1 A Good and carefull Phisition, doth not onely prepare his portion according to Art, but also, if neede be, perswade and intreate his patient to take it. This ex­ample I haue propounded to my selfe in this Treatise. In the former part whereof, I haue faithfully, and with the best skill I could vse, prouided such a medicine, as in it selfe is not vnfit, and (I hope) by the mercifull blessing of God, shall be made effectuall, to bring that to passe which is intended. My charge in this ministring is, rather a care to preuent what may happen, then a cure to reme­dy what hath happened. For the Papists, who are alrea­die fallen into sicknesse, not onely like melancholicke men, refuse all meanes of cure, vpon conceite that they neede it not; but also like Vlisses companions, haue their eares stopped with the waxe of preiudice, and their eyes sealed with blind obedience, that they can neither heare nor see in what case they are. I must therefore be content to let the mole thinke, that no creature can see better then she, and apply my waters and powders to their eyes, who are rather weake sighted, then starke blind.

2 To you then I addresse my speech (beloued Christians) who see the truth, as he that had newly recouered his sight, did iudge of men: he was able to perceiue they were men, but they seemed to him to be as high as trees: so that he saw what they were, but could not discerne their true proportion. So fareth it with a great part of those, who professe the Religion of God maintained in [Page 2] the Church of England: they haue a strong perswasion that poperie is to be de [...]ested, but they see not cleerely what it is tht maketh it detestable. Iosuah and the peo­ple of Israel perceiued that the Lord was offended with Ibsua 7. 7. them, but could not find out Achan that had prouoked his displeasuie. Behold, by Gods gracious assistance I haue found him out, attached, indited, and brought him to the barre, that all men may see the Babilonish stuffe which he hath conueyed into the campe of the liuing God, and hidden there in such sort, that he hath not­withstanding a long time beene taken for a true Israelite. Oh that it would please the Lord God, who onely can worke wonders, to giue him an heart and tongue to glo­risie the Lord Iesus by confessing of his theft, and resto­ring him his honour: whereof vnder a colour of doing him seruice, he hath trai [...]erously robbed him.

The proofe of this treason I leaue to the insuing dis­putation and discourse, with hope that I shall thereby (through Gods blessing) both inlighten the vnderstan­ding, and inslame the affection with detestation of popish errours. It remaines, that (as briefly as I can,) I giue an ac­count of the course I haue taken in debating so weightie a matter. I haue herein gone a little out of the common high-way, into the by path of Schoole-learning: into which I either slipped, or thrust my selfe, partly of choise, and partly of necessitie; Of choise, because this kinde of writing in matters of this nature doth best content me; Of necessitie, because I was asraide, least in so wide a sea I might loose my selfe, and either ouer shoote my port, or fall short of it.

But why should I delight in such thornie and vnbea­ten wayes: dayly experience shewes how hard a thing it is to giue a reason of liking, and misliking. All I will say is this. It is in studies as in apparrell. There are that think large discourses like loose garments, and regard neither the finenesse of the stuffe, nor the neatnesse of the work­man-ship, but onely the fitnesse for the bodie it must [Page 3] serue. These consider what aptnesse and force there is in that which is deliuered, to manifest and proue that which is vndertaken. Othersome cannot abide to be kept to the point in question, no more then to be pinioned in a streight doublet; these men seeme to loue daintinesse and easinesse more then warmth and lasting: so that which they reade or write, please for the present, they care not greatly whether it be little or much to purpose. Both nature and education haue bred in me another hu­mor, that I had rather reade or writ that which may true­ly informe my understanding, thā that which may tickle my affection. In these things I conceiue the Heathen said wel, that Nature is the best guide. For he that setteth him selfe to that, to which he hath no fitnesse by nature: doth like him that swimmeth against the streame, who being not able to hold out, is either driuen back or drowned.

What meaneth all this? may some man say. Nothing else but this, that I may the easier be excused for follow­ing that course, to which I find my selfe inclined, rather then that, which of it selfe might procure better liking. And this I trust, I shall the sooner obtaine by signifiyng, that my breeding strengthened my inclination. For it pleased God, that at my first comming to Cambridge, I should be entred into the Kings-colledge, by that worthy and learned gentleman Sir William T [...]mple, who in his Lo­gicke readings, alwayes laboured more to fitt vs, for the true use of that Art, then for vaine and idle speculations, and earnest wranglings about trifles of no profit nor cer­tainty. Thus haue you the reason of my choyse: may it please you to take knowledge also of the necessitie of this course.

Custome is said to be an other nature; and is common­ly called a tyrant: because many times it inforceth a man to that of which in his owne disposition he hath no man­ner of liking. As I was brought up rather to the profitable use then vaine oftentation of that noble Art of Logicke: so (as new vessels doe) keeping a tang of the first liquot, [Page 4] wherewith I was seasoned, I applyed my selfe in the read­ing of Philosophy, History, Oratory, Poetry, to make use of that Instrument of instruments, as (Aristotle calleth it,) in every peece of worke I undertooke. By this meanes it came to passe, that I began to thinke, (as men commonly doe account highly of that, wherewith they are most in loue) that Logicke was if not the onely, yet the principall Art, for the obtaining of true knowledge in any kind of learning whatsoever. If I lighted in reading upon any thing that was hard, that I seemed to be in a Labyrinth, Logicke was like Ariadnes clew of thrid, to guid me in it & to bring me out of it. Was I desirous in any exercise of lear­ning to take the right course in speaking or writting? Logicke, like Mercuries Statue poynted me out the way, and shewed me all the turnings and windings in it. To conclude, my continuall practise in this Art, hath given it such power over me, that with the Hebrew servant, my Exod. 21. 6. eare is fast nayled to the doro post, so that I can nether stir from it, nor willingly heare any sound without, that may draw me from thinking on it. This is the first degree of necossitie by which I am bound to this kind of writing.

7 The other is greater and streighter. And therein, as we are all ready, like our first parents to excuse our faults, I haue a good mind [...] to make a vertue of necessitie, by perswading my selfe, that I doe that out of iudgement, which I doe indeed to help my weaknes, in judging. For I must and doe freely confesse, that I haue neither such quicknes in apprehending, nor such sharpnes in judging, but that I find my selfe many times at a stand in under­standing, and at a losse in resolving. What help haue I in this case, but to flee to Logicke as to an Oracle. By that I am instructed to take the frame in sunder, to view every part by it selfe; to trie how every tenant and mortuis is fit­ted each to other, which principals are too weake, which peeces are too long, which too short, whether they will serue in that building or no? if they will, how they must he ordered. If any man be able without this labour, at the [Page 5] first sight of a building, to say all is right & well, I would intreate him to beare with my slownes and backwardnes, upon promise, that I will not repine at his quicknes and forwardnes.

8 As for them that thinke I troble my selfe more then needeth by taking this paines, I hope they are not like him in Seneca (as I remember Mendyrides) who would yawne and stretch, when he saw an other man labour, as if he had ben wearied therewith himselfe. Long experi­ence aboue 40 yeare, hath made me fearefull & suspicious. I haue many times perswaded my selfe of the strength & goodnes of an argument, which upon triall I haue found to be weake and naught. Many times I haue thought I understood a thing at the first reading very fully, where­in upon the review I perceived I was deceived, In this dis­putation it had not ben possible for me to haue discerned the weaknes and sophistry of the Papists arguments, if I had not brought them to the beame, and weighed them parcell by parcell as I haue done. But if I had now for­borne to runne this course, and written more plausibly to euery mans apprehension, yet I must haue been faine to come to it hereafter, whensoeuer the aduersaries shall as­say to make good their arguments against my answers. If this course be followed in examining Popish bookes, we shall saue them and our selues a great deale of labour: for they will be afraid to come to such a triall, as will not suffer them to run the wild-goose chase, but will tether them, that they shall be kept within compasse, as if they were coiured within a circle; By this sifting we shal seuer the flower from the bran, that a bushell will be brought within a peck: that in a book of twentie sheets, there will be no more to be answered, then may well be contained in fiue or sixe.

But this course will be too hard for ordinarie mens vn­derstandings: it will, till they be acquainted with all, as strange things commonly vse to be: perhaps they will not at the first be able to conceiue fully of euery answer: [Page 6] if they will but take the paines to pause vpon it, they may learne more by a few lines often read, then by a great ma­nie once posted ouer; besides if they vnderstand not all: yet I dare vndertake, they shall by this course vnderstand more, and more certainely in reading 3 leaues, then by iunning ouer 13 in a loose discourse. Logicke (beloued,) is nothing else but the perfection of reason: it is not a deuise of Schollers, but a plant of nature: euery man vseth it dayly in his speaking or writing: the termes are vn­knowne; so are the termes of warre, of Nauigation, of husbandrie, and of the meanest trade and occupation: till they be knowne they are hard, when they are known easie. If I might find so much fauour with you, as to get you to make a tryall, I make no doubt but this course would soone haue entertainment, and your knowledge thereby grow beyond your expectation.

At the least, let me craue and obtaine pardon of you for making so bold with you, in a matter (as I take it) so fit and needfull. I hope it shall not fall out with vs (reuerend fathers and brethren in the ministrie) as it did with Aristo­tle and Isocrates, they were both Platoes Schollers: but followed diuers professions: the one giuing himselfe to Philosophie, the other to Oratorie: each of them was so carried away with the pleasure he took in his own course, that he wholy despised the other. As it becommeth me, I leaue euery one to his owne iudgement and practise, de­siring to be directed and aduised by any man, that can and will doe it. At some of you I wonder with delight, other I commend: there is none but I excuse, as I desire to be excused my selfe. Great wits may make a shift without artificiall Logicke: ordinary men shall find extraordinary helpe by it. The Lord in mercie so direct vs all, that we may seeke and procure by his blessing, the manifesting and maintaining of his truth, to the glorie of his name, the good of his Church, and our euerlasting saluation in Iesus Christ our Lord.

THE Heathen taught by Plato, alwayes held them for bad common-wealths men, who in a ciuill broile, when their countrie was in an vproare, would not labour to informe themselues whether part had the right, and ioyne with them, but keepe aloofe from both, that they might strike in with the conquerour to their most aduan­tage. And what kinde of Christians shall we account those men, that seeing all on fire euer since they were borne about matter of Religion, haue not all their life re­solued what is true, what false, but are still to make their choyse whon they are neerer their buriall then their bap­tisme? May we not iustly ranke them with those luke­warme Revel. 3. 15. 16. Laodiceans, that were neither hot nor cold, fish nor flesh? And may not they certainely looke for the euent which our Lord Iesus threatneth, that he will spue them out of his mouth? It is high time therefore for all men 1. Reg. 18. 21. to resolue themselues, whether they will follow God or Baal, Christ or Antichrist, and not to continue halting betwixt two opinions.

I cannot reasonably conceiue whence this want of re­solution should proceed, in them that are not desperately carelesse, or profainely politicke, but onely from igno­rance, of the necessity of being separated from the church of Rome. The clouds of this ignorance I desire and pur­pose to scatter by the light of truth, that all men, which will not shut their eyes against the beames thereof, may see both the way wherein they are, and the place it leades them too. Now, to the end I may the bettor vnderstand my selfe, and be vnderstood by them that seeke for resolu­tion, if they doubt, or confirmation if they be resolued; I will labour to speak as plaine as the matter will giue me [Page 8] leaue to doe, desiring to haue that I deliuer rather iudged of, thèn wondered at. And because we are accused by the Church of Rome sometimes of heresie, sometimes of schis­me, I will apply my disputation and discourse to the iusti­fying of our forefathers in separating from the popish re­ligion, and our selues in continuing that separation.

3 Wherefore that we may proceed orderly and plainely, I propound the matter to be disputed in these termes.

Euery man is bound vpon paine of damnation, to refuse the faith of the Church of Rome.

This proposition or sentence hath two things in it to be proued; That 1. The faith of the Church of Rome is to be refused. That 2. It is to be refused vpon paine of damnation. These two I will handle seuerally. First, by shewing the necessitie of that refusall; Secondly, by set­ting out the penaltie if that faith be not refused. And that nothing may be wanting, which may helpe the sim­plest to conceiue and iudge aright of that which shall be spoken, (before I come to debate the point) I will declare the meaning of the termes in which I haue deliuered it, as shortly as I can with plainenesse.

4 By the faith of the Church of Rome, I meane the Do­ctrine of the said Church deliuered by it in certaine Ar­ticles, propositions or sentences, to be beleeued by all men that desire to be saued as matters reuealed by God to that end. This their faith I consider, as one individuall or singular thing. For although it may indeed be devided into many seuerall Articles, of which it consists, and is as it were compacted or framed; yet it is conceiued by them­selues as one intire body: because they are all knit toge­ther by the same bond, namely by being assented to, or beleeued vpon one and the same ground or reason, which is the spirit of that body: and are all to be receiued a like vnder paine of the same Auathema or curse, if they be not receiued: and this is especially to be obserued, as the maine point in this iuquir.

That the faith of the Church of Rome is so to be con­ceiued [Page 9] of, it appeareth manifestly by Mr. Fisher the Iesu­ites Mr. Fisher. Trea­lise of saith, vn­der the name of AD. treatise of Faith, vnder the name of A. D. wherein the whole fourth chapter is spent to shew that Faith must be intire. Faith (saith he) must be intire, whole and sound in all points: and it is not sufficient to beleeue stedfastly some points, mis-beleeuing, or not beleeuing obstinately other some, or any one. The reason thereof followes a little after, where he saith, that Not to beleeue any one point whatsoeuer, which God by reualing it, doth testisie to bo true, and which by his Church he hath commanded vs to beleeue, must needs be damnable; as being a not able iniury to Gods verity, and a great disobedience to his will. To the same purpose writes the titular Arch­bishop of Spalato, that All Articles of faith determined by Spalato Consil. [...] pag 20. the Church are fundamentall, and that none of them may be de­nied without heresie.

6 By this it comes to passe, that whosoeuer is a true member of the Church of Rome, must as stedfastly and re­solutely beleeue the least point of reliques, and Images deliuered by the Councell of Trent, as the greatest my­steries of the God-head, the Trinitie, the Redomption of the world by the Lord Iesus, and that if he denie any of the former, he is no lesse an hereticke, then if he did re­fuse to beleeue any of the latter: yea, though he beleeue all they propound to be beleeued, saue some one small matter, he is, for want of beleeuing that one, (if he know the Church propounds it to be beleeued) a miscreant, and mis-beleeuer; the reason of this is, that if the Church may erre in one thing, it may erre in an other, and so can be no sure foundation of faith.

7 But what is it to refuse the faith of the Church of Rome? surely nothing else, but not to acknowledge the doctrine deliuered by the Church of Rome to be true: but to abhoire it as false; I speake not of euery particuler point, but of all ioyntly together, according to my for­mer exposition. For I doe freely and willingly confesse, that the Papists hold many great misteries of diuinitie truely and soundly, wherein also we agree with them; [Page 10] but yet I say, we may not at any hand receiue their faith for true, as it is deliuered by them for one intire bodie of diuinitie, reuealed by God, to be acknowledged by all men that will be saued. So then to refuse the faith of the Church of Rome, is not to beleeue that it is true: or to beleeue tht it is false; and this I say is required of euery man vpon paine of damnation. The exposition of the se­cond point, vpon paine of damnation, I referre to the place where it is to be handled, after I haue dispatched that which is first to be debated.

THere are not a few that looke more after the man, then after the matter, and inquire rather who is the writer, then what is written. Therefore least the mean­nesse of my condition and abilities, should bring some preiudice to the truth I search for, giue me leaue I pray you in the first place to shew, that the point I intend by Gods gracious assistance to proue, is no new conceit or deuise of mine, but a matter aduisedly resolued of, and set down by more then one of the worthies of our church and nation.

Amongst whom, the first in time and authoritie was that rare and pretious Iewel, Bishop of Salisburie. They B. Iewel des. apol. paro [...], cap, 22. divis. 1. haue no cause (saith he of the Papists) to complaine of our departing, and to call vs againe to be fellowes and friends with them; If we should content our selues to turne to the Pope, and to his errours, it should be a very dangerous matter both to kin­dle Gods wrath against vs, and to clogge and condomne our soules for euer.

And in another place he speakes thus to the same pur­pose. [Page 11] As for vs, we haue not fallen from the Bishop of Rome cap. 20. dirts: 2. vpon any matter of worldly respect: but so the case stood, that vnlesse we left him, we could not come to Christ.

Dr. Reynolds, another shining light of the Vniuersitie D. Renolds. of Oxford, shewes vs the same truth in another maner; viz. in his verses vpon the third conclusion, handled in the Schooles Nouemb. 3. 1579.

If that ye seeke eternall life, see that you Rome forsake.

Of the same minde was Dr. Whitaker, a man for his lear­ning, whether we respect reading or iudgement, knowne and approued of the Churches of Christ, especially this of England. We say, (saith he) that the Church of Rome must be D. whitaker, de Eccles. cont. qu. 6 cap. 1. forsaken of all men that desire to be saued. And a little after he addes, that There can be no saluation hoped for in the Church of Rome.

Lastlie Mr. Perkins, in knowledge and zeale a worthy Scholler of so excellent a Master, treading in his foot­steps concludes: that All those that will be saued, must depart M. P [...]rlins Re­formed Chath. n [...] the prolog sed. Thus then and separate themselues from the faith and religion of the pre­sent Church of Rome.

We haue seene the iudgement of these learned and re­uerend Diuines, and therein the consent of both the Vniuersities Cambridge and Oxford; for their bookes, e­specially the three last, were allowed for printing by the principall Doctors of the seuerall Vniuersities then re­sident in them; neither is it to be taken for the iudge­ment of the Vniuersities onely: but also of the whole Church: as appeareth euidently by the continuance of it from time to time, in the writings of these famous lear­ned men successiuely one after another. It was first pro­pounded by that reuerend Father in defence of the Church of England, to iustifie our departure from that strumpet of Babylon; diuers yeares after proclaimed o­penly in the publike Schooles by Dr. Reynolds; ratified afterwards by Dr. Whitaker in his publike lectures of Di­uinitie; and last of all confirmed by Mr. Perkins: and by euerie one of these published in print, with the appro­bation [Page 12] of our Church and State.

3 And this (to say the truth) hath alwayes beene the iudgement and practise of the Churches of God in all Protestant Countries, euer since the last birth and infancy of reformation in this age, for the space of more then an hundred yeares; for what else hath beene aymed at in so many writings and disputations of Ptotestants, but the iustifiing of our depar [...]ure from the Synagogue of Rome; Not of a bodily departure (saith Mr. Perkins) in respect of co­habitation Peform chathol. in Prol gu [...]. and presence, but of a spiritūall separation in respect of faith and religion. It cannot then reasonly be denyed or doubted, but that our Church generally, holds separation from the Church of Rome to be a matter of great conse­quence, yea of absolute necessitie: especially if we re­menber, that euery Parish throughout the whole Land is enioyned to haue the Booke of Bishop Iewel, with the rest of his workes in their seuerall Churches, for all men to read, and that they were all new printed to that end.

