of this case they would not conclude the cause specially before a Iudge not acquainted with the mystery of the Creation For he that hath a wife and a wife hath a wife and shee that hath a husband and a husband hath a husband But if that precept of our Sauiour Whosoeuer putteth away his wife vnlesse it bee for adulterie and marieth another committeth adultery and hee that marieth her being so put away committeth adultery were once produced any Heathen Ciuilian might giue this absolute and infallible sentence If yee Christians will admit this Law for true and iust or for a rule of conscience then Polygamy certainly is a naturall part of Adultery and hee that hath a wife and marieth another is to bee punished as an Adulterer For what is the reason why he that putteth away his wife though by legall diuorce and marieth another commits adultery with the second or why he that marieth the first being so put away is likewise an Adulterer Is not the reason because the bond of matrimonie betwixt the husband and the first wife according to this your Christian law is not dissolued by a legall sentence of diuorce extra casum adulterij vnlesse in case of adultery Yet as a sentence of diuorce gotten vpon suspicion of adultery or subornation or vpon other causes which humane Lawes and Gods Law vnto the Iew did permit cannot by the Evangelicall Law altogether dissolue the bond of matrimony so out of all question it doth rather loosen or weaken it than corroborate or knit it faster Wherefore if hee that hauing gotten a sentence of diuorce by formall course of Law against his wife become guilty of Adultery in the Court of conscience and by the Euangelicall Law if hee marry another then much more shall he be an Adulterer who hauing a wife whose chastity was neuer called in question against whom no sentence of Law hath beene obtained if he shall presume to marry another Thus farre an Heathen by light of naturall reason without the assistance of Gods Spirit may goe in this and many other controuersies amongst Christians 3 Were not most Recusants throughout this Kingdome worse affected I will not say towards vs and our Religion but towards truth it selfe euen towards the light of the Gospell than any ciuill Heathen either are or can be they might as clearly discerne the vsurped authority of the Romish Church ouer their faith and ouer Scriptures the rule of faith to be as true a branch of Apostasie from Christ as Polygamy is of Adultery and that it doth more euidently dissolue the bonds of matrimony betwixt Christ and his Spouse the Church than Polygamy or adulterie doth the bond of matrimonie betwixt man and wife First they make the Scriptures as was said before not onely an imperfect rule in respect of its quantity but this defect being in their opinion supplyed by associating vnwritten Traditions vnto it in the second place they make both Scriptures and vnwritten Traditions to bee an vnsufficient rule in respect of their quality For it is their doctrine that we cannot know which be Canonicall Scriptures which are not which be authenticke traditions which not but by relying vpon the authority of the visible Church Againe admitting the Church could determine which were Authenticke Traditions which were not and that no Traditions should hereafter be receiued besides those which shee had determined yet if any controuersie should arise concerning the meaning of those Scriptures which she hath determined to be Canonicall or concerning the meaning limitation or vse of these Traditions which shee hath acknowledged to be authentike no priuate man may take vpon him absolutely to beleeue this or that to be the meaning of either but with submission of his iudgment to the Churches sentence And this as I haue elswhere shewed at large is not onely to make the authority of the Church to bee aboue the authority of the Scriptures but vtterly to nullifie the authority of the Scriptures saue onely so farre as they may serue as a stale or footstoole to support or hold vp the authority of the Church or Pope So that the last resolution of the Romanists beliefe as out of their owne comparisons of the Scriptures to colours and the authority of the Church vnto the light by which colours become visible to vs as is elsewhere demonstrated must be this That he absolutely beleeues onely the infallible authority of the Church concerning the truth of Scriptures and their true meaning their truth or meaning he neither absolutely nor infallibly beleeues So that if he beleeue any diuine truth it is onely ex accidenti that is in as much as the Church doth not erre in that point of faith which she proposeth vnto him howbeit to beleeue that which is true vpon no better motiue or condition then this is much worse then the ignorance of truth or meer vnbeliefe of the same truth How many seuerall diuine truths or articles of faith soeuer he thus beleeueth hee can be no true Catholike because he beleeues no diuine truth but as it is mixt with hellish antichristian falshood If wee shall proue that this supposed infallibilitie of the Romish Church doth in diuers points induce not onely heresie but infidelity and that infidelity of a worse sort then can be incident to any Heathen I hope our intended conclusion will bee sufficiently euicted that whosoeuer holds this absolute infallibility of the present visible Romish Church whatsoeuer he holds besides can bee no Catholike To giue you an instance for proofe of this 4 If one being a Christian shall steale hee doth commit a grieuous sinne yet a sinne of one kinde or species that is theft he doth not thereby cease to be a Christian he doth not thereby become an Infidell or Antichristian The like wee may say of fornication adultery murder incest or the like all which are grieuous sinnes and without repentance exclude men from the Kingdome of Heauen Yet can wee not say that they make a man an Infidell though worthy to be cast out of the Church vntill hee giue full proofe of his humble submission and hearty repentance for his fact But if any man that hath beene baptized and made a partaker of the word which in many points hee beleeues shall by couetousnesse malice intemperancie or the like haue so farre corrupted the feeds of Christianity or Law of God written in his heart as he shall thinke that which indeed and truth is theft fornication adultery murder or incest to be no sinne he is by the generall verdict of the Schooles not onely an hereticke but an Infidell Now Infidelitie is of two sorts either infidelitas purae negationis priuatiue infidelity such as is in the Heathen which haue not knowne God or his Lawes as hauing no commerce with his people or infidelitas prauae dispositionis depraued infidelity of which there bee more degrees as first it may bee in the Heathen to whom the truth of the
