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.

THE SECOND BOOKE. (Book 2)

THAT THERE BE TRVE points of faith, besids the principal, or capital Articles. FIRST CHAPTER.

1. IN the fift Chapter of the former boo∣ke we shewed, how Protestants, some∣times, (to wit, when they wil mainteine Churches erring sinfully in Not-fun∣damental points, or saluation in them, their communion with them) affirme, that Not-fundamental points, are no

points of faith: that opposition against them, is no heresie: and for which, there should be no separation in com∣munion: that denial of them, de∣stroieth nether sauing faith, Church, nor saluation; Al which (God willing) we shal refute hereafter. But first we wil shew, that there are true points of faith besids those, which are principal or capital; For this is the ground of al our discourse following.

2. First, whatsoeuer is clearely deliuered in Scripture, and sufficiently proposed to vs, is a matter of faith,* 1.1 and ought to be beleued: But there be manie things besids the principal and capital articles, that are clearely de∣liuered in Scripture, and sufficiently proposed to vs, as that Saint Paul had a cloak, Saint Timothe was sicklie, and the like. Therfore they also are matters of faith, and ought to be be∣leued.

3. Secondly, matters of faith are not* 1.2 to be measured only by the greatnes of the material obiect, which is bele∣ued, but especially by the formal

obiect of faith, for which it beleues, which is diuine reuelation sufficiently proposed to vs. For euerie habit rea∣cheth to whatsoeuer hath is formal obiect. But manie smal matters haue the like diuine reuelation sufficiently proposed, as that of S. Pauls clooke, and Timothes sicknes; Therfore they are alike matters of faith.

3. Thirdly, the holie Scripture* 1.3 Mat. 5. and 22. saieth plainly, that there are greatest and least comman∣dements, and that there are Iots or Tittles of the Law. And why not lik∣wise, great and les matters of beleif? If anie obiect, that though there be great and litle things commanded to be done, yet litle matters are not com∣manded to be done vnder paine of losse of Gods fauour, or of saluation: so though litle matters of saith be re∣uealed, and ought to be beleued when they are sufficiently proposed, as testifyed by God; yet are we not bound to beleiue them vnder paine* 1.4 of damnation. I answer, that litle matters are not commanded to be

done vnder paine of los of Gods freindship, or of saluation, becaus smal matters of their nature do not break freindship. For he were an vn∣reasonable freind, who for trifles would break freindship, and the end of the law is charitie: but al litle mat∣ters testified by God, and sufficiently proposed to vs, oblidge vs to beleue them, becaus in not beleuing them,* 1.5 we account God not worthie to be be∣leued in such matters, which is to de∣nie his veracitie, and consequently his deitie: For who in things equally testifyed by God, and equally propo∣sed* 1.6 to vs as from God, beleueth some∣things, and not others, beleueth no∣thing for Gods authoritie, but becaus himself iudgeth somethings more liklie to be true, then others. For if he beleued anie for Gods authoritie, he would beleue al, which Gods au∣thoritie equally proposed, doth equal∣ly testifie. Wherfore we maie keep charitie with God, though we obserue not litle matters, commanded by him, becaus breach of litle maters, is not op∣posit

to charitie, but only to perfection of charitie. But we cannot keep faith with God, if we beleue not smal mat∣ters, testified by him, and sufficiently proposed to vs, beca{us} not beleif of thē, is opposit to Gods veracitie, which is the formal obiect of diuine faith, and implicitly saieth: God is not worthie of beleef in such matters. For where is the lest vntruth, there is not diuine or prime veracitie: so his veracitie is denied by the lest vntruth, but not his charitie by the lest sin. Hereupon God in the last of the Apocalips, threatned to put him out of the book of life, who putteth out one word of that prophesie: but no where threat∣neth the like, to whosoeuer shal not keep the lest thing he commandeth.

5. Holie Fathers also testifie, that al things reuealed by God, and suffi∣ciently proposed to vs, are matters of faith, in that (as we shal see he∣reafter c. 2.) they account obstinat error in al such matters, to be formal heresie, and al such obstinat errants, formal heretiks: And as Saint Basil

saied: we should rather loose our li∣ues,* 1.7 then fuffer one syllable of Gods Word to perish.

6. Protestants likewise sometimes confes, and must needs confes, that al, that is clearely testified by God, and sufficiently proposed; or that those points, which they cal vnfunda∣mental, if they be sufficiently propo∣sed, are matters of faith, and of Reli∣gion. Whitaker controuer. 2. q. 5. c. 17. Shal it not be a true Church, if it think not sincerely of al heads of Religion, if it corrupt anie point of Religion. God forbid,* 1.8 yea it maie be a Church, though it think not sincerely of some parts of faith and Religion, so they be not fundamental. Loe, not fundamentals, are heads, points, and parts of faith and Reli∣gion; And controu. 4. q. 1. c. 2. p. 527. It is not necessarie, that faithful men agree in al things, which are of faith, so they agree in the highest, the cheifest, and the necessarie. Behold againe, vnfun∣damental points, matters of faith.* 1.9 Doctor Potter sec. 2. p. 38. calleth them diuine truthes, and p. 39. inten∣ding

to declare his distinction of fun∣damental, and not fundamental points, saieth: Points of Religion are wel distin∣guished* 1.10 by Thomas, and Stapleton. Some (saie they) are primitiue articles, others are Secundarie. So that Secondarie, or Not fundamentals, are points of Reli∣gion, as wel as primitiue or fundamen∣tals. And sec. 7. p. 71. Being to proue his distinction into fundamental and not fundamental, saieth: There be di∣uers degrees of truths, and errors in Re∣ligion: and commendeth Aquinas for* 1.11 deuiding the obiect of faith, into that, which is so by itself, and that, which is by accident and secondarily: The first, be to that, wherby a man is made blessed: the latter, that, which is reuealed, what∣soeuer it be: as that Abraham had two sonns. Loe, whatsoeuer is reuealed, is a truth of Religion, and of the obiect of faith. P. 73. There is a certaine mea∣sure* 1.12 and quantitie of faith, without which none can be saued (and these are his fun∣damentals) but euerie thing reuealed, belongs not to this measure. It is enough to beleue some things by a virtual faith.

