Of the distinction of fvndamental and not fvndamental points of faith devided into two bookes, in the first is shewed the Protestants opinion touching that distinction, and their uncertaintie therin : in the second is shewed and proued the Catholick doctrin touching the same / by C.R.

That sinful error, or error in anie point of faith sufficiently pro∣posed, destroieth the substance of a true Church. SIXT CHAPTER,

1. ALbeit it be euident, by what we haue proued before, that sinful error against anie point of faith sufficiently proposed, destroieth the substance of a true Church, becaus al such error is formal heresie, and de∣stroieth Catholik faith: And a true Church cannot be with heresie, or without Catholik faith: Yet wil we proue it more particularly, out of the definitions or descriptions of a true Church, giuen by Scripture, Fathers, and Protestants themselues, and lastly by reason.

2. The Scripture Acts 2. v. 42. de∣scribing the true Church of Christ, saieth: They were perseuering in the doc∣trin

of the Apostles, and communication of breaking bread, and praiers, In which words is cōteined a description of the true Church, euen by confession of Protestants. For thus Whitaker Con∣trou. 2. q. 5. c. 19. This place is surely no∣table, and thes words do shew, by what Notes the Apostolik Church was known and shewed. The first note, was the doctrin of the Apostles. For the Apostles deliuered that doctrin, which they receaued from Christ, the Christians of thos times em∣braced and perseuered in it, and it distin∣guished that companie of men from other companies and societies. For they alone then were the true Church, who perseuered in doctrin. And Plessie l. de Eccles. c. 2. Thes words of Scripture, are nothing but a description of the true Church of Christ, instructed in the true faith of Christ by his word, and knit together in true loue by the Communion which is in him. But they who beleue only fundamental points, and sinfully denie Not fundamental points of faith, de not absolutly per∣seuer in the doctrin of the Apostles. For the doctrin of the Apostles, is their

whole doctrin, and includeth as wel Not fundamental, as fundamental points of faith. Who therfore perseuer only in the fundamental points, and not in the vnfundamental, perseuer only in a parte of the Apostles doctrin, and in parte leaue it, and cōsequently are not the true Church. Besids, our Sauiour Ioan. 10. saieth: My sheep, heare my voice. But who heare his voice only in fundamental points, doe not absolutly heare his voice, but in parte only, and in parte heare it not. For Christs voice, is as wel in Not funda∣mētal points of his doctrin, as in fūda∣mental. Therfore such are not Christs. And Ioan. 8. If ye abide in my word, ye shal be my disciples indeed. But they abide not in his word, who forsake it in al points not fundamental. Moreo∣uer, sinful errors in faith, are gates of hel. But gats of hel preuaile not a∣gainst Christs true Church. Therfor not sinful errors in faith. Besids if the the Catholik Church, should sinfully err in anie point of faith, she should not be holie men, nor a holie societie.

For she should be a societie in he∣resie: and so that article of our Creed: I beleue the holic Catholik Church, should be false.

3. And in like manner, the holie Fathers define the true Church, as is euident by their exclusion of al he∣retiks, and by this confession of Moulins lib. 1. contra Peron cap. 2. The ancient Doctors are wont to vnder∣stand by the Church (which oftentimes they cal Catholik) the whole societie of Christian Churches, Orthodox, and sound in faith, vnited together in Com∣munion: and they oppose this Church to the societies of Schismatiks, and heretiks, which sense (saieth he) we wil not reiect. But who sinfully err in some points of faith sufficiently proposed, or for their fault not so proposed, are not Ortho∣dox nor sound in faith. Therfore if we wil vnderstand by the Church, what the Fathers did, we cannot saie, that such are of the Church. And this is confir∣med, becaus the true Church, which we beleue, is Catholik, as is professed in the Apostles Creed: And Catholik,

