Roman-Catholick doctrines no novelties, or, An answer to Dr. Pierce's court-sermon, miscall'd The primitive rule of Reformation by S.C. a Roman-Catholick.

CHAP. IX. (Book 9)

Of the Churches Infallibility. The necessity thereof, that she may be a certain Guide to Salvation; And the grounds whereupon She claims it.

1. THe Second pretended Novelty of Ca∣tholick Doctrine, is the Infallibility of the Church, called by the Preacher,* 1.1 The Pa••••a∣dium of the Conclave, and derived from the Schol∣lars of Marcus in Irenaeus, or from the Gno∣sticks in Epiphanius. Against which Infallibi∣lity his unanswerable Arguments are,* 1.2 1. Infal∣libility is one of Gods incommunicable Attributes. 2. The Church not being omniscient, must there∣fore be ignorant in part, and consequently may fall into Error. 3. It is confess'd by the great Cham∣pions of the Papacy, that the Heresie of the No∣vatians was hatch'd in Rome, and continued there almost two hundred years. 4. Besides Ari∣anism that over-spread the Church, she was infe∣cted

with the Heresie of the Chyliasts, being de∣ceived by Papias, which Heresie found no contra∣di•••••••• for some Ages. 5. Yea, the whole Church in the opinion of St. Augustin and Pope Inno∣cent, (during the space of six hundred years ac∣cording to Maldona••) thought the Sacrament of the Eucharist necessary to Infants: yet the Council of Trent is of a contrary mind.

2. In order to the answering of this Di∣sco••rse, he will sure acknowledge that all Sect▪ of Christianity agree in this, that each of them has both a Rule of their Faith, and a 〈◊〉〈◊〉 also: But in both these there is diffe∣rence among them. To the Presbyterians, In∣dependents, Anabaptists, Quakers, Socinians, &c. the only Rule is the Holy Scripture. But both Catholicks and English Protestants, though they acknowledge Divine Revelations to be their only Rule, yet they admit certain universal∣ly received Traditions, besides expresse Scri∣pture.

3. But as for the Guide from which we are to learn the true sense of this Rule, the dif∣ference among the said Sects is far greater, and more irreconcilable. The Socinians will have Scripture interpreted onely by private reason, a Guide evidently fallible, and therefore not to be imposed on others. The Indepen∣dents, Anabaptists, Quakers, and Presbyterians too, pretend to an Infallible Guide, Gods Holy Spirit; but with this difference, that the In∣dependents, Anabaptists, and Quakers, rationally

acknowledge that this Guide is only to direct those that have it, and perceive they have it, but cannot oblige other men that have it not, nor can be sure they have it. Whereas the Presbyterians by an unexampled Tyranny (at least in France) do oblige themselves and their Posterity to a Profession, that by a Di∣vine Illumination they are taught to distin∣guish Canonic••l Books of Scripture from Apo∣criphal, and by the same Guide to justifie all the Doctrines by which they dissent from all others: And moreover, by a most senslesse inhumanity, will impose a necessity on all o∣thers, to belie their own Consciences, and acknowledge the same Guide; though they have never wrought any Miracles, which certainly are necessary to oblige others to believe and follow the internal Guidance of that Spirit to which they pretend.

4. As for Dr. Pierce, and the generality of English Protestants, (I speak of them now, as hitherto they have bin, for what they must be hereafter, neither they nor I know a special Guide of theirs, beyond Reason and Spirit, for the finding out the sense of Scripture, and judging of Traditions received by them, is the Primitive Church, or foure first General Councils: But since those ancient Fathers are now past speaking, and their Writings are as obnoxious to disputes as the Scriptures themselves, a speaking Judge of the sense of all these, I suppose, is their Ecclesiastical Sy∣nods,