Behold, vnfundamental points be∣long to faith, though not to the hi∣ghest measure therof, and are to be beleued with a virtual faith. And p. 73. 74. By fundamental doctrins, we meane such Catholik verities, as princi∣pally and essentially perteine to faith, such as properly constitute a Church, and are necessarie, in ordinarie course, to be di∣stinctly beleued by euerie Christian, that wil be saued. Other points of truth, are* 1.13 called Not fundamental, becaus they are not of such absolute necessitie, and doe not primarily belong to the vnitie of faith, or to the essence of a Church or to saluation of a Christian. Behold, not fundamen∣tal points, belong to the vnitie of faith, though not primarily. And ibid. It is* 1.14 true, whatsoeuer is reuealed in Scripture, or propounded by the Church out of Scrip∣ture, is in some sense fundamental, in regard of the diuine authoritie of God, and his word, by which it is recommended, that is, such, as maie not be denied or contradicted, without infidelitie. Mark; whatsoeuer is reuealed in Scripture, or propounded out of Scripture, is not

only a matter of faith, but also is so* 1.15 fundamental to faith, as it cannot be denied without infidelitie. And in the like sorte p. 105. It seemes fundamental to the faith, and for the saluation of euerie member of the Church, that he beleue al such points of faith, as wherof he maie be sufficiently conuinced, that they belong to the doctrin of Iesus Christ. And p. 111. It is fundamental to a Christians faith, and necessarie for his saluation, that he beleue al reuealed truths of God, wherof he maie be conuinced, that they are from God. So that al reuealed truthes, are not only points of faith, but also fun∣damental points of faith, when they maie be conuinced that they come from God: And surely they maie then be so conuinced, when they are so sufficiently proposed, as points of faith require.

7. Chilling worth in answer to the Preface p. 10. repeateth and defendeth the aforesaied words of Doctor Potter p. 105. So that by his confession, al reuealed truths, are not only points of faith, but also fundamental points

of faith, when they can be conuinced to come from God, as al reuealed truths sufficiently proposed, can. And* 1.16 ibid. p. 11. diuers times admitteth, not fundamētal points to be called points of faith. And saieth c. 4. p. 209. There be manie more points of faith, then there be articles of simple beleif, necessarie to be explicitly beleued. Where, by articles ne∣cessarie to be explicitly beleued, he mea∣neth fundamentals. For thus he ex∣presseth himself ibib. p. 220. By funda∣mental, we meane al, and onely that which is necessarie. And c. 5. p. 285. By al points of faith, you meane (saieth he) al fun∣damental points only, or al simply and ab∣solutly. So that fundamental points,* 1.17 are not simply al points of faith. Ibid. p. 294. I would faine understand, why one error in faith, (especially if Not fun∣damental) should not consist with holines of this Spouse, this Church, as wel as manie and great Sinns. So there be er∣rors* 1.18 in faith, and yet not fundamental. And c. 4. p. 193. saieth, that, Not fun∣damental points are to be beleued, becaus they are ioined with others, that are ne∣cessarie

to be beleued, and deliuered by the same authoritie, which deliuered thes. And if they be to be beleued, and de∣liuered by the same authoritie, which* 1.19 deliuered fundamentals, surely they are matters of faith. And (we shal shew hereafter c. 3.) he oftentimes saieth, that it is damnable to denie anie reuealed truth sufficiently pro∣posed. c. 5. p. 290. Fundamental errors maie signifie, ether such, as are repugnant to Gods commaund, and so in their nature damnable (and thes are errors against his not fundamentals) or such, as are not only meritoriously, but remidilesly per∣nitious, and destructiue of saluation. And thes are errors against his fundamen∣tals. And so errors against not funda∣mentals, are of their nature dam∣nable.

8. Lord Canterburiesec. 38. p. 325.* 1.20 Bellarmin is forced to grant this: There are manie things defide, which are not absolutly necessarie to saluation. Therfore there is a latitude in the faith. Where, by points absolutly necessarie, he meaneth fundamētals. So there be manie things

defide, besids fundamentals. And sec. 10. p. 37. Al which perteines to superna∣tural,* 1.21 diuine, and infallible Christian faith, is not by and by fundamental in the faith, to al men. Sec. 25. p. 161. he gran∣teth, that apoint of diuine truth, though by sundrie consequences deduced from the principles, is yet a point of faith. P. 163. The promises reach not to this, that the Church shal neuererr, no not in the ligh∣test matters of faith. So that al matters of faith, are not the weightiest. Sec. 10. p. 29. Deductions can not be fundamen∣tal, and yet to some mens saluation they are necessarie.

9. Thus plainly doe thes men sometimes confes, that such, as they terme Not fundamental points, are matters of faith: and when they are sufficiently proposed, are fundamen∣tal to faith, and to saluation, and that it is infidelitie to denie them, and er∣rors in them, of their nature, damna∣ble. How contrarie is this to that, which before they saied, that not fun∣damentals* 1.22 were no points of faith, matters of opinion, in which modest

opposition is tolerable, and for which no separation of communion ought to be made. And thus hauing shewed, that al reuealed truths whatsoeuer, sufficiently proposed for such, are matters of faith: now let vs shew, that al obstinat or sinful error against such truths, is formal heresie, and al such opposers, formal heretiks.

THAT SINFVL DENIAL of anie point of faith sufficiently proposed, is true heresie. SECOND CHAPTER.

1. IT seemeth so euident, that al sinful opposition or denial of anie point of faith sufficiently proposed, or which, for the opposers fault, is not sufficiently proposed, is true heresie,* 1.23 as it cāscarce be proued by anie thing more euident. For what doe Christiās conceaue by the name of heresie, but sinful opposition to some point of

Christian faith: or what by an heretik,* 1.24 but such an opposer? Yet wil I endea∣uour to make it more manifest.

