not pertinent to that end for which the whole Dispute was intended to weet to shew to those who are not able by their owne ability to finde out the infallible faith necessary to saluation without learning it of the true visible Church of Christ and consequently the Visibility of the Church is first to bee shewed before the truth of Doctrine in particular shall be shewed D. Featly First what speake you of those who are not able by their owne ability to finde out faith Is any man able by his owne ability without the help of diuine grace Secondly what helpeth the Visibility to confirme the truth of the Church Visibility indeed prooues a Church but not the true Church Heere M. Fisher alleaged some words out of D. Field of the Church supposing thereby to iustifie his former Answer Whereunto D. Featly promised Answer should bee made when it came to their turne to answer now hee was by order to oppose M. Fisher. Master FISHER his Answer These words either were not spoken or M. Fisher did not regard them beeing in the midst of his Answer in which he went on shewing the necessity of a visible Church by a saying of D. Fields viz. Seeing the controuersies of Religion at this day are so many in number and so intricate in nature that few haue time and leasure fewer strength of wit and vnderstanding to examine them what remaineth for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to seeke out which among all the Societies of men in the world is that Spouse of Christ the Church of the liuing God which is the pillar of the Truth that so they may embrace her Communion follow her direction and rest in her Iudgement M. Fisher therefore I say beeing busily speaking this did not regard what D. Featly did then say but might easily haue answered first that he neuer meant that any were able of themselues without help of Gods grace to attaine the true faith which hindreth not but that some may haue that ability of wit and learning by which they can better examine controuersies of faith then those that want these abilities Secondly although Visibility alone doe not prooue the true Church yet it supposing Gods promises that the true Church shall be alwaies visible much helpeth and want of Visibility in any one Age prooueth a company not to bee the true Church Doctor FEATLY'S Reply This parcell of your Answer containeth in it an allegation out of D. Field and an alleuiation or mitigation of a speech of yours sauouring of Pelagianisme To your allegation out of D. Field I answer Mitte quod scio Die quod rogo D. Fields speech I acknowledge which is very pertinent to his end but nothing to yours that it is requisite for all Christians especially the weaker to fly to the Church and hide themselues vnder her wings to preserue them from the danger of Romish Kites as D. Field prudently obserueth so no Protestant to my knowledge denieth Our Nouices and Catechumeni are taught as to honor God their Father so also the Church their Mother Now because the Whore of Babylon beareth her selfe as if shee were the Spouse of Christ and true Mother of all Christians it is most behoouefull to all those that haue care of the health of their soules to distinguish their true Mother from a false harlot the sincere milke and wholsome brests of the one from the poysoned dugs of the other to which end D. Fields Treatise of the Church is a singular help which when I reade mee thinks I see that strong wrestler Iritarius so much innobled by Pliny qui rectos â—t transuersos celatim toto còrpore habuit neruos who had double sinnewes running acrosse ouer all his body so able so sinewie a Writer is D. Field who hauing well traced true antiquity doth in that whole Treatise take vp your owne weapons and conquereth you with them hee takes away your strongest harnesse in which you trust I meane the Catholique Church proouing it to bee ours not yours To the authority of Scriptures which I here beginne at hee addeth the consent of the Church of the liuing God the pillar of truth in whose determination and Communion both wee and you are to rest But doe you M. Fisher in earnest or with mentall reseruation appeale to D. Fields iudgement Me thinks you draw the latch as if you meant to enter into the penetralia Clozet of that work of the Church If you bee willing so to doe I will leade you into the Entrie Turne me but the page ouer you shall finde before the circuit of the sentence alleaged by you be ended a Writ of Error sued against that Church which wil needs be the Mistresse and