or Bishops, when Synods are dissolved: but principally those that are to make, and determine the sense of Acts of Parliament. And upon these grounds they finde them∣selves obliged to behave themselves different∣ly to several adversaries. For against Sects that went out from them, they use the help of Catholick weapons, the Authority of the Chu••ch, Councils, &c. But against Catholics, they (renouncing the Authority of the present Church in her Supremest Councils, of conve∣ning which the times are capable, and (in the interval of Councils) in the major part of the Governours thereof united with him, whom themselves acknowledge the prime Patriark) will make use of a kind of private spirit or reason; or the judgment of a most inconsiderable number of Church-Govern••rs, going against the whole Body of the Catholick Church, and their chief Pastor, but this, as to assent only, where it likes them, and so will be their own selves Judges of what is the sense of Councils, Fathers, Scriptures and all: And great difficultie they often find how to a∣void being accounted Papists, when they speak to Sectaries, and being even Fanaticks when they Dispute with Roman Catholicks. And truly the Doctors whole Sermon, is in ef∣fect meerly Fanatick: For though he florish with Greek and Latin••quotations of Fathers joynd to Scripture, which they do not; yet since there is no visible Judge talk'd of in it,

but himself, that is able to speak; What is this but private spirit, having little measure of the gift of Tongues more than Quakers have? So that let them preach as much as they will, the result of all Dispute between them and us must come to this, Whether their last speaking Iudge in England, or ours in the whole Catholic Church, deserves better to be be∣liev'd and rely'd on.

5. It cannot be deny'd but that there is som∣thing of Truth in all these Sects. The Guide which each of them respectively layes claim to, is a justifiable Guide, though being alone not sufficient. For 1. To exclude Reason from guiding us, would be to become Beasts. 2. To exclude Gods Spirit from directing us, would be to cease being Christians. 3. To renounce the Testimony of Antiquity, and Au∣thority of General Primitive Councils, would be an arrogant temerity unpardonable. 4. And last of all to deny a judging deter∣mining power to the present visible Go∣vernors, I mean those Governors and Synods which are Superior, in respect of all other Governors or Synods Inferior, would be to make all Heresies and Schisms justifiable. Therefore not any of these partial Guides must be neglected: Yet unlesse they all concur, that which we take to be Reason, and Inspira∣tion, and the sense of the Primitive Church may deceive and mis-guide us.

6. Now, it is only the Roman Catholic

Church, whose en••••re Guidance proceed•• from all these, and the effect of which Guidance in full satisfaction to each mans Soul, and u∣niversal peace in Gods Church: which ef∣fects cannot possibly flow but from a compli∣cation of all these Guides. Roman Catho∣lics admit Reason to judge of the sense of Scripture, (as the Socinians do:) but they give due bounds to Reason, nay they silence it quite, when it would presume to judge of incomprehensible Mysteries, and reject them because Philosophy cannot comprehend them. When Reason has found out the sense of Scripture, they with the Presbyterians, and even Fanatics, acknowledge it is Divine Inspi∣ration that moves the Soul to assent thereto, and embrace the verities contained in Scri∣pture, directing their actions accordingly. But because the Devil can transform himself into an Angel of Light, neither can there be any Guide more dangerous then false Inspi∣rations, they conclude that all such preten∣ded Inspirations are indeed Diabolical Sug∣gestions, which are prejudicial to Honesty, Virtue, Piety, and the common Rules of O∣bedience, both Spiritual and Civil; All In∣spirations which which incite private, uncommissi∣on'd persons to reform either Churches or State; all that nourish Factions or Com∣motions in the Common-wealth: All that beget Pride, and an opinion of self-sufficiency, or an humor of censuring others, especially

Superiors. In a word, whensoever the spirit of single Prophets refuse to be subject to the com∣munity of the Prophets, that is, Church Govern∣ors; such Inspirations in Catholic Religion are rejected, detested, and sent back to the Infernal Father of them.

7. Moreover, Roman Catholics do wil∣lingly and confidently appeal to the Primi∣tive Church, the four first General Councils, and the holy Fathers. But universal experi∣ence demonstrating it impossible, that any writing can end a Debate between multitudes of persons interessed, and therefore not im∣partial or indifferent, their last recourse is to the present visible Church; which cannot de∣clare her sense to us in any other way then as she is represented by her Pastors out of all Nations, that is, by a General Council. All Catholics, submiting to this Council, not their tongues only, but also their judgments, by following the Church thus with humili∣ty, shew, that they are guided both by Reason, Inspiration, and Examples of Primitive Fathers. Hence St. Austin sayes, We receive the Holy Spirit if we love the Church, if we rejoice in the name of Catholics, and in the Catholic Faith. And elsewhere, [Contra rationem nemo sobrius, &c.] No sober man will admit an opinion against Reason, no Christian against Scriptures, no lover of peace and unity, against the Church. And this only is the Guide that we say, and presently will demonstrate to be infallible.