2. And first, out of the definitions or descriptions of heresie or heretiks, giuen in holie Scripture. Rom. vltima v. 28. I desire ye Brethren, mark them, that make dissentions and scandales, con∣trarie to the doctrin which ye haue lear∣ned, and auoid them. 2. Thessal. 3. we* 1.25 denounce vnto ye Brethren, in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ, that ye with∣draw yourselues from euerie Brother wal∣king inordinatly, and not according to* 1.26 the tradition, which they haue receaued from vs: And Gal. 1. Albeit we, or an* 1.27 Angel from heauen, euangelize to ye, be∣sids that which we haue euangelized to ye, be he anathema. In al which places, an heretik, or heresie, is described, not by opposition to fundamental points only, but by opposition to the doctrin which we haue learned, against the Tradition which we haue receaued, or against which Saint Paul had preached.* 1.28 But Not fundamental points, are parte of that which we haue learned, parte

of that tradition which we haue recea∣ued, and parte of that, which S. Paul preached. Therfore sinful opposition to them, is true heresie according to Scripture,

3. Secondly, I proue it out of the descriptions of heresie, and heretiks,* 1.29 giuen by the holie Fathers, of whom, no one describeth heresie or heretitks, by opposition to only principal or ca∣pital points of faith, but by only oppo∣sition to Scripture, or doctrin of the Catholik Church. Saint Hierom. in in Galat. 5. He is an heretik, who vn∣derstands* 1.30 the Scripture otherwise, then the Holie Ghost would. Saint Augustin lib. 18. de Ciuitate c. 51. The diuel rai∣sed vp heretiks, who vnder the name of Christians, should resist Christian doctrin.* 1.31 And addeth, who in the Church doe hold anie vnsound and naughtie thing perti∣naciously, are heretiks. Lib. 7. de Genesi ad literam c. 9. They are not heretiks, but becaus they vnderstand the Scripture wrongly. And lib. de haeresibus in fine. After he had reckoned diuers here∣sies, wherof manie are not against

anie principal point of faith, he thus pronounceth: whosoeuer holdeth anie one of thē, is no Catholik Christian: which is as much, as to saie, he is an heretik. And both he, and al antiquitie ac∣counted* 1.32 Donatists, heretiks, for their error about rebaptization. who yet, (saieth Lord Canterb. sec. 35. p. 300.) for ought I know, did hold the founda∣tion.* 1.33 And Morton in his Grand Im∣posture c. 15. p. 418. The question of Rebaptization, was no fundamental er∣ror. And Chillingworth c. 1. p. 41. Saint Cyprian and Stephen might both be saued, becaus their contrarie beleif (about Rebaptization) was not touching anie point conteined in Scripture. Nether can they saie, that the Donatists error a∣bout Rebaptization, was fundamen∣tal, vnles they wil damne S. Cyprian, who confessedly held that error, but* 1.34 without obstinacie, as the Donatists did. Saint Epiphan. in Saint Hierom. l. 3. contra Ruffinum Manie heresies haue been cast out of the Church for one word or twoe contrarie to faith. He saieth not, contrarie to the foundation of

faith, but absolutly, to faith, Saint Gregorie Nazianzene Orat. 49. There* 1.35 can be nothing more dangerous, then those heretiks, who with one word, as with a drop of poison, infect our Lords true and simple doctrin, and Apostolical tradition. But who err in Not funda∣mental points of faith, doe so: For they are parte of Christs doctrin, and Apostolical Tradition. Herupon Cal∣uin 4. Institut. c. 2. paragr. 5. saieth: Augustin putteth this difference betweene Heretiks, and Schismatiks, that they, by false doctrins, corrupt the sinceritie of faith, but thes, &c. And in 1. Corinth. c. 11. v. 13. The Fathers put heresie, in* 1.36 dissention of doctrin. So clearely he con∣fesseth, that the Fathers account anie corruption of Christs faith or doctrin,* 1.37 to be heresie. And Perkins Galat. 5. v. 11. The Fathers condemned as He∣retiks, who erred in smal matters, hol∣ding the foundation, as Vigilantius No∣uatus, &c.

4. Protestants also define heresie, to be an obstinat error in anie point of faith. Wittenbergenses in Refuta∣tione

orthodoxi consensus p. 73. Not* 1.38 enerie heretik impugned al and euerie ar∣ticle of faith: but for the most parte, each heretik impugned one only purposely; whom neuertheles, being obstinat in their error, the Church rightly condemned as Heretiks. Schusselburg 1. 2. Theol.* 1.39 Caluin art. 1. we are certaine out of the word of God, that obstinat error in anie false doctrin, doth make heretiks. Thus the Lutherans: Beza li. de puniendis* 1.40 hereticis p. 150. we eal them properly he∣retiks, who pretending great pietie, yet doe not yeeld to the admonition of the* 1.41 Church: and by false doctrin, doe break the peace and confession of the Church. And ibid. The Apostle in his epistle to the* 1.42 Romans doth not name heretiks, but plainly defineth thē: For when he had ad∣monished the brethren, that they should note thos who make dissentions and scan∣dales, he addeth, against that doctrin which you haue learnt: wherfore where thes two meet, there is heresie according to the Apostles definition, then the which we ought not to seek anie better. Fulk in his Reionder to Bristow p. 82. The

Parlament determineth Heresie by con∣trarietie* 1.43 to the Canonical Scripture: And p. 71. I say, an Heretik is he, which in the Church obstinatly mainteineth an opinion contrarie to the Scripture. Plessie de Ec∣clesia c. 2. we cal them heretical Chur∣ches, who err in faith. Moulins lib. 1. contra Peron c. 7. They are called He∣retiks, who are separated from the ortho∣dox Church, for some error in faith. Bu∣canus in locis q. 33. heresie, is properly dissention in doctrin. Morton lib. 1. Apol. c. 3. whosoeuer anie waie departeth from the Catholik faith, is an heretik, saieth Thomas, to whom subscribeth Oc∣cam, and that rightly. Tom. 2. l. 5. c. 13. To be an hcretik, is to dissent from Scrip∣ture. And in his Grand Imposture c. 5. p. 325. To be vnwilling, ether to learne, or to yeeld to manifest truth, is proper to* 1.44 a Satanical Synagog. Iuel in Defence of the Apologiae p. 44. For iust proof of Heresie three things necessarily are re∣quired 1. that it be an error. 2. that it be an error against the truth of Gods word 3. that it be stoutly and wilfully main∣teind. Sharpe de Notis Eccles. col. 333.