by the Fathers iudgment, erreth not in anie point of faith. For thus Saint August in l. imperfec. in Genesin c. 1. The Church is called Catholik, becaus she is vniuersally perfect, and halteth in no∣thing. And Epistle 48. Perhaps she is called Catholik, becaus she truly holdeth the whole, of which truth, some peeces are found in diuers heresies. The like hath Saint Cyril. Catechesi 18. S. Optatus l. 1. Patianus Epist. 1. Vincet. c. 3. But who denie anie point of faith suffi∣ciently proposed, are not vniuersally perfect, nor truly hold the whole, but halt in something. Therfore they are not Catholiks, and consequently not of the true Church. Hooker l. 5. p. 324. Cyprian with the greatest part of African Bishops were of nothing more certainly persuaded, then that heretiks are, as rot∣ten branches, cut of from the life and bodie of the true Church.

4. And in the same manner doe Protestants sometimes define the true Church. For thus Moulins l. 1. contra Peron c. 26. That is the true Church, which is vnited together in profession of

true faith, and communion of Sacraments. This definition (saieth he) is receaued by our Aduersaries. Whence it followeth, that the true Church is discerned by profession of true faith. And that he meaneth by true faith, entire true faith. I proue: First, becaus parte of true faith, is not absolutly true faith: but a parte there of. Secondly, becaus he saieth, Ca∣tholiks admit this definition, which they neuer admit, vnles by true faith, be meant entire true faith. Thirdly, becaus c. 28. he saieth. The whole en∣tire doctrin of saluation, is the Note of the Church. Therfore when he defined the Church, by profession of true faith, he meant entire true faith. And in the saied c. 26. he saieth. The true Church is opposed to heretiks and Schismatiks. And c. 25. The question (which is the true Church) is of the Orthodox Church, ioined in Communion, by what Notes she maie be discerned from heretiks, schisma∣tiks, and idolaters. Whatsoeuer Church therfore is heretical, or not orthodox, is no true Church.

5. And generally al Protestants,

put in their definitions of the true Church, Pure, sincere, entire, and incor∣rupt word of God. The confession of En∣gland ar. 19. The visible Church of Christ, is a Congregation, in which the pure word of God is preached. The Swisers Confes∣sion c. 17. In which is sincere preaching of Gods word. The French Confession art 27. In which is consent in embracing pure Religion. Beza Epist. 24. and Sa∣deel contra Turian. loco 1. In which the doctrin of the Ghospel is purely deliuered. And loco 30. When I defined the visible Church, consisting of al her parts, I saied, that puritie of doctrin, and true vse of Sacraments, was essential to the Church. Vrsinus in Catechis. q. 2. In which the entire and vncorrupt doctrin of the Law and Gospel is embraced. Field l. 2. of the Church c. 2. Entire profession of thos supernatural verities which God hath re∣uealed in Christ, is essential and giueth being to the Church. Fulk. Ioan. 14. not. 5. The true Church of Christ can neuer fal vnto heresie. It is an impudent slander to affirme, that we say, so. The Magdebur∣gians Centur. 1. cap. 4. In which, the

sincere doctrin of the Ghospel, is embraced. Iames Andrews li. contra Hosium p. 210. In which the incorrupt word of God soundeth. Whitaker contro. 2. q. 5. c. 17. Sincere preaching of the word, and lawful vse of the Sacraments, make the Church: so as where they are not, the Church is not. And c. 18. The Church is no other multi∣tude, then which holdeth the pure prea∣ching of the word. Ibid. It can not hold anie heretical doctrin, and yet be a Church. Spalatensis l 7. de Repub. c. 10. nu. 26. The forme of the Catholik Church, is the entire profession of Christs faith. And c. 12. num. 132. To the true Church, two things only are required, to wit, entire faith in Christ, and peace and cōmunion with al that profès this faith. Caluin in Ioan. 10. v. 1. We must not communicate with anie other Societie, then that, which conspires in the pure faiih of the Ghospel. Besids, Protestants profès, puritie in doctrin, to be the essential Note of the Church, as Beza lib. de Notis Eccles. Whitaker controu. 2. q. 5. c. 17. Mor∣ton l. 2. Apolog. c. 41. Danaeus contr. 4. p. 741. Riuet tract. 1. sec. 45. Luther