8. Now, that the final Decision of all Con∣troversies in Faith, can only be expected from such a Guide, and consequently that all Chri∣stians under pain of damnation, are obliged never to contradict this Guide, and alwaies to assent when it requires, we are taught, not by Reason only, but God himself also, and this in the Law of Moses. The whole Nation of the Iews, (saith St. Augustin) was as it were one great Prophet; the policie of their Church was the Scheme of the Christian, to the twelve Princes of their Families answer'd the twelve Apostles, to the Seventy Elders the Seventy Disciples, to the several Courts of Judgement, our Ecclesiastical Synods, to the great Sanhedrim, a general Council, and to the High Priest, our Supreme Pastor. Now for our present purpose, the Ordinance that God made in the Jewish Church for deciding Controversies about the Law, ran thus, If there arise a matter too hard for thee in judge∣ment,* 1.3 &c. (that is, as we find in 2 Chron. 19. 8. between blood and blood, between Law and Commandment, Statutes and Iudge∣ments, then shalt thou arise and get thee into the place which the Lord thy God shall chuse: And thou shalt come to the Priests and Levites, and to the Iudge that shall be in those dayes, and en∣quire, and they shall shew thee the sentence of Iudgement, and thou shalt do according to the sentence which they shall shew thee, &c. Thou shalt not decline from the sentence to the right

hand or to the left. The man that will do pre∣sumptuously, and will not hearken to the Priest, or unto the Iudge, even that man shall die, and thou shalt put away the evil from Israel. Up∣on those words in this passage [unto the Iudge that shall be in those daies] Ainsworth,* 1.4 out of the Rabbins, observes, that if the high Synedrion had determin'd of a matter, & after another Synedrion rose up, which (upon Rea∣sons seeming good unto them) disannulled the former Sentence, then it was disannull'd, and Sentence passed according as seemed good to those later; So that the present Authority was alwaies to take place, and no Appeals to be made from it. For if any Disputes against the Sentence of living speaking Iudges, upon any pretence whatsoever, either of a private exposition of the Law, or the Authority of preceding Rabbies were allow'd, there would never want Contentions and Schisms in the Synagogue. And observe that in this obedi∣ence was implyed an assent or submission of Judgment: For otherwise it would be against Conscience, in case the party continued in a contrary opinion of the sense of the Law. It is just so, and alwaies has been so in the Ca∣tholic Church: The present Superiors living and speaking must conclude all Controver∣sies, their Interpretation of Scripture and Fathers, their Testimony of Tradition must more then put to silence all contradiction of particular Persons or Churches, it must also

subdue their minds to an assent, and this un∣der the Penalty of an Anathema, or cutting off from the Body of Christ, which answers to a Civil death in the Law.

9. If then an Obedience so indispensable was required to Legal Iudges, who might possibly give a wrong sentence: How secur••∣ly may we submit our judgements to the Su∣pream Tribunal of the Church: And how just∣ly will an Anathema be inflicted on all gain∣sayers of an Authority that we are assured shall never mislead us? And the grounds of this assurance, which the Preacher is not yet perswaded of, are now to be discoverd.

10. The true grounds of the Churche•• Infallibility are the words of Truth, the In∣fallibility of the promises of Christ, the Eternal wisdom of the Father. These Promises are the true Palladium, not of the Conclave, but of the Vniversal Church: Nor do we think Doctor Pierce such an Vlisses, as to apprehend he can steal it away.

11. We do not deny however,* 1.5 that Infal∣libility and Omniscience are (as he saies) incommu∣nicable Attributes of God: It is God alone to whose Nature either lying or being deceived are essentially contrary, because he is essenti∣ally immutable as in his Being, so in his Vn∣derstanding and Will. Yet the immutable God can preserve mutable Creatures from a∣ctual mutation: God, who is absolutely Omniscient, can teach a rational Creature 〈◊〉〈◊〉

Truths necessary or expedient to be known: So that, though a man have much ignorance▪ yet he may be in a sort omniscient within a determinate Sphere, he may be exempted from ignorance or error in teaching such special verities as God will have him know, and has promised he shall faithfully teach others. Our Saviour, as man, was certainly infalli∣ble, and as far as was requisite, omniscient too: So were the Apostles likewise, whose wri∣tings Protestants acknowledge both to be in∣fallible, and to contain all Truth necessary to Salvation. Good Doctor, do you think it a contradiction that God should bestow an in∣fallibility, as to some things, on a Creature? What did our Saviour give St. Peter when he said, I have prayed for thee that thy Faith fail not? Thus the Doctor, may see what a trifling Dis∣course he has made against Gods Church.