That is an heretical Church, which obsti∣natly holdeth errors in doctrin. Chil∣ling worth c. 2. p. 101. heresie is nothing,* 1.45 but a manifest deuiation from, and an op∣position to the faith. The like he hath c. 4. p. 199. Doctor Potter sec. 2. p. 55. Whosoeuer, ether wilfully opposes anie Ca∣tholik* 1.46 veritie mainteined by this Church, (of Saints) or the Catholik visible Church, as do heretiks &c. sec. 4. p. 95. He is iustly estemed an heretik, becaus he* 1.47 yeelds not to Scripture sufficiently pro∣pounded to him. Ibid. p. 124. An obstinate standing out against euident Scripture sufficiently cleared vnto him, makes an heretik. Sec. 7. p. 110. where the reuealed wil or word of God is sufficiently propoun∣ded, there he, that opposeth, is conuinced of error, and he who is thus conuinced, is an heretik. And ibid. p. 105. 106. It seemes fundamental to the faith, and for* 1.48 the saluation of euerie member of the Church, that he acknowledg and beleue al such points of faith, as whereof he maie be sufficiently conuinced, that they belong to the doctrin of Iesus Christ. For he, that being sufficiently conuinced, doth oppose,

is ostbinate an heretik, and finally such a one as excluds himself out of beauen. Feild l. 2. de Eccles. c. 3. Freedom from fundamental error, may be found among Heretiks. And l. 1. c. 13. Heretiks are they that obstinatly persist in error cōtrarie to the Churches faith. Behold, how ob∣stinat opposition to the doctrin of the Scripture, of the word of God, of the Catholik visible Church, or of anie point of which maie be conuin∣ced to belong to the doctrin of Christ, is true, proper, and damnable heresie. The English Protestant Church also excommunicateth al, whosoeuer shal affirme that the (39.) articles are in anie parte superstitious or erroneous. And yet I hope they wil not say, that euerie parte of their 39. articles is funda∣mental in their sense. Wherfor they may be iustly excommunicated out of the Church, who affirme some not fundamental point, to be erroneous. And art. 33. who are excōmunicated, are cut from the vnitie of the Church. Wherfore, when Protestants wil haue* 1.49 only obstinat opposition to some prin∣cipal

or capital point of faith, to be true and proper heresie, they speak nether with Scripture, Fathers, nor with themselues. Nether haue they anie authoritie of Scripture, Father,* 1.50 or other reason to limit heresie to ob∣stinat opposition of fundamental points, but onely, least they should condemn some of their Brethren for heretiks, whom they cannot denie, but err in some points of faith suffi∣ciently proposed, or which, (if it were not their fault) would be so pro∣posed to them, and consequently, err obstinatly and sinfully. And if we ask them, what sin they call, sin∣ful error in anie point of faith, if not Heresie, they can not tel. But now hauing seen, that euerie sinful error against anie point of faith sufficiently proposed, or which would be so pro∣posed, if it were not the errants fault, is true heresie: Let vs see, that eueric such error is damnable, becaus some∣times Protestants wil confes that al such error is heresie, but denie, that al heresie is damnable: as is euident

by what we haue rehearsed of their doctrin in the second Chapter l. 1. n. 2. And Chillingworth c. 5. p. 278. put∣teth fundamental heresles, and others,* 1.51 which (saieth he) doe not plainly destroie saluation, nor of themselues damne no man.

That sinful denial of anie point of faith sufficiently proposed, is damnable. THIRD CHAPTER.

1. THat al sinful opposition or de∣nial* 1.52 of anie point of faith suffi∣ciently proposed, or which would be so proposed, if it were not the oppo∣sers fault, is damnable, followeth out of that we haue proued, that al such opposition, is true heresie. For that al true heresie, is damnable, is euident out of holie Scripture, Fa∣thers, Reason, and Confession of Protestants. For the Apostle Galat.

5. v. 20. and 21. reckoneth sects or he∣resies,* 1.53 among those sinns, of which he saieth: who doe such things, shal not obteine the Kingdom of God. And ma∣keth no more distinction of heresie, then he doth of the other sinns. And Galat. 1. V. 8. saieth generally: If anie Euangelize, beside that, which ye haue receaued, be he accursed. And Tit. 3. v. 10. Auoid a man, that is an heretik, after the first and second admonition, knowing that he, who is such a one, is subuerted, and sinneth, being condemned by his* 1.54 owne iudgment. But what hindereth to obteine the Kingdom of God, what deserueth a Curese, and condemneth a man in his owne iudgment, is doubt∣les damnable. Our Sauiour also Ioan. 10. calleth heretiks Theeues and Rob∣bers. And Apocal. vltim. v. 19. it is saied. Ifanie shal diminish of the words of this Book of this prophesie, God shal take awaie his parte out of the Book of life. And if it be damnable to diminish a word of Gods Book, much more damnable is it, to diminish some point of his faith or doctrin. The same also

followeth out of thos places of Scrip∣ture, which we shal cite hereafter,* 1.55 which commaund vs to flie the com∣panie of heretiks.

2. Holie Fathers also teach the same. Tertullian de praescript. c. 2. Heresies are to destroie faith: and do* 1.56 bring euerlasting death. And c. 37. If they be heretiks, they can be no Christians. And surely it is damnable, to be no* 1.57 Christian. Saint Cyprian Epist. 73. Nether faith, nor Church, are common to vs with heretiks. And he addeth, that both by the testimonie of the Ghospel and Apostle, heretiks are called Anti-Christs.* 1.58 The like hesaieth Epist. 40. 55. 74. 75. and lib. de vnitate and Fir∣milian Epist. 75. Saint Augnstin l. 2. contra Crescon. c. 10. saieth to the Donatists. Ye haue no Christian Church. l. 3. de Baptis. c. 19. Al heretiks and* 1.59 Schismatiks, are false Christians. L. 21. de Ciuitate c. 25. An heretik, is worse then an Infidel. And in Enchiridioc.* 1.60 5. Christ, in name only, is found with anie heretiks. Saint Gregorie Nazian. Orat. 21. Driue awaie heretiks, as the