YOu see from whom I take the point that I haue vn­dertaken to maintaine: from the same men will I ferch the grounds of my disputation. What is the reason by which these worthy, learned, and godly diuines did iustifie the separation of our Church, and her continuing separated from the Romish faith? let vs heare themselues speake: We haue departed from that Church (saith there­uerend Father B. Iewel) whose erro [...]rs were proued and made B. Iewel Iuf. apol pag. 4. cap. 11. [...]. 1. manifest to the world, which Church also had alreadie depar­ted from Gods word: and yet we haue not departed so much from it selfe, as from the errours thereof. What errours? They are generally implōyed in these words of his: chap. 10. [Page 13] diuis. 2. Ignorance, errour, superstition, idolat [...] [...] in­uentions, and the same commonly disagreeing [...] the holy Scriptures. And againe: These men haue broke [...] in peeces Apolog. p [...] 5. cap 13. divis. 1. all the pipes and conduites: they haue stopped all the springs, and choaked vp the fonntaine of liuing water with dirt and mire. And againe: Wee haue renounced that Church wherein vve Cap. 15. divis. 2. Apol. could neither haue the word of God sincerely taught, nor the Sacraments rightly administred, nor the nam: of God duely cal­led vpon: and wherein was nothing able to stay any wise man, or one that hath consideration of his owne sasetie. To conclude, vve part 6. chap. 22. divis. 2. haue departed from him (saith that learned B. of the Pope) who hath vtterly forsaken the Catholicke faith. For (as Dr. Bilson Dialogue [...]t 3. Bilson saith most truely) No Article of the Church of Rome, wherein we dissent from them is Catholicke.

2 D. Reynolds speakes not so plaine, yet giues us suffici­ently to understand, that he therefore concluded the Church of Rom̄e was to be forsaken, because she was no sound member of the Catholicke Church, nor held the right faith. Her unsoundnes he thus sets out. The Church Reynolds conclu. 5. of Rome is not distempered with a little ague, such as hindreth not the functions of life greatly; but is sicke of a canker, or ra­ther of a le [...]prosy, or rather of a pestilence, in so much that she is past hope of recouery, unlesse our Saviour Christ the heavenly physician doe giue her wholesome medicines to purge her of perm­cious humors. Conclus: 5.

And in his presace to his sixe conclusions? he writes thus. Sith [...] the fellowship of the Church of Rome it was not In Preface, at the 6. [...]n. [...]as [...]on. lawfull for vs, either to serue God with a holy worship, or to be­leeue God with a holy faith, as God hath commanded: s [...]h the Church of Rome being taken with contagious diseases and a frensie, did put her Counsellers to the fire, friends to the sword, brethren to cruell death, and stained the faith of Christ with reproaches, creatures with the Lords honour, Gods service with Idolatry: we went away from Papists, not willingly as from m [...]n; not vnwillingly as from heritickes. But D. Whitaker, and M. [...] deec­c [...]e [...]. co [...]o 2. quist. 6. cap. 1. Perkins are most plaine. W [...] affirm [...] (saith D. Whitaker) that the Church of Rome is to be shuned of all men, and that no [Page 14] salvation is to be hoped for in it; yea we say it is to be cond [...]m [...]ed as a deepe pitt of heresy and errour.

M. Perkins avoucheth our departure for the same rea­son. Perkins in prolog. Resor. Catho. The cause of this Separation lyeth in the Church of Rome, namely the cup of abomination in the whores hand, which is their haereticall and schismaticall religion.

3 Vpon this foundation of these learned men, I set this frame of disputation.

• Euery erroneous faith is to be refused.
• The faith of the Church of Rome is an erroneous faith.
• Therefore the faith of the Church of Rome is to be re­fused.

Can there be any question made of the first part or proposition of this reason, when the holy Apostle Saint Iude exhorts all men without exception of person, time or matter, to striue for the faith delivered to the Saints? Iudev. 3. But how striue we for that faith which is the reuealed truth of God, if we can be content to beleeue errours which are against the truth? Yea, what doe we else by holding errours for truth, but adde to the diuine reue­lation giuen by the Lord God himselfe, contrary to his charge? Deut. 4. 2. You shall put nothing to the word that I command you.

The second part which we call the assumption or mi­nor, Deutr. 4. 2. is that wherein all the doubt lieth: for what is the Church of Rome the worse, for granting that an errone­ous faith is to be refused, vnles their faith can be proued erroneous. And whereas I say in my question and dispu­tation erroneous, rather then hereticall, I doe it od of pur­pose, because I would shunne all needlesse wrangling a­bout the word: for it seemes to many somewhat doubt­full what is properly to be called heresy; For my part I can not see that any false proposition deliuered for an Arti­cle of faith, can be lesse then heresie: I doubt not but a man may thinke somthing to be true which is false, & be [Page 15] no heriticke: bu [...] he th [...] shall obstinately hold such a point for an Article of faith, necessarily to be beleeued by all men vpon paine of damnation, cannot for ought I see, be freed from heresie. As for the errours of the Papists, Dr. Reynolds, Dr. Whitakers, and Mr. Perkins, (as we haue seene,) make no doubt to call them heresies.

5 Now that we may the better vnderstand whether the faith of the Church of Rome be erroneous or no, we must enquire how the truth and falsenesse of faith is to be dis­cerned: which we cannot doe either better or otherwise, then by considering how the Article of faith, or propo­sition enioyned to be beleeued, agreeth with the diuine testimonie concerning that point or Article; for the di­uine testimonie is the thing or rule, to which the Article must be applied, and by which it must be squared; so that if it agree wholy with it, it is true: if in any part it differ from that testimonie, it is false and erroneous. This Sess. 14. ca [...] Decret de necessi­tate satiffactio­n is Dec [...]ct. de sa­cram paenitentiae can. 6. description of errour and falsehood in matters of faith, is warranted by the Councell of Trent, where they make falsehood consist in differing from the word of God: and That which differs from the institution of Christ, is called an humane tradition, and therefore is erroneous.

6 According to this declaration of a false and erroneous faith, I proceed now to shew, that the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous.

That faith which hath a false and ertoneous foundati­on, is false and erroneous.

Wherein first I take it for granted, that Faith must haue an extrinsecall foundation out of the shings them­felues which are to be beleeved. This outward and ex­trinsecall foundation is the credit and authority of him, that delivereth those things for true, and requires assent or agrement to them.

Secondly, I hold it for certaine, and agrred vpon by all, that faith is true or false, according to the foundation whereon it stands: as the diuine restimonie begets a di­uine faith, an humane testimonie breeds an humane, [Page] which may thus appeare. What makes the faith of the ancient heathen, and the now heathenish Turks, and all sorts of Infidels, who beleeue that there is but one God, to be humane false and erroneous; and the faith of Chri­stians concerning the same point, to be diuine and true: but the diuerse foundations of these faiths, the former de­pending vpon the coniectures and testimonies of men: the other arising out of the witnesse of God himselfe. To come nearer home; why doe the Papists denie that wee are of their faith, although they confesse wee hold the very same Articles of the Creed that they professe, and a­agree with them in most points of religion: but for that we haue not the same foundation of our faith, which they haue of theirs? It is then the goodnesse or badnesse of the foundation that make the faith good or bad: so that where the foundation is false, the faith whatsoeuer it be cannot be true.

The proposition thus prooued, I will adde the assumpti­tion to it: The foundation of the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous: For the foundation of their faith, is the authority of the Pastors of their Church, as it Sect. 4. Decret. de edit. scriptur. sect. praeterea. is manifest by the Councell of Trent: It is the office of the Church (saith the Councel) to giue sentence of the true meaning and sense of the Scriptures. Now by the Church, they meane the Pastours of the Church, as their continuall practise de­clareth, no man being suffered to giue a voice in any Councell, but their Bishops, whom onely they hold to be the Pastours of the Church. By true sense and meaning they vnderstand the doctrine of faith, which is nothing else but the Word of God, truly vnderstood. By the Scrip­tures, they meane euery particular place of Scripture; for, if they should meane some places onely, there could be no certainty in this their decree, vnlesse they had determined, what particular places they are, whereof the Church may giue sentence.

These things thus declared, I dispute thus:

8 They that haue the office to determine which is the true faith, their authority is the foundation of Faith.

But the Church hath the office to determine which is the true faith: as it appeares by the words of the Councell ere-while recited.

Therfore the authority of the Church is the foundati­on of their faith.

That the Church of Rome claimes this authority, it may further appeare by those titles whcih it vsurpeth in the said Councell, that, The Bishop of Rome is Gods Ʋicar on Sess. 6. de refor­mat. cap. 1. & Sess. 14. de poe­nitentia. cap. 7. Sess. 7. de Bap­tism. Can. 3. & Sess. 22. de sacri­ficio missae cap. 8 De verbo dei lib. 3. cap. 3. S [...]ct. Tota igitur. Cap. 5. Sect. Ex his. earth. The Church of Rome is the mother and mistris of all Churches. Yea, euerie man may plainly see, that Bellar­mine teacheth the same things of the church of Rome. The Church is the iudge of the true sense of the Scripture, and all controuersies. By Church, hee vnderstands the Pope with a Councell: and this, he saith, is expresly to be found in the Councell of Trent, Sess. 4. which is the place I alled­ged ere-while. It is committed singularly to Peter and his suc­cessors, that they should teach all men what is to bee held concer­ning the doctrine of faith. For the expounding whereof, he saith a little after, Sect. Si etiam; that, The Lord speakes of a singular office of teaching the whol Church, by appointing and de­creeing what is to be beleeued of all men. And againe, he saith; that The Councels, & Popes execute the office of a Iudge commit­ted Cap. 10. Sect. Re­spond. aliud est. to them by God. What the Office of a Iudge is, he shews in the same place a few lines before: To explication after the manner of a Iudge, there is authoritie required: A Iudge deli­uereth his sentence, as a thing that necessarily must be followed. To conclude, hee tells vs in the same tenth chapter; that, Sect. Septi [...]um argumentum. Christians, who are sure the Church cannot erre in expounding the doctrine of faith, are bound to receiue that doctrine, and not to doubt whether those things be so or no.

This matter Bellarmine makes plaine to all men, by shew­ing the manner of this Office, in this sort; The Scripture for Cap. 10. Sect. Responde [...], Chri­stus. It selfe needs not the witnes of men, for it is most true in it selfe, whether it be vnderstood, or not: but for our sake it needs the wit­nes of the Church, because otherwise wee are not certaine, what [Page 18] bookes are sacred and diuine, nor what is the true and proper mea­ning. In the same Chapter he giues vs to vnderstand, what manner of foundation the testimony of the church is. The word of God deliuered by the Prophets and Apostles, is the first Sect. Respondeo, Ad hoc. foundation of our faith, for, therefore we beleeue whatsoeuer we beleeue, because God hath reuealed it by his Prophets and Apo­stles. But we adde, that besides this first foundation, there is a­nother secondary foundation needfull, to wit, the testimony of the Church: for, we know not certainly what God hath reuealed but by the testimony of the Church. Therefore our faith cleaueth to Christ, the first truth, reuealing those mysteries, as to the first foundation: It cleaues also to Peter, that is, to the Pope, propoun­ding and expounding these mysteries, as to a secondary foundation. And to make the matter yet more plaine, he speakes thus in the same tenth chap. Sect. Respondeo, verbum. We are to know, Sect. Responde [...], verbum. that a Proposition or article of faith is concluded in such a Syllogisme as this.

• Whatsoeuer God hath reuealed in the Scriptures is true.
• But this God hath reuealed in the Scriptures.
• Therefore this is true.

Of the first of these Propositions no man makes any question. The second is held for certaine truth amongst all Catholikes, for, it is grounded vpon the testimony of the Church, that is, the Councell, or the Pope. By which it appeares, how little M ^r. Fisher vnderstands the doctrine whereof he makes profes­sion, or how vnaduisedly he deliuereth his opinion. For, whereas Bellarmine will haue a two-fold foundation, prima­ry, and secondary, M ^r. Fisher will acknowledge but one, namely; the authority of God, speaking by the mouth of the church: Christian beleefe (saith hee) ought onely to bee Treat. of Faith in the Preface. Sect of which point. grounded vpon the authority of God, speaking by the mouth of the Church.

10 We haue seene Bellarmines opinion of this matter: which indeed agrees very well with the words of the Councell, where it challengeth the office of interpreting the Scrip­tures. For, in that clayme it presumes, that the diuine truth is already reuealed, and that it is the first foundation [Page 19] of our faith; to which the office of the Church is added, which is but a secondary foundation. Now, by these pla­ces of the Counce [...]l, and Bellarmine, it is cleare, that;

The foundation of the Romish faith, is the authority of the Church.

This foundation of faith (say wee) is false and erroneous: That our Sauiour Christ and his Prophets and Apostles are the foundation of faith, wee beleeue and acknowledge, and in this we and they agree. That secondary foundation which lyeth in the authority and testimony of the church, we refuse as false and naught, and in this lyeth the true dif­ference betwixt vs and them in this point: as besides other, De Script. quaest. 5. cap. 3. Apol. part. 2. chap. 3. diuis. 2. 11 D ^r. Whitaker hath noted, and the reuerend B. Iewell. And this indeed is the main reason why we may not ioyn with them.

If they demand of vs, VVhy we receiue not this autho­rity of the church, for a foundation of faith? VVe answer; Because we find no commission in the word of God, wher­by any such office is conueyed vnto it. Neither deale wee herein any otherwise then reason and law direct men to do in the like case. For, is any man so destitute of reason, or so ignorant of the law, that he would receiue a man for L. Chancellour, L. Treasurer, or Lord Chiefe Iustice, that were not able to shew any commission for the hauing and executing such an office? And shall wee in a businesse of such importance, that concernes our free-hold, not onely for our present being of the church, but for our future be­comming heires of glory in heauen, giue credit to men vpon their bare word, without sight of their commission? VVerfore doth our Lord and Sauiour so often in the Scrip­tures, plead his authority from God, warranted by the old Testament: and vpbraid the Iewes with lightnesse and fol­ly, for being ready to receiue one that should come in his owne name? If then the Papists would haue vs beleeue, that their church is appointed to bee a foundation, let them shew their warrant for it, and we will accept it, and build our faith vpon it.

But we looke that their commission should be very plain [Page 20] and certaine, because it is of such a matter as no naturall reason can conceiue to be true. For who would imagine or beleeue that the Apostles, who had a little before receiued full power of order and iurisdiction ioyntly and equally with Peter, (as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth) should sud­denly De Rom. Po [...]t. lib. 1. cap. 12. Sect. vt autem. haue their authority abridged, and be made subiect to Peter: yea, to his successors too, as it fell out with S. Iohn, to learne of them which wee bookes of Scripture, and what was the meaning of the seuerall places or texts; and what was true, what false in Diuinity.

Besides, the matter it selfe is of such importance, by their doctrine, that without the constant beliefe thereof, and o­bedience according thereto, there is no possibility of salua­tion. For, Whosoeuer (saith Bellarmine) will not be sed by Pe­ter, De verb. Dei. lib 3. cap. 5. Sect. quartum. that is, learne of him or his successors as iudges and deter­miners, what he is to take for matter of faith, and what is the sense of the Scripture, is none of Christs sheepe.

1 I Haue shewed that the foundation of the saith of the Church of Rome, is the authority and testimony of the church; and haue refused that foundation as vnsound and erroneous. It will now perhaps be looked for, that I should proceed by prouing that it is false and counterfeit. But I see no necessary or sufficient reason for this course, and therefore haue rather chosen to follow tha [...] way in this dis­putation, which the matter it selfe leads me to, and in which it leads me.

2 The question betwixt the church of Rome and vs is this: Whether the articles or propositions to which they require our assent, as to certaine truths, reuealed by God, and com­manded of him to be beleeued vpon perill of damnation if we do not assent and beleeue, be reuealed and commanded [Page 21] by God, or no, as Bellarmine himselfe putteth it in the as­sumption of his Syll [...]gisme, set down by me Chap. 3. num. 9. The church of Rome saith they are, and call for obedi­ence thereto accordingly. We deny that they are reuea­led and enioyn [...]d by God, and therefore refuse to giue as­sent to them. Who seeth not that the very nature of this difference betwixt vs, layeth vpon them a necessity of pro­uing, that those points or articles are propounded by God, to be beleeued as matters of faith reuealed by him?

This made the reuerend and learned B. Iewell, in his A­pology, 3 B. Iewell Apol. part. 1. chap. 10. diuis. 1. tell the Doctors of the Romish church: that, It was their part to prooue clearly and truly, that the Romish Church is the true and right instructed Church of God. And in his se­cond answer to D ^r. Cole, lett. D D. E E. to affirme: that, It was vnreasonable for that D ^r, to call for the proofes of our do­ctrine. And therefore as it appeares in that answer, lett. O. he stands vpon the negatiue (as he speakes) and putteth the Papists to their proofes, because they presse vs to receiue those points for articles of faith.

4 This course I haue holden in those bookes that I haue formerly published in this kind of writing, this I meane to hold now and hereafter, if it please God to afford me op­portunity to goe forward in the defence of his truth. Yet for their better satisfaction, and clearer manifesting of the truth, I will alwaies giue some reason of my denying the propositions I refuse: howsoeuer, it were enough for an answer, to deny that which of it selfe is not apparantly true. And thus much of the course of this disputation.

5 I returne now to the disputation it selfe. The maine ground for the proofe of the authority of the church in this kind, is taken by Bellarmine, out of Iohn 21. 15, 16, 17. Ioh. 21. 15, 16. De verbo dei. lib. 3. cap. 5. Sect. quartum testimo­nium, & seqq. Iesus said to Simon Peter, Simon the sonne of Ionas, louest thou mee more then these? He said, yea Lord, thou knowest that I loue thee. He said vnto him, Feed my sheepe, &c.

From these words Bellarmine disputeth thus:

Feeding of Christs sheepe, Ioh. 21. 15. is a singular office of teaching the whole Church, by determining and iudging [Page 22] what is to bee beleeued of all men.

To Peter and his successours the feeding of Christs sheepe is committed. Ioh. 21.

Therefore to Peter and his successors, a singular office of teaching the whole Church, by iudging and determining what is to be beleeued of all men, is committed.

Vpon this conclusion Bellarmine inferreth: that, he that will not be thus taught by Peter, is none of Christs sheepe.

6 Many weighty points are hudled vp together in this Syl­logisme, worthy of serious consideration and debating. In the Proposition, or first part, these foure things are com­prised:

• 1. In those words, Ioh. 21. 15. a singular Office is contained.
• 2 Feeding there, signifieth teaching.
• 3 Feeding Christs sheepe is, teaching the whole Church.
• 4 Teaching the whole church is, by way of determining what is to be beleeued of all men.

All these are contained in the Proposition, and euery one of them so necessarily required to the truth thereof, that if any one of them bee vntrue, the Proposition of necessity must be false. How then shall the conclusion be an article of faith, as the Papists will haue it? I will therfore examine euery one of them seuerally, and then goe forward to con­sider of the Assumption.