vndertake the like task in your own defence and maintaine the affirmatiue in the like question which we now propound vnto you heere in writing Whether the Romish Church that is a Church holding the particular entire doctrine of the now Romanists as it is comprised in the Councell of Trent was in all ages visible especially in the first 600 yeeres And whether the names of such visible or legible Romanists in all ages can be shewed and prooued out of good Authors Heere D. Featly reading this question through a mistake in stead of out of good Authors read out of Gods Word Whereunto M. Fisher replied No I will prooue it out of good Authors Then said one that sate at the Table By no meanes can M. Fisher endure to demonstrate his Church out of Gods Word D. Featly God is a good Author M. Fisher but it is true I did mistake What say you to the condition Will you vndertake to name visible Papists in all ages out of good Authors M. Fisher. I will so you prooue the Visibility of your Church Heere an order was set downe that D. Featly should for an houre and a halfe oppose M. Fisher in this question and afterwards M. Fisher for the last houre and halfe should oppose D. White in the other question for the Visibility of the Romane Church M. Sweet Before you proceed to dispute I desire these conditions may bee assented vnto on both sides 1. That all bitter speeches be forborne 2. That none speake but disputants Which conditions were well approoued by the whole company D. Featly I desire a third to bee added thereunto viz. that both the Opponent and Respondent be tyed to Logick Forme M. Fisher. I hold not that condition fit because the company vnderstands not Logick Forme D. Featly There are of the company that vnderstand Logick as well as you or I and the rest are men of vnderstanding and reason therefore I am resolued to keepe Logick Forme and expect from you direct answers M. Fisher. You your selfe confesse that this question is not to be handled syllogistically D. Featly I said indeed that it required rather a large historicall volume then a briefe syllogisticall Dispute the more you too blame to propound such a question and my taske the harder yet beeing propounded as a question I will keep my self to Logicke Forme But before I propound my argument I craue leaue in fewe words to lay open the vanity of the vsuall discourse wherewith you draw and delude many of the ignorant and vnlearned You beare them in hand that there was no such thing in the world as a Protestant before Luther and that all the world before his time beleeued as you doe That your Church hath not bin onely visible in all Ages and all times but eminently conspicuous and illustrious which is such a notorious vntruth that I heer offer before all this company to yeeld you the better and acknowledge my self ouercome if you can produce out of good Authours I will not say any Empire or Kingdome but any City Parish or Hamlet within 500. yeeres next after Christ in which there was any visible assembly of Christians to bee named maintaining and defending either your Trent Creed in generall or these poynts of Popery in speciall to wit 1. That there is a treasury of Saints merits and superaboundant satisfactions at the Popes disposing 2. That the Laitie are not commanded by Christs institutions to receiue the Sacrament of the Lords Supper in both kindes 3. That the publicke seruice of God in the Church ought or may bee celebrated in an vnknowne Tongue 4. That priuate Masses wherein the Priest sayth Edite et bibite ex hoc omnes Eate and drinke yee all of this and yet eateth and drinketh himselfe onely are according to Christs institution 5. That the Popes pardons are requisite or vsefull to release soules out of Purgatory 6. That the effect of the Sacrament dependeth vpon the intention of the Minister M. Sweet These are scholasticall points not fundamentall D. White Those things which are defined in your Councell of Trent are to you matters fundamentall Whatsoeuer article denied makes a man an hereticke is fundamentall But the deniall of any of these makes a man an hereticke Therefore to you euery one of these articles is fundamentall To which argument nothing being answered D. Featly proceeded 7. That extreme vnction is a Sacrament properly so called 8. That wee may worship God by an Image 9. That the sacred Hoast ought to bee eleuated or carried in solemne procession 10. That Infidels and impious persons yea Rats and Mice may eate the body of Christ. 11. That all ecclesiasticall power dependeth of the Pope 12. That hee cannot erre in matter of faith 13. That hee hath power to canonize Saints 14. To institute religious orders 15. To depose Kings c. which latter points and the like I leaue to D. White to mayntaine against you when according to your promise you doe vndertake to name visible and legible Romanists in all ages M. Fisher. After you haue proued your Church visible in all ages and named the professours thereof I will satisfy you in your particulars D. Featly In the meane-while name but one Father but one Writer of note who held the particulars aboue-named for 500. yeeres after Christ. To which instant demand of D. Featly nothing was answered Sr. Humfrey Lynde M. Sweet proue mee but this one point out of Saint Augustine namely Transubstantiation or satisfy such arguments as I shall bring you