Masse for which they can haue no true assurance or warrant from God or his Lawes but onely rely vpon the supposed infallibilitie of this Church which notwithstanding may be manifestly conuinced of grosse and stupid heresie in the doctrine of â—ransubstantiation But because the doctrine is ex specie hereticall and the practice deadly I shall reserue the refutation of both the explication of the ancient and orthodoxall opinions concerning the manner of Christs presence in the Sacrament or communication of his body and blood vnto a peculiar Treatise 13 Generally the more dangerous or deadly any practice doth seeme to bee whilest wee compare it with the ordinary common rule of mans actions the more euidently it ought to appeare vnto him that vndertakes it by what speciall rule or warrant it is exempted from the common rule or generall prohibition of other facts and practices in nature and appearance like it If a Iudge should charge the Sheriffe or other inferiour officer to see execution done vpon some malefactor it were no wisedome for the inferior Officer to aduenture vpon the Iudges command vnlesse hee knew that the Iudge had speciall commission and warrant from the King to sentence him to death and that hee had legally so sentenced him Yet would it be a point of ill manners and indiscretion for an inferior Iustice or officer to require the like speciall warrant or expresse rule of Law for whipping a vagrant person or putting some idle fellow in the stocks The Iudges word or command might in this case be a suffâ—cient warrant especially to one not skilfull in the Lawes nor too scrupulous in yeelding obedience to such as are skilfull in them It is nicitie ill manners and indiscretion to exact an expresse rule of scripture or faith for standing at the Creed for kneeling at the Lords board for vsing the Cap and Surplice In these cases consent of the Church or tradition will suffice so there be not any expresse Law or commandement to the contrary He that exacts in these points as expresse rules of faith or warrant of scripture for his obedieÌ„ce to ecclesiasticall authority as hee would or as euery man ought to doe for aduenturing vpon worshipping of Images inuocation of Saints or the like hath made his braine or fancy the chiefe seat or mansion of his Religion which should bee seated in the heart To runne thus farre in seeming opposition to the Romanist is not truly to oppose him but to meet with him in the point of disobedience to Gods Lawes The one by disobeying the Church in these cases wherein it hath authority to command obedience disobeyes those Lawes or mandates of God which giue the Church authority to make Lawes in things indifferent neither expresly forbidden nor commanded by the Law of God The other by vowing absolute blinde obedience to the Church disobey Gods particular and expresse Lawes euen the most fundamentall Lawes of pâ—ety and religion the lawes of nature and of Nations 14 To kill a priuate man without warrant of authority is a heynous and fearefull sinne but farre more hainous to kill a Prince or to raise tumults in a State or incense the multitude to take armes against their soueraigne Lord yet vpon these and worse practices will any well catechized Romanist aduenture without any further warrant then the Churches command or approbation which hee beleeues to bee infallible But that the Church hath absolute infallibility and full power to command his conscience or authorize his action in these cases what speciall warrant hath hee from God or his Lawes The best they bring is this Tu es Petrus super hanc petraÌ„ aedificabo Ecclesiam meam Thou art Peter and vpon this rocke will I build my Church But doth this place either proue Peter to be the Rocke on which the church is built or the Popes to be Peters perpetual successors in that confession which Peter then vttered which was the rocke indeed on which Christs Church is built and which did make Peter to be such a rocke or liuing stone as hee was in the house of God I could bee content to try this issue with any Iesuit whether he could by better probabilitie from this Text inferre that the Pope is Peters successor in the infallibility of holy doctrine then I shall inferre from another Text following in the same Chapter that the Pope is the first borne of Sathan perpetually obnoxious to the check which our Sauiour gaue vnto Peter Get thee behind me Sathan thou art an offence vnto me for thou sauourest not the things that bee of God but those that bee of men Matt. 16.23 This was but a friendly checke of Peter but will proue the iudiciall censure of the Pope and his Disciples vnlesse they recant this wicked doctrine Our Sauiour bestowed the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Rocke vpon the sonne of Iona as the Iesuits will haue it in the former place whilest hee vttered that worthy confession Thou art Christ the Sonne of the liuing God By faithfull adherence to this confession hee became a liuing stone a part of the foundation of Christs Church the first in order of twelue But nominis omen habuit hee did best brooke this name after our Sauiours resurrection A little after the vttering of the former confession when out of his kind nature as wee would tearme it but certainly our of a carnall imagination as the Spirit would censure it he sought to disswade his master from suffering death and so to hinder him from dissoluing the works of Sathan and ouerthrowing his Kingdome our Sauiour calls him Sathan as if he had said Peter thou counsellest me to that very thing whereunto Satan himselfe so I would giue him audience would perswade me with more Rhetorick then thou hast What if I should say That all the Popes are Peters successors and that so much may bee proued out of this 16 chapter of S. Matthew will it therefore follow that none of them are Antichrists or Sonnes of Satan No distingue tempora concordabunt scripturae distinction of times is the reconciliation of scriptures The first and ancient Popes were Peters successors in the former confession all or most of them liuing stones in the house of God The later Popes are Peters successors in counselling Christs Church to vndertake those practices in Christs name wherunto the Deuill doth alwayes counsell men by internall suggestions of the flesh Peters temporary infirmity is become their hereditary heresie Certainly their succession in Peters chaire doth no more argue theÌ„ to be his successours in the stability of faith than succession in Moses chaire proues the Scribes and Pharises to haue beene Moses true Disciples or theÌ„ the Iewes lineall descent from Abraham proues then to be Abrahams childreÌ„ The Analogie of faith will warrant this doctrine for conclusion That these later Popes and their followers are of their father the Deuill for they goe about to murther Kings and Princes which