1 THE first of the foure points to be discussed is this: In the words rehearsed, Ioh. 21. 15. a singular office is appointed.

That Bellarmine speakes of a singular Office, the words themselues shew: that hee must needs bee vnderstood of appointing such an office, not of disposing of one already appointed, it is manifest: as well because there was no office [Page 23] yet ordained, but that which was common to Peter with the rest of the Apostles; and therefore not singular: as also for that it will not serue Bellarmines turne to speake of an of­fice common to all the Apostles, since hee endeauors to set­tle such an office vpon Peter, as was proper and peculiar to him, and such as no other Apostle euer had. This may far­ther appeare by another place in Bellarmine, where he saith, that that very thing is really giuen Iohn 21. 15. which was pro­mised, Mat 16. 19. I will giue thee the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen: and as he there saith, giuen to the same Simon, to whom Bellar. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 14. Sect. Ac pri­mum & cap. 12. Sect Et prop­terea. before it was promised: hee saith, that the keyes were promised Math. 16. 19. and [...]eliuered Iohn 21. 15, 16, 17. Thus haue we the first point in Bellarmines proposition, now let vs try the truth of it.

2 For our parts we vtterly reiect it as false, because wee are out of doubt, it cannot any way bee soundly proued. And we are the rather so perswaded because Bellarmine hath not once attempted to proue it; although hee could not chose but see, that there was necessity of prouing it: for it is not so plaine and manifest in it selfe, that it needs no proofe; and the conclusion drawne out of it is an Article of their faith; yea such an article, as, like Atlas, beareth the waight of the whole body of their faith. Besides, Bellarmine knew well enough that we deny it to be true. For hee brings Luthers words to that purpose. Martin Luther (saith Bellarmine in his booke de potestate Papae) affirmes that by the word Feed, Iohn 21. there is no new power giuen, but only the duty of louing Bellar. de Rom. Pont. la. ca. 15. Sect. Iam vero. and teaching enioyned Peter, who was made an Apostle before.

3 Neither doth the text it selfe, nor any other place of Scrip­ture (for ought they say, or we see) afford vs any proofe thereof. If there bee any thing in the text for their reliefe, it is in that Peter is commanded to feed. But this charge doth not so much as imply the appointing of an office: be­cause feeding is many times enioyned, where there is no singular office ordained, but the executing of an office com­manded, which had before been appointed. So the Apo­stle Peter, 1. Peter 5. 2. chargeth th [...] were already 1 Pet. 5. 2. [Page 24] Ministers, to feed the flicke of God. And the Apostle Paul, Acts 20. 28. giues the like charge to the Elders or Mini­sters of Act. 10. 28. Ephesus, Take heed to your selues, and to all the flocke, to feed the Church of God. And this Dr. Reynolds well obser­ued, Dr. Reynolds a­gainst [...]art, Chap. 3. diuis. 2. and vrged against Hart, You say true, wee might there­fore with good reason refuse this proposition, till it be pro­ued. But I will deale more kindly with Bellarmine, and shew that Luther truely affirmed, there was no new office erected by those words, but the execution of one formerly appoin­ted, enioyned.

If this feeding be the teaching, for which all the Apostles had commission, Mark. 16 15. Goe ye into all the world, and Mark. 16. 15. preach the Gospell to euery creature: Iohn 20. 23. Whose sinnes soeuer ye remit, they are remitted to them: then is it not the e­recting of a new office: for this was at our Sauiours third ap­pearing to his Disciples, Iohn 20. 13. that, at his first, Ioh. 20. Ioh. 20. 19. Bellarm. de pont. Rom. lib. 1. cap. 12. Sect. Dices &c. 19. 20. when (as Bellarmine affirmeth) they had power giuen them both of iudisdiction to gouerne, and of order to execute their sacrificing Priesthood. And it had beene a thing not be­seeming our Sauiours wisdome, to giue a new Commission when there was no need, nor occasion of so doing. Yea, to say the truth, it had beene altogether in vaine, because the former being as sufficient and in force, there could be no place for this later.

But this feeding, Ioh. 21. 15. is the teaching, for which they had commission Mark. 16. 15. Ioh. 20. 23. For wee finde no other kinde of feeding but this one practised by the Apostles in the new Testament, namely, feeding by way of reuealing. This appeareth touching the Scriptures, Bellarm. de Co [...] ­cil. authorit lib 2. cap. 12. Sect. Obseruandum, &c. and Sect. Di [...]untur Counc. Trent. Sess. 4 decret­de Canon. scrip­turatum. 2. Tim. 4. 15. The Scriptures were giuen by inspiration. 2. Pet. 1. 21. Holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost: as Bellarmine also confesseth: The Scripture is the word of God immediatly reuealed. The holy writers had immediate reuelation, and writ the words of God. As for traditions, which the church of Rome makes a second part of the diuine testi­mony, or word of God, by their owne confession, they are also by reuelation, for so saith the Councell of Trent: Tra­ditions [Page] were either receiued by the Apostles, from the mouth of our Sauiour, or deliuered by themselues, the holy Ghost enditing them.

6 Indeed this feeding, Ioh. 21. 15. is nothing else but an exhortation or charge for the performance of that duty, which was enioyned in that Commission, Mark. 16. 15. That it was such an exhortation, the manner of deliuering the words sheweth, which is, by repeating the same thing three seuerall times. For this course is very fit to make an impression of a duty commanded, no way beseeming the giuing of a Commission Besides, it answereth to Peters de­nying of his Master thrice: as Cyril noteth in Ioh. Because Cyril supra Ioh. lib. 12. cap. 64. he denied him thrice at his passion, therefore there is a threefold confession of loue required of him. A threefold confession (saith S. Austin) answereth to a threefold negation, that the tongue may Aug. Tract. in Ioh. 123. expresse as much loue, as it did feare. Adde hereunto, that our Lord calls for the performance of this duty, as a proofe of Peters loue to him, wherein hee had failed more then the rest, because he had made more protestation of it then the rest. For thus lies the reason. If thou loue me as thou hast professed thou doest, shew thy loue by the performing of the duty of feeding. But what proofe had it beene of Pe­ters loue to our Sauiour, to become the visible Monarch of the whole Church? Well might the giuing of such an of­fice argue our Sauiours loue to Peter, but the taking it vp­on him, could not testifie any great loue of his to our Saui­our. For, who would haue refused such an offer? The bur­then of teaching was laid vpon the other Apostles, as well as vpon him; the honour of the Supremacy (if this were true) was appropriated to him; yea, the rest of the Apo­stles, who before were equall to him, were now made infe­riour and subiect to him.

7 Lastly, in giuing a commission, the authority of him that giues is ordinarily expressed, alwaies implyed. Mat. 28. 18, 19. All power is giuen to me in heauen and earth: Goe therefore and teach all nations, Ioh. 20. 21, 22, 23. As my father sent me, so send I you, receiue the holy Ghost: whose sins, &c. But here, although (as they say) it is the onely place that speaks [Page 26] of this commission, there is no authority, either expressed or implyed: onely as Cyrill saith, It was a duty of loue to feed, as it had beene formerly a proofe of feare to deny. What else then can this Feeding be, but the teaching, which was en­ioyned all the Apostles at our Sauiours first appearing to them? Whereupon I may safely conclude, that the word neither necessarily, nor in any likelihood of reason impor­teth, the erection of any new office in the Church.

8 Let vs now proceed to debate the second point: yet with this memorandum, that although it be neuer so plainly pro­ued, yet Bellarmines proposition of a new office appointed, Ioh. 21. 15. is false, because the first point contained in it, of a singular office here ordained, is neither true nor likely. The thing now to be discussed, is this:

Feeding Christs sheepe, Ioh. 21. 15. is teaching.

This sentence is plainly deliuered by Bellarmine, in that proposition, as he that looks vpon it cannot choose but see, and proued also by two reasons: the former; that, Reaso­nable sheepe are fed by teaching: the latter; that The Lord saith by Ieremy, I will giue you Pastors according to my heart, which Ier. 3. 15. shall feed you with knowledge and vnderstanding. But these proofes might haue been spared; for we acknowledge, that Feeding is Teaching.

9 But for the fuller discussing of this matter, wee must re­member, that Bellarmine, as we saw, chap. 4. numb. 9. tel­leth vs: Teaching is double: by reuealing, or propounding things reuealed. Wee say, that the teaching here spoken of, is by reuelation, not by propounding matters already reuealed, as they would haue it. But if they will haue vs yeeld to it, they must proue it, and not take it for granted, as Bel­larmine doth. For, without it be proued, as I signified chap. 6. numb. 6. his proposition cannot be true. It is ther­fore as easie and reasonable for vs to refuse his argument, grounded vpon that, which we deny, as for him to affirme that he cannot proue.

10 Yet, that we may deale more kindly with him, then he doth with vs, wee will giue him a reason of our answer: [Page 27] which is, that, None of the Apostles did euer vse any other kind of teaching, then reuealing. If they deny this, let them shew, that any Apostle did euer informe the Church, that, This or that booke was scripture: that, this or that tradition was by diuine authority: that, this or that place, had this or that sense. And that this information of theirs, was not by way of reuelation: that is, of immediate inspiration and motion from God: wherby they were freed from all errour. If they cannot doe this, as I am out of doubt they cannot, it must needs be granted, that they taught onely by reuelation, not otherwise.

11 They will perhaps obiect, Act. 15. 7. but in vaine: For the Apostles doe not there expound any place of Scripture formerly written, or propound matters already reuealed by God: but by the immediate inspiration of the holy Ghost, resolue and enioyne what was to be done in that case. So that their determination was a law then first giuen by way of reuelation from God, not by way of interpreting and propounding what the Lord had formerly deliuered. For it is manifest, that the Lord hath no where taught in the old Testament (& the new was not then written) that the Gen­tiles conuerted to the faith, were to abstain from strangled things, and from blood: to the forbidding wherof, the ho­ly Ghost directed them immediately, vpon that occasion, for that time. From which after a time he freed them by the like direction and reuelation giuen to the Apostle S. Paul, and by him to the Church, Rom. 14. And that this decree of the Apostles was made by reuelation and inspira­tion of the holy Ghost, De Rom. Pons. lib. 4. cap. 25. Sect. Responde [...] ad primum. Bellarmine himselfe grants.

12 Yea, the Apostles in that same place seeme to take a con­trary course to that: which, if they had expounded the for­mer Scriptures, or propounded things formerly deliuered, they must haue followed. For as it appeareth by debating of the point by Iames and Peter, the old testament absolute­ly Act. 15. freed the Gentiles conuerted from the ceremoniall law. Why tempt ye God, (saith Peter, Vers. 10.) to lay a yoake on the Disciples neckes, which neither our fathers nor wee were able to [Page 28] beare? Yet the Apostles by this decree of theirs, bind them to part of that law, by enioyning them, Vers. 20. 29. To obstaine from blood, and that that is strangled. Which they might not haue done, if they had propounded matters al­ready resolued of, and not followed the immediate reuela­tion and direction of the holy Ghost. To this I may adde, the manner of this charge, giuen by the Apostles, which is by inspiration from the holy Ghost, whose authority in this case they alledge, It seemed good to the holy Ghost: not, thus saith Moses, Dauid, or the Lord by this or that Prophet. Ther­fore in that Councel, the Apostles did reueale what was to be done, not propound what formerly had beene reuealed. And yet this is the onely place in all the new Testament, wherein there is any shew of Feeding by expounding and propounding, otherwise then by reuelation.

1 HAuing found the two former points to be light and false: I come now to weigh the third, which is set downe as plainly as either of the former: that,

Feeding Christs sheepe, Ioh. 21. 15. is teaching the whole Church.

There hath beene enough said already to discredit and disable the proposition: yet I will goe forward, that it may appeare what truth there is in it. Bellarmine laboureth De Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 16. much to proue, that by Christs Sheepe in this place, all Christians whatsoeuer are signified. But what needeth all this adoe? Wee neuer meant to deny it, neither doth our granting, or his prouing of it, any thing at all helpe them, or hinder vs. For, there is nothing meant in this place by teaching, but reuealing, as I shewed in the for­mer chap. numb. 10, 11, 12. But this the church of Rome [Page 29] claimes not, but striueth tooth and naile for such a teaching as consisteth in expounding and propounding things re­uealed: yea I will grant him both proposition and assump­tion in the tearmes wherein they are deliuered. Because the whole Church was to bee instructed by the feeding here spoken of, and no man had or hath liberty either to refuse as vntrue, or not to obey as needlesse any thing that should be deliuered according to this commandement, Feed my sheepe.

2 The more doth Bellarmin wrong vs, in saying, that we de­nie that the whole Church is meant by the name of sheepe in this place. For whereas our Diuines say that Peter was made a particular not an vniuersall Bishop: they meane not thereby to deny his authority to teach all Nations whatsoeuer, and all congregations in all nations, as occasion was offered, but onely to signifie, that hee had no commission giuen by those, or any other words to be soueraigne Bishop of the whole Church, as they speake in the words going a little Sect. Primum. before. As for that of Iohn 21. 15. they shew, that those words can argue no such authority, because then Paul might not haue had the same office among the Gentiles, which Peter had among the Iewes: so that the vniuersali­ty denied in that, and other places by our Diuines, is an au­thority of feeding those, who were ioyned with him in the same commission of feeding, and had equall authority with him to reueale the truth of God, to all the sheepe of Christ without exception: which Caluin expresseth thus, If the Caluin. Institut. lib. 4. c. 6. n. 4. same authority be granted to all which was promised to one, wher­in shall he be aboue his fellowes in office? As for n. 7. which Bel­larmine quoteth, Caluin doth neither mention nor signifie that place, Iohn 21. 15. therein.

3 There remaineth the fourth poynt to be considered, that seeding Christs sheepe, Iohn 21. 15. is teaching by way of iudging or determining what is to be beleeued of all men. This also is ex­pressed in plaine termes, and is of as much importance, as any of the other three. His proofe is, that wee cannot better vnderstand it then in that sense.

I see not, why I may not grant him this without any in­conuenience. For indeed the Apostles feeding, either by word of mou [...]h or writing, was by way of sentence, so that no man might deny or doubt of any thing, which they deliuered. Neither was there any higher court, to which there might be any appeale from their sentence, but all men were absolutely bound to beleeue and obey whatsoeuer they taught and commanded. This wee grant, and herein we would agree with Bellarmine, if this were all he meaneth.

5 But he contenteth not himself with this kind of teaching; but will haue the teaching here spoken of, to be a difi [...]itiue sentence declaring and determining what is reuealed, and what the sense and meaning of it is, as I shewed chapter 4. numb. 7.

To this must his proofes be applyed, which lie thus.

If feeding Iohn 21. 15. be not teaching, by way of deter­ming, what is reue [...]led, and what the meaning of it is: Then we must vnderstand it of preaching or writing commenta­ries.

6 How shall the consequence of this proposition bee made good; since this feeding may (at the least as reasonably) be vnderstood of reuealing the sacred mysteries? yea this inter­pretatiō is more reasonable; because the words were spoken to him, whose office it was to reueale those mysteries by vertue of his Apostolicall commission, as I shewed numb. 4. yea they are the very same in sense and meaning, with those that are vsed in the commission, Goe teach all Nations, Mark. 16. 16. and Iohn 20. 23. as was declared c. 4. n. 4.

But admit a man should say, it is meant of preaching or writing: how doth Bellarmine refute him? By telling vs that if we so take it, wee must condemne many Popes that haue written nothing at all.

7 As if that were any inconuenience to vs; although to say the truth, most of the Popes that haue written, might haue had as much thanke to spare their labors, as to write as they haue done. Well, say we vnderstand it of preaching. That may not be neither, saith Bellarmine. Why so? because [Page 31] the Pope cannot preach to all: no, not diuers Popes to any at all: For as their owne Histories confesse, some of them did not so much as vnderstand their Grammar. But what if the Pope cannot? no more could any of the Apostles, nor Peter preach to all: yet had they authority to preach to all, as occasion might happen; and were not restrained to this or that congregation, diocesse, prouince, nation, or Coun­try; and in that respect were vniuersall Pastors of the whole Church, yea euery one of them.

1 HItherto I haue shewed, what little shew of reason there is for that interpretation of Iohn 21. 15. where­on the strength of Bellarmines conclusion principally de­pendeth. I will now set my selfe to the sifting of the assump­tion or second part of his syllogisme, which is.

To Peter and his successors that feeding Iohn 21. 15. is com­mitted.

As the proposition, so the assumption also, containeth foure seuerall points, distinctly to be considered, that

• 1 Those words Iohn 21. are spoken to Peter.
• 2 The office of seeding is committed to Peter.
• 3 Peter hath his successours.
• 4 The office of seeding is committed to Peters successors.

2 The first of these foure [...]entences or points is rather sup­posed then expressed in the assumption; but it is plainly deliuered by Bellarmin. It is said to Peter only, Feed my sheepe. Bel de Rom. Po [...]. l c. 14. Sect. Hacten [...]. Who denyeth this, if it be [...]ightly vnder?

The speech was directed immediately to Peter with whom our Lord then talked: but not so to Peter, as if the duty, to which he is exhorted, belonged to none but to Institut. lib. 4. cap. 6. n. 4. him. Therefore Calvin truely saith, that as Peter receiued [Page] mandem [...]m of [...] Iohn 21. 15. so all other ministers are exhorted to feed the sheepe, 1. Pet. 5. 2. and by so saying hee granteth, that those words were spoken to Peter, but hee telleth the Papists withall, that if they will proue, that they auouch, they must shew that whosoeuer are commanded [...]o feed Christs s [...]eepe, to them the power ouer the whole Church is committed: In which words he denieth the consequence of the proposition, which he doth not expresse; but acknow­ledgeth the assumption contained in those words, To Peter Bellar. de Rom. ponl. lib. 1. c. 14. Sect. Sed co [...]tra. onely Christ said, feed my sheepe. By which it is manifest, that Bellarmine doth Caluin great wrong, in charging him with the denying, that those words Iohn 21. are spoken to Peter onely: and spendeth his time and strength in vaine to proue by seuen arguments against Caluin, that which Cal­uin neuer denyed.

3 But Bellarmines meaning is, that the words are so spoken to Peter, that the thing signified by them belongeth not to the rest of the Apostles. And in this sense we say it is false, that those words were spoken to Peter onely. If Bellarmine can not proue them true in this sense (as I am sure he cannot) his argument is nothing worth. For how shall that proue for Peter and his successors, against the rest of the Apostles, which was spoken to them, as well as to him: yet it is not to be wondred at, that Bellarmin goeth not about to proue it in that sense. For indeed there is no shew or colour of proofe for it, because the Word of God no where maketh any di­stinction betwixt this feeding, Iohn 21. 15. and that teach­ing, Mat. 16. 16. Iohn 20. 21. which was enioyned Peter, and the rest of the Apostles equally and alike, as Bellarmine De Rom. Pont. lib. 1. c. 12. Sect. [...]ices. confesseth. The keyes were giuen, Iohn 20. and 21. For when our Lord said, (Iohn 20. 19.) Peace, be vnto you, as my Father sent me, so send I you, then hee gaue them the power or key of iu­risdiction. For by those words hee made them as it were Legates and Gouernors of the Church, in his name. But in the words following, Receiue ye the holy Ghost: whose sinnes yee remit, &c. he gaue them the power of order: And thus much of the first proposition of the foure.