out of Saint Augustine to the contrary and I will promise you to goe to Masse To which M. Sweet made no other answer then this That is not now to the question M. Fisher. I expect your argument Doctor Featly D. Featly There are two meanes only to proue any thing by necessary inference to wit a Syllogisme and an Induction other formes of argument haue no force but as they are reducible to these I proue the visibility of our Church by both and first by a Syllogisme That Church whose faith is eternall and perpetuall was euer visible in the professours thereof But the faith of the Protestant Church is eternall and perpetuall Therefore the faith of the Protestant Church was euer visible in the Professours thereof M. Fisher. You conclude not the question D. Featly There are two Quaeres in your question first Whether the Protestant Church was in all ages visible and secondly Whether the names of such visible Protestants in all ages can bee shewed I haue concluded in my Syllogisme the first Quaere M. Fisher. There are not two Quaeres or parts in the question it is but one question D. White Where there are two propositions with two distinct Vtrums there are two questions But heer are two propositions with two distinct vtrums to wit whether the Protestant Church c. and whether the names c. Therefore there are two Quaeres or parts in the question M. Fisher. Conclude any thing
faith of the Protestant Church is eternall perpetuall and vnchanged Therefore the Protestant Church is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and the Popish Church is pretended by M. Fisher to bee M. Fisher. I distinguish the Maior That Church whose faith is perpetuall and vnchanged so as the Names can bee shewed is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to be and as M. Fisher pretends the Roman Church to be I grant it That Church whose faith is perpetuall and vnchanged yet so as the Names cannot be shewed in all Ages is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to bee and as M. Fisher pretends the Roman Church to be I deny it To the Minor I apply the like distinction and consequently to the Conclusion in the same manner D. Featly What Answer you to the Conclusion also This is a Strain of new Logick M. Fisher. Tolle distinctionem D. Featly A strange distinction of the etemity of faith by Professers to be named and not to bee named What are Professers nominable or innominable to the eternity of faith M. Fisher. Conclude that which I deny that the Protestant Church is so eternall as the Names of visible Protestants in all Ages may be shewed D. Featly That Church whose faith is the Catholique and Primitiue faith once giuen to the Saints without which no man can be saued is so perpetuall visible as the Names of some of that Church may be shewed in all Ages But the faith of the Protestant Church is the Primitiue and Catholique faith once giuen to the Saints without which none can be saued Therefore the faith of the Protestant Church is so perpetuall and visible as the Names of some of that Church may be shewed in all Ages M. Fisher. I answer the Minor If this Proposition bee taken simply in it selfe I absolutely deny it but if this Proposition bee considered as it must bee as related to the first question and the end thereof I further adde that it is not pertinent to that end for which the whole Dispute was intended to weet to shew to those who are not able by their owne ability to finde out the infallible faith necessary to saluation without learning it of the true visible Church of Christ and consequently the Visibility of the Church is first to be shewed before the truth of doctrine in particular shall be shewed D. Featly First what speak you of those who are not able by their owne abilities to finde out faith Is any man able by his owne ability without the help of diuine grace Secondly what helpeth the Visibility to confirm the truth of the Church Visibility indeed prooues a Church but not the true Church Heer M. Fisher alleaged some words out of D. Field of the Church supposing thereby to iustifie his former Answer Whereunto D. Featly promised Answer should be made when it came to their turn to answer now hee was by order to oppose M. Fisher. D. Featly The Summe of your former Answer was that the Minor of my former Syllogisme was both false and impertinent It is neither false nor impertinent Therefore your Answer is false and impertinent And first my Minor is not false M. Fisher. I answer to the Antecedent that it is both false and impertinent but I adde that for the present it must first be prooued to be pertinent or else it diuerteth vs from the chief end of our Dispute which was as I said before that infallible truth may bee learned of the true visible Church and not the true visible Church by first finding euery particular infallible truth and by that to conclude which is the true visible Church D. Featly I proue that the Minor