may by necessary consequence bee deduced out of them for points of faith and this growth is still in eodem genere from the same root Other points of faith besides these our Church admitteth none but tyes euen her Prelates and Gouernours to obtrude no other doctrines as points of faith vpon their Auditors than such as are either expresly contained in Scriptures or may infallibly bee deduced from them And this is the fundamentall and radicall difference between our Church and the Romish Church which admitteth such an illimited increase or growth of faith as is in heapes or congests of Heterogenealls CHAP. 22. Of the adinuentions or new Articles added to the Creed by the Romish Church by which she hath defiled the Holy Catholike and Apostolike faith Of the difference betwixt the Church of Rome and the Church of England concerning the rule of faith What that ecclesiasticke tradition was which Vincentius Liâ—inensis so much commendeth to what vse it serued in the ancient Councels 1 THe paine-worthiest enquiry in this argument were first to make search what additions or adinuentions vnto the ancient or primitiue Canon of Catholike faith haue beene made receiued or authorized by the Romish Church since the Councel of Ephesus which was some 3. yeers before Vincentius Lirinensis wrote his admonitions concerning this point and in what age and vpon what occasions such additions haue beene made or receiued Secondly to make proofe or demonstration how farre and in what manner such additions do corrupt or contaminate the Holy Catholike faith and how farre each or all of them ioyntly or seuerally doe vndermine or overthrow the holy Catholike faith The first addition or adinuention of moment which comes into my memorie is the Inuocation of Saints and veneration of Images Both which points were added as articles of faith or parts of the creed which all were bound to beleeue and professe by Tharasius Patriarke of Constantinople and President of that illiterate parasiticall and factious Assembly which hath bin coÌ„monly enstyled the seuenth generall or second Nicene Councell In these the like abominable decrees the then Bishop of Rome was Tharasius his complice his instigator and abettor as may appeare from the speeches of his Legates in that Councell and by his owne Epistles although part of the Epistle may bee iustly suspected to haue beene framed since But by what spirit this Councell was managed or in whose name they met together I referre the Reader vnto that learned Treatise in the booke of Homilies whereunto wee haue all subscribed concerning the perill of Idolatry especially the third part What ingenuous minds of this Kingdome thought of that Councell before either the Author of these Homilies or Luther was borne may in part bee gathered from an ancient English Historiographer who saith the Church of God did hold this decree in execration 2 The selfe same points with a great many more of like or worse nature all whatsoeuer any Councell which the Romish Church accounteth generall or oecumenicall or any Canons which the same Church accounteth Catholike euen all the decrees whereto the Trent Councell hath affixt their Anathemaes haue beene annext by Pius Quartus to the Nicene Creed and are inserted as principall points of that oath which euery Roman Bishop at his consecration is to take one part of which oath or solemne vow it likewise is that euery Bishop shall exact the like confession of his inferiors to bee ratified by oath or solemne vow Caetera omnia à sacris oecumenicis concilijs ac praecipuè à sacrosancta Tridentina Synodo tradita definita declarata indubitanter recipio atque profiteor fimulque contraria omnia atque haereses quascunque ab ecclesia damnatas rejectas anathematizatas ego pariter damno reijcio anathematizo Hanc veram catholicam fidem extra quam nemo salvus esse potest quam in praesenti sponte profiteor veraciter teneo eandem integram inviolatam vsque ad extremum vitae spiritum constantissimè Deo adiuvante retinere confiteri atque à meis subditis vel illis quorum cura ad me in munere meo spectabit teneri doceri praedicari quantum in me erit curaturum Ego idem N. spondeo voveo ac iuro sic me Deus adiuuet haec sancta Dei Evangelia Onup de vita pont pag. 472. The particular decree concerning Inuocation of Saints and adoration of Images is much inlarged by the Trent Councell and by Pius Quartus But of the equivalency of Idolatry in Rome Heathen and Rome Christian elsewhere at large In this one point to omit others the present Romish Church farre exceeds the Easterne Church in the time of the second Nicene Councell in that it ratifies the worshipping of all such Saints as are canonized by the Pope 3 The second addition made by the Romane Church vnto the ancient canon of faith is a transcendent one and illimited and that is the making of Ecclesiasticall Tradition to be an integrall part of the canon of faith This doth not onely pollute but vndermine the whole fabricke of the holy primitiue and Catholike faith That there is a certaine rule or authentick canon of faith is a principle wherein the ancient primitiue Church the moderne Roman and all reformed Churches agree The first point of difference betwixt vs is about the extent of the written canon specially of the old Testament The maine points of difference are these First we affirme with antiquity and in particular with Vincentius Lirinensis that the canon of Scripture is a rule of faith perfect for quantity and sufficient for qualitie that is it containes all things in it that are necessary to saluation or requisite to be contained in any rule so containes them as they may be beleeued and vnderstood wthout relying on any other rule or authority equivalent to them in certainty or more authentick in respect of vs then the Scriptures are The moderne Romish Church denies the canon of Scripture to bee perfect and compleat in respect of its quantity or sufficient for its quality or efficacy To supply the defect of its quantity they adde Tradition as another part of the same rule homogeneall and equiualent to it for quality To supply the vnsufficiency aswell of canonicall Scriptures as of Tradition in respect of their quality or efficacy towards vs they adde the infallible authority of the present visible Church The former addition of vnwritten Traditions as part of the infallible rule doth vndermine this latter addition of the Churches infallible absolute authority aswell in determining the extent as in declaring the true sense and meaning of the whole rule vtterly puls downe the structure of faith yet when we reiect Ecclesiasticall Tradition from being any part of the rule of faith we doe not altogether deny the authority or vse of it Howbeit that Ecclesiasticall Tradition wherof there was such excellent vse in the Primitiue Church was not