The second followeth, namely:

The office of feeding, Ioh. 21. is committed to Peter. This is affirmed in plaine words; and must bee vnderstood of Pe­ter alone, not of him and the other Apostles. For that will not serue Bellarmines turne, because it proues nothing for the Popes power, or against that wee defend. Besides, Bel­larmine striues here for an office proper to Peter, because he cals it a singular office. But how can that be proper to Peter which is cominon to the rest of the Apostles with him? This also we deny, as Caluin did long since; In this word Institut. lib. 4. cap. 6. n. 4. feed (saith he) nothing is giuen to Peter, more then to the other. Bellarmine should haue proued that this conueyeth a proper office to the Pope, and not haue taken that for granted, which he knoweth we alwayes deny. But hee doth not so much as offer to make any proofe of it, either de verbo Lib. 3. cap. 5. Lib. 1. cap. 14. Dei, or de Roman. Pontif. in both which places he professed­ly disputeth the point. Indeed in the latter place, hee pro­ueth that the words, Feed my sheepe, were spoken to Peter only. But what is that to proue that feeding, Iohn 21. is com­mitted to Peter onely.

5 Some man perhaps will imagine, that the latter depen­deth vpon the former, but he wil quickly change his mind, if he doe but looke vpon them both together in one pro­position.

If those words, feed my sheepe, were spoken to Peter onely, then the feeding is commited to Peter onely; as if it were all one,

• To require or exhort Peter to feed, and
• To commit the feeding to Peter onely?

Put case a man that hath many seruants to goe about a peece of worke, reaping, or the like, should say to some one of them whom he might suspect of idlenesse, Looke that you reape cleane and faire: Will any wise man conclude hereupon, that by these words hee giueth him an office to ouer-see and iudge of his other fellowes worke, or maketh him the onely worke-man? And yet it cannot be denyed that he speaketh to him onely.

6 But it will peraduenture bee replyed in defence of the consequence of the forme proposition, that if Christ requi­red Peter onely to feed, and did not commit that feeding onely to him, then there was no end or reason of his spea­king to him onely; but it were absurd, yea blasphemous, to say of our Sauiour, that there was no end or reason of his speech. It were certainely blasphemous for any man to say of the Lord Iesus, that any action or speech of his was without reason, or not to good purpose. But it were also a bold and blind presumption, for any man to affirme, that there is no reason or end of our Sauiours speech at all, be­cause there is none knowne to men. What if I know not the end or reason of it, may I conclude, that therefore there is none? So then if wee should grant, that there can no reason bee giuen by vs, of our Sauiours speech, vnlesse thereby such an office bee bestowed vpon Peter; yet it might well bee, there was some reason thereof though vnknowne to vs.

7 But we can assigne good reason of that speech: that is, we can shew, that there was good reason, why our Sauiour Christ should direct his speech in that sort to Peter onely, though he meant not to place him in any office thereby. First therefore wee say, that our Lord speake to Peter thus par­ticularly, that hee might giue him occasion to make profes­sion of his loue to him, which hee had brought into que­stion, by denying his Master with swearing and cursing. And because there was no meanes more effectuall to proue the continuance or renuing of Peter; loue to our Sauiour, then the feeding of his sheepe, therefore our Sauiour presseth him with this duty aboue the rest, because there was more need to haue his loue shewed, then the others, who had not made their loue to him so doubtfull. Let me adde to these two a third, that it was needfull for Peter himselfe, that the execution of the commission formerly giuen should bee viged on Peter, because it might seeme, that by so soule a fall, hee had wholly beene put out of commission: which doubt is fully remoued by our Saui­ours [Page 35] charging him to goe forward in the execution there­of. We shall not need then to make any such construction of the Lord Iesus words, as if hee had intended by them to seale a commission to Peter for an office to bee newly erected; for feare it should be suspected that those words were to no purpose, or without reason. Nay rather most vnreasonable is that consequence, that would haue those things inferre each other, betwixt which there is no kinde of agre [...]ment.

1 NOw in the next place, the third proposition offereth it selfe to be considered, although it bee but implyed, not expressed, that

Peter hath his successours, which is manifestly implyed, For he that saith, The office is committed to Peters successors, supposeth that Peter hath successors. This sentence is thus to be vnderstood; Peter onely hath his successors, so as none of the other Apostles haue. For so Bellarmine expoundeth him­selfe. De Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 9. Sect. Re­spondeo, Pontifi­catum. The chiefe ecclesiasticall power was giuen to Peter, as to the ordinary pastour, who was alwaies to haue successors: to the other Apostles as to the delegates, who were not to haue successors. And he saith, that The Bishop of Rom [...] succedeth Peter proper­ly L. 4. c. 25. Sect. Respondeo, mag­num. as the ordinary pastour of the whole Church, but the Apostles were extraordinary, and as it were delegated pastors, and such haue no successors.

That Peter hath successors in the ministery of the Gos­pell, wee confesse, and professe: but wee adde, that this is common to him with the rest of the Apostles. For the far­ther explication whereof wee say, that to succeed the Apo­stles, [Page 36] is either to succeed them properly, as one King suc­ceedeth another, or in similitude or proportion, as Bel­larmine truely saith. Wee grant that all the Apostles haue De Rom Pon. l. c. 15. Sect. Dicun [...]ur. successors in a proportion; namely, such as preach the Gos­pell, as they did, though not by reuelation; and that also haue power of ordination and iurisdiction fit for the good gouernment of the Church. But we say none of the Apo­stles haue any successors of the second kind. Therefore Bel­larmine might haue saued his labor in prouing that the A­postles De Rom. Pont. l 4 c. 25. Sect. sta vero. haue no such successors.

3 Let vs see how he proueth that which we deny, that Pe­ter hath successors properly. This hee propoundeth in these tearmes.

Some must succeed Peter in the Bishopricke of the whole De Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 12. Sect. Primum ergo. Church.

Which he doth more plainly declare, where he saith, that the Bishop of Rome succeeds Peter properly, not as an Apostle, lib. 4 c. 25. Sect. Respond [...], mag­num. but as an ordinary Pastor ouer the whole Church. This we vt­terly deny, that Peter was to haue any such successor in the Bi­shopricke of the whole Church. Our reason is, that Peter him­selfe had no such office. But let vs see how Bellarmine would proue, that he had such successors.

Bellarmines proofe of this point is set downe, and is thus De Rom. Pont. l. 2. c. 12. Sect. Nos ergo [...]tram­que. to be framed.

Either Peter hath successors in Episcopall office ouer the whole Church, or that office perished at Peters death.

But that office perished not at Peters death; for that of­fice was ordained for the good of the Church, and the Church hath had, and shall alwaies haue no lesse need of it, then it had while Peter liued.

Therefore Peter hath successors in the Episcopall office, ouer the whole Church.

4 Who seeth not, that in this argument Bellar. taketh that for granted, which he should proue, namely that Peter had such an office while he liued? For he was not ignorant that all Pro­testants deny it? What is this else, according to Aristotles Topicorum l. 8. cap. 13. Philosophy, but to beg the question? He (saith Aristotle) [Page 37] that takes that as granted which he ought to proue, manifestly beggeth the question. As for the proofes hee hath formerly brought, touching this office of Peter, I haue shewed, that they are weake and vaine, so that the point is still as que­stionable as it was before. Therfore Bellarmine is also guil­ty of a second begging of the question, because his proofes are by-matters, as doubtfull, or more doubtfull then that is which he would proue by them. And of this manner of begging the question, speaketh the forenamed Aristole, Begging of the question is, when the proofe is from things lesse Prio. Analyt. l. 2. Cap. 16. knowne, or equally vnknowne. And this is not (saith Aristo­tle) to demonstrate the question.

5 But what if we graunt Bellarmine that which he cannot proue, that there was such an office: yet may wee neuer­thelesse deny his assumption, and say that;

The Episcopall authority ouer the whole Church, perished at Peters death.

Will he tell vs that it was ordained for the good of the Church? What then? It will not follow thereupon that it must be perpetuall, vnlesse he can shew, that our Lord ap­pointed it should continue for euer by succession. For the whole course of publishing the Gospell, and bringing men to true faith in Christ, dependeth wholly vpon the ordi­nance of God, who being able to make any meanes effe­ctuall to his purpose, is not tyed to vse any, but what please him. Therefore if Bellarmine cannot shew that it was the ordinance of God, that such an Episcopall function as he imagineth Peter had, should be continued alwaies in the Church, it is no inconuenience to hold, that it perished with Peters death. And of this first argument enough.

6 His second Argument is in the said twel [...]th Chapter, Sect. secundo, and it is thus to be disposed.

If in the time of the Apostles there was one supreame Gouernour of the church, then there ought to be so now, because the forme of the Church may not be changed, see­ing it is one and the same at all times.

But in the time of the Apostles there was one supreame [Page 36] [...] [Page 37] [...] [Page 38] Gouernour and head of the Church.

Therefore there ought to be so now.

The assumption, or second part of this Syllogisme, is as doubtfull as the conclusion inferred vpon it, and therefore it is a begging of the question, not a proofe of the former Syllogisme. But were it neuer so true, he were neuer the nearer; for the consequence of the proposition is naught, be­cause there is no necessity, that the Church should alwaies haue that office, which at any time it hath had. For, this necessity (if there were any such) must spring out of the nature, either of God himselfe, or of the Church, or de­pend vpon the decree of Gods will. To say there is any necessity in the nature of God, or of the Church, which may enforce the continuall being of that which once was, were absurd. It remaineth then, that there must be some act of Gods will, by which it is decreed, that whatsoeuer office hath once been in the Church, shall be in it for euer, as I answered numb. 5. Wherefore Bellarmine must shew vs some ordinance of God, for the continuance of such go­uernment (supposing there was once such an one) or giue vs leaue to reiect it.

7 He would make good the consequence of the proposi­tion, and the proofe of it, against our exception, by this ar­gument.

If the Church be one and the same at all times, then the forme of it may not be changed.

But the Church is one and the same at all times.

Therefore the forme of it may not be changed.

In the antecedent part of the proposition, and in the as­sumption, by One, Bellarmine meaneth essentially one: by forme in the consequent part, he vnderstandeth, forme of gouernment. According to this sense wee say, the conse­quence of the proposition is naught: for the forme of the gouernment of the church, is not of the essence of the church, as Bellarmine here vainly supposeth, and falsly af­firmes in his D [...] Eccles lib. 3. cap 2 Sect. Nostra autem. definition of the church. The assumption rightly vnderstood is true. The Church indeed is alwaies [Page 39] one with Christ the head, because of one and the same spi­rit in him, and euery particular member of it. It is also one in faith, because the true faith is one. But Bellarmine mea­neth that the church is one and the same, in respect of the gouernment and officers thereof. This we deny, and looke for better proofe of it from him, then his bare affirmation, in a matter of faith to bee beleeued vpon paine of dam­nation.

8 There followeth a third proofe in the some twelfth chapter, Sect. tertio, after this sort.

If the Sheepe-fould endure to the end of the world, then successors to Peter in that his chiefe pastorall office must endure to the end of the world: For the office of the Pa­stors in the nature of the thing, must endure as long as the Sheepe-fould continueth, because it is an ordinary and perpetuall office.

But the Sheepe-fold endureth to the end of the world.

Therefore successours to Peter in that chiefe Pastorall office must endure to the end of the world.

Bellarmine kepeth his custome to beg the question. For here againe he taketh it for granted, that Peter was Pastor of the whole church. But say it were so, what getteth he by it? For, the consequence of his proposition is naught, neither can the proofe hee bringeth make it good. The Sheepe-fold may endure to the end of the world, and yet that pastorall Office not continue. Because they doe not goe together in their nature; for if they did, then the one must be of the essence or being of the other, as a reasona­ble soule and man are: or arise out of the principles of the nature of the other, as speech doth from the re [...]son [...]ble soule, which no man will say. Neither is there any ordi­nance of God for the ioynt continuance of them together. Bellarm. seemeth to tell vs, that there is some ordinance of God for the knitting of them together. For he saith in proofe of his consequence, that, That pastorall Office is an ordinary & perpetual office: as no office can be in the church, but by the diuine ordination. If he had shewed vs withall, where [Page 40] we may finde that ordinance, he had said somewhat to pur­pose: Since neither he hath, nor we can finde any such in the word of God, he must giue vs leaue to take it for no ar­ticle of faith.

Touching his assumption, I answer; that, If by Sheepe­fold, he meane a company of people separated from the world by the profession of Christian Religion, and vnited together in obe­dience to the diuine reuelation: Wee graunt that there is, and shall alwaies be such a Sheepe-fold. But, if he dreame of a­ny other Sheepe-fold, he must proue his assumption, ore we can beleeue it.

9 Yet Bellarmine hath not done, but setteth vpon vs with a fresh charge, in the same twelfth chapter, Sect, quinto: which is thus in due forme.

Either some must succeed Peter in his Pastorall office o­uer the whole church, or the church must bee without an head at Peters death and after.

But the Church must not be without an head at Peters death, and after.

Therefore some must succeed Peter in his pastorall office.

Here Bellarmine perceiued, that we were like enough to deny the proposition, because the disiunction in it is naught, for that Christ the head of the church, continued to be the head thereof at Peters death, and shall do so for euer. Ther­fore he telleth vs, it is not sufficient for the Church to haue Christ for head; but that the Scripture maketh mention of another head of the Church, his reason lyeth thus:

The head, 1 Cor. 12. 12. is not Christ, for that head 1 Cor. 12. 12. hath need of the members, which is not true of Christ.

The head, 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church:

Therefore there is some head of the Church which is not Christ.

10 Wee easily yeeld the proposition is true: and therfore Bellarmine needed not haue troubled himselfe to proue it; especially since his proofe is no better. For, our Sauiour, considered as the Mediatour, the head of the Church, can­not say to the Members, which make the body, I haue no [Page 41] neede of you, although, as he is God, he hath absolutely no need of any of them.

The assumption, that the head, 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church, we refuse, as false. And how doth Bel­larmine proue it? As he doth many other points, by say­ing so. But this will not serue our turne in a matter of faith: Belike he looketh we should disproue it. Though it be no orderly course of disputation, yet I say in a word, the head in that 21 verse. in which the words quoted by Bellarmine, signifies the naturall head, to which the principall mem­bers in the church are resembled; which, as principall as they are, cannot be without the feet, that is, the meanest members: And this interpretation is warranted by Chry­sostome and Theophilact, who by head, vnderstand, those which had receiued greater gifts. So that indeed, the place containeth a comparison, wherein the coniunction of the parts of the mysticall body, is declared by the like in the naturall body.

11 There are two other arguments in the same chapter, Sect. Sexto, and Sect. Denique: the one is drawne from the suc­cession of the high Priests in the old Testament: the other from the necessity of monarchicall gouernment in the church. But they are so sleight and idle, that I should but wast time, labour, and paper to meddle with them: where-I thus end this third point and this Chapter.

THe fourth and last point to be considered in Bellarmines 1 Chapt. 5 num. 5. & chap. 8. num. assumption, is this:

Feeding, Ioh. 21. is committed to Peters Successors also.

This we say is vntrue; and will make it appeare to bee 1. Ioh. 21. 25. so, by answering the arguments he bringeth to proue it. Bellarm. leverbo De, il. b. 3 cap 5. Sect. Quartum. The first whereof is in this manner:

Either our Sauiour, when he required Peter to feed his sheepe, Ioh. 21. spake also to his successors: or else he pro­uided for his church for twenty fiue yeares onely, and not to the end of the world.

But when he required Peter to feed his sheepe, Iohn 21. he prouided for his Church, not for fiue and twenty years onely, but to the end of the world.

Therefore, Ioh. 21. he spake also to Peters successors.

2 Concerning the assumption, we say, that wee are out of doubt, our Sauiour by those words prouided for his church to the end of the world. For hee thereby required Peter to publish the Gospell by reuealing it. Now this reuealing or preaching of the Gospell by reuelation, is and shall be of great vse to the Church, in all ages and times, so long as the world shall endu [...]e. And in this sens [...] I grant the assumpti­on: but in Bellermines sense, that our Sauiour prouided for his Church by instituting such an Office as hee fancieth, which the whole argument presumeth, I deny the assump­tion and proposition too.

Indeed, the proposition is vtterly false: our Lord proui­ded for the Church to the end of the world, though hee spake not at all in that place to Peters successors. For in those words hee tooke order for the reuealing of the Gospell, which reuelation of Peters, containeth prouision for the [Page 43] Church to the end of the world.

3 There is a second argument of Bellarmines to the same Bellarm. do Pont. Rom. l. 2, cap. 12. Sect. quinto. purpose.

In which words Christ committed all his sheepe, both for place and time to Peter; in those he spoke to Peters suc­cessors also: for Peter was not to liue alwaies in the flesh.

But in those words, Ioh. 21. Christ committed all his sheepe, both for place and time to Peter. For, it behoued our Sauiour to haue no lesse care of vs, then of our Prede­cessors.

Therefore in those words, Iohn 21. Christ spake to Peters successors also.

Of the assumption, which speaketh of our Lords com­mitting his sheepe to Peter, by those words, there hath beene enough said already in the former chapter, which needeth no repetition.

The proposition I reiect as false. For our Sauiour might well by those words commit all his sheepe, for place and time, to Peters Feeding, by the doctrine of the Gospell to be reuealed, which was to continue, as by Gods blessing it hath done, and shall doe; no lesse to vs and our posterity, then to our predecessors, from time to time, whereby hee sheweth his care of vs, as well as of them.

4 Now for a conclusion of this fourth point, and a full sa­tisfaction to this whole argument, drawn from those words Iohn 21. 15. I will propound a reason or two out of the text it selfe, by which it shall appeare, if not necessarily, yet with as great likelihood as any thing Bellarmine hath brought in this question, that our Lord spake to Peter one­ly, and not to his successors also.

Of them to whom those words were spoken, our Saui­our demanded whether they loued him, or no.

Of Peter [...] successors, Christ did not demand whether they loued him or no: for they neither were there in pre­sence, nor at all in being in the world.

Therefore to Peters successours those words were not spoken.

He to whom those words were spoken, had giuen occa­sion, that our Sauiour should repeat this question thrice. For it is not likely that our Lord would haue repeated them so often, if there had not beene occasion giuen: and wee finde iust occasion of repeating them thrice, in Peters deny­ing him thrice.

But Peters successors had giuen no occasion of the three­fold repetition: for, they neither were at that time, nor had beene before in the world.

Therefore to Peters successors those words were not spoken.