12. Now, the infallible promises of our Lord to his Church, by vertue of which she has alwaies been believed to be in our sense infallible, follow: At least as many of them as may suffice for the present purpose. 1. Our Saviour has promised his Apostles,* 1.6 That he would be present with them alwaies to the end of the World: Therefore since not any of them out∣liv'd that age, this infallible promise must be made good to their Successors. 2. He has promised that When two or three of them meet together in his Name,* 1.7 he will be in the midst of them; Surely to direct them. Therefore much

more when the whole Church is repre∣sentatively assembled about his businesse onely. 3. He has promised that he will lead his Church into all Truth; at least all that is necessary or but expedient for them to know.* 1.8 4. He has promised, that Against his Church, built upon St. Peter, the Gates of Hell (that is Heresie, say the Fathers) shall not prevail: Therefore it shall be in∣fallibly free from Heresie. 5. He has com∣manded that,* 1.9 Whoever shall not obey his Church, shall be (cut off from his Body) as a Heathen and a Publican: Therefore Anathema's pronounced by his Church are valid. Our Lord indeed speaks of De∣cisions made by a particular Church in quarrels among Brethren: Therefore if Disobedience to such Decisions be so grie∣vously punished, what punishment may we suppose attends such as are disobedi∣ent to Decisions of the Universal Church, (call'd by the Apostle, The Pillar and ground of Truth) made for the com∣posing of publick Debates about the com∣mon Faith. 6. To conclude, the be∣lief of the Churches Vnity is an unchang∣able Article of our ••reed: Therefore cer∣tainly the onely effectual mean to pre∣serve Unity, (which is an un-appeal∣able, and infallible Authority) shall ne∣ver be wanting in the Church.

13. All these Texts and Prmises we by the example of the Holy Fathers and Autho∣rity of Tradition, produce as firm Grounds of an Infallibility in the Universal Church re∣presentative, which has an influence over the Souls of men•• requiring much more than an external submission, which yet is all that Pro∣testants will allow to the most authentic gene∣ral Councils. We hope now Doctor Pierce will not fly to Mr. Chillingworths miserable shift, and say that all these Promises are on∣ly conditional and depending on the piety of Church-governors: For this is contrary to the assertion of all Antiquity, which from these Promises argues invincibly against all He∣retics and Schismatics, who might otherwise, on Mr. Chillingworths ground, alledge (as the Donatists did) that the Church by the sins of some had lost all her Authority, and that Gods spirit was transplanted from her in∣to themselves. Nor yet that he will use the plea of several other Protestant Writers som∣what more discreet, who are willing to allovv those Promises absolute, and to belong also to the Guides of the Church som or other, that they shall in all ages continue orthodox, but not alvvayes to the more superior, or to the greater bodies of these assembled in Coun∣cils (because, thus, they see their cause will suffer by it.) But this plea also is utterly un∣satisfying; For whenever the superior and subordinate Church-Officers, or Ecclesiasti∣cal

Courts shall contradict or oppose one an∣other, here the superior questionlesse is to be our Guide (otherwise we have no certain rule to know who is so) and therefore to these, not the other, in such cases, must bel••ng these promises, where they cannot possibly agree to both.

14. These promises now being Yea and A∣men, the Doctor must not seem to make our Lord passe for a Deceiver, but apply them to his English Protestant Church, since he will not allow them to the Catholic, for to some Church they must be applyed. But let him consider withal, he must condemn St. Gregory,* 1.10 who professed that he venerated the four first General Councils of the Catholic Church, as the four Gospels. He must condemn Con∣stantine, who, in the first Council of Nice pro∣fessed,* 1.11 that [〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c] whatever is decreed in the holy Councils of Bishops, that ought to be attributed to th•• Divine will In a word he must by condemning all the Gene∣ral Councils of Gods Church, condemn like∣wise (which is more dangerous) the Act of Parliament, 1 Eliz. For manifest it is that all the Fathers in those Councils did pronounce many Anathema's against all those that would not submit to a belief of such and such Decisi∣ons of theirs, in some of which were new ex∣pressions not extant in Scripture, but devised by the Fathers then present, as the words 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, &c. Now I ask Doctor