staine and destruction of the Church, and the poison of truth. And Saint Athanase in his Creed, whosoeuer wil be saued, before al things, he must hold the Catholik faith: which vnles he keep whole and in∣uiolate, without doubt he shal perish euer∣lastingly. But heretiks hold not the Catholik faith whole and inuiolate. Therfore &c. S. Fulgentius de fide c. 38. & 39. Hold most firmely, and doubt not at al, that not only Pagans, but also al Iewes, Heretiks, and Schismatiks, who* 1.61 end this life out of the Catholik Church, shal goe into euerlasting fire prouided for the Deuil and his Angels. Finally Saint Chrysostom in Galat. 1. expresly saieth that the lesterror in matter or faith de∣stroieth faith. That he (S. Paul) might shew that anie litle thing wrongly min∣gled* 1.62 doth corrupt the whole, he said the Ghospel was ouerthrown. For as he who in the Kings coine doth clip but a litle of the stamp, maketh the whole of no value: so who destroieth the lest particle of sound faith, is wholy corrupted. Where then are they who condemn vs, becaus we contend with Heretiks, and say: there is no dif∣ference

betwixt vs and them, but that al our discord is for ambition to dominere. Let them heare what Paul saieth, that they had ouerthrown the Ghospel who had brought in neuer so litle noueltie. Which words are more cleare then to be eluded by Chillingworths Answer c. 6. p. 381. that Saint Chrysostom by Faith meaneth only Fundamental points of faith. For Saint Chrysost. expresly speaketh of litle things, and lest particles of faith, and neuer so litle nouelties. Besids his exposition is vo∣luntarie, not proued out of one word of Saint Chrysostom. And his reason, becaus by Faith is oftentimes meant onely Fundamental points, is Sophi∣stical. For it is a particularibus and dissimilibus. For Faith is neuer taken for anie part of it, but when that is some way declared by the speaker or writer. Becaus al words are to be meant according to their proprietie and latitude, vnles the contrarie be declared, els we could not be certaine how words were to be taken. Which were to destroie the end of speech and

writing. Far more testimonies of Fa∣thers might be brought to this purpos, but whom these suffice not, none wil suffice.

3. Reason also conuinceth, that al herefie is damnable. For it is a sin in a weightie matter, to wit, against faith. Moreouer heresie, is a sinful Not beleif, or Disbeleif of some di∣uine truth sufficiently proposed to come from God which is in effect not to beleue God in that truth: or to denie Gods veracitie, and to giue God* 1.63 the Lie; as Chillingworth speaketh, or as Doctor Potter saieth: An act of Infidelitie. And an act of infidelitie, or to giue God the Lie, and to denie Gods veracitie, is doubtles most dam∣nable. And, as the same Potter saieth sec. 7. p. 109. In this case, the difference is not great, betweene him that is wilfully* 1.64 blinde, and him, that knowingly gaine∣saieth the truth: but knowingly to gaine saie diuine truth, is most damnable, and a sin against the Holie Ghost. Nether is there anie ground in holie Scripture, Fathers, or Reason, to

denie al heresie to be damnable: But some Protestants denie it, merely, be∣caus they cannot denie, but that some of their Churches and Brethren cul∣pably hold some heresies, whom they are ashamed to confes, to be in state of damnation.

4. Protestants likewise sometimes confes that al heresie is damnable. Luther in Explicat. Symboli Tom. 7. fol. 124. No heretik is saued, vnles* 1.65 he returne to the Church, and in al things think, doe, and teach the same. And l. de* 1.66 votis Tom. 2. fol. 272. If anie denie Marie to be a Virgin, or doe not beleue anie other singular article of faith, he is damned. King Iames Resp. and Pe∣ron p. 384. Damneth al, who (saieth he) haue departed from the faith of the Catholik Church, and are become here∣tiks. Apologie of the Church of En∣gland. Heresie is a forsaking of saluation and departure from the bodie and Spirit of Christ. Idem: we pronounce al them damned, who haue a wiked opinion of anie point of Christian Religion. French Protestants in their cene. I excommu∣nicate

al Heretiks. Feild Append. p. 23. we doe not admit anie sectaries into the communion of the true Catholik Church. White in Preface to his way: In que∣stions of faith whosoeuer erreth, looseth no les then his soule therby. Hooker of iustific. §. 11. Heresie is heretically main∣teined by such, as obstinatly hold it, after holesome admonition. Of thes I make no doubt, but their condemnation, without an actual repentance, is ineuitable. Whi∣taker Praefat in controu. One heresie, is* 1.67 sufficient to damnation. And controu. 2. q. 4. c. 2. No heretiks can be saued. And ibid. q. 5. c. 2. we confes that here∣tiks are to be fled. Hooker l. 3. p. 129. Heresies which are not actually repented of, exclude quite and cleane from saluatiō. More of the like Confessions of Pro∣testants, maie be seene lib. 1. of the Author of Protestancie c. 1. to which I wil ad the Confessions of late English Writers.

5. Doctor Potter sect. 2. p. 55. Whosoeuer, ether wilfully opposes anie Catholik veritie mainteined by this Church (of Saints) or the Catholik

visible Church, as do heretiks, their con∣dition* 1.68 is damnable. Sec. 7. p. 74. It is true, that whatsoeuer is reuealed in Scrip∣ture, or propounded by the Church out of* 1.69 Scripture, is in some sorte fundamental, in regard of the diuine authoritie of God, and his word, by which it is recōmended, that is, such, as maie not be denied, or con∣tradicted* 1.70 without infidelitie. And p. 110. Where there is no such impediment (of incapacitie) and the reuealed wil or word of God is sufficiently propounded, there he that opposeth, is conuinced of error, and he who is thus conuinced, is an heretik, and* 1.71 heresie is a work of the flesh, which ex∣cludeth from heauen. Galat. 5. v. 20. p. 105. It seemes fundamental to the faith,* 1.72 and to saluation of euerie Christian mem∣ber, that he acknowledg, and beleue al such points of faith, wherof he maie be sufficiently conuinced, that they belong to the doctrin of Iesus Christ. For he that being sufficiently conuinced, doth oppose, is obstinat, an heretik, and finally such a* 1.73 one, as excludes himself out of heauen. And p. III. It is fundamental to a Chri∣stians faith, and necessarie for his salua∣tion,

that he beleue al reuealed truths of God, wherof he maie be conuinced that they are from God. Sec. 4. p. 99. Heresie is a greiuous crime, where it is true. And as Chillingworth saieth in Answer to the Preface p. 8. He giues them only, hope of pardon of errors, who are desirous, and according to the proportion of their opportunities and abilities, industrious to finde the truth: or at least truly repen∣tant, that they haue not beene so.