5 Thus haue I at the last examined this argument of Bel­larmines, with all the proofes of euery seuerall part thereof, whereby it hath appeared (I doubt not) to euery iudicious and vnpartiall Reader, that there is no force in it to proue, that the Church or Pope hath a commission from our Lord Iesus, to teach the whole Church by way of iudging and determining, what is to be beleeued of all men, and what is not. It will bee looked for perhaps, that I should proceed to the discussing of some other, that are brought for the proofe of this question. But I thinke it would bee but lost labour: for Bellarmine, who was as able as any Po­pish writer, that hath dealt with this matter, and had allow­ance of that he wirt (especially in a point that so nearely touched the Popes free-hold) if not from the Consistory immediately, yet with the knowledge thereof, from the of­fice appointed for that purpose in Rome, setteth vp his rest vpon that place in Iohn and telleth vs confidently; that, Then onely Peter receiued the keyes of the kingdome, as princi­pall Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. c. 12. Sect. vt autem. and ordinary gouernour, when he heard those words, Feede my sheepe: and then also (as he saith) the charge of the rest of the Apostles, his brethren, was committed to him.

6 Therefore since we require a commission for such an of­fice, and that is either here or no where to bee found: to what purpose should we examine other arguments, which can proue no such matter? Now that we haue good reason to call for the sight of a commission, by which, such an [Page 45] office should be erected, no reasonable man can doubt, if he consider, what himselfe would doe, if any man should chal­lenge to himselfe the authority of the Lord Chancellor, or Lord Treasurer of England: would he take his word with­out knowledge of his commission vnder the broad seale? And why then should wee be so simple, as in a businesse of such importance, to take the word of a Cardinall, for the Popes prerogatiue.

7 Master Fisher the Iesuit, after some other Papists, allea­geth for the proofe of this commission, Mat. 28. 19. Goe teach all Nations. But Bellarmine hath disclaimed and dis­proued all commission in that place: and that not without reason. For (he saith) Then onely he receiued the keyes of the Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 12. Sect. Vt autem. Kingdome, as principall and ordinarie gouernour, when he heard, Feed my sheepe. In this he disclaimeth it, his disproofe is, that the commission, Mat. 28. 19. is all one with that Ioh. 20. 21. as that which by Bellarmines confession Sect. Dices. containeth power both of order and iurisdiction: which is also conueyed to the Apostles, Math. 28. 20. Goe teach and baptize. And this Master Fisher must needs acknowledge, if he will haue that place be a commission for the Popes authority. As for that Iohn 20. 21. the power there was not committed seue­rally to Peter alone, but to all the Apostles, as to Legates, not to ordinary pastors; as Bellarmine noteth. All other Sect. Vt autem. places of Scripture brought by the Papists to this purpose, are of the same kind, and concerne all the Apostles as well as Peter: wherefore all this considered, I hold it altoge­ther needlesse, to meddle with those other eight arguments of Bellarmines, which indeed are of another kinde; and per­swade my selfe, that I haue said enough of that weake foun­dation of the Papists faith, the authority of the Church in person of the Pope for the time being. Whereupon I infer my former conclusion, that

The saith of the Church of Rome is erroneous and false, euen in the very foundation of it; and therefore to bee refused and re­iected of all men.

1 SVch as the foundation of the Romish faith is, such is the faith it selfe; namely, false and erroneous, as I will shew by the argument that followes, in the seuerall parts of it.

If some of the Articles of the faith of the Church of Rome bee false and erroneous, then the faith of that Church is false and erroneous.

But some of the Articles of the faith of the Church of Rome are false and erroneous.

Therefore the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous.

2 Lest any man should hastily except against the conse­quence of the proposition, as if I went about to proue the whole by the part, which may not bee; I must intreat him to remember, that (as I noted before) in this question, wee take the faith of the Church of Rome, for one intire thing, because of that one bond, the authority of the Church or Pope, by which all the parts of it are so ioyned together, that they all make but one body. By reason of which bond he that refuseth any one part reiecteth the whole. For by that his refusall, he accuseth their Church of errour, and fai­ling in determining matters of faith, and so ouerthroweth the very foundation of their faith. Besides, the denying of any one such Article, let it bee in it selfe of neuer so small importance, draweth vpon the denyer that Anathema or curse, which seizeth on all them which are not of the faith of the Church of Rome. Wherefore I may presume with­out presumption, that the consequence is good, seeing eue­ry Article is equally and alike a matter of faith.

3 My assumption, I will make good by setting downe out of the Councill of Trent diuers Articles of the Romish saith, which are false and erroneous: and these they are,

[Page 47]1 The sauing verity [or truth] taught by Christ and his A­postles, is contained in written bookes, [or Scriptures] and vn­written traditions. Concil. Trident. Sess. 4. decret. de Canon. Scripturae.

2 The bookes of Iudith, Tobit, Ester [chap. 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. Wisdome, Ecclesiasticus, Baruch, Daniel] chap. 3. 13, 14. Macchabees 1, 2. are canonicall scripture. d. decret. de scriptur.

3 The whole bookes of Scripture, and euery part of them, as they are in the vulgar Latine edition, are to be receiued for sacred and canonicall. d. decret. de scriptur.

4 It is the office of the Church to iudge of the true sense, [or interpretation] of the sacred [or holy] Scriptures. d. sess. 4. de edit. & vsu librorum sacrorum, Sect. insuper.

5 The Bishop of Rome is Gods Vicar on earth. Sess. 6. decret. de reform. cap. 1. and sess. 14. de poenitentia, cap. 7.

6 The Church of Rome is the mother and Mistris of all Chur­ches. Sess. 7. de baptis. can. 3. and sess. 13. de extrem. vnct. cap. 3. and sess. 22. de sacrif. missae. cap. 8.

7 Grace [bestowed in baptisme] doth take away whatsoe­uer hath the true & proper nature of sin. sess. de pec. orig. can. 5.

8 Concupiscence in the regenerate is not truely and properly sinne. d. canon. 5.

9 Man doth freely assent to, and cooperate [or worke toge­ther] with Gods exciting and cooperating grace, so that he can al­so reiect [or refuse] the same grace. Sess. 6. de iustif. cap. 5. And dessent if he will. can. 4.

10 The onely formall cause of iustification, is iustice [or righ­teousnesse] inhaerent. d. sess. de iustit. cap. 7.

11 By keeping the commandements of the Church, a man doth encrease in the iustice, which he receiued by the grace of Christ, and is more iustified. cap. 10.

12 The iust in some actions doe not sin venially. cap. 11.

13 By euery mortall sinne a man falleth away from the grace of iustification, which he had receiued. cap. 14, 15. and can. 23.

14 By the Sacrament of poenance the grace of iustification, which was lost, is recouered. cap. 14.

[Page 48]15 The good workes of a man that is iustified, are his merits. can. 32.

16 The iust truely deserue euerlasting life by works wrought in God. cap. 16. and can. 32.

17 vnlesse a man faithfully and firmely beleeue the Catholick doctrine of the Council of Trent touching iustification, he cannot be saued. cap. 16. Sect. Post hanc.

18 Some that are not predestinate receiue the grace of iustifica­tion. can. 17.

19 The Sacraments of the new Testament are neither more nor fewer then 7, to wit, 1 Baptisme, 2 Confirmation, 3 The Lords Supper, 4 Poenance, 5 Extreame Vnction, 6 Ordination, 7 Matrimony: and euery one of these is truely and properly a sa­crament. sess. 7. de sacram: in genere, can. 1.

20 Baptisme, Confirmation, and Ordination imprint in the soule a character that cannot be blotted out. can. 9.

21 The sacraments of the new Testament, containe the thing they signifie, and bestow it vpon them, that hinder it not. can. 6. And vpon all as much as is required on Gods part. can. 7. And that by the worke wrought. can. 8.

22 After the consecration of the bread and wine in the Lords Supper, our Lord Iesus Christ true God and man is contained, truely, really and substantially vnder the shewes of those sensible things, sess. 13. de sacram. Eucharist. cap. 1.

23 The holy Eucharist is to be reserued in the Chancell, and caried honorably to the sicke. cap. 6.

24 The tenth Commandement, Thou shalt not couet, is rent in sunder and made two by the Council of Trent. sess. 14. de poeni­tentia, cap. 5. and can. 7.

25 The time of Lent is holy and most acceptable. sess. 14. de poenitentia, cap. 5.

26 No man that knowes himselfe to be guilty of mortall sinne, how contrite soeuer he seeme to himselfe to be, may come to the ho­ly Eucharist, without sacrament all confession going before. d. sess. 13. cap. 7. and can. 11. that is, Ʋntill hee haue confessed all and euery one of his mortall sinnes, and also those circumstances, which change the kind of the sinne, sess. 14. de sacram. poenitentia, c. 5. [Page 49] And that to a Priest in secret. can. 6. 7.

27 Power [or authority] was giuen to the Apostles and their lawfull successors to remit and retaine sinnes for the reconciling of such of the faithfull as fall after Baptisme. sess. 14. de sacram ent. poenitentiae, cap. 1.

28 It is vtterly false and differing from the word of God to say, that the Lord God neuer remitteth the fault, but with all he par­doneth the whole punishment. d. sess. 14. de poe [...]it. cap. 8. & can. 12. & sess. 6. de iustif. cap. 14. can. 30.

29 Neither the Lay [...]y, nor any Clergy man that doth not con­secrate, is bound by any Commandement of God, to receiue vnder both kinds. sess. 21. de sacram. sub utraque specie, cap. 1.

30 The Church hath decreed it for law, that all the Laity, and the Clergy, that doe not consecrate should receiue vnder one kind onely. d. sess. cap. 5.

31 We may make satisfaction to God through Iesus Christ by temporall afflictions layed on vs by God, and borne patiently by vs. sess. 14 de sacram. poenitent. cap. 9. & can. 13.

32 The Priesthood was not to bee abolished by the death of Christ, sess. 22. de sacrif. missae. cap. 1.

33 Our Sauiour Christ by these words, This doe in remem­brance of me, charged his Apostles and their successours to offer his body and blood vnder the signes of bread and wine, d. cap. 1.

34 Water is to be mingled with wine in the Chalice that is to be offered, d. sess. cap. 7.

35 The names of Subdeacons, Acolytes, Exorcists, Lectors and Doore-keepers, and the proper office of euery one of these, hath beene euer since the beginning of the Church. sess. 23. de sacram. o [...]dinis, cap. 2. and de reformat. cap. 28.

36 Matrimony contracted, not consummated is dissolued by the solemne profession of religion by either party. sess. 24. de sacram. Matrimon. can. 6.

37 There is a Purgatory, sess. 25. decret. de purgat.

38 The soules which raigne with Christ do offer vp their prai­ers to God for men. sess. 25. decret. de innocatione sanctorum.

39 It is good & profitable humbly to call vpon the saints fore­named, and to fly to their prayer, helpe, and furtherance, for the obtaining of benefits, [or blessings] from God by his sonne Iesus [Page 50] Christ our Lord. d. decret. de inuocat.

40 Ʋeneration and honor are due to the reliques of the Saints Sess. 25. decret. de inuocat. venerat. & reliq. sanctorum.

41 The Images of Saints, and other sacred monuments are not honored without profit, &c. The memories [or monuments] of the Saints are not frequented in vaine for the obtaining of their helpe. d decret. de venerat.

42 The Images of Christ, and the Virgin Mary, and other Saints are to be had and retained especially in Churches, and due honor and veneration is to be giuen them, d. sess. 25. de sacris I­maginum.

43 The power of granting indulgences was committed by Christ to the Church, and the vse of them is helpfull to Christian people. d. sess. 25. decret. de indulgent.

1 VPon the 43 propositions set downe out of the Councill of Trent in the former chapter, I thus argue to proue the faith of the Church of Rome erroneous.

The aforesaid Articles or propositions are false and erro­neous.

The aforesaid Articles or propositions are articles of the faith of the Church of Rome.

Therefore some of the Articles or propositions of the faith of the Church of Rome are false and erroneous.

Touching these propositions, that they are articles of the saith of the Church of Rome, it is euident, because we finde them in the Council of Trent, propounded to be beleeued of all Christians. Are these all, will some man say, wherein we dissent from them, and which we reiect as erroneous? No, there are many other and some of them of no small mo­ment. But I hold these onely needfull to be debated: be­cause [Page 51] the other so depend vpon these, that if these bee false, none of them can be true. For example, It is said article 36. that there is a purgatory, if this cannot be proued, then it is false, that the Saints in Purgatery are holpen by the suffrages of the faithfull, or sacrifice of the altar: which yet is deliuered as an article of faith in that decree. Againe, it is affirmed ar­ticle 32. that Christ appointed his Apostles and their successors to offer his body and blood vnder the signes of bread and wine. If there bee no such commandement of our Sauiours, then 1 There is no Masse. 2 The vertue of the bloody sacrifice is not applyed by the sacrifice of the Masse. 3 The sacrifice of the Masse is not truely propitiatory. All which are propounded for Articles of saith by the forenamed Councill, sess. 22. de sacrificio Messae. I might say the like of many other points, but these may suffice.

2 It remaineth that I proue the proposition, which must be done by handling the points seuerally: First therefore I thus begin with the first.

The sauing truth [or verity] taught by Christ and his Apostles Concil. Trid. Sess 4. decret. de Can. Script. is contained (saith the Councill) in written bookes [or in the Scriptures] or in vnwritten traditions.

In this proposition or Article wee must vnderstand, that the Scriptures and traditions are made diuers parts of that record, wherein the sauing truth is contained: so that nei­ther of these parts containeth all, but the one some, the o­ther some, which appeareth plainly by the Council it selfe, where, describing Traditions, it saith, that They are not wri­ten, that They were receiued by word of mouth from the Apostles and were deliuered to them either by our Sauiour, or by his spirit, and haue beene so conueyed from hand to hand to the present Church. And indeed if this were not the Councils mea­ning, they said nothing at all against vs: who make no que­stion, but that the Christiās, which liued presently after the Apostles, did truely gather diuers points out of the Scrip­tures, which haue worthily beene receiued and maintai­ned from time to time. Such for instances, were these points; that our Lord Iesus is true God, that the holy Ghost is [Page 52] true God, that our Sauiour Christ consisteth of two distinct na­tures, that He is but one person, not two. These points the Chri­stians rightly drew out of the Scriptures. For they bee not expressed there in so many words: and these were acknow­ledged to bee Articles of faith by the foure first generall Councils against Arius, Macedonius, Eutiches, and Nestorius. Of this kind there are many traditions in the Church, and will daily be more, as it shall please God to blesse the labors of his seruants in the reading & vnderstanding of the Scrip­tures. Of these we dispute not, but onely of such, as are not comprised in the Scriptures.

3 It would also bee obserued, that the Councill saith not barely and simply truth, but sauing truth: which, in all like­lihood, was put into the decree, because we grant that some things concerning rites and ceremonies, were deliuered by Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto l. 4 c 3. Sect Se­cundo dissidemus our Lord or his Apostles, which are not recorded in the Scriptures, as Bellarmine confesseth.

4 Lastly, whereas the Councill saith, the sauing truth, taught by Christ and his Apostles, wee must inquire whether they meane vniuersally and wholly whatsoeuer our Sauiour and his Apostles taught, not any one sentence excepted; or onely so much, as was intended for the perpetuall vse of the Church: That it meaneth absolutely all sauing truth so taught, it may be probably gathered out of the very words of the Councill. For it saith, that The preaching of Christ and his Apostles is the fountaine of all sauing truth; and by and by addeth, which truth is contained in written bookes and vnwritten traditions: which is all one, as if the Councill should haue said in plaine termes, All sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in written books and vnwrit­ten traditions.

5 Thus haue we the meaning of the Councill, now that it may appeare what is true in it, what false, I will draw it in­to seuerall propositions, namely these 3.

1 All sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles, is recor­ded for future ages.

2 Some sauing truth is contained in written bookes.

[Page 53] 3 Some sauing truth is comprehended in vnwritten traditions.

The two latter propositions, viz. the second and third, are manifestly in t [...]at article of the Councell: the first of the three is necessarily implyed: For if some things taught by them remaine not to posterity, then all sauing truth so taught, is not to be found in the Scripture and tradition, because some of it is not at all recorded. In the second pro­position: that, Some truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in the Scripture: wee wholly agree with them, and say farther in particular: that, All such truths are contai­nd therein, as the Lord appointed for the saluation of the Elect in all ages. And this is the meaning of our Diuines, when they say; that, All things necessary to saluation are comprehen­ded in the Scriptures. Which is manifest by D ^r. Reynolds: for, D. Reynolds pro­face to his sixe conclusions, at conclusion first. D Whitaker de script. q. 6. c. 6. saying; that, The Lord teacheth the Church all things necessa­ry to saluation, he expoundeth necessary to saluation, thus; which lead the faithfull to saluation and life. And D ^r. Whita­ker, propounding our opinion of the same matter, in the same manner, interpreteth, necessary to saluation, in these words; by the way of life: signifying thereby; that, Those things are necessary to saluation, which teach vs the way to euer­lasting life. Reuerend B. Iewell speakes to the same purpose; B. Iewells Apol. part.. 2. c. 9. di­uis. 1. that, The Scriptures doe fully comprehend all things whatsoeuer bee needfull for our health: and that they be the very might and strength of God to attaine to saluation.

6 Whereby it is manifest, that Bellarmine dealt falsly and De verbo Dei non scripte l. 4. l. 3. Sect. Contro­versia. deceitfully when he propounded the question. The contro­versie (saith he) betwixt vs and the Heretickes, is, that we say, The whole doctrine necessary to faith and manners is not contai­ned in the Scriptures expresly; and therefore besides the written word of God, there is also an vnwritten word of God required; that is to say: Diuine and Apostolicall traditions. Wherefore I will leaue Bellarmine with his frauds, and debate the point as it is deliuered in the Councell of Trent.

7 For the first: that, All sauing truth, taught by Christ and his Apostles, is recorded for future ages, Bellarmine bringeth no proofe: and yet he could not choose but see, that there is [Page 54] no necessity in the point it selfe, why we should take it for true. For it might well be, that our Sauiour and his Apo­stles taught some things, which tended to the saluation of some particular men, not of all men, and therfore might be left vnrecorded without any losse, or damage, to the Church. Therefore we may iustly call for proofe of a point so vncertaine, that is made by Bellarmine a matter of faith.