in caput 2. Isaiae: In which confessions of Protestants we are to Note, how, when they intend to define the true Church, they put, pure, sincere, entire, and vncorrupt doctrin in its definition, and saie, that such doctrin is the essen∣tial Note of a true Church, and the forme therof. Also, how they denie anie companie to be a true Church, which hath not the pure word. But such as sinfully denie the not funda∣mental points of Gods word suffi∣ciently proposed, profès not his pure, sincere, entire, and vncorrupt word. Therfore they are not of the true Church.

6. To this, no other answer can be giuen, but that, when Protestants de∣fine the true Church, by the pure, sincere entire word of God, or saie that such is the essential Note, or forme of the Church, they meane only, pure, sin∣cere, entire, or vncorrupt, in funda∣mental points of Gods word, not in al Gods word sufficiently proposed. But this euasion in clearely refuted. First becaus this condemneth their

definition of obscuritie or defect. Next becaus if they had only defined the Church to be a cōpanie, in which the word of God, or the faith of Christ, is professed, they could not haue ex∣pounded it, of anie parte of Gods word, or of Christs faith: becaus the word of God, The faith of Christ, signifie his whole word, his whole faith, as the Church signifieth the whole Church: And much les can they ex∣pound this definition, of profession of anie parte of Gods word, or of Christs faith, seing they haue added to the word of God, or to the faith of Christ those most significant adiecti∣ues, pure, sincere, entire, vncorrupt. For what is the pure, sincere, vncorrupt, word of God, cannot be mixt with anie fal∣sitie, or word of man. And what is the entire word of God, cannot be a parte only, but must needs be his whole word. Whosoeuer therfore sinfully, profés anie falsitie, or word of man, or not the whole reuealed word of God, are not the true Church. Se∣condly, becaus (as we proued before)

there are no fundamental points in the Protestants sense, that is, such as are sufficient to be beleued, though other points of faith be sufficiently proposed: nor anie Not fundamental in their sense, that is, such as are not necessarie to be actually beleued, when they are sufficiently proposed, and virtually, though they be not proposed. But al points of faith what∣soeuer, are fundamental or essential to a true Church, and are to be bele∣ued, ether actually and explicitly, if they be sufficiently proposed, or (at the least) virtually and implicitly, if they be not sufficiently proposed. For (as is said before) the whole reuealed word (which conteineth as wel Not∣fundamentals, as fundamentals) is the true obiect of faith. And no com∣panie, but such as professeth al Christs doctrin, can be a true Church of Christ. And therfore none, who de∣nie anie points of his doctrin suffi∣ciently proposed, can be his true Church absolutly, but only his Church in parte, as in parte onely

they profès his doctrin. And this D. Potter insinuateth, when sec. 7. p. 74. he saieth; That Not fundamentals do not primarily belong to the vnitie of faith, or to the essence of a Church, or to the saluation of a Christian. For if they doe anie waie truly belong (whether primarily, or secondarily) to the es∣sence of a Church, a Church cannot be without them altogether, becaus nothing can be without that which any way belongs to its essence. And they maie be faied to belong secunda∣rily, to the essence of a Church, be∣caus a Church maie be without actual beleif of them, to wir, if they be not sufficiently proposed.