vnwritten tradition or customes commended or ratified by the supposed infallibility of any visible Church That Ecclesiastical Tradition which Vincentius Lirinensis so much commends did especially consist in the Confessions or registers of particular Churches Now the vnanimous consent of so many seuerall Churches as exhibited their Confessions to the Nicene Councell being not dependent one of another not ouerswayed by authority nor misled by faction to frame the Confessions of their faith by imitation or according to some patterne set them but voluntarily and freely exhibiting such Confessions as had beene framed and taught before these controuersies arose was a pregnant argument to any vnpartiall vnderstanding man that this faith wherein they all agreed had beene deliuered vnto them by the Apostles and their followers by the first planters of the Churches thus agreeing a pregnant argument likewise that these first planters had beene inspired and taught by one and the same Spirit Each particular Church was a competent or authentike witnesse of euery other Churches integrity and fidelity in seruando depositum in carefull preseruing the truth committed to their speciall trust On the contrary in that Arius Eutyches Nestorius and other heretikes did obtrude such constructions of scriptures vpon their Auditors as had no where beene heard of before but sprung vp with themselues or from the places wherein they liued this was an argument more then probable that if the Apostles had deliuered the whole forme of wholesome doctrine vnto posteritie a point questioned by no Church in those times these men or the particular Churches which abetted them had not kept the doctrine deliuered vnto them by our Sauiour and his Apostles but had corrupted or defiled it with the idle fancies of their owne braines or with the muddy conceit of their discontented passions To speake more briefly though perhaps more fully The vnanimous consent of so many distinct visible Churches as exhibited their seuerall Confessions Catechismes or Testimonies of their owne and their forefathers faith vnto the foure first oecumenicall Councels was an argument of the same force and efficacie against Arius and other heretikes for whose conuiction these Councels were called as the generall consent and practice of all Nations in worshipping some Diuine power or other hath beene in all ages against the Atheists Nothing besides the ingraffed notion of a Deitie or diuine power could haue inclined so many seuerall Nations so much different in naturall disposition in ciuill discipline and education to affect or practice the dutie of adoration Nothing besides the euidence of truth deliuered vnto the Christian world by Christ and his Apostles could haue kept so many seueral Churches as communicated their Confessions vnto the Councell of Nice and Ephesus c. in the vnitie of the same faith 4 Howbeit this vnanimous Tradition Ecclesiasticke was not in these times held for any proper part of the Rule of faith but alleadged onely as an inducement to incline the hearts of such as before acknowledged the written word for the onely Rule of faith to beleeue that the interpretations or decisions of those Councels did containe the true sense and meaning of the Rule acknowledged by all So that the written Tradition which Vincentius so much commends was not by the Nicene Councell vsed to any such purpose as the Romanist now vse vnwritten Traditions The onely vse of it was to direct the present Church in her examination of the Catholike truth or points of faith The chiefe authority which the visible Church then challenged did consist in the vnanimous consent of Ecclesiasticke Tradition and that as was said before but an inducement to imbrace the interpretations of the present Church and reiect the interpretations of vpstart heretikes 5 But was it a receiued truth in these Primitiue times or a truth acknowledged by Vicentius the pretended patron of Roman Catholike Tradition that the ioynt consent of so many Bishops as were assembled in the first Councell of Nice or the ioynt Confessions of so many seuerall Diocesses as were then deliuered to that Councell should vnto the worlds end continue an argument or inducement of like force or validitie as it then was either for establishment of the Canons which succeeding Councels should make or for condemning such opinions as with the consent of as many or more Bishops as were there assembled should be condemned for heresies No the same Vincentius hath giuen posteritie a Caueat as full of wisedome as of religion in some cases not to admit of his former admonition concerning the triall of Catholike faith either for refelling heresies or for establishing of the truth The limitation of his former admonition is in his owne words thus As for ancient and inueterate heresies they are not in any wise to bee refuted by the former method because continuance of time after heresies be once set on foot may afford Heretikes many opportunities of stealing Truth out of the writings of the Ancient or for exchanging orthodoxall antiquity with prophane nouelties Now what opportunities of falsification did these 800. yeeres last past affoord which the Romane church was not alwaies ready to take The opportunities afforded by dissolution of the Romane Empire and variance of christian Kings first made the Romane Cleargie such sacrilegious Thieues as Vincentius supposeth any opportunitie may make heretikes to be And the Romane church being flesht with the spoile of Christs flocke and christian churches through the West haue not beene wanting vnto themselues in deuising new opportunities in coyning a new art of falsifying Antiquitie of stealing the consent and suffrages of the christian world from orthodoxall and primitiue truth So that if this controuersie may be examined and discussed by Vincentius his rules since the first acknowledgment of the Popes supremacie since the making of Edicts for the acknowledging of it since the exemption of Clarkes from royall or ciuill iurisdiction all the written testimonies or vnwritten traditions which the children of the Romish church doe or can rake together are voyd in law and voyd in conscience there is not so much as one legall single Testimony but all are as a multitude of false and illegall witnesses of parties or conspirators in their owne cause 6 But although heresies of long standing continuance cannot be refuted nor may not be assaulted in Vincentius his iudgement by the former method that is by multitude of suffragants or ioynt consent of seuerall Prouinces is there therefore no other meanes left to conuince them no way left to eschew them yes we may eschew them saith he as already condemned by ancient and orthodoxall Councels or we may conuince them so it be needfull or expedient by the sole authority of Scriptures Now if the Scriptures be sufficient to conuince heresies of long continuance or long standing and to confute such heretikes as want neither wit will nor opportunitie to falsifie ancient records and imprint traditions of their owne coyning with inscriptions of Antiquity I hope the same Scripture was