8 The third proposition at numb. 5. is; that, Some sauing truth is comprehended in tradition. For the better vnder­standing and cleering whereof, wee are first to learne, what vnwritten traditions are. Which the Councell of Trent teacheth vs. Ʋnwritten traditions, are things endicted by our Concil. Trident. Sess. 4. decret. de canon script. Sauiour, by word of mouth, or by the holy Ghost, and kept in the Church by continuall succession. We may content our selues with this description, without seeking any explication out of Bellarmine. or any other, because Bellarmines definition, that, A tradition is a doctrine, not written by the first author thereof, is so far from making the meaning of the Councell of Trent plaine, that indeed, it doth rather more obscure Bellarm. de verb. De [...]l 4. c. 2. Sect. Vocatur. it. The Councell setteth downe no distribution of tradi­tions but this; that, some of them concerne faith some manners. But Bellarmine, wearieth himselfe and his Reader, with a number of distrib [...]ions, which, as I said of his description, are of no vse, but to darken the question. Tradition be­ing thus vnderstood, I say, that third proposition is false, and the contradictory thereof, true. No sauing truth, taught by Christ or his Apostles is contained in vnwritten traditions: which may thus appeare: If no part of the Scripture refer vs to tradition, for some part of Gods word, not contained in the said Scriptures, then haue we no reason to seeke for any part thereof in tradition. For the Scriptures doe send vs to the scriptures for the knowledge of sauing truth, Ioh. 5. 39. Search the Scriptures, for in them ye thinke to haue eter­nall life. And the Apostle Paul, 2 Tim. 3. 15. saith: that, The 2 Tim. 3. 15. Scripture is able to make vs wise to saluatiō. And wold not the scripture, trow we, haue sent vs to tradition for supply of that which was wanting in it, if there had beene any sup­ply [Page 55] to be had therein? For, it was as easie and as orderly for the Scripture to referre vs to tradition, as to it selfe: and as well beseeming the wisdome and prouidence of God, to haue sent vs to both parts of his word by the Scriptures, as to the one of them: yea, it was a great deale more need­full, For no man could doubt, but he was to haue recourse to the Scriptures, because they were knowne to be the word of God. But who could haue imagined that the Lord God, teaching vs so plentifully in the Scriptures, would leaue out some part of the sauing truth, and not so much as giue vs any inkling thereof, nor direct vs where we might finde it.

9 But they tell vs, the Scripture doth put vs ouer for some of the diuine truth, to vnwritten traditions. Let vs see and examine the places that are brought to this purpose by Bel­larmine: Bellarm. de verb. Dei non scripto l. 4. c. 5. Sect. Ac primum. who made choise of the best places, that had beene, or could be alledged in this matter. The first wher­of is thus to be concluded.

Those things which our Sauiour spake of, Ioh. 16. 12. and Ioh. 16. 12. and 21. 25. 21. 25. Act. 1. 3. are comprehended in tradition. For they are not written: and it is not credible, that the Apostles which heard them did not deliuer them to the Church. Surely they were neither so enuious that they would not, nor so forgetfull that they could not.

But those things which he spake in those places, were sa­uing truths.

Therefore some sauing truths, taught by Christ, or his Apostles, are contained in tradition.

10 Ere I answer to this argument particularly, I must note in general, that euery proposition of euery argument brought in this question must be certainly and euidently true, be­cause the point concluded is an article of faith, which must be either expresly set downe by the holy Ghost, or colle­cted from the word of God, by manifest and necessary con­sequence. Therefore if we finde any proposition in any ar­gument, that is not in such sort true, the conclusion cannot be an Article of faith, because of those premises: but is on­ly [Page 56] at the most probable, as they are.

11 Particularly I say of this argument, that no Article of faith can bee concluded by it, because the proposition or Maior, with the proofe of it, are at the most but probable, as the examining of the reason will shew.

Either our Sauiors speeches the [...]e mentioned are contai­ned in tradition, or else they remaine not at all to posterity.

But they remaine to posterity: for the Apostles did not omit the recording of them, since they were neither enui­ous nor forgetfull.

Therefore our Sauiours speeches there mentioned are contained in tradition.

12 First, this argument presumeth that whatsoeuer our Sa­uiour spake, was some way or other committed to posteri­ty. And this was the first proposition in this doctrine of the Council, & denied by vs, n. 5. & 7. therfore Bellar. doth but play the sophister by begging the question, & proueth no­thing. Secondly, I answer, that if I should grant him that he beggeth, yet his p [...]oposition would be false. For the dis­iunction is nought. What if I say, those speeches of our Sa­uiour neither perished, nor remaine in tradition, but are re­corded in some part of the Apostles writings in the new Testimē [...]. For since our Sauior promised Ioh. 16. 13. to send them his spirit which should lead them into all truth, and Ioh. 14. 26 bring to their remembrance all things, which he had told thē. and performed what he promised, Acts 2. 3. It is more then likely, that they did cōmend the things to posterity, which he caused thē to remember: for why else were they brought to their remembrance? But wee find no other course, that eu [...]r they tooke to deliuer the Gospell to posterity, but writing. Why then should these points be kept vnwritten? Su [...]ely they are neither greater mysteries, nor smaller mat­ters, then some that are written.

13 The proposition then is either false or doubtfull, and the assumption little better. For how can Bellarmine tell whe­ther those matters be recorded in any of the Apostles wri­tings or no, vnlesse he know what they were, as he will not for very shame say he doth.

But If we doubt of it, he would make vs beleeue wee accuse the Apostles of envie or negligence. God forbid. We will grant him any thing almost, rather then lay such an imputation upon those glorious instruments of our salvation. We haue a better way to answer then so, name­ly, that Bellarmine commeth short of his reckonig, either of negligence or enuy. What needeth that? It may well be, that they did not record every one of our Saviour spee­ches, because they had no commission to leaue them on record: and they were to doe according to their comissi­on; being to deliver the word of God, as they were inspi­red by the holy Ghost, not to set downe every thing they could remember, as men doe that follow their owne natu­rall discretion.

14 Neither can Bellarmine any way make good the assump­tion of the principall Syllogisme negatiue, that Those things, which our Lord spake of in those places, were sa­ving truths, except he can certainely tell, what they were.

BEllarmines second argument in the place aboue na­med, must be thus ordered. a Bellar. de ver­bo Dei non script. lib. 4. cap. 5. sect. Secundum test [...]. mon [...]im.

The ordinances which the Apostle speaketh of, 1. Cor. 11. 2, are not written; for they concerne the manner of praying and receiuing the Sacraments: and these we find not written any where.

The ordinances which the Apostle there speaketh of, are sauing truths; for he commendeth the Corinthians for keeping them.

Therefore some sauing truths are contained in vnwritten tradition.

2 The proposition taketh it for granted, that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught, is committed to posteritie. But this we denie: as I shewed cap. 12. n. 7. How then shall this argument proue, that the conclusion is an article of faith?

Well, admit it were true: yet is, the proposition vn­certaine, as the proofe sheweth; For out of doubt, it is no [...] manifest of it selfe. The proofe lieth thus.

• Whatsoeuer was deliuered to the Apostles, and is not found written any where, that is kept in vnwritten tra­dition.
• The ordinances the Apostle speaketh of, were deliuered by him, and are not found written any where.
• Therefore the ordinances the Apostle speaketh of, are kept in vnwritten tradition.

3 The proposition of this Syllogisme is vntrue. For al­though it be not found, yet it may be written: diuers things are contained in the Scriptures, which are not knowne to be there contained, but may in time be mani­fested: as I signified cap. 11. n. 2.

4 Now concerning the principall assumption n. 1. The ordinances which &c. I answer, that it is neither cleere in it selfe, nor proued by Bellarmine. For euery precept of the Apostle, the keeping whereof deserueth commenda­tion: it is not therefore a sauing truth. Obedience to any commandement, or aduise of an Apostle touching but a rite or ceremony: yea the smallest matter that can be imagined, though it be no sauing truth, deserueth due cōmendation: and Bellermin hath nothing else in this dis­putation that may be applied to the proofe of that point.

But say we grant Bellarmine, that the precepts signified verse. 2. are sauing truths. (as we may doe with great likely hood, vnderstanding thereby the doctrine deliue­red in the former part of the Epistle to that 11. Chapter.) What will it auaile him, seeing the assumption then will conuince the proposition of falsehood, because the pre­cept is there written? Therefore this second argument is to as small purpose, as the former. [Page 59] 5 I come to the third argument in the same place.

• Those things which the Apostle disposed, 1. Cor. 11. 34.
  Bellar. de verbo Dei non scripto. lib. 4. cap. 5. sect. alteram quasti­o [...]em.
  are contained in tradition; for we find them not writ­ten any where.
• But the things he there disposed were sauing truth.
• Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition.

Both the faults of the former proposition are in this al­so; first, that he taketh it for granted, that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is recorded: which we alwaies denie. Secondly, that he saith confidently, these things are not written, and yet knowes not what they are: so that he may find them, and not know of it.

Let vs passe by the proposition: yet will Bellarmine come short of his conclusion, because the assumption is full of doubt; for how will he be able to proue that the things disposed by the Apostle, were sauing truth. He confesseth that some of them were matters belonging to rits & ceremonies: but he telleh vs, with all that Catholiks worthily thinke that he deliuered also some greater matters, concerning the ordination of Ministers, the sacrifice of the Al­ter, and the matter and forme of other Sacraments: and hee addeth, that The hereticks cannot disproue them.

6 That we may the better iudge of these worthy thoughts of Bellarmins Catholickes: we will set his reason in frame.

• Whatsoeuer Catholickes worthily thinke, and hereticks cannot disproue, that is to be holder. for true.
• But that the Apostles disposed of those weightie matters Catholickes worthily thinke, and the hereticks cannot disproue.
• Therefore that the Apostles disposed of those weightie mat­ters, it is to be holden for truth.

A stout argument, and well worthy such Catholickes who seeth not the absurditie of the maior? Truth is not to be measured by their affirmation or conceite, and our vnablenesse to disproue, but by the adaequation or full agreement of the thing,, and our apprehension of it. For a man then onely speaketh the truth of a thing, [Page 60] when hee speaketh as the thing is indeede.

But the assumption presumeth we cannot disproue it. That were hard. Why should not our saying, we thinke he did not meane those matters, be as good a disproofe of it, as their saying you thinke he did, is a proofe? Such an­swers are good enough for such arguments. But surely me thinketh, we may bring some likelyhood of reason for our opinion. For who would imagine that the Apo­stle would spend so many lines as he doth in this chapter, about matters of so small importance, as long haire, and bare heads, which were not for the perpetuall practise of the Church, as experience sheweth: and put off mat­ters of so great weight till his comming to them, which might haue been neuer.

7 And that they may not say, we conjecture this without any likelihood; as Bellarmins Catholiks worthily doe, let them heare what Chrysostome saith upon the place. He Chrysost. Homil. 28. ad 1. Cor. 11. meaneth either some other things, or the same that he hath mentioned. For seeing it was likely that they would bring other cases and he could not redresse althings by letters: Let those things (saith he) that I haue admonished you of be obserued; and if any other thing need redresse, let is be referred till my comming. He speaketh (as I said) either of the same thing, or some matter not greatly urgent.

He speaketh (saith Theophilact) of some other faults of Theophilact. ad 1. Cor. 11. theirs, which had need of correcting, or of some which he had mentioned. It is likely (saith he) that some men are praparing to defend themselues against that which I haue said, but in the meane time let thom obserue that I haue charged them to keepe, ad 1. Cor 11.

When he had written of those things that were more necessary, he reserueth the rest, for his praesence with them.

The Interlinear glosse expoundeth it thus: Other things concerning the Sacrament I will order when I come; but you might not be without direction for those things that I haue deli­uered. ad 1. Cor. 11.

Other things (saith Lombard) which perteine to order in [Page 61] the same Sacrament. I will order when I come. ad 1. Cor. 11. Other things which are not of so great danger, I will order [...]resence. Thomas ad 1. Cor. 11.

LET vs see if Bellarmines fourth reason be any better then the former.

That which the Apostle commanded the Thessalonians to Bellar. ubi supra Sect. tertium. keepe, 2. Thess. 2. 15. is contained in tradition: for it was not written, but deliuered by word of mouth.

That which the Apostle commanded the Thessalouians to keepe, was a sauing faith.

Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition.

2 There is no end of Bellarmines begging. We must deny as before, that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is recor­ded and come to posteritie.

To the proposition I answer in particular, that being vnderstood of that time when the Apostle writ that E­pistle, it is true: he had then deliuered some things by word of mouth, and not written them: and those hee commandeth them to keepe. But what proofe can Bellar­mine make, that those things were not written afterwards?

The assumption is not easily to be proued, that those things were sauing truth. Why doth not Bellarmine tell vs what they were? Me thinks he dareth not so much as guesse at them: otherwise he would let vs know at the least, what his Catholickes worthily take them to be. Would any man dally thus in a matter of faith, to bee be­leeued vpon paine of damnation?

3 Bellarmine will make amends for the want of weight in his reasons, by the number of them: and he pro­poundeth [Page 62] his fift thus to bee deliuered. Bellar. ubi supra sect. quaitam.

That which was committed to Timothy, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. is contained in tradition.

That which was there committed to Timothy, is a sa­uing 1. Tim. 6. 20. 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. truth.

Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition.

Here he beggeth againe as before: but wee cannot grant, that whatsoeuer the Apostles preached, is remain­ing vpon record to posteritie.

If that were granted: yet should I thinke the propo­sition no sufficient warrant for an Article of faith. There­fore Bellarmine offereth proofe of it on this maner:

That which Timothy had heard of Saint Paul, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2, and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other also, that is contained in tra­dition.

But that which was committed to Timothy, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2, he had heard of Saint Paul, and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other also.

Therefore that which was committed to Timothy, 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2, is contained in tradi­tion.

4 Least wee should deny the first part or Proposition of this Syllogisme, because the things so delivered, and gi­ven in charge by the Apostle, might be matter for the present vse of the Church, and such as needed not to be al­wayes knowne, Bellarmine telleth us, that by those things so heard, and so to be committed, the vnderstanding of the sense of the scriptures, and other doctrine is signified: so that the whole force of his Argument lyeth in this interpreta­tion, which he never offereth to proue. Therefore vnlesse we will take his bare word for proofe, wee are as farre to seeke, as we were before. Now that we haue no reason to doe so, I thinke it may appeare by those things, which I will now propound to the consideration of all reasona­ble men.

First then, I would know o [...] Bellarmine whether by Vn­derstanding of the sense, he meane generall rules for the vn­derstanding of it, or the sense of particular places? Se­condly, I demaund whether he deliuered to him the sense o [...] euery place of Scripture, or of some onely? Whether he answer this or that; I aske thirdly: what is become of those rules and expositions? How will he proue to vs, that they haue beene continued from time to time till now? If they haue not beene continued, what haue wee to do with them, who dispute onely of such traditions as are in the possession, and vse of the present Church?

Fourthly, is it likely, euen in Bellarmines iudgement, that Saint Paul would take vpon him to instruct Timothy in the sense of any place of Scripture, when as the office of interpreting the Scripture is committed by the Coun­cell of Trent to the Church, that is (as Bellarmine expoun­deth it) to Peter and his successours? Did he meane am­bitiously to vsurpe Peters office, or to send him to Peter or his successours, to learne of them whether the interpre­tation he had giuen were true or no. 5 Touching the se­cond part of the first Syllogisme, that Those thinges which were committed to Timothy, were sauing truths: Bellarmine saith nothing: which argueth that he knew not what to say. What reason haue we then to imagine that they were sauing truths, or that this argument concludeth any thing for the doctrine of the Councell of Trent concer­ing traditions?

6 There is yet one argument more in the same fift chap­ter, thus to be concluded.

Those things which Iohn had to write, 2. Ioh. 11, and Bellar. ubi supra Sect. ultimum testimonium. 3. Ioh. 14. are contained in tradition; for he saith, he would not write them.

But those things which he had then to write, were sa­uing truths taught by the Apostles.

Therefore some sauing truths taught by the Apostles are contained in tradition.

I am inforced here also to repeate my former answer: [Page 62] [...] [Page 63] [...] [Page 64] that Bella [...]mine still takes it for granted, that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is continued to posteritie; which we denie: and no papist can proue.

His assumption or minor is to weake to beare vp the weight of an Article of faith, vnlesse he be able to [...]ll [...] certainly what the things were which the Apostle would not write: and to whom hee did, or at the least, that hee did afterward deliuer them to some body, from whom the Church hath receiued them. Till we know what they were, how shall we be sure they were part of the sauing truth?

1 VVEE haue done with the fift Chapter: and are now to examine two arguments, set downe chap. 4, the former I frame thus.

That there are Scriptures: that these we haue he they is [...]. Bellar de ver­bo Dei non scrip­to cap. 4 Sect. quarto, quinto, Soxio. contained in tradition; For we cannot find them in the Scriptures.

But that there are Scriptures; that these wee haue are they, is part of sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles.

Therefore some sauing truthes taught by Christ and his Apostles, are contained in tradition.

2 It hath appeared by my answer to Bellarmines argu­ments, that he can find no place of Scripture, that sendeth vs to tradition for any part of sauing truth, taught by our Lord or his Apostles; Wee might therefore conclude, that there are no such traditions, without troubling our selues any further. But that we may dit vp the mouths of the Papists, wee will bestow a little time and paines in these arguments.

3 If there had beene no more intended by the Councell of Trent in the decree touching tradition, but to signifie that these three points are contained in tradition, the dan­ger had not beene great: for then both the number and the particulars had been determined; but the Papists by vertue of that Article take authoritie to thrust what they list vpon the Church, and warrant it by tradition.

4 Thus much to the argument in generall: Particularly I answer, that the first part of it and the proofe thereof, suppose that those two propositions, There are Scriptures: These we haue be they, are formally, that is expresly contain­ed either in the Scriptures or tradition; But this say we is false: they are contained formally in neither; where then shall we finde them? Radically and originally in the Scriptures themselues: which of themselues afford iust occasion to all men to conceiue, both that There are Scrip­tures, and that These are they; They are contained formal­ly in the apprehension of euery mans vnderstanding that beleeueth them: and that this beleife is diuine faith, not humane coniecture it appeareth, because it is wrought in men by a speciall prouidence of God, which per­swadeth and draweth men to acknowledge the things to be as they are in themselues: and is farther grounded vp­on the diuine authoritie, vertually affirming that they are both true indeed.

5 And yet wee make not a priuate spirit the ground or rule of our faith, or the iudge to determine what is mat­ter of faith, what is not; As Bellarmine slandereth vs: and Bellar de ver­bo Dei non scrip­to lib. 3. cap. 5. Sect. Norum & cap. 9. sect. quod [...]. after him Mr. F [...]sher, and other. But wee onely attribute to that speciall prouidence the office of in lightening, and mouing the vnderstanding in lightened, to giue assent to the bookes of Scripture, that they are the word of God: as indeed and truth they are. Now to this assent it moueth vs by many reasons fit and effectuall for such a worke: as namely by the continuall consent and testimonie of the Church: by the matter deliuered in the bookes them selues: by the stile or maner of deliuering it, and the like [Page 66] as diuers of our diuines haue shewed at large; and that this assent of ours is a true faith, it is very manifest: be­cause it conceiueth of the thing deliuered as in truth it is: which is the very rule of truth, and wherein the nature of truth consisteth.

