Charity mistaken, with the want whereof, Catholickes are vniustly charged for affirming, as they do with grief, that Protestancy vnrepented destroies salvation.

That Protestants neither do, nor dare declare what are their fundamentall points of faith; whereby yet they would pretend that they liue in the Communion of the one true Church of Christ our Lord. CHAPTER IX.

IT is vsuall with many to affirme that the Apostles Creede containes all the Fundamentall points of Faith: but these men when they are pressed, grow soone ashamed of that opinion; when they are tould that in the Creede, there is no men∣tiō made at al, either of the Canō in ho∣ly Scripture, or of the nūber, or nature, yea or so much as of the name of Sacra∣ments. Besides that there are so great dif∣ferences betweene them and vs about the

vnderstanding of the Article of the de∣sce••t of Christ our Lord into Hell, and that other of the holy Catholike Church; and that also, of the communion of Saints, which we belieue and they deny to inuolue both prayers for the dead, & prayers to Saints, as that we should not be much the better, either for our knowing or confessing that the Creede containes all the Fundamentall points of Faith, vnles with all there were some certaine way, how to vnderstand them right, and especially vnles vnder the Ar∣ticle, which concernes the holy Catholicke Church, they would vnderstand it to be indued with so perfect infallibility, and great authority, as that it might teach vs all the rest. For indeed according to that sense, not only the whole Creede, but euen that single Article of the holy Ca∣tholicke Church might be said to con∣taine the reason of all our Faith so Fun∣damentally, as that we should neede noe other guide then that.

But if we vnderstand it otherwise, the Scripture it selfe speakes of particu∣lar errours, which are dānable in them, by whome they are embraced; and yet they are not at all against any expresse

doctrine of the Creede. As namely where S. Paule calls it a doctrine of diuells, to forbid marriage, and meats: which, by the way, is not to be vnderstood of the chastity, and fasts of the Catholicke Church (as Protestants do most peruer∣sely affirme) which knowes that those things are lawfull, but that yet it is most gratefull to God, when his seruants, for his loue, depriue themselues of those delights; but of the heresie of the M••∣ni••hees, as S. Austen doth expresly de∣clare, who forbad both marriage and meats, as being abominable and im∣pure through the institution thereof, which they said was deriued from a cer∣taine second ill cōdicioned God, of their owne making. In like manner S. Peter saith, that S. Paule in his Epistles had written certaine thinges, which were hard to be vnderstood, and which the vn∣learned and vnstable did peruert to their owne destruction. S. Austen declares vpon this place, that the places misunderstood concerned the doctrine of Iustification, which some misconceaued to be by faith alone, by occasion of what S. Paule had written to the Romanes. And of pur∣pose to countermine that errour, he saith

that S. Iames wrote his Epistle, and prooued therein that good works were absolutely necessary to the acte of Iustifi∣cation. Here vpon we may obserue two things; the one that an errour in this point alone, is by the iudgment of S. Pe∣ter to worke their destruction, who em∣brace it: and the other, that the Apo∣stles Creede which speakes no one word thereof, is no good rule to let vs knowe all the fundamentall point of faith.

Others say, that the booke of the 39. Articles declares all the fundamentall points of Faith, according to the Do∣ctrine of the Church of England; but that also is most absurdly affirmed. For as it is true, that they declare in some cō∣fused manner (which yet indeed is ex∣treamely confused) what the Church of England in most things belieues; so is it as true, that they are very carefull, that they be not too clearely vnderstood. And therefore in many cōtrouersies, whereof that booke speakes, it comes not at all to the maine difficulty of the question betweene them and vs; and especially in those of the Church, and Free will. For whereas there are two maine Contro∣uersies concerning the Church; namely

whether the Catholicke Church of our Lord must not euer be visible to the eyes of men, though at some times more glo∣riously then at others; and whether the said Church be infallible in the definitiōs of Faith (in both which points we hold the affirmatiue and they the negatiue;) they dare not declare in this publique manner what they hold therein. And so also in that of Free Wil, they only affirme thereof in haec verba. The condition of mā after the fall of Adam is such, that he cannot turne, & prepare himselfe by his owne naturall strength, & good workes, to faith, & calling vpō God; wherfore we haue no power to do good workes plea∣sant, and acceptable to God, without the grace of God preuenting vs, that we may haue a good will, and working with vs, whē we haue that goodwil. Now this is true Catholick Doctrine, which we be∣lieue better them they. But they declare not the while, whether or no a man haue freedome of will to do a good worke or not to do it, when first he is inspired, and moued to it by God Almighties grace; which we affirme, & they deny, & which is the only knott of our question, & the point vpō which so many other Catho∣licke Doctrines depend.