in Vincentius his iudgement a Rule of faith neither vncompleate for its quantitie nor vnsufficient for its qualitie a Rule euery way competent for ending controuersies in religion without the assumption either of Tradition or decrees of Councell as any associates or homogeneall parts of the same rule 7 Vnto what vse then did Ecclesiastical tradition or generall Councels serue for quelling heresies Ecclesiastical traditions or vnanimous consent of particular Churches throughout seuerall Kingdomes or Prouinces in points of faith was in ancient times yet may be an excellent meanes by which the Spirit of God leads generall Councels into the truth And the Councels whose care and office it was to compare and examine Traditions exhibited were the soueraigne and principall meanes vnder the guidance of Gods Spirit by which as many as imbraced the loue of truth were led into all those truths which are at all times necessary to saluation but were much questioned and obscured by the iuglings and falsifications of former Heretikes Into the same truths which these Councels were then wee now are led not by relying vpon the sole authority of the Councels which the Spirit did lead but by tracing their footsteps and viewing the way by which the Spirit did lead them And this was by necessary deductions or consequences which reason inlightened by the Spirit and directed by the sweet disposion of diuine prouidence did teach them to make and doth inable vs to iudge that they were truely made by them CHAP. XXIII Of the agreement betweene the Enthusiast or some non-conformitants to the Church of England and the Romish Church concerning the manner how the Spirit of truth as they suppose doth lead men into all truth That the true sense of scriptures is as determinable by light of reason and rules of art as the conclusions of any other sciences or faculties are A generall suruey of the depraued or more then hereticall or heathenish infidelity of the moderne Romish Church 1 IGnorance or vnaduertence of the manner how the Spirit leads vs into the truth or true sense of the rule of faith hath beene the mother of two monstrous twinnes in latter ages of Enthusiasme and of Romish implicite or magicall faith The Enthusiast presumes hee hath the Spirit for his guide and knowes he hath it meerely by his breathing or afflâ—tion The Romanist obseruing the Enthusiâ—st to runne into grosse errours by relying vpon the immediate voyce the breathing or suggestion of his priuate Spirit thinkâ—s it safest to beleeue none but publike Spirits and that the publike spirit speakes nothing or iudgeth nothing for authentike saue onely in publike Assemblies as in generall Councels or in such publike place as is the Consistorie of the Pope and his Cardinals Neither of them consider as the truth is that either the connexion betweene principles of faith and the conclusions or inferences which follow vpon the admission of such principles as true or the non-coherence of inferences pretended from sacred principles expresly contained in the Scriptures may be as clearely demonstrated to reason though vnsanctified as the connexion or non-coherence betweene the principles and conclusions of any art or science whatsoeuer Betweene sciences properly so called and the facultie of diuinitie this is the onely difference The principles or Maximes of sciences properly so called may bee rightly conceiued and fully assented vnto by meere light of nature without such assistance or illumination of the Spirit as Christ hath promised to his Church and without which no principles of faith though expresly contained in Scripture can be rightly conceiued much lesse firmely beleeued So that the conclusions of arts and sciences may by light of nature be absolutely knowne whereas euen those conclusions of faith whose connexion with the principles of faith expresly contained in Scripture is as cleere and demonstratiuely euident to reason not inlightened by the Spirit as any connexion is betweene scientificall conclusions and their principles cannot bee absolutely knowne or firmely beleeued without the assistance of the Spirit because the principles whence they are deduced cannot by reason vnsanctified or not inlightened bee absolutely knowne or assented vnto And vnlesse the princples be absolutely known or beleeued the best knowledge or beliefe of the Conclusions can be but conditionall Euery Artist knowes that the connexion or non-coherence betweene a postulatum or hypothesis that is a proposition not fully knowne but taken as granted and the conclusion thence rightly deduced or pretended may bee as cleare and euident as the connexion betweene an vndoubted principle and the conclusion demonstratiuely deduced from it or pretended to bee so deduced Hee that is no competent Iudge of a probleme absolutey considered may giue absolute and infallible iudgement of the same probleme vpon the mutuall acknowledgement or agreement of the controuersors As if two Nouices in Arithmetike should moue this question Whether fifty were a square number whether sixty foure were a cubicke and referre the decision of both ore tenus to an exquisite Mathematician that did not well vnderstand English it were impossible for him to resolue the probleme before he perfectly vnderstood the termes But vpon their mutuall acknowledgement that fifty in English was as much as Quinquaginta in Latine and a square the same that Quadratum in Latine hee could absolutely resolue them that fifty could be no square that the next number below it was a square although hee knew not how to expresse it in English Vpon the acknowledgement of both parties likewise that sixty foure in English was as much as sexaginta quatuor in Latine he could absolutely resolue them that it was both a square and a cubicke number 2 To propose the like case in Diuinity which shall be this Whether Polygamie bee lawfull or rather a true branch of adultery suppose this controuersie were to bee handled before some Heathen Ciuilian betweene two Christians the one of which had maried the others daughter and intended to marry a second wife in a forraigne Country where the party grieued had no Christian Magistrate to doe him right An heathen Iudge that could vnderstand the literall meaning of the Scripture though he did not in any sort beleeue them and made no conscience of Polygamie himselfe might in this case giue as vpright iudgement as the Pope and his Cardinals could and that according to the rule of faith so the parties would both submit themselues to haue the controuersie decided by that rule that is by the Scriptures of the old and new Testament The party peccant might plead custome and tradition The practice of the Patriarckes and holy men of God for his warrant and that with greater probability than the Romanist can plead for worshipping Images or then they excuse themselues from spirituall Adultery If the party grieued should against custome and tradition plead or oppose that law Let every man haue his wife and euery wife her husband or other like Texts which some great Diuines haue alleaged for decision