is pertinent That Minor Proposition which together with the Maior doth necessarily and directly inferre the Conclusion of the Minor last denied is pertinent to the probation of that Minor denied But the Minor Proposition of the third Syllogisme doth necessarily and directly inferre the conclusion of the Minor last denied Therefore the Minor of that Syllogism is pertinent Note that M. Fishers Answers to euery one of these Syllogismes were penned by him verbatim with the aduice of M. Sweet and one other suggesting priuately and amending what they thought fit Which breeding much delay irkesom to the hearers and the Opponent then saying You are very long M. Fisher M. Chamberlane standing by said Let him alone for he and his learned Councell are not yet agreed M Fisher. I distinguish the Maior That Minor proposition which together with the Maior doth necessarily and directly inferre the conclusion of the Minor in such manner as it may serue for the purpose to which the whole Dispute is ordained I grant it to be pertinent But if it doe inferre the conclusion yet not in such manner as it may serue for that purpose for which the whole Dispute was ordained I deny the Maior Heere the Disputants iarred and so the Writer ceased yet that which followeth was then deliuered by them D. Featly That Minor which together with the Maior inferres the proposition last denied the whole processe hauing beene per direct a media is pertinent to that purpose to which the Dispute is ordained But this Minor together with the Maior directly and necessarily inferres the proposition last denied the whole processe hauing beene per directa media Therefore it is pertinent to that purpose to which the Dispute is ordained M. Fisher. Your Media in your Syllogismes were directa but they tended not ad directum finem D. Featly This is a Bull. M. Fisher. Media directa yet not addirectum finem that is direct and not direct for Media are said to be directa only ratione finis in regard of the end M. Sweet Is there not a fault in arguing called transitio à genere in genus When a man by arguing quite leaues the maine question and subiect D. Featly I acknowledge that transitio à genere in genus is a fault in disputing but I neuer heard that the inference of the effect by the cause was transitio a genere in genus such was my argument For faith in a right beleeuer produceth profession and confession thereof which makes a visible member and the like profession of many members a visible Church Where the cause is perpetuall the effect must needs bee perpetuall Therefore where the faith is perpetuall the profession thereof must needs be and consequently the Visibility of the professors thereof Is this transitio à genere in genus D. Good M. Sweet you once learned better Logick in Cambridge then you shew now Heere againe those of M. Fishers side calling for names Where are your names D. White sayd D. White This is nothing but an apparant tergiuersation you will not answer any argument directly nor suffer vs to proceed in our argument and therefore I require you M. Fisher according to the order mentioned in the beginning for each party to haue an houre and a
the conference make any such long discourse Vntruth for first D. White was appointed in the beginning of the Conference for the last houre and half to answer M. Fisher in the contrary Question for the Visibility of the Roman Church The first houre and half was already spent and therefore D. White had iust occasion and reason to call vpon M. Fisher as hee did to prooue the Visibility of the Romane Church And as for the six points mentioned in the Conference they were the same which D. White shewed Sir Humfrey Linde and mee before the Conference and told vs that he would put M. Fisher vpon the proofe of them Secondly those of the Auditors which sate and stood next about D. White testifie vpon their perfect remembrance that he called vpon M. Fisher to oppose and propounded those six points vnto him set downe in the Conference In which because M. Fisher found himself vnable to deal with Doctor White therefore he makes bold to borrow a point of Iesuiticall honesty Fairly to deny that any such points were proposed Page 35. M. Fisher solemnly protested vpon his conscience that wittingly and willingly hee did neuer wrong either D. White or D. Featly in report of any conference To this nothing was replied and therefore I suppose that the Audience was well satisfied of M. Fisher's sincerity in his relation Vntruth for D. Goad immediately replied that what M. Fisher wrote was for his owne aduantage and therefore he could not but suspect that he did it wittingly and willingly See the Attestation to the Conference Page 37. D. Featly turning to M. Fisher said Will you dispute vpon Christ and his Apostles or not To which M. Fisher said I will if you will stay and stretching out his hand he took D. Featly by his arme offering to stay him yet he