Pierce, were those Anathema's lawfull? were they valid? Or will he say, those first Coun∣cils (to which he professes assent) usurped an Authority in this, not of right belonging to them? If those Anathema's were valid, then the Councils had a just authority to oblige Christians to an internal belief of verities de∣clared by them, as the sence of Divine Re∣velation, and this, under the penalties of being separated from Christ: And can any Autho∣rity but such as is infallible lay such an obliga∣tion upon Consciences under such a penalty? But, if those Anathema's were illegal and inva∣lid, then were the Fathers both of those Coun∣cils and of All others, who still followed the same method, not only impostors, but most execrable Tyrants over the Souls of men.

15. These Deductions surely are more effe∣ctual to demonstrate the Churches infallibility, than any of his Quotations can be against it: Here we have expresse Scripture, and uni∣versal consent of Antiquity: Nay here we have the concession of the more judicious Writers of the Church of England (at least before their late restitution:)* 1.12 who seem to agree that in the Controversies between our Church and theirs, they would certainly submit to a future lawful General Council: Now, could they lawfully make such a Promise and think such a Council could misguide them? Therefore tru∣ly I cannot have the uncivility to judge, that, when one of your 39. Articles declares, that

some General Councils have err'd,* 1.13 the meaning should be •• that any legal, legitimate General Council has err'd, but only som Councils that som Roman Catholics esteem to be General, concerning which the Church of England is of another opinion: And if this be the mean∣ing, the breach made by it may be cu∣rable.

16. Now whereas the Doctor alleages, as against this Point,* 1.14 the concession of Baronius, &c. that Novatianism was hatch'd and conti∣nued two hundred years at Rome. I cannot de∣vise how to frame an Objection out of it: Can no Church be Orthodox, if Heretics rise and continue in the same City? Is the English Church a Quaking Church, because Qua∣kers first began, and still encrease at London? As for Novatians at Rome he cannot deny but they were so far from being Members of the Roman Church, that they were continually esteem'd Heretics and condemned by it.

17. The like we say touching the Donatists.* 1.15 Indeed his objecting the Arians has more ap∣pearance of reason and sense [Ingemuit orbis, &c.] The world (says. St. Hierom)* 1.16 sadly groa∣ned and was astonished to see it self on a sudden becom Arian,, that is, after the Council of ••ri∣minum. But how was it Arian, if it groaned? &c. for it could not be really Arian against its will. But St. Hierom uses this expression, because the great Council of Ariminum had seem'd to favour the Arian party against the

Catholics. And true it was, that Catholic Bishops were indeed persecuted, and many banish'd: But not one of them chang'd their Profession of the Nicene Faith, unlesse you will accuse Pope Liberius, who for a while dissem∣bled it, and presently repented. Besides, the Canons at first made in that Council were per∣fectly Orthodox, but afterwards by the Empe∣rors Tyranny, and subtilty of two or three Arian Bishops a Creed was composed, wherein though the Nicene Faith was not sufficiently expressed,. Yet there was not one Article per∣fectly Arian, but capable of a good sense: to which may Catholic Bishops out of fear sub∣scribed, yet to nothing but what in their sense was true▪ though defective in delivering all the truth; but presently after, being at li∣berty, both themselves and all the rest re∣nounced. And after all, there remained but three years of persecution, for after that time the Arian Emperour Constantius dyed.

18. Next concerning the objected Heresy of the Millenaries: It is very unjust and a great irreverence in him to charge upon the Primitive Church the sayings of two Fathers: and though one of them says, All that were purely Orthodox, (that is, such as he esteemed so, because they were of his Opinion) held that Doctrin•• yet he thereby shews, that his own Opinion was not universally embraced by the Church: But the truth is, there was a double

Millenary opinion, the one that interpreted the reign of Martyrs with Christ for a thou∣sand years, in base, sensual pleasures, ban∣quets, and women: This was the Doctrine of the unclean Heretick Cerinthus, as Eusebius and St. Augustin relate:* 1.17 Against this St. Dio∣nysius Bishop of Alexandria wrote an elegant Book, as St. Hierom affirms:* 1.18 And it is most deservedly detested by the Church. But there was another Opinion, that the Martyrs should reign a thousand years with Christ in all Spiritual delights, and ravishing consolation, in a blessed conversing with him: And this Opinion might not unbecom Papias, St. Ire∣neus,* 1.19 and St. Iustin Martyr: For St. Augustin and St. Hierom both professe themselves un∣willing to censure it, neither can the Doctor, I believe, shew that it was ever condemned by the Church.