Church visible or representatiue did first incroach vpon the royall Attributes of the holy Catholike and Apostolike Church For what causes Christians may separate thewselues or suffer themselues to be separated from any visible Church whereof they were sometimes members 111 15. That our Forefathers separation from the Romish Church was most lawfull and iust both in respect of Prince and State and in respect of euery priuate person which feared God or sought to retaine the holy Catholike and Apostolike Faith 118 SECTION III. The visible Church of England retaines the holy Catholike faith which the Romish Church hath defiled 16. That our Chvrch was in the Romish Church before Luthers time and yet in it neither as a visible Church altogether distinct from it nor as any natiue member of it 139 17. That men may be visible members of the holy Catholike and Apostolike Church and yet no actuall members of any present visible Church 149 18. In what sense it may bee granted that the visible Romish Church at the time of our forefathers separation from it was a true Church and yet withall the Synagogue of Sathan the seate of Antichrist and common sinke of heresies 160 19 Whether our Forefathers in separating themselues or suffering themselues to be separated from the Romish Church did any otherwise then Gods Prophets or our Sauiours Disciples had their case and opportunity beene the same would haue done 170 20. Whether the name Catholike can in good earnest bee pleaded or pretended for an vnseparable marke of the true visible Church 21. That the title of Catholike is proper and essentiall vnto the faith professed by the present visible Church of England but cannot truely be attributed to the Faith or Creede of the moderne visible Romish Church 180 22. Of the adinuentions or new Articles added to the Creede by the Romish Church by which shee hath defiled the Holy Catholike and Apostolike faith Of the difference betwixt the Church of Rome and the Church of England concerning the rule of faith What that ecclesiasticke tradition was which Vincentius Lirâ—nensis so much commendeth to what vse it serued in the ancient Councels 185 23. Of the agreement betweene the Enthusiast or some non-conformitants to the Church of England and the Romish Church concerning the manner how the Spirit of truth as they suppose doth lead men into all truth That the true sense of scripture is as determinable by light of reason and rules of art as the conclusions of any other sciences or faculties are A generall suruey of the depraued or more then hereticall or heathenish infidelity of the moderne Romish Church 195 Errata Page 80 lin penult for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A TREATISE of the Holy Catholique Faith and CHVRCH IN the Exposition of the Apostles Creed a worke vndertaken by me long agoe I did sequester foure points from the body of that intended worke now almost finished The first was the doctrine of the holy blessed Trinitie which I reserued for the last part of my labours to be set downe by way of prayer or Soliloquies as being an argument in my iudgement both then and now more fit for meditation then for controuersie or Scholasticke discourse The second point was the Article of the holy Catholike Church The Third the Communion of Saints The fourth the Forgiuenesse of sinnes Points which I knew not how to handle in that ranke and order as they are propounded vnto vs in the Creede without manifest interruption of my intended method which I indeauoured should be continuate each latter part immediately issuing out of the former Nor could I finde a commodious entrance into the Article of Christs comming to iudge as well the dead as the liuing before I had treated of the resurrection of the dead Nor could I finish what I had to say or what was to bee said concerning the last Iudgement it selfe without some explication of the sentence to be awarded and that is life euerlasting to all true beleeuers and euerlasting death to the disobedient and vnbeleeuers So then the articles of the holy Catholique Church of the Communion of Saints of the forgiuenesse of sinnes haue beene out of choice and intended method left altogether vntouched reserued for peculiar Treatises CHAP. I. That it is easier to oppose than to answer a Romanist in this Argument of the Church The Authors method for meeting with wrangling Sophismes FIrst then of the Holy Catholique Church An Argument fitting for these times being specially insisted vpon and inlarged by Priests and Iesuites to our preiudice they well perceiuing their intricate disputes and sophisticall discourses in this point to bee the only net which Peters pretended successors haue left them for catching silly vncatechized soules or for intangling men of deepe vnderstanding but of deeper discontent or dislike with their present Gouernours or Dispensers of preferment For vnto men either not misled by discontented passion or otherwise not vncapable of sound reason it might easily appear that there is no heresie at this day maintained in Christendome at least so generally which doth either so highly offend God and his Christ or so grieuousty disturb the publike peace of Christs Church or so desperately indaÌ„ger the soul of euery one that subscribes vnto it as this heresie concerning the transcendent Authoritie of the visible Romish Church Howbeit I must confesse it is a great deale easier to discouer their blasphemies refute their heresies to pittie the stupiditie of some or to deride the petulancie or rashnesse of others then to auoide the contrary errors into which some reformed Writers of good note haue fallen some through meere eagernesse of opposition others through weakenesse and want of Arts. And no maruell for there is nothing which sooner or faster leades Artists themselues into errour than identitie of names or words including in them diuersitie of significations or importances The diuers significations of one and the same word may be either equiuocall or analogicall or a medly of both Be the diuersitie of this or that kinde or of what kinde it may bee vntill the difference betwixt them be exactly notified or vnfolded by some commodious distinction or artificiall explication they are apt to bring forth seeds of such endlesse quarrels betwixt controuersie-writers as grounds and tenements not well bounded or suruaide alwaies breede betwixt greedy and wrangling neighbours As in the one case each man is prone to trespasse vpon his neighbours possession so in the other each seuerall signification or importance is alwaies incroaching vpon the attributes or prerogatiues which most properly appertaine to some other more prime and principall Now there is no word or terme vsed either in any scientificall morall or popular discourse which hath so many so much different significations or importances as the word Church hath whether we take it in the Greeke Latine or English For preuenting the inconueniences whereunto the multiplicity and diuersitie of its significations or