Soe also do they play at fast and ••oose, when in the sixt Article, of holy Scripture, they enumerate al those books of the old Testament, which they allow to be Canonicall; wherein by the way, they are rather Iewes then Christians, for not admitting the bookes of Iudith the Machabees, & diuers others into the Ca∣non. And they trifle, also when they tell vs, that they vnderstand those only bookes both of the old and newe Testa∣ment to be Canonicall, of whose authori∣ty there was neuer any doubt in the Church. For they know as well as we, that the Apocalips, the Epistle of S. Iames, S. Iude, and one of S. Peters, were not acknow∣ledged till prooffes were made, during the space of three or fower hundred yeares after Christ our Lord. And yet these mē haue beene pleased out of their great grace, to admit them, though the Machabees must be reiected, because they speake of prayer for the dead. But ob∣serue in the meane time, what this booke of Articles sayeth concerning the Ca∣nonicall bookes of the new Testament. It saith only this. All the bookes of new Te∣stament, as they are commonly receaued, we doe receaue, and account them for Canoni∣call.

But why doe they not particularly enumerate all the bookes which they acknowledge to be of the new Testament, as they had done them of the old? but on∣ly because they must so haue named those bookes of S. Iames and others for Canonicall, which the Lutherans haue cast out of their Canon. A mad peece of vnity, God wot, when these refor∣mers of the Church, according forsooth to Scripture (if you will take their word) cannot so much as agree about the very Canon it selfe of the Scripture.

But abstracting from all these insince∣rities, wherewith that booke of Articles is full fraught, they doe not so much as say, that the Articles of Doctrine, which they deliuer are fundamentall, either all, or halfe, or any one thereof; or that they are necessarily to be belieued by them, or the contrary damnable if it be belieued by vs; but they are glad to walke in a cloude, for the reasons which haue beene already toucht.

Maister Rogers indeede, in the Ana∣lysis which he makes of those nyne and thirty Articles, speakes lowd inough by way of taxing the doctrine of the Church of Rome, as being contrary to that of the

Church of England; and he giues it as many ill names, as his impure spirit can deuise; & affirmes amongst other things, that many Papists, and namely the Fran∣ciscans blush not to affirme that S. Fran∣cis is the holy Ghost: And that Christ is the Sauiour of men, but one Mother Iane is the Sauiour of woemen, a most execrable of Postellus the Iesuit; with a great deale of such base trash as this. And yet his booke is declared to haue beene pervsed, and by the lawfull authority of the Church of England permitted to be publicke. But yet, euen Maister Rogers himselfe, is not so valiant as to tell vs in particular which point of their Doctrine is funda∣mentall to saluation, and which is not.

Much lesse is there any apparance that euer the Church of England should doe it; since euen now we haue seene, that it dares not, in diuerse points, soe much as declare in publicke manner, that it professes the expresse contrary of what we held. Nay we are not likely to see the fūdamental points of Faith, whereof they talke so lowd, to be auowed by so much as either of the Vniuersities, yea or yet by any one Colledge, or society of learned men amongst them. And the reason of

their reseruation in this kind is playne▪ For if, when they write ioyntly, and in a body, they should be conuinced of any absurdity or errour, by the testimony either of the ancient Fathers on the one side, or the Lutherans on the other, their maine cause would receaue a mortall wounde; because so their Church, o•• Vniuersities or Colledges would plainly appeare to be controlled, and confuted, eitheir by the Fathers, or their fellow ghospellers: whereas now when they speake or write, but in the name or per∣sons of particular men, one of them will not thinke, that himselfe, or his cause is much preiudiced, if any other of them be found guylty of errour; and in such cases, it is vsuall for them to say, what care I if Doctour Morton say this, or Doctour White say that? and the like. For this reason it is, that I haue heard some Catholickes affirme, (and that, to my thinking, with great reason) that they would hold it to be no ill worke for them, if the pretended Colledge of Chelsy, or any other, were founded by Protestants expresly for writing bookes of controuersie, by common consent. But I belieue I shall not see them halt

vpon that leg, for feare least they should be found to be lame of both.