18. To his last Objection touching the communicating of Infants, it is granted that in St. Augustin and Pope Innocent's time, and ma∣ny years after, such was the common pra∣ctice of the Church to communicate them Sacramentally (but withal take notice, it was onely in one species.) Again, it is confessed that from that Text [Nisi mand••caveritis car∣nem▪* 1.20 &c.] St. Augustin, &c. argue a necessity that Infants should participate of the flesh and blood of our Lord, but this not Sacra∣mentally, but Spiritually, by such a participa∣tion as may be had in Baptism.

This appears first, From the constant Doctrine of St. Augustin,* 1.21 &c. the whole Church affirming that, Baptism alone may suffice to the salvation of Infants. 2. From his interpreting his own meaning, in a Sermon quoted by St. Beda and Grati∣na. His words are these,* 1.22 None ought by any waies to doubt but that every Christian by be∣ing made a Member of Christ in Baptism, thereby becomes partaker of the Bo••y and Blood of our Lord, and that he is not estranged from a Com∣munion of that Bread and Chalice, though being setled in the Vnity of Christs Body, he should de∣part out of this World, before he really eat of that Bread, and drink of that Chalice. For he is not deprived of the participation and benefit of the Sa∣crament, whensoever that is found in him which is signified by the Sacrament.

19. That therefore which the Church since, and particularly the Council of Trent alter'd in this matter, was nothing at all touching Belief: For all Catholicks this day believe St. Augustin's Doctrine in that Point, but onely an external practise of the Church: And this was done out of a wonderful reve∣rence to those Holy Mysteries, which by fr••∣quent Communions of Infants could not escape many irreverences and inconveniencies. And many such Alterations even the English Church observes and justifies, both in the administring of the Eucharist and Baptism too.

To conclude this matter: For a further

proof that these two instances about the Millena••y Belief, and Infant Communion are not at all conducing to the Doctors Design, I will refer him to the Judgment of Doctor Ferne, of some weight no doubt with him, who expresly saies, and proves by Reasons not unlike these,* 1.23 That nothing can be concluded by those two Instances to the prejudice of the whole Church, as if thereby might be proved that the whole Church, Vniversally, and in all the Mem∣bers of it, may be infected with Error in Points of concernment or prejudicial to the Faith.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Serm. pag. 8.
• * 1.2

  Ib. page 22.
• * 1.3

  Deut. 7, 8, 9.
• * 1.4

  Ainsworth in Deut. 17. 9.
• * 1.5

  Serm. page 22.
• * 1.6

  Math. 28. 20.
• * 1.7

  Math. 18. 20.
• * 1.8

  Math. 16. 18
• * 1.9

  Math. 18. 17.
• * 1.10

  Geg. M. l. 1. Epist. 24.
• * 1.11

  Act. Conc. Nicen.
• * 1.12

  Dr. Hamond of 〈◊〉〈◊〉. sect. ••. n 1. sect. n. 15. sect. 13. n. 2. sect. 14. n. 6. Bishop Bram∣••a••l Reply to Bish••p Chal∣ced Prefa••e and Vindic. ca. 2. p. 9.
• * 1.13

  Artic. 19.
• * 1.14

  Serm. p. 22.
• * 1.15

  Ibid.
• * 1.16

  Hieron.
• * 1.17

  Euseb. Hist. Eccl. l. 3.
• * 1.18

  Hierom. Aug. l. 2. de Civ. D. c. 7.
• * 1.19

  Aug Ibid. Hieron. l. 4.
• * 1.20

  Aug. l. 1. de pec. merit. cap. 20. Innocent in Epist.
• * 1.21

  Aug. ••b. c. 19. 21, 22. & lib. 2. cap. 28. &c.
• * 1.22

  Bed. ad 1 Cor. c. 10. Gratian Consecr. dist. 2. cap. Qui passus est.
• * 1.23

  Dr. Fern in certain Consid. in Preface.