7. Reason also conuinceth, that what is simply and absolutly a true Church of Christ, must, (at least vir∣tually and implicitly) profès al his doctrin. Becaus if it doe no waie pro∣fés his whole doctrin, but only some parte of his doctrin, it is not simply and absolutly his Church, but in parte only his Church, and in parto not his Church; as in parte it professeth

his doctrin, and in part reiecteth it. And they, nether virtually not impli∣citly profès his whole doctrin, who sinfully reiect anie part of it, when it is sufficiently proposed to be his. Se∣condly, becaus to reiect anie parte of Christs doctrin sufficiently proposed to be his doctrin, is to reiect Christs veracitie: for it is as much as to saie, he is not to be beleued in that, and is an act of infidelitie, as Protestants before confessed. And how can they be a true Church of Christ, who in anie point reiect Christ, veracitie, and commit an act of infidelitie. Besids, as Lord Canterburie saieth, sec. 10. p. 36. whatsoeuer is fundamental in the faith, is fundamental to the Church, which is one by the vnitie of faith. But Not funda∣mental points sufficiently proposed, are fundamental to faith, as before D. Potter and Chilling worth confessed. Therfore &c.

8. And out of thes definitions of a true Church, which we haue brought out of holie Scripture, Fathers, Pro∣testants, and reason, it appeareth:

First, how vntrue it is, which Canter∣burie, saieth sec. 16. p. 62. The Catholik Church, which wee beleue in our Creed, is the societie of al Christians: or which Moulins saieth l. 1. cōtra Peron c. 2. The Scripture taketh the name of the Church sometimes, for the vniuersal companie of al those, who profès themselues Christians, and to beleue in Iesus Christ. Secondly, how, vntrue it is, which the same Lord Canterburie hath sec. 36. p. 314. No man can be saied simply to be out of the visible Chureh, that is baptized, and holds the foundation. Or sec. 20. p. 129. That Church, which receaues the Scrip∣ture as a rule of faith, and both the Sa∣craments, as seales of grace, can not but be a true Church in essence. Or which D. Potter saieth sec. 5. p. 18. A true Church, is alone with a Church not erring in the foundation. Or as Chilling worth saieth c. 5. p. 283. Protestants grant their com∣munion to al, who hold with them, not al things, but things necessarie. Or, (which generally al Protestants saie:) That the Catholik Church, is the multitude of al Christians through the whole

world, who agree in profession of the principal articles of Christian faith, howsoeuer they denie other points of faith sufficiently proposed to them, nor communicate together at al in Sa∣craments or publik worship of God. For, beside that these things are saied without al apparent proof, ether of Scripture, Fathers, or reason, but me∣rely to include themselues and such others as they please, within the bounds of the true Catholik Church, they are clearely conuinced out of the aforesaid definitions of the Church, taken out of Scripture, Fa∣thers, Protestants, and reason. For nether do al Christians, or al that profès themselues Christians, perse∣uer in the doctrin of the Apostles, but onely in a part of it: nor are they al Orthodox or sound in faith, or vnited in communion: nor do they al profès the pure, sincere, vncorrupt, and en∣tire word of God: and therfore, ac∣cording to the definitions of the true Church giuen by Scripture, Fathers, Protestants, and reason, they are

not al members of the true Church.

9. And with les apparence, can they be saied to be the Catholik Church. For Catholik (as before I said out of Saint Augustin and other Fathers) halteth in nothing, and manie of thos Christians, who hold the principal articles, halt in manie other points of faith. And besids, al such Christians communicate not to∣gether, and cōdemn one an other, as is euident in the Roman the Grecian, the Lutheran the Caluinist, and such other Churches: And communion, is as wel essential to the true Catholik Church, as puritie in faith, as hereafter shal be proued. Nay Catholik rather signifieth communion, then puritie in faith. What monstrous Catholik Church then must that be, which consisteth of al thos Christians, who agree only in the principal points of Christian faith, but in al other points, how sufficiently soeuer proposed to them, disagree, and condemn one an others beleif, and communion? Is such a Chaos, or hydra, the Church instituted by