On the otherside, at times, they make eager inuectiues against vs, for declaring so many, yea and all the Doctrines of our Church to be Fundamentall; so far forth as that whosoeuer refuses obstinatly to belieue any one of them, doth forfette the saluation of his soule. And in the strength of this zeale of theirs, Doctour Dunne in a sermon made before his Ma∣iesty at his first happy coming to this Crowne, doth bitterly exclame against the Catholicke Romane Church as mak∣ing euery toy to be Fūdamentall. Where, by the way, he takes his pleasure vpon vs, & sayes that we Papists will not let Protestants be saued, though they be∣lieue the same Creede, and the same faith with vs; vnles withall they will belieue, the same Mathematicks, and gouerne thēselues by the same Kalēders, which to omit other poornesses of his, was soe weake and meane a iest, so misbecom∣ing of that Audience and of the place he helde, as being fitter indeed for some Ordinary, thē for a Chappel or Church; and withall so very vntrue, if he were in earnest, that vnles the pride of his owne

conceit had raised vp a dust to put out his eyes, he could not but haue seene the senselesnes of what he said, euen whilest he was speaking: since we the Romane Catholickes in this kingdome do rather gouerne our selues at this day, by the lesse perfect Kalender, which now is vsed in this place, then by the other, which is both the better (euen by the iudgment of learned Protestants) & is authorized by the Catholicke Church abroade. Letting he world see thereby, how willingly we can accommodate to them in all things, which belong not meerely to Religion. But Maister Do∣ctour forgot himselfe worse shortly af∣ter. For hauing grauely admonished mē before, not to account things arbitrary to be necessary, nor to call superstructions foundations, nor to esteeme that euery little thing in Religion should be able to depriue a man of saluation, he takes the paynes to wipe out with a wet finger the whole substance, and drifte of all his owne discourse, by saying to his effect: That differēce in beliefe, in points, which are not very important, is not to preiu∣dice a mans saluation, vnles by not belie∣uing them he commit a disobedience

with all, for (saith he) Obedience indeede is of the Essence of Religion. Which vpon the whole matter, is the very thing we say; and the very thing whereby he crosses the whole scope of his owne sermon. For if a mans disobediēce to the propo∣sition and direction of the Church, con∣cerning an inferiour point of Doctrine, do impugne the very essense of Religion, it will follow that their distinctiō of points Fundamentall or not Fundamentall (wher∣by they would inferre that a man can not loose his saluation but for misbelief in some few mayne points of Religion, and not in the rest) is absurd and vaine, and detractiue both of Doctour Dunnes Doctrine last mentioned, and of their owne obiection of vncharitablenes a∣gainst vs, for saying that men dying in different Religions cannot be saued. And withall that this distinction will not se∣cure them from committing the crime of separation from the Church of Christ our Lord, and in swaruing from the di∣rections thereof; in which case, all the Doctrines of the Church are found to be Fundamentall towards saluation.

And this shall serue for a dischardge, both of what they obiect against our vni∣tie

in faith, and of what they alleadge in the behalfe of theirs. And in the meane time, I conceaue that I haue also suffi∣ciently secured and settled those two mayne groundes vpon which this whole, discourse is turned. Namely first that there is but one true faith, and one true Religion and Church, out of which there is no saluation: and secondly that both Catholickes and Protestants can not possible be accounted to be of that one Religion, Church & Faith. And now for the finall proofe of this last point according euen to their practise as well as ours; let my Reader but looke vpon the body of their lawes made against vs, and especially vpon the Preambles there∣of, wherein they plentifully shew how hatefull an opinion they haue of our Church; Let him looke vpon the seue∣rall Acts of State, which haue issued from my Lords of the Counsell; Let him looke vpō the proclamatiōs, which haue beene made and published from time to time; Let him looke vpon the large cō∣missions, which haue beene granted to Pursiuants, whereby that scume of the world, hath been and is enabled, both to ransome & ransacke vs at their pleasure;

Let him looke vpon those speeches, which haue been vttered in both houses of Parliament, not only against the pro∣fessours, but euen the profession it selfe of our Religion; and how his most ex∣cellent Maiesty, hath been importuned by their Petitions, to add more weight to our miseries: for thus it will easily be seene, how false how rotten, how su∣perstitions, how Idolatrous, how dete∣stable, how damnable, and euen destru∣ctiue of all truth and goodnes they pro∣fesse themselues to esteeme our Religiō, and in fine that we carry such a marke of the Beast in our foreheads as must needs, in their opinion, shut vp the gates of Heauen against vs, and set open the iawes of Hell to deuoure and swallowe vs vp. So that certainely we are no more of one Church with them in their opi∣nion, then they are of one with vs in ours. And now there will remaine noe more but a short Recapitulation of what hath been deliuered more at large, for the finishing of this discourse, to which I will now betake my selfe.

Notes

• Art. 10.
• Fol. 23.
• Fol. 14.