6 The assumption is false. The last proposition, is not part of sauing truth taught by our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles. Neither all nor any of the Apostles (for ought appeareth in the word) did euer set downe a Catalogue of the Bookes of the New or Old Testament: neither in­deede was it possible for any of them to doe it but S. Iohn, who out liued them all, and writt after them all. As for S. Iohn, he neither might nor could doe it, because that was onely Peters office or his successors, to declare which were Scriptures, and which were not, as we learned out of Bellar. Chap. 3. 11. 9. P [...]ar. ubi supra sect, d [...]nique.

7 The second and last argument lieth thus.

This Proposition, There is no word of God besides that which is written, is contained in tradition not written.

This proposition is a sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles.

Therefore some sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles, is contained in tradition not written.

First it is to be considered, that Bellarmine bringeth this assumption as a proposition of ours, and from thence con­cludeth for the Church of Rome against vs; For if hee brought it as his owne, and acknowledged by him for true, he should thereby gaine say the Councell of Trent, affirming that There is some part of the word of God contained in tradition, which is not to be found in the Scriptures. But in this Bellarmine doth vs wrong: for although we say, that there is no word of God but that which is contained in the Scriptures, as Rellar. de ver­bo Dei lib. 4. cap. 3. Sect. adipsi. Bellarmin alleageth out of Caluin. Instit. lib, 4. cap. 8. [...]. 8. Caluin; yet we say uot, that this proposition is a sauing truth taught by Christ & his Apostles: neither indeed need we say so; For by that propositiō we only deny that which the Coū cell affirmeth, and set it downe as a contradictory thereto: [Page 67] and Bellarmine himselfe in the place for enamed bringeth it to the same end. The reason of our deniall is, that the Scripture doth no where send vs to tradition, nor hath any word to that purpose; as hath appeared in the for­mer disputation. And this reason is very sufficient: be­cause nothing is to be receiued for an Article of faith, but that which is taught in the word of God.

8 The like answer is to be made to the proposition. If it be true in Bellarmines iudgement, then the doctrine of the Church of Rome in his iudgement is salfe. For the Coun­cell of T [...]ent teacheth, that There is some word of God con­tained in tradition; but this proposition affirmes, that There is no word of God besides that which is written. If Bel­larmine would father it vpon vs, he accuseth vs falsly. For we neuer sai [...] nor thought that that proposition was con­tained in tradition; but perhaps he thinketh it will fol­low vpon that wee say: but in so thinking, hee thinkes idly; for we doe no more hereby, but denie that which they say: and neither do nor neede affirme that it is con­tained either in the Scriptures, or in tradition. It is en­ough for vs in matter of faith, to refuse whatsoeuer is not taught in the Scriptures.

9 But it may be said, that this proposition, There is no word of God besides that which is written, is either true or false; we grant it: because it is certainely true, that in euerie contradiction properly so called, the one proposition is true, the other false. What of this? It will farder be said; If it be false, then the contradictory to it which we hold, is true. We grant this too: what more? If this be true, it is contained either in the Scripture, or in tradition. This we denie; It may be true, and yet contained in neither of them; For the truth of this proposition is not positiue, whereby one thing is affirmed of, or ioyned to another: but negatiue, by which one thing is denied of, or seuered from another. Now propositions of this kinde are then true, when the things comprehended in them are indeed seuered the one from the other: for then the proposition [Page 68] speaketh of the thing as it is. Therefore it is enough to make this negatiue proposition true, that the Scripture is silent in that which they affirme, and doth not ioyne Heb. 1. 5. them together, as they doe. And this is the ground of those negatiue disputations wee find in the Scriptures P. Iewels answ. to D [...]. Coles second [...]. let. O. P. especially, To which of the Angells said be, &c. He that de­sireth to see more of this, may reade the reuerend Bishop Iewel in his answer to Dr. Cole.

10 I should now goe on according to the order followed in the Councell of Trent, to examine the rest of the Ar­ticles set downe by me chap. 11. num. 3. But for this time I thinke it enough that I haue debated these two que­stions: because if these proue false, as I trust they haue done, all the other differences betwixt vs and the Church of Rome, will easily be decided to the confirmation of the truth we maintaine, and the ouerthrow of their false and erroneous faith. I haue alreadie in another disputati­on in Latine, discouered and proued the erroneousnesse of the faith of that Church in the seuenth, and tenth Ar­ticles of the eleuenth Chapter before mentioned, touch­ing grace and iustification. The like I will doe in the rest, if it please God to giue me opportunitie and abilitie.

1 ALthough the point propounded by me to be dispu­ted, is sufficiently proued by that which hath past: and all men may see a necessitie of separating from the Church of Rome: yet that the truth may be the more cleere, and all mens consciences the better satisfied, and fortified against the deuises of the Romish seducers: I [Page 69] haue thought good to examine two principall motiues of theirs, by which they mis-lead many that are simple or carelesse; and in handling of them, I will take the same course that hetherto I haue followed, for the more plain­nesse and certaintie in iudging what is true, what false.

The former of the two is this:

2 Euery man must receiue his faith by the teaching of the Ro­mish Church

That it may appeare what force there is in this to con­clud any thing for the Church of Rome against the que­stion hetherto disputed, I will apply it to the matter in question, and answer to it accordingly.

They that must receiue their faith by the teaching of the Church of Rome, must ioyne in faith with that Church.

Euery man must receiue his faith by the teaching of the Church of Rome.

Therefore euery man must ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome.

The proposition or first part of this reason I acknow­ledge for true: because the teaching of the Church of Rome giueth being to the faith of that Church.

The assumption is false, being grounded vpon that false foundation, that The Pope of Rome is to feede the whole Church as Peters successour, by determining what is matter of faith, what is not. But this appeared to be manifestly false, chap. 8. and 10. wherein I propounded and handled the question.

The second deuise is commonly deliuered by way of question. Where was your Church before Luther? Now this question implyeth a negation; as if they should say: The Protestants Church was not before Luther. This must be applied to the point in question, after this sort.

Euery man must ioyne in faith either with the Church of Rome, or with the Protestant Church.

But no man may ioyne in faith with the Protestants Church.

Therefore euery man must ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome.

Let the proposition passe for true: to which we may iustly adde an assumption contrary to theirs; No man may ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome: and this assumption is alreadie made good by the foregoing dis­putation, through this whole treatise: which hath shewed that the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erro­neous.

5 But to answer directly to their assumption, we say it is vtterly false, and the contrary to it euidently true, that Euery man is bound to ioyne in faith with the Protestants Church. For our faith is nothing else but Euery article or proposition to be assented to, or beleeued as true vpon the authori­tie of God the reuealer of them by his holy seruants the Prophets, and Apostles. The Articles which we assent to or beleeue in this sort, are either expressely set downe in the Scrip­tures in direct words, so that the sense of them cannot rea­sonably be doubted of: or else gathered, and concluded from such places by necessarie consequence: so that if the one be true, the other must needs be true also. What­soeuer proposition is not of this nature, we allow not for an article of faith, how likely soeuer it seeme to be. Now in this faith of ours there can be no danger: seeing what­soeuer proposition is plainely expressed in the Scripture, or necessarily concluded from it, is vndoubtedly the di­uine reuelation, which is the onely foundation of true faith.

More particularly I say touching the said assumption, that it must be vnderstood of the Protestants faith, so far forth as it differeth from the faith of the Church of Rome, else by it they should disswade men from the faith of their owne Church.

Besides, It is to be considered that this assumption sup­poseth, that the Protestants haue a faith opposite to the faith of the Church of Rome; Which is vtterly false. All the opposition we make to them is, by refusing their [Page 71] faith, not by deliuering any of our owne, and by ans­swering to their arguments: so that we hold the negatiue part of the contradiction, in all points, wherein we dis­sent from them, although in some we adde a contrarie affirmatiue, where the Scripture affirmeth that which they denie. For example, they say The Pope is Gods Vicar. This we oppose by saying, that The diuine reuelation doth not teach vs, that the Pope is Gods Vicar. Againe, they de­liuer this for an Article of faith: that Concupiscence in the regenerate, is not properly sinne. To this we answer by way of opposition as to the former: The diuine reuelation doth not say, that Concupiscence in the regenerate is not properly sin; Yea in this point we say further: the Scripture saith it is properly sinne: but our opposition to them in this point stands in this, that the Scripture doth not say it is not properly sinne, so that though there were no word to the contrarie of it in Scripture, yet that propos [...]on of theirs were vtterly false. By which it is manifest, that in those things wherein we dissent from them, we haue not arti­cles of faith contrarie to the articles of faith which they propound: but onely deny, that Those they would thrust vpon vs are articles of faith.

7 If any man obiect (as Stapleton and Wright doe,) that Our religion is negatiue; we answer, that if they meane we hold no articles of faith which are affirmatiue, they charge vs vntruely; for we consent with them in many affirmatiue articles of faith. As for those points wherein we dissent from them, it is no fault in vs to hold the ne­gatiue; for there is no other way for vs to oppose the er­rours they bring for matters of faith, but by denying them to be matters of faith.

So thē this is that they auouch in the former assūption:

No man may ioyne in faith with the Protestants Churches, in those points wherein they dissent from the Faith of the Church of Rome.

The reason is, because the faith of the Protestants in those points is false; which they thus proue:

The true faith hath been professed so publikely in all ages since the Apostles, that the professors of it from age to age may be named.

The Protestants faith hath not been so publikely professed in all ages since the Apostles, that the professors of it from age to age may be named.

Therefore the Protestants faith is not the true faith.

8 Before I answer directly to the parts of this Syllogisme, I hold it needfull to note a few things concerning the reason in generall. The first is, that in this question wee inquire not of such professours onely as our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles were, who deliuered the Articles of faith by way of reuelation: but of such as haue be­leeued and profest those articles, as they haue beene ga­thered out of that which they reuealed. Secondly, it is worth the doing, to consider a little way of gesse, what the reason should be why the Papists are so loath to make tryall of their faith by the Scriptures, and cry so loud for a catalogue or register of the names of such as haue from time to time beleeued as now we do. This may well seeme strange to all men, who vnderstand that the diuine reue­lation is a most faithfull record, and most certaine rule in all matters of faith: so that whatsoeuer is agreeable there­to, is a part of true faith: whatsoeuer differeth from it either positiuely by affirming that which is not reuealed, or negatiuely by denying that which is reuealed, is vn­true, and may not be taken for an article of faith. As for a beadroll of names, who knoweth not that it must needes be made out of humaine storie. Wher as Diuine and infal­lible faith is not built upon deduction out of humane historie, but diuene reuelation; as is well obserued by the learned & reuerend D. Featly And how can that be any foundation of diuine faith, when it is not diuine authoritie, nor free from errour: but humane onely, and subiect to errour: yea among all kindes of humane authoritie of least cre­dit? Our of doubt then the Papists would neuer haue pursued this course so eagerly, but for some especiall [Page 73] aduantage to thei [...] cause, which in all likely hood is this; that they saw well enough, it was not for their religion to abide the tryall by Scripture in those articles of faith. But what saith the Prophet Isaiah? If they refuse the Law Isa. 8. 20. 8 and the testimonie, it is because there is no light in them.

8 Now in particular, I say that the proposition is faultie diuers wayes. First whereas it supposeth that the true faith hath beene in all ages in the word: if they meane it hath been in the Scriptures in all ages: we grant that they say is true, but we adde that it is not to purpose; for our question is not of faith as it is reuealed in the Scrip­tures, but as it is gathered out of them, and particularly beleeued; and in this latter sence, we denie that the true faith hath been in all ages.

For proofe of our deniall we alleage the experience of all ages: by which it is manifest, that some articles of faith haue been obserūed and concluded out of the Scriptures from time to time, and were not all known and beleeued for articles of saith at once. I may bring for instance those great points debated and determined in the 4 first gene­rall Councells. For certainely if The god-head of our blessed Sauiour, and the holy Ghost, the distinction of the diuine and hu­maine natures of our Lord Iesus, the Vnitie of his person, had 5 bin resolutely holden in the Church for articles of faith: Arius, Macedonius, Eutyches, and Nestorius would not haue durst to speake of them so wickedly and heretically as they did; neither would the Church haue assembled Councells to aduise of the points, but haue cast out those wretches as enemies of the faith. The like might be said of Pelagius touching grace: and of many other points of no small importance.

To come nearer to this our age, there is no Papist of any reading and iudgement, but will confesse that diu [...]rs propositions in tholate Councell of Trent, which ended since I was borne, were neuer receiued for articles of faith, till they were neuer receiued for articles of faith, till they were propounded for such by that Coun­cell.

10 Secondly, to grant them as much as they desire; I yet except against their proposition as false: because there is no necessitie, that the being of true faith, and such a profession thereof must alwayes goe together; For such a publike profession of faith, is neither of the essence of true faith, as a reasonable soule is of the essence of a man: nor proceedeth from the essence thereof, as the faculty of speech doth from the essence of man: neither are they lincked inseparably together by any ordianance of God, as faith and iustification are. The two former I am not out of doubt all Papists will grant; If they fly to the last, let them shew the record or deed, wherein that coniunction of true faith, and such a publike profession of it is inrolled and ingrossed. Will they tell vs I know not what goodly matters of the visibilitie of the Church? what is that but to beg the question? For we denie that, as no lesse vn­certaine and vntrue, then the other.

11 The assumption also is false, which auoucheth so con­fidently that:

The professours of the Protestants faith in such things As they dissent from the Church of Rome in, cannot be shewed in all ages from time to time since our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles.

If we call for a proofe of this: they bid vs shew a bead­roll of their names that were professours of our faith; what if we cannot? will they conclude thereupon that it can­not be done? there may be a Catalogue, though we can­not shew it; Which cannot seeme strange to any man that shall consider, that the Papists had for many yeares, yea, ages the whole sway & command of Christendome, and laboured all they could to make away (if it had been possible,) not onely the writings, but the memorie of all such as made any kind of opposition to their doctrine or proceedings; Yet by the gracious & mighty prouidēce of God it hath come to passe, that the registers of their own bloudy persecutors haue by the worthy paines of som of our writers, afforded the world a view of the names, of many holy Martyrs & confessours, which from time to time [Page 74] haue refused as we do now, to acknowledge many of the points wherein we dissent from the Church of Rome: and it cannot be looked for, that wee should shew that all of them haue been denied, because many of them were first bred and hatched in the late Councell of Trent, and were neuer articles of faith till then. Wherefore to returne to my first conclusion: since the faith of the Church of Rome is erroneous, both in the foundation of it: which is the authoritie of the Church, and in many particular articles thereof; I may boldly affirme, that it is to be shunned as a perilous rocke, whereon many haue suffered shipwrack of their eternall saluation.

1 VVHen I first deliuered the proposition I inten­ded to handle, (that there might be no igno­rance by errour, nor shifting by willfull mistaken) I be­gan to declare the meaning of the termes, in which I propounded my question; but because I purposed to ex­amine the matter in two seuerall disputations, I forbare to expound the last words, till I should come to the particu­lar debating of the second point. Now I am to enter vp­on it, and must therefore shew what I meane by those words, Vpon paine of damnation: and then proue, that the faith of the Church of Rome is to be refused vpon so grieuous a penaltie.

2 Those words Vpon paine of damnation, are not so to bee vnderstood, as if I tooke vpon me to pronounce sentence of condemnation against all that beleeue as the Church of Rome teacheth: but I would thereby giue all men to vnderstand, that the beleeuing of that doctrine as matter [Page 75] [...] [Page 74] [...] [Page 76] of faith, is a thing in it selfe damnable, and such as maketh a man liable to damnation. How it shall fall out with par­ticular men in the euent, I neither know, nor meane to enquire. Onely I say againe, that their mis-beliefe is a sinne, which setteth them in the state of damnation.

3 Now hauing proued alreadie that their faith is erro­neous, I shall not neede to make many words about the point. For the Church of Rome against which I dispute. holdeth it for a ruled case, that an erroneous faith is damnable. Wherefore else doe they thunder out so many I [...]ai. 8. 20. curses in the Councell of Trent, against all that shall con­ceiue otherwise of the matters of faith determined by that Councell, then is therein decreed? Notwithstanding that I may the better perswade all men to keepe good watch, for feare they be suddenly surprized, or vnawares intrapt by the great army of locusts, the Priests and Iesu­ites, which haue almost couered the Land from sea to sea, I will bestow a little paines to giue them warning of the danger.

4 There are two wayes by which sinne leadeth a man in­to to the state of damnation: the one is the desert or fit­nesse it hath to procure damnation: the other is the actu­all meriting or deseruing of damnation. Into the former, sinne casteth a man off it selfe. Into the latter he falleth, as by sinne, so by the ordinance or decree of God, who hath layd a penalty of damnation upon it. Out of this I raise this disputation against receiuing the faith of the Romish Church.

That which maketh a man vncleane in Gods sight, hath a fitnesse to procure damnation. For vncleane things are vnmeete for the presence of God: and consequent­ly are meete for damnation.

But the faith of the Church of Rome maketh a man vn­cleane in the sight of God.

For it is erroneous in so high a nature, that it maketh a man guiltie of treason against God, by installing the Pope in the Throane of God, giuing him power and [Page 77] authoritie to determine as a iudge what is matter of faith, what not, without commission or warrant from God, as I haue shewed in the former part of this disputation; Nei­ther doe they onely giue him authoritie to interprete the Scriptures: but also allow him to set vp a forge, where he hammers what he list, and venteth it to be receiued vpon paine of damnation, for the word of the euer liuing 2. Thes. 2. 4. God. What is it To sit in the Temple of God, shewing him­selfe that he is God, if this be not? And are not they ac­cessaries to this high treason that acknowledge this au­thoritie, and yeeld obedience to it? How can it then reasonably be denied, that there is a worthinesse and fit­nesse in the faith of the Church of Rome to procure dam­nation? hereupon it followeth, that euery one that ioy­neth in faith with the Church of Rome is lyable to dam­nation.

5 There remaineth nothing now but the ordinance or decree of God, to appoint damnation as a punishment of this sinne, according to the desert thereof: but that was passed long since by the Lord himselfe, You shall put no­thing to the word which I command you. The penaltie is ex­pressed. Deut. 4. 2 & 12 30. Revel. 21. 18. If any man shall adde to those things, God shall adde to him the plagues that are written in this Book [...]. But more plaine. The Lord shall send them strong delusions, that they 2. Thes. 2. 11. 12. should beleeue lyes, that all they might be damned which belee­ued not the truth. Behold the Lord wrappeth them vp in damnation, by his sentence that beleeue lyes: (that is) false and erroneous doctrine not agreeable to the truth, which they ought to beleeue. What is wanting then to make the faith of the Church of Rome damnable, and the pro­fessours thereof lyable to damnation: when both the thing it selfe deserueth it, and the Lord hath decreed, that they which beleeue it, should haue according to their de­sert?

6 I might, as our writers commonly doe, adde to that which hath beene said, diuers foule and grosse errors, which seeme more specially to touch the glory of God, [Page 78] and secretly to vndermine the very foundation of our saluation: namely the Mediatorship of our Lord and Saviour Iesus Christ. But this (as I take it) will more plainly appeare, and be more throughly inforced against them, in the particular handling of the seuerall Articles; to which I reserue it.