Christ, the holie Church professed in our Creed, the Spouse of Christ, the howse and Kingdom of God? Cer∣tainely a Church consisting of al Christians, or of al that profès them∣selues Christians, or of al that hold the principal points of Christian doc∣trin, but denie other points of his doctrin sufficiētly proposed to be his, and communicate not together in Sa∣craments, but condemn one an other, was neuer gathered or instituted by Christ, neuer mentioned by the Fa∣thers, but is a mere Monster of a Church, merely feigned by some Protestāts, for to include themselues, and sinfully erring Christians, within the pale of the Church. But we care not, whom they include in a Church of their owne inuention or making. It sufficeth vs, that no such, can be in the true Church of Christs making and which the Scripture, Fathers, rea∣son, and Protestants also (when they only consider the nature of the true Church) describe and propose vnto vs. And that sinfully to err in anie

point of Christs doctrin sufficiently proposed, destroieth the nature and substance of such a Church; which Protestants would neuer denie, if ne∣cessitie of defending sinfully erring Churches, did not force them to it. It is the propertie of the vniuersal Church onely, promised to her by Christ, not to err at al, ether volun∣tarily or involuntarily, ether vincibly or inuincibly, in anie thing which she professeth as matter of faith: but it is essential, both to the vniuersal, and to euerie particular true Church, not to err sinfully, voluntarily, or vin∣cibly, in anie matter of faith what∣soeuer. So that, it implieth contradi∣ction, to err in that manner, and yet to be a true Church substantially; And hauing thus proued that sinful er∣ror in anie point of faith, or of Christs doctrin sufficiently proposed, de∣stroieth the nature or substance of a true Church of Christ: Let vs also proue, that such error destroieth the true vnitie of a true Church.

Notes

• L. Canterb. sec. 10. p. 36. what is sub∣stantial in faith, is substantial to the Church.
• Description of the Church by Scripture.
• The doctrin of the Apo∣stles, inclu∣deth al their doctrin.
• Description of the Church by Fathers.
• Catholik holdeth al.
• Description of the Church, by Protestants.
• Hiremias P. C. Resp. 1 ad VVirtenb. Qui se non totos veri∣tati dedide∣runt, nè in Christi qui∣dem Ecclesia sunt.
• Entire true doctrin is the Note of the Church.
• Field l. 2. c. 2. Entire profession of the truth re∣uealed by Christ dis∣tinguisheth right bele∣uers from heretiks.
• The Church professeth the pure, en∣tire, an vn∣corrupt word of God.
• Caluin 4. instit. c. 2 §. 3. vbi ad de∣finitionem Ecclesiae vē∣tum est, hae∣rent in suo luto.
• Puritie of doctrin es∣sētial to the Church.
• Entire.
• vncorrupt.
• Forme of the Church, is entire pro∣fession of Christs faith.
• Protest. can not answer without cō∣fession that they equiua¦cate.
• See c. 2. nu. 5. l. 1.
• Protest. ex∣pound pure by impure Entire by a parte.
• VVhat is pure, hath no mixture, and what entire, is no part.
• C. 2. 4.
• Field l. 2. de Ecclesia c. 3. freedom frō pertinatious error, is euer found in the true Church. Fulks ouer∣throw of the answer to Char Pre∣face p. 114.
• Al points of faith essen∣tial to a true Church.
• Not funda∣mentals be∣long to the essence of a Church.
• See Chil∣ling. p. 209. 291.
• How Not-fundamen∣tals may be∣long secun∣darily
• Al points Christs doc∣trin howsoe∣uer must be professed at least vir∣tually or implicitly.
• C. 3. §. 5. 6. l. 2.
• C. 3. § 5. 6. l 2.
• Catholik Church in∣cludeth not al Christiās.
• Tertul. praescrip. c. 41. haeretici pacē passim cum omni∣bus miscent.
• C. 6. n. 3. l. 2.
• C. 13. S. Austin Epist 48. l. de vnit. c. 6 Collat. 3. diei c. 3. de Pa∣storib{us} c. 13. Field l. 3. de Eccles c. 43.
• A mon∣struous Church of Protestants.
• Protestants equiuocate in the name of the Church.
• Propertie of the vniuer∣sal Church, not to err at al.
• Essential, not to err vincibly, or sinfully.