6. Chillingworth in Answer to* 1.74 the Preface p. 10. and 11. To denie, or disbeleue anie point of faith sufficiently proposed to his vnderstanding, as a truth reuealed by God, is to giue God the Lie. P. 18. If this proposal be so sufficient, as the partie, to whom it is made, should, and (but for his own fault) would haue been* 1.75 conuinced of the diuine veritie of the doc∣trin proposed, a fault I confes, it is, and without repentance, damnable, if, al cir∣cumstances considered, the proposal be suf∣ficient.* 1.76 P. 19. When God hath interposed his testimonie on one side, or other, so that ether they do see it, and wil not, or were it not for their owne voluntarie and auoi∣dable

fault, might and should see it, and doe not, let al such errors be as damnable as you please to make them. P. 21. If anie Papist or Protestant be betraied into, or kept in anie error, by anie sin of his wil, such error is, as the cause of it, damnable. P. 23. There is, (as matters now stand)* 1.77 as great necessitie of beleuing thos truths of Scripture, which are Not fundamental, as thos, that are. And p. 24. he citeth Doctor Potter saying. If anie be ne∣gligent in seeking truth, vnwilling to finde it, ether doth see it, and wil not: or* 1.78 might see it, and wil not, his case is dan∣gerous, and without repentance, desperat. And Chillingworth addeth: He secu∣reth none, that in matter of Religion, are* 1.79 sinfully, that is, willingly erroneous. And c. 3. p. 138. You infer out of Doctor Pot∣ters words, that al errors are alike dam∣nable,* 1.80 if the manner of propounding the contrarie truths, be not different: which (for ought I know) al Protestants, and al, that haue sense, must graunt. And ibid. p. 161. we are obliged vnder paine of dam∣nation, to beleue al, wherof we may be fufficiently assured, that Christ taught it his

Apostles, his Apostles, the Church. And p. 137. namely he saieth of a Not fun∣damental* 1.81 point: It maie, by accident, become fundamental, becaus it maie be so proposed, that the denial of it, wil draw after it, the denial of this fundamental truth: That al, which God saies, is true. And al that is so sufficiently propo∣sed, as matters of faith ought to be, are proposed in such sort. Ibid pag. 134. Among the conditions of saluation, which Christ requireth, one is, that we beleue what he has reuealed, when it is suf∣ficiently declared to haue beene reuealed by him. And 158. If the cause of the error be some voluntarie, and auoidable fault the error is in itself finful, and conse∣quētly in its owne nature dawnable. And c. 5. p. 280. Capital danger may arise from errors, though not fundamental. Seep. 278.

7. Lord Canterburie sec. 37. p. 320. It is true, that error in points not funda∣mental maie be damnable to some men, though they hold it not against their con∣science. As namely, when they hold an er∣ror in some dangerous points, which grate

vpon the foundation, and yet wil nether seek the meanes to know the truth, nor accept and beleue truth, when it is known especially being men able to iudge. And p. 342. I agree, that he which hopes for sal∣uatiō, must beleue the Catholik faith whole and entire in euerie point. And sec. 35. p. 289. saieth. A matter of faith, and so* 1.82 of saluation too. As if euerie matter of faith, were also matter of saluation. And both he p. 24. 31. 139. 140. 162. 165. Chillingworth p. 14. 277. 279. 281. 285. And Potter sec. 5. p. 19. sec. 7. p. 58. 78. speak of absolutly or simply fun∣damental, or necessarie points, which in∣sinuateth, that there are others truly fundamētal, or truly necessarie, besids thos which are absolutely such. The Author of the Preface to K. Iames before Iuels workes. In things neces∣sarie onely, necessitate Precepti, not onely witting and willing disobedience, but also wilful and affected ignorance doth condemn.

8. In which Confessions of the* 1.83 Protestants, I would haue the Reader to mark wel thes points. First, that al* 1.84

errors, fundamental or Not funda∣mental, are alike damnable, if the contrarie truth be alike proposed. Secondly, that a Not fundamental* 1.85 point sufficiently proposed, is so fun∣damental to faith and saluation, as to contradict it, is infidelitie, and to giue* 1.86 God the Lie. Thirdly, that who be∣leueth not anie one diuine truth suffi∣ciently proposed, is an heretik, and excludes himself out of heauen. Fourthly, that who is negligent to* 1.87 seek truth, or vnwilling to finde it, is, without repentance, desperat. Fiftly,* 1.88 that who, were it not for their auoida∣ble faults, might, and should see truth, and do not, their error is dam∣nable, and that they secure none, who is sinfully erroneous. And if they would constantly stand to thes points, there would be litle cōtrouersie about fundamental, and not fundamental* 1.89 points. For this is to grant plainly, that no points of faith are so fundamental, as they are sufficient to sauing faith, Church, and saluation, if other points be sufficiently proposed and not bele∣ued,

or for the not beleuers fault, not so proposed: nor anie so not funda∣mental, as they are not necessarie to sauing faith, Church, and saluation to be beleued actually, if they be suf∣ficiently proposed, and necessarie to be virtually beleued, whether they be so proposed, or no. And al the que∣stion betwixt Catholiks and Protes∣tants is, whether anie points of faith be thus fundamental, and anie thus Not-fundamental, or no. But be∣caus Protestants can not denie, but that some Churches, which they mainteine, haue had the truth, against which they err, sufficiently proposed to them, or if it were not their auoid∣able fault, might and should see the truth, therfor when they are to de∣fend such Churches, they forget this doctrin. But now hauing proued, that to err sinfully, in anie matter of faith, is both heresie, and destroieth saluation, let vs also proue, that it destroieth true sauing faith.