superstition and palpable darkenesse which had ouerspread the visible Romish Church there were within it though not of it many visible members of the Holy Catholike Church men by so much more true and liuely members of the Holy Catholike Church or Body of Christ by how much they were lesse true and actuall members of the visible Romish Church that is by how much their adherence vnto the Romish Church representatiue or to the authority of the Court of Rome was lesse firme or none as in a generall plague when euery city and towne throughout the whole Kingdome is infected they are most safe which haue solitarie dwellings in the country and haue least commerce with port townes or markets Such adherence to the visible or representatiue Church of Rome as the Iesuites and others now challenge doth as we haue often said induce a separation from the Holy Catholike Church and is more deadly to the soule then to be bed-fellow to one sicke of the pestilence is to the body CHAP. XVII That men may be visible members of the holy Catholike and Apostolike Church and yet no actuall members of any present visible Church 1 THe two principall points whereon we pitch may bee comprised in these two propositions the first A man may be a true liue-member of the holy Catholike Church albeit he hath no vnion or commerce with any member of the Churches visible And this proposition is cleere from that point formerly discussed how farre it was true of the visible Church extra ecclesiam non est salus Out of the Church there is no saluation The second A man may be a true and visible member of the Holy Catholike Church and yet be no actual member of any visible Church The truth of this later proposition may be proued by many instances of most ages since the Church whether vnder the Law or Gospell became visible For this present it shall suffice to explicate the meaning of it according to my former promise and to confirme the truth of it so explicated by one or two pregnant instances Albeit most of the termes in this proposition or distinction contained haue beene explicated before in two inquiries the one what was required to the constitution of the Holy Catholike Church The other what was required to the constitution of a visible Church To what was then said I will adde onely thus much That the Church may bee termed Catholike either in the prime sense or as we then sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or in a secondary analogicall sense The Catholike Church in the prime sense consists only of such men as are actuall and indissoluble members of Christs mysticall body or of such as haue the Catholike Faith not onely sowne in their braines or vnderstanding but throughly rooted in their hearts In a secondary Analogicall sense Euery present visible Church which holdeth the Holy Catholike faith without which no man can bee saued pure and vndefiled with the traditions or inuentions of men may bee termed an Holy Catholike Church When we say a man may be a visible mēber of the holy Catholike Church and yet no actuall member of any present visible Church we take the catholike Church in the later or secondary sense that is for a Church wherein no point of faith or doctrine is maintained or allowed which is not consonant and homogeneall to the Catholike primitiue faith deliuered by Christ his Apostles Who are indissoluble members of Christs bodie is onely visible or known to him Many thousands are and haue been true mēbers of it which are haue been altogether inuisible to vs. But who they be which professe the vnity of that faith which the Apostles taught and without which no man can bee saued is visible and knowne to all such as either heare them professe it viua voce or can read and vnderstand their profession of it giuen in writing 2 The truth of the second proposition may easily be manifested hence in as much as the vnion betweene the members of any Church as visible consists in the vnity of discipline or iurisdictiō or of lawes iudiciall or ceremoniall whereas the vnion of the Church as holy and Catholike formally consists in the vnitie of faith or doctrine or of Lawes and Mysteries internally spirituall and morall It is cleare that the former vnion may be dissolued without the dissolution of the latter as the latter likewise in some cases may be dissolued without dissolution of the former As for example a man may be cut off by excōmunication or exile from all commerce with the present visible Church wherein hee was bred and borne and yet not thereby cut off from the Holy Catholike orthodoxall Church Againe a man by heresie or impious opinions whether voluntarily and secretly imbraced by him or thrust vpon him by the visible Church which hath authority of Iurisdiction ouer him may separate himselfe from the Holy Catholike Church and yet still remaine an actuall member a deare sonne of the visible Church in whose bosome he is willing to liue Euery visible Church whose Lawes are ratified by Soueraigne Authority and whose Gouernours are armed with power coactiue may cut off any particular member besides the head from which all power coactiue is deriued Suppose one or two or more be actually cut off by excommunication exile or the like censure not onely from publike communion in the Church but from all ciuill commerce with his neighbours yet if I know that hee was so cut off either vpon mis-information or mistake of his Iudges as if he had held some grieuous heresies which as appeares to mee hee did not or that the Church Gouernors out of ignorance spleene or faction or other sinister respects which I may not in particular examine did condemne these opinions held by him for hereticall or schismaticall which are in themselues and to my knowledge orthodoxall and truly Catholike hee is to mee and to others which know his meaning a visible member of the Holy Catholike Church though no more a member of the visible Church wherein he did and we yet remaine And albeit I haue no power to rescind the visible Churches decree or authoritatiuely to pronounce him a Catholike whom they to whom the cognizance of such causes belongs haue condemned for an hereticke and albeit I may not admit him to publike prayers or to communion at the Sacraments as being interdicted by authoritie yet I may and ought still to retaine that communion with him which in this Creed we beleeue to be betwixt all true members of Christs body or professors of the Holy Catholike faith that is the Communion of Saints such a Communion as is betwixt the members of the Church triumphant and the liuing members of Christs body militant or rather such as is betweene the orthodoxall professors of the English or other reformed Churches I am bound to pray for him and he for me that we may continue stedfast in the faith which we haue receiued