D. Featly in that abrupt manner went away Vntruth So many words almost so many vntruthes and God be thanked there are witnesses enow to conuince the Counter-relator of a fignall and transcendent leasing in this last passage See the Attestation I might furnish this Head and common place of M. Fisher with many more instances but these may suffice to prooue that M. Fisher deemeth himself one of those that haue past Thyle who if we may beleeue Synesius may lie by authority and without controule Of the second Head 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Contradiction reade Page 14. Hee alleageth my words thus Although this Question be grounded vpon vncertain and false Supposals For a Church may haue been visible yet not the Names of all visible Professors thereof now to be shewed c. And again page 32. Are all visible Names vpon Record Are all Records in former times now to bee produced And again in the same page M. Sweet calling for Names of Protestants well might say If Protestants had been in all Ages their Names in euery Age might bee produced vnto which as the Protestant Relator saith and the Counter-Relator denieth not D. Featly replied saying This is a non sequitur And page 19. he propoundeth my Argument thus That Church which holdeth this faith you beleeue not we shall be so visible that the Names thereof may be shewed in all Ages But the Protestant Church holdeth this faith Ergo. And again in repeating the like argument That Church whose faith is the Catholique and Primitiue faith once giuen to the Saints is so visible that the Names of the Professors thereof may be shewed in all Ages To this Maior Proposition I added page 21. The Maior is ex concessis neither doth the Counter-Relator deny that these words were added Yet page 49. M. Fisher in his Letter to the Earle of Warwick saith They are so farre from hauing discharged themselues of the great enterprize they vndertook as they stand more engaged than before hauing now professed and acknowledged that the true Church or to vse their owne words the Church which is so visible as the Catholique Church ought to bee is able to name Professors in all Ages CONTRADICTION Doctor Featly professeth acknowledgeth that The true Church ought to be so visible as that it is able to name professors in all ages Doctor Featly holdeth not that The true Church ought to be so visible c. but disputed ad hominem and ex concessis aduersarij not according to his owne iudgement Page 32. M. Fisher had no reason to diuert to particular matters in regard it was his Aduersaries fault to spend so long time in impertinent Syllogismes And page 48. Your Lordship may remember the substance of all the proof to haue consisted in this that The true Church ought alwaies to be so visible as the Professors thereof in all Ages might be named But the Protestants was the true Church We refused to dispute of the Minor because it transferred the Question And in many other places he cals my Argument from the truth of faith to the Visibility of the Church A diuersiue Proof And page 34. Dilatory and iâ—pertinent Syllogisms Yet Page 23. he saith In asking which is the true visible Church wee ask at least vertually which is the true faith in regard the true visible Church cannot bee without the true faith yes therefore doo we ask which is the true Church that of it we may learn what is the true faith And page 69. line 14. That the right order of things requireth thâ—â— first it onely be disputed to whom the faith belongeth which is all one say you as if he should say Which is the true visible Church CONTRADICTION In the Question touching the Visibility of the true Church it is impertinent and a diuersion to dispute of the true faith In the Question of the visibility of the true Church it is not impertinent nor a diuersion to dispute of the true faith because the Question of the true faith is vertually at least included in the Question of the true Church Page 37. Doctor Featly in his rising turned to Master Fisher saying Will you dispute vpon Christ and his Apostles or no To which Master Fisher said I will if you will stay And in the same page Master Fisher did not prohibit him Doctor Featly to begin with the names of Christ and his Apostles And againe M. Fisher expressed his yeelding to dispute about Christ and his Apostles two seuerall times once thus I will dispute of them in due place Another time thus I wil if you wil stay Yet Pag. 64. he writeth thus M. Fisher and M. Sweet still kept the Aduersary to the point and would not permit him to diuert either to dispute about Christ and his Apostles or any other point vntill names were giuen in all ages The which course they tooke vpon iust and good reason And Pag 65. hee alleadgeth two reasons for it See them there And Page 71. M. Fisher had good reason and right to deferre disputing with him D. Featly out of Scripture of Christ and his Apostles vntill he had made