That vincible and sinful error against anie point of Christian faith suf∣ficiently proposed, destroieth true sauing faith. FOVRTH CHAPTER:

1. THat vincible and sinful error against anie point of faith suf∣ficiently proposed, destroieth true sa∣uing faith, is euident out of this, that al such error is true heresie, as is be∣fore* 1.90 proued, and heresie is opposit to sauing faith, as is euident out of the definitions of heresie, related before c. 2. out of Scripture, Fathers, and Protestants: and also out of the testi∣monies of holie Fathers c. 3. n. 2. that heresie is the destruction of faith, the poison of faith, that heretiks haue ne∣ther faith, nor Church, common with Catholiks, haue Christ only in name: that heretiks are no true Christians, are false Christians, are Christians

only in name, are worse then Infidels, are Anti Christs. Which euidently shew, that heresie is opposit to sauing faith, and heretiks, to Catholiks. For if they be no Christians, much les are they Catholiks. And Protestants sometimes giue the same iudgment of them. For thus Luther in caput 7. Math. tom 7. Heretiks, are not Chri∣stians:* 1.91 Magdeburgians in Praefat. Centur. 6. They are Anti-Christs, and diuels. Beza de puniendis haereticis. They are infidels, and Apostataes. Whi∣taker Controu. 2. q. 5. c. 2. the name of Catholik, is opposit to Heretiks. Morton l. 1. Apolog. c. 7. Ether we must giue the name of Catholiks to Protestants, or we must denie thē the name of Christians. And surely, who are no Christians, but Anti-Christs, diuels, infidels, and Apostataes, and opposit to Catholiks, haue not sauing faith. And though Estius in primā Ioan. 4. and 3. distinst. 23. paragr. 13. think, that, what truth heretiks beleue, they beleue it with* 1.92 diuine faith, yet he denieth, that their faith is Catholik, or simply faith, be∣caus

it is not entire faith: nor euer said, that it is a sauing faith, as Protestants saie, and is the main question bet∣weene vs and them.

2. Secondly, I proue it out of* 1.93 Scripture. 1. Timoth. 1. v. 20. where certaine heretiks are saied, to haue made Shipwrack of faith. And c. 4. v. 1. In the latter daies, some shal depart from faith harkning to spirits of error, and doc∣trins of Diuels. And Epist. 2. c. 2. v. 18. he saieth of other heretiks: They haue fallen from truth, and ouerturned the faith of some. But who haue made Shipwrack of faith, haue departed from faith, haue fallen from truth, and whos faith is ouerturned, haue not sauing faith.

3. Thirdly, I proue that sinful error against anie point of faith suffi∣ciently* 1.94 proposed, destroieth true sa∣uing faith, becaus it destroieth the true formal obiect of diuine faith. For the formal obiect of diuine faith, is whole diuine truth reuealed by God, and sufficiently proposed to vs,* 1.95 that it is from God. But voluntarie

error against diuine truth reuealed, and sufficiently proposed, taketh awaie this formal obiect. Therfore it taketh awaie diuine faith. For what taketh awaie the formal obiect of anie habit or power, taketh awaie the habit itself. The Minor is euident. The Maior also is cleare. For what other can be saied to be the formal obiect of faith? And it is confessed by Protes∣tants. For thus Lord Canterburie sec.* 1.96 38. p. 344. we beleue them for the same formal reason in al, namely, be∣caus they are reuealed, from, and by God, and sufficiētly applied in his word, and by the Churches ministration. And Doctor Potter sec. 5. p. 3. The formal obiect of faith, is diuine reuelation. The same he hath p. 8. and 10. And Chillingworth c. 1. p. 35. Faith is an assent to diuine re∣uelation, vpon the authoritie of the re∣uealer. And hereupon the same Chil∣lingworth p. 23. saieth: He that doth not beleue al the vndoubted parts of the vn∣doubted* 1.97 books of Scripture, can hardly beleue anie, nether haue we reason to be∣leue, he doth so. And the same I say

of vndoubted points of Christs doc∣trin.

4. Fourthly I proue, that sinful er∣ror against anie point of faith suffi∣ciently proposed, destroieth true-sa∣uing faith, becaus it destroieth the true vnitie therof. For true diuine faith, is wholy one, and the same in al true Beleuers. But who sinfully beleue not some points of faith sufficiently pro∣posed, which others beleue, haue not wholy one and the same faith There∣fore &c. The Minor is euident. The Maior I proue out of Scripture, Fa∣thers, Reason, and Confession of* 1.98 Protestants. The Scripture Ephes. 4. saieth: One God, one Faith, one Baptisme. Where, not only faith is saied to be one, but also it is saied to be one, as God, and baptisme are, which are wholy one. And this same, proue al* 1.99 thos places of Scripture, which teach, that the Church is one, which here∣after we shal cite. For seeing the pro∣fession of faith is part of the forme of the Church, she could not be wholy one, if her forme were not

altogether one.

5. The Fathers also teach the same* 1.100 For thus-Saint Ireneus l. 1. c. 4. She, who is the vniuersal Church, hath one and the same faith in al the world. Saint Cy∣prian l. de vnitate: God is one, and Christ is one, and his Church is one, and faith is one, vnitie cannot be deuided, nor one* 1.101 Bodie separated by disunion of the ioints. Saint Hilarie l. 11. de Trinitate: Who doubteth, but it is beside faith, which is beside one faith? And lib. contra Con∣stantium. What is beside one faith, is not faith, but persidiousnes. Saint Optatus* 1.102 l. 5. If you giue an other faith, giue also an other God. Saint Leo serm 4 de Na∣tiuitate: If it be not one, it is not faith. And thes Fathers saie simply ad abso∣lutely, that faith is one, without anie restriction to fundamētal points. And it is both voluntarie, and Sophistical, to limit that to a parte, which is spo∣ken absolutly, when the speaker giues no occasion of such limitation: Rea∣son also cōuinceth, that faith is wholy one in euery true beleuer. For (as we saied before) the formal obiect of true* 1.103

faith, is diuine reuelation sufficiently proposed: but this is wholy one and the same in al beleuers, and conse∣quently also faith, which (as al other habits) taketh its vnitie and distinction from its formal obiect.