had deliuered this sentence ex cathedra It is expedient for vs that one man die for the people and that the whole nation perish not Iohn 11. ver 49. And vpon his authority or warrant they aduentured to put the Lord of glory to death Had not this false Apostaticall Priest beene in vero sacerdotio a chiefe officer in the house of God neither could so cleer a truth as he vttered haue beene inuerted to such a pernitious end as it was spoken by him apprehended by others nor could hee haue conceiued or vttered so cleare a truth of himselfe as S. Iohn instructs vs he did This he spake not of himselfe but being high Priest that same yeer he prophesied that Iesus should die for the Nation Ioh. 11.51 Other Acts of his priesthood tooke their validity from his office not from his person this speculatiue truth tooke its poysonous operation from his person not from his office although he could not haue borne so bitter enmity vnto Christ vnlesse he had beene in that office Now albeit we grant that Caiaphas did prophesie by vertue of his place or Priestly office yet no Romanists as I hope will deny that Caiaphas in the preposterous application of his propheticall sentence might well brooke the name of Antichrist at the least that hee was a type or shadow of the Antichrist to come who was to sit as Caiaphas did in the Temple of God or if so they will haue it in S. Peters chaire that hee may wrest diuine truths authoritatiuely to as wicked ends as Caiaphas did 5 But may it not hence bee inferred that as the Sanedrin was the onely visible Church which God had here on earth so the Romish Church from which Luther did separate himselfe was the onely true visible Church of Christ at the time of his separation This may be granted de facto but not de iure For there was an expresse Law of God that there should be no more visible Churches then one before our Sauiours death and resurrection after which there were to bee as many visible Churches de iure as there were seuerall independent Soueraignties I haue heard indeed of some French Catholikes as they would bee accounted which vse this as an argument whether intended by them ad homines to delude the obiecter onely or ad rem to the matter it selfe I know not But this argument they vse to proue that their Church as opposed to Reformed Churches is the true Church because the Pope is Antichrist Antichrist as the Apostle teacheth is to sit in the Temple of God and the Temple of God no question is the true Church whence seeing hee sits in their Church they inferre that theirs is the true Church not ours But as in most other arguments concerning the Church so in this they cozen themselues with the fallacy à dicto secundùm quid ad dictum simpliciter First both letter of Scripture and analogie of faith doe teach that Antichrist is to sit as Caiaphas did in a true Church yea to be a chiefe Officer of some Church otherwise he could not be a principal Rebell or notorious Traitor against Christ But in that he was to be such a rebell and such a Traitor it is not conceiuable that the Church which wholly submits herselfe to him as to her head should bee the true Church much lesse the onely Church of Christ The former argument will hold thus farre The Pope is Antichrist ergo the Church of Rome is a true Church secundùm quid that is in opposition to the Synagogue of Iewes of Turkes or other professed Infidels But if we speake absolutely or compare it with Churches truly Christian it is no true Church of Christ but the Synagogue of Satan Or as he said of his sordid Hosts entertainment that there was so much fire as a man could not haue truly said in strict propriety of logicke phrase there was no fire that is there was so much as if hee had beene bound by couenant of Lease neuer to haue suffered the fire to goe out hee might haue saued his lease from forfeiture and yet there was no fire but a mocke-fire to the entertaining of a stranger so much as was a greater eyesore to him that had sought comfort or refreshing from it then if there had been none at all In like manner there is so much of the true Church in the present Romish visible Church as a man cannot say it is no Church at all so much true doctrine in it as sufficeth to support the title of Antichrist and to make it the very seat of all abominations or impieties more then natural For as the mingling of the Traditions of men with Moses doctrine did make the leuen of Pharises to be so malignant and distastfull to God and all good men so is it the mixture or making vp of the doctrine of Christ and of Deuills in one and the same Liturgy which makes Antichristianisme in graine And as elswhere is obserued the Idolatry of the Romish Church is so much worse then the Idolatry of the Heathens by how much that Churches generall beliefe of one God of the glorious Trinity and of the redemption of mankind is better then the Heathens beliefe or knowledge of the same points 6 But when it is said that Antichrist is to sit in the Temple of God it is not meant onely that hee should sit in the present visible Church but that he should be an vsurper of that chaire which sometimes had beene the seat of Gods Saints and bee an intruder into that Church which had beene Holy and Catholike before his intrusion and which still retaines the rootes and stemmes of Catholike faith into which it shall be his and his followers continual care to ingraffe the doctrine of Deuills and to exercise their spirituall whoredomes in the Oratories of God CHAP. XIX Whether our Forefathers in separating themselues or suffering themselues to be separated from the Romish Church did any otherwise then Gods Prophets or our Sauiours Disciples had their case and opportunity beene the same would haue done 1 BVt here againe the Author of the Antidote or the blinde Guide of faith will obiect That neither the Prophets of old nor our Sauiours Disciples before his death did separate themselues from the present visible Church If not to beleeue as the Church visible and representatiue for the time present did if not to communicate with her in matters of fact or practice were to bee separated from the present visible Church as this Authors words elsewhere imply the Prophets out of all question did either separate themselues or suffer themselues to be separated from the visible Church wherein they liued Ezekiel and Daniel would neuer haue consented to the Priests and Rulers in their persecutions of Ieremie as a false Prophet or Traytor Our Sauiours Disciples before his death stood excommunicated by the visible Church of the Iewes they were as farre from communicating with