7 Neither will I enter into the common way of prouing popery to be damnable, because it is Antichristianisme; much hath beene disputed by our men to this purpose: and it is like enough that much more may, and will be ad­ded to their disputations. But the controuersie is long, and requireth more time then I can now afford it: onely this I will say for the present, that (as his Maiestie hath prudently obserued) there is no Church, State, nor man that hath beene since the penning of the Reuelation, to whom those things foretold by the Apostle from the mouth of the Lord Iesus, can in any reasonable sort agree, but the Church and Pope of Rome alone. And it is vt­terly against reason to imagin, that the Lord Iesus would direct Iohn to spend so many words in deliuering prophe­cies for some three yeares and a halfe in the end of the world, and leaue so many yeares betwixt vnspoken of, wherein such strange matters haue befallen the Church.

8 It is manifest, that the Historie is prophetically con­tinued for the first 300 yeares at the least: and of that, be­cause it seemeth not much to concerne them, the Papists make no great doubt; he that will take the paines to reade the whole aduisedly, may easily discerne that our Lord continueth his discourse to his beloued Disciple, of such things as were to fall out to the very end of the world. I forbeare to shew how vnlikely, (that I may speake most fauourably of the point, because it hath some col­lourable allowance from antiquitie) I will not say how vnpossible it is, that any man should imagine hee can de­ceiue Christians, as Antichrist (by their conceite) must doe: or force them generally to denie the Lord Iesus, and [Page 79] take himselfe to be either God, or any man sent from God. This appeared plainely in that cousening com­pannion Mahomet: who yet was not so mad, as (in their opinion) Antichrist will be, to require that all men should acknowledge and adore him for God.

I Said a little more in that matter of Antichrist, then I purposed to doe when I entred into it: for it was my meaning onely to touch it by the way: and that rather because I thought it would bee looked for, then that I found it greatly necessarie; for what neede I seeke any other reasons to inforce a necessitie of separating from the Church of Rome, then those I haue already alleaged? Therefore I will now adde a few words of exhortation, and so end both the readers, and mine owne labour.

It is reported by Irenaeus, & by Eusebius, of the holy Apo­stle Irenaeus contra hares. lib. 3. c. 3. Euseb. eccle. hist. lib. 3. cap. 25. Saint Iohn, that when he spied Ceri [...]thus the hereticke in the bath where he was, he made all the hast he could to be gone, thinking it dangerous to be vnder the same roofe with him. Yea the very Heathen (as Tully saith) being at sea in a sore storme, were much afraie they should Tully de natura Deorum lib. 3. haue beene cast away, because they had Diagoras the A­theist abord amomg them. I would to God some Pro­testants were as charie of their soules, as, (I say not the A­postle) but the Heathen of their bodies: and had as much care to prouide for their eternall saluation, as they had to procure their temporall safetie; neither the Apostle, nor the Heathen had any thing to doe with the impietie of Ceri [...]thus or Diagoras: and yet both he and they doub­ted some euill might befall them, because they were in [Page 80] in the companie of such prophane wretches. And can any Protestant imagine that he may be free from danger, though he ioyne in faith with the Pope of Rome? It cost Iehosophat deare, though he were otherwise a good King, for going to warre with Ahab against a common enemy. What said Hauani the Seer? Wouldest thou helpe the wicked, 2. Chr. 19. 2. and loue them that hate the Lord? therefore for this thing the wrath of the Lord is vpon thee.

What then may they looke for, who like the Ladice­ans Reu. 3. 16. are luke-warme neyther bote nor cold, altogther indi­fferent, whether they be Papists or Protestants? They are in better case, yet not safe neither, who are per­swaded that Poperie is erroneous, but doe not thinke it so dangerous a matter to be a Papist, that a man neede flee out of the Romish Church, as Lot did oun of So­dom. That I may plucke or thrust these men out, as the Angells did Lot, I haue undertaken this discoverie of the danger, by labouring to informe their judgement with the knowledge of the truth. I must now proceed to inflame their affection with detestation of errour. The glory of the vnderstanding is truth: the height of the affection zeale. To be zealous without knowledge, is to fight without armes, like the Israelites, that had not a sheild nor spare amongst fourtie thowsand of them. Iudges 5. 8. To haue knowledge without zeale, is to haue armes with­out courage, as the Ephraimites had. Psal. 78. 9. Who went up armed with bowes, but turned their backs in the day of bat­taile. In this fight against Popery, you haue need of know ledge; because your enemy is subtill to deceiue; of zeale, because your quarrell is great. For you are to fight, not for your wiues and children onely, but also for your God, and your religion: not against an errour or two that dis­grace your profession, like a wen in a faire body: but a­gainst such an heretick, as like the disease in the hart, will vndermine and ouerthrow the whole state of the body.

For as Iudas kissed his Lord and Master that thee might betray him; so the Pope of Rome vnder a shew of humili­tie, [Page 81] hath taken the honour of God to himselfe, and preten­ding to be his factour, intendeth to rob & vndo him. Will he with the stubborne Iewes in Mallachy aske mee wherin? I will not answer him as the Prophet doth, In tithes and of­ferings. What are tithes & offerings to supremacy & soue­raignty? This, this is the robbery, the Sacriledge whereof we accuse the Pope of Rome. If he had but taken from his fellow Bishops, and appropriated to himselfe the honour & authoritie that is common to them with him, we would haue holden our peace: although this proud Haman could no way haue made recompence to the Church of Christ, for the losse she sustaineth thereby. Yea, though he haue with the euill seruaut in the Gospell imprisoned, beaten, murdered his fellow seruants for doing their masters work, we would as we haue done, in dure it with patience and si­lence. Shall I say more? Albeit he had maintained, as he doth, diuers foule and grosse errours against the truth of God, we would haue contented our selues with dissenting from him therein, without breach of the band of peace. But now so standeth the case, that he hath claimed and v­surped the prerogatiue of the great God of heauen and earth. Should we now forbeare to speake? Should we in such a case look for commendation of modestie, and peace­ablenesse? Haue we no more zeale of the glory of our fa­ther, our King, our God? Hath the loue of our most deere Lord and Sauiour Iesus Christ, deserued no more kindnes at our hands? If we could be so monstrously vnthankfull, the very stones in the Church walls, and the becames in the roofes would cry out against vs and him.

5 For hath he not made himselfe a foundation of the faith of all men, yea the next and immediate foundation of all diuine faith, so that nothing may be taken for matter of saith but vpon his authoritie? Neither doth this authority of his lay hold on vs only, which are as it were of the lower house, but it reacheth also to the vpper house of the Apo­stles themselues; For by vertue of that commission (saith Ioh. 21. 15. Bellarmine,) The rest of the Apostles were made subiect to Peter, [Page 82] and his successours the Bishops of Rome. O ridiculous conceit! O presumptious ambition! was it not enough for you to trample on the necks of other Christians, many of whom were (at the least) equall to the best of your Popes for lear­ning and pi [...]tie, but that you may bring the Apostles heads vnder your Idols girdle?

6 Heare O heauen, and hearken O earth! The holy Apo­stle Saint Iohn liued by the record of Histories, till the yeare after our Lords birth 100; Saint Peter was (as it is also writ­ten) martired at Rome in the yeare 68: therefore there were 32 yeares betwixt the death of Peter and Iohn. In these 32 yeares (not to reckon Linus, who is thought to haue bin Pope) there were 4 seuerall Bishops of Rome, Clemens, Cletus, Anacletus, and Euaristus. By popish diuinitie S. Iohn was so subiect to these successours of Peter, that he was to receiue from them assurance of the truth that he deliuered: of them he was to know whether his owne Epistles were the word of God or not: yea whether they were his owne Epistles or not: they, or some of them were to assure him from God, that his Reuelation was from God, and not from the deuill: if any doubt arose about any sentence in his Gospell, Epistles, or Reuelation he could not know by di­uine faith, what the true meaning of the place was, but was to learne that of Euaristus then Pope: whose office it was to deliuer an interpretation of the text to the Apostle, or to allow of the interpretation made by the Apostle, if he iudged it to be true. Poore S. Iohn was an vnderling in all this businesse, the Pope was Magister fac totum.

7 Most glorious Lord Iesus, thou didst vouchsafe to shew thine extraordinarie loue to this thy holy Apostle, & too­kest order to haue it made known to all posterity, wouldest thou so much abase him, as not onely to take from him the honour thou hadest bestowed vpon him, by making him inferiour to S. Peter, to whom before he was equall in authoritie and dignitie: but also to appoint him to lacky, (if occasion fell out) vpon foure Popes one after another, to learne of them what was diuine reuelation, or the word of [Page 83] God, what was not? Wherefore didst thou solemnely pro­mise thy Apostles, and Iohn amongst the rest, that thou wouldest send them the comforter, the holy Spirit, to lead them into, and to direct them in all truth? Alas it was a poore comfort for them so to be taught by him, that they must be faine to trauell or send to Rome, to know whether he had taught them right or no. But who can be patient in this indignity offered to the holy Spirit? Shall a wretched and ignorant man (that I say no worse) sit in iudgement to giue sentence of thy diuine Maiestie, whether thou hast in­spired thy seruants with truth or no? Diddest thou instruct the Apostles, as the deuills amongst the heathen did their counterfit prophets, that they either knew not what they vttered, or could not be assured what they meaned, with­out the Pope like an Oracle made them vnderstand them­selues; as Daniell told Nebuchadnezar his dreame, and the interpretation thereof?

8 If these things seeme to be, as indeed they are absurd, monstrous, impious, blasphemous, what is the doctrine thinke you, vpon which they are grounded? I will repeate it againe, that all men may learne to know and detest such foolish wickednesse and wicked folly. S. Peter (saith Bellar­mine) was made by Christ ordinary pastour of the whole Church: his ossice was to determine what was matter of faith; The Bishops of Rome. Peters successours, haue the same authoritie of ordinarie pastourship which he had; Whosoeuer will not be thus fed by Pe­ter and his successours, belongeth not to the sheepefold of the Lord Iesus. This is the arch, whereon the Popes supremacie is built. For the vpholding of this, all the Romish Clergie are in armes. If you hold not this, whatsoeuer you hold, you can be no true Roman Catholike.

9 From whence ariseth the impossibility of reconciliation betwixt vs and them: wee cannot bee members of their Church, but we must ioyn with them in this acknowledg­ment of this Papall authoritie. They cannot renounce this opinion, but they must withall viterly dissolue their Church, the forme whereof (as we heard out of Bellarmine) [Page 84] consisteth in this very manner of gouerment. This is th [...] bōd, these the ligamēts by which the whole body of their Church is coupled and knit together. From the Pope thus feeding (that is teaching and gouerning) as from the head, all life and motion is conueyed into the rest of that huge chaos; take away the head, all life and motion ceaseth, and the parts fall asunder one from another, that it can no lon­ger be accounted the Church it was, nor as they hold any Church at all. We see the prophecie of the Apostle Paul fulfilled. God hath sent these men strong delusions to beleeue lyes. 2. Thes. [...]. 11. For what greater delusion can there be, then for a man to beleeue that of euery Pope, that no Pope euer be­leeued of himselfe, or of any of his successours.

10 And shall we notwithstanding all this, still halt betwixt two opinions? Shall we suffer our selues to be so swallowed vp by the cares of this world, that we can haue no leasure to know what belongeth to our saluation? Shall wee so melt away in continuall voluptuousnesse, that we will not spare one houre to learne which is the right way to true happinesse? Shall we so please our selues in wilfull igno­rance, that we despise the knowledge of truth in matter of religion? Doe these things concerne Preachers onely? If our fore fathers had been of that minde, the troups of holy Martyrs, that now gloriously follow their puissant & victo­rious leader the Lord Iesus in triumph, would haue beene very thinne; Oh that you could see them with your bo­dily eyes: How many blessed Saints should you behold now triumphing in heauen, that were as you are, not Prea­chers, but ordinary professours of the truth? Brethren de­ceiue not your owne soules: cast not your selues away wil­fully. Are not the people to be saued by the same meanes by which the Preachers are? Is not the same faith in the Lord Iesus which must saue the Ministers, required of the people also? The Lord indeed hath giuen vs speciall charge to studie, and know the holy Scriptures; to what end think you? surely as for our owne comfort, so for your instructi­on; The affaires of the world in your seuerall callings draw [Page 85] you away from opp [...]rtunity of studie; the Lord in mercy to you, hath commanded vs to labour in it: that your want may be supplied by o [...]r aboundance. Now especially hee looketh for this dutie of vs, because he will now especially make tryall of your knowledge and constancy.

11 Do you not see many fall dayly on your right hand, and on your left? It is not your strength, but Gods mercifull prouidence that holdeth you vpright: he hath graciously vouchsafed to keepe you hetherto from occasion of being seduced: he hath afforded you more time yet before the temptation, like an armed man shall assault you: if you pre­pare not now for the day of battell, the enemy will surprise you are you be aware, when you shall not be able to make resistance; Many of you scarce know a friend from an e­nemie, you are not able to discerne which be your owne colours. It is an easie matter to carry you into the middest of Dothan, while you seeke for the Prophet, whom you know not if you meete him. As he that walketh into the fields, where there grow as well poysonous weeds as whole­some herbs, if he know not the one from the other, may as easily light vpon that which shal kill him, as that which shal nourish him. So he that is ignorant what is true, what false in matters of faith, is as like to be led into errour that shall damne him, as to be taught truth that shall saue him.

If then there be any desire in vs to obey the commande­ment of God; if any feare of erring to damnation; if any care of beleeuing aright to saluation, let vs labour to vn­derstand the misterie of iniquitie in the Romish faith: that knowing it, we may abhorre it, and may auoide: auoiding it we may embrace the loue of the truth, and be saued. What is it that leadeth thee out of the way to destruction? doth the glorious outward shew of the Popish Churches blinde or dazle thine eyes? It may perhaps admit some ex­cuse in children, that they haue beene deceiued by such toyes and gewgawes; But it is ridiculous and vntollerable for men to runne after sights and shadowes. Surely if thou hadst liued in our Sauiour Christs dayes, or his Apostles [Page 86] times, thou wouldest haue chosen the Temple and the beauty thereof, with the Priests, Scribes, and Pharises, rather then the barren mountaines or wildernesse with our Lord and his Disciples.

13 But what is it that maketh thee a papist? discontent that thou art not honoured or inriched as thou desirest to be? Perhaps thou ouerualuest thine owne worth, and thinkest there is more due to thee, then indeed there is; but say thou hast not thy due? doest thou not know, that these things are ordered by the prouidence of God? shalt thou haue no cause of discontent if thou become a papist? are all papists r [...]spected and rewarded? I could name two great Earles, the experience of whose miserie aboundantly refu­teth this conceite. Well, say thou attaine to all thou hopest for: the reckoning is behind; What shall it profit a man though he winne the whole world, if he loose his owne soule? An­tigone Math. 8. 36. in Sophocles was so wise, that when her sister Ismente demanded of her how she durst bury her brother Polinices body against Creons commandement, she answered her re­solutely, like a noble Lady, that she knew it was a duty ac­ceptable to the gods, with whome she was to liue longer, then vpon the earth with men: and therefore had more care to please them. Shall not this Lady, this heathen, con­demne many men, many Christians, that choose rather to enioy the pleasures of sinne for a season, then to raigne e­ternally in the glory of the Lord Iesus in his heauenly Kingdome?

14 Doth antiquitie, vniuersalitie, visibilitie, consent, like a loo [...]stone draw thee after them? Antiquitie is then one­ly a rule of truth, when the pedegree of it can be fetched from the beginning. For if euery opinion be truer, as it is ancienter, why should not the Scribes and Pharises traditi­ons, be of more account then our Sauiour Christs instructi­ons? certainely they had beene receiued and vsed in the Church of the Iewes many yeares before he was borne: yea they had vniuersally the approbation and allowance of the whole Church: and continued in good liking, except [Page 87] with a few that followed our Lord, for all his preaching, to the end of his life; what greater consent could there be? all the Iewish Clergie, Priests, Leuites, Scribes, and Pharises agreed as one man, to maintaine their owne superstitions, and keepe downe the religion of our Lord Iesus; These men the people depending vpon them, were, and had beene time out of minde the visible Church. Oh that they had been as wise and learned as our papists now are, to haue called to our Sauiour for a Catalogue of their names, that had from time to time professed the Religion which he sought to bring in, contrary to that they held. doubtlesse he must haue beene faine (vnlesse he had vsed his diuine knowledge) to confesse, that at the least, for the last 300 yeares, there was no such beadroll of names to be found. I confessest Saint Luke in the geneallogy of our Sauiour, re­hearseth the names of his ancestours, who were question­lesse holy and religious worshippers of God, and trusted in the Messiah to come. But I suppose it could hardly haue beene made plaine by any record of the Iewes (and yet they were more diligent and carefull in such matters then Christians haue beene) that the points wherein our Lord dissented from the Scribes and Pharises, were distinctly knowne, and publikely professed by them one after ano­ther

15 But of this matter, so much as concerneth the difference betwixt vs and the Church of Rome, I said enough in the former Chapters, and will not repeate it needlessely. This one remaineth for conclusion, that I humbly intreate all men which haue any true care of their own saluation, that they would not be carried away with words: but indeuour to enable themselues to iudge how those plausible fancies, with which they are seduced, may be applied to proue that which is vndertaken thereby. To this end I haue employ­ed my selfe in this course: they that are desirous to see the truth, may find direction therein for the iudging of it: and thereby arme themselues against tho assaults, and vnder­mining of furious souldiers, and craftie pioners, by obser­uing [Page 88] their approches, and discouering their works, to the defeating of all their enterprises. The greatest matter of all is, that you would embrace the loue of the truth, and re­solue with your selues, as those glorious martyrs I spake of did, rather to indure torments and death, then to forsake the religion of the Lord Iesus, or to ioyne in profession with the Church of Rome.

16 This resolution will bring safetie in peace, in war victo­rie, that no ill tidings shall affright you, no losses discourage you, no discontent turne you out of the right way. The Lord Iesus himselfe like the Angell in Iosua, will march on the head of your troupes, and be as a cloud to refresh you in the heate of Summer, and as a fire to warme you in the cold of winter: your swords shall eate the flesh of your ene­mies, your pikes and bullets shall be drunke with their blood: one of you shall chase a thousand, and an hundred of you put ten thousand to flight: Babylon shall be cast like Math a milstone into the sea, and be found no more: you shall reward the scarlet-coloured strumpet, as she hath rewarded you, and giue her double according to her vvorkes, and in the cup that she hath filled to you, fill her the double; to the glory of God that hath appointed her this punishment, the increase of religion, the safety of the State, and your honour in this life, and e­uerlasting saluatiō in the life to come, through Iesus Christ our Lord, to whom with the Father and the Holy Spirit, one God in three Persons, be all glory, praise, obedience, and thanksgiuing now and for euer. Amen.