6. Protestants also sometimes con∣fès,* 1.104 that faith is wholy and entirely one, and vndeuided. Luther in caput 7. Math. Tom. 5. fol. 74. Faith must be round, that is, in al articles, beleuing* 1.105 howsoeuer litle matters. For who doth not rightly beleue one article, doth not rightly beleue in al: as Saint I ames saieth, who offendeth in one, is made guiltie of al. And in tria Symbola Tom. 7. fol. 141. Christian faith must be entire and perfect* 1.106 euerie waie. For albeit it maie be weak and faint, yet must it needs be entire and true. In caput 7. Deutron. tom. 3. fol. 56. Faith suffereth nothing, and the word beareth with nothing: but the word must be perfectly pure, and the doctrin alwaies wholy Holsome. And tom. 1. German. Epist. ad Albertum: He doth not satif∣fie, if in other things he confes Christ and his word. For who denieth Christ in one

article or word, denieth him in al, seing there is one only Christ, the same in al his words. Wittenbergenses in Refutat. Orthodoxi Consensus p. 73. As he, who keepeth al the Law, but offendeth in one, is (witnes Saint I ames) guiltie of al: So who beleueth not one word of Christ, though he seeme to beleue the other arti∣cles of the Creed, yet beleueth nothing, and is damned, as incredulous. Scussel∣burg l. 1. Theolog. Caluin. art. 1. Most truly wrote Saint Chrysostom in 1. Galat. He corrupteth the whole doctrin, who subuerteth it in the lest article. Most truly saied Ambrose Epist. ad Demetriadem: He is out of the number of the faithful,* 1.107 and lot of Saints, who dissenteth in anie point from the Catholik truth. Field l. 3. c. 3. There are some things explicitè cre∣denda, some things implicitè: which, whosoeuer wil be saued, must beleue them, atleast implicitè and in general.

7. Martyr Epist. ad peregrinos in Anglia, tomo 2. loc. colum. 136. we answer, that al Gods words, as they pro∣ceed* 1.108 from him, are of equal weight and authorities and therfore none maie of his

iudgmēt receaue this, and reiect an other, as fals. Iames saieth boldly, who effendeth in one, is made guiltie of al. If that haue place in obedience to the commandements, it wil be true also for points of beleif. Cal∣uin in Ephes. 4. v. 5. vpon that: One God, one Faith, writeth thus. As often as thou readest the word, one, vnderstand it put emphatically, as if he saied: Christ cannot be deuided, faith cannot be parted. Perkin in Explicat Symbolicolum, 512. Thus indeed fareth the matter, that a man failing in one article, faileth and erreth in al. Wherupon faith is termed in entire copulatiue. Spalatensis cōtra Sua∣rem,* 1.109 c. 1. nu. 7. Diuine faith perisheth wholy by the lest detraction, and conse∣quenity, it is no true Church, no not vi∣sible,* 1.110 in which entire faith is not kept in publik profession. L. Canterb. p. 325. There is but one sauing faith. Item 338. And 342. who hopes for saluation must beleue the Catholik saith whole and entire in euerie point. P. 105. Faith beleueth not onely the articles, but al the things right∣ly deduced from them. Doctor Potter sec. 2. p. 41. commendeth Saint Basil

for saying; Not asyllable of diuine doc∣trin must be betraied: And S. Gegorie Nazian. for saying: One word, like a drop of poison, maie taint and corrupt faith. And sec. 7. p. 74. insinuateth clearely, that not fundamental points perteine to the vnitie of faith, though not prima∣rily: and pag. 73. that they are to be beleued by a virtual, or general faith, and as it were a negatiue faith, wherby they are not to be denied or contradicted. Whosoeuer therfore denie thē, being sufficiently proposed, haue no true sa∣uing faith. The like he hath also p. 75.* 1.111 and (as I cited in the 3. Chapter n. 5.) doth oftentimes say, that it is funda∣mental to faith to beleue al that is suf∣ficiently proposed, and that it is infi∣delitie to denie anie such point: whos words alloweth Chillingworth and* 1.112 addeth that not to beleue such points, is to giue God the Lie And, that not fundamental points maie be so propo∣sed, as the denial of them, wil draw af∣ter it, the denial of this fundamental truth. That al which God saies, is true. And if Not-fundamental points be

fundamental to faith, when they are sufficiently proposed, how can sauing faith be, and not beleue them? Seing nothing can be without al that is fun∣damental to it, as is euident by itselfe, and confessed by Protestants before* 1.113 l. 1. c. 7. num. 5. Besids they profès by Fundamental, to vnderstand essential: and nothing can be without that, which is essential to it. And if it be infi∣delitie, and to giue God the Lie, to de∣nie such points, how can there be true sauing faith, where such points are denied? seing sauing faith cannot stand, where infidelitie is, or the Lie giuen to God. And out of al that hath beene said of faith it is euident, that there can be no sauing faith, but that which actually beleueth not onely al fundamental points, but euen al points whatsoeuer of Gods reuealed word sufficiently proposed: and virtually also, al points or partes of his word whatsoeuer: and that al other kinds of beleif, is true heresie, and a spice of infidelitie.

The errors of Protestants, touching the essence and vnitie of true faith, and true Church, confuted out of that vvhich hath beene saied. FIFT CHAPTER.

1. OVt of that which hath been saied of the essence and the vnitie of true diuine faith, together with that, which shal be saied here∣after of the essence, and vnitie of the true Church of God, the errors of Protestants touching the essence and vnitie of true faith and Church, maie be easily, and clearely con∣futed.

2. Their first, and principal error, (out of which proceed the others) is,* 1.114 that there be certaine principal arti∣cles, which alone, belong (as D. Potter speaketh, sec. 5. p. 16.) to the substance of faith. Sec. 3. p. 60. Cōprehend the life and substance of Religion. Sec. 7. p. 74. which

essentially perteine to the faith, and pro∣perly constitute a Church. P. 78. which make vp the Catholik faith. And p. 102, wherin consists the vnitie of faith, and of the Catholik Church. Whervpon he saieth, sec. 2. p. 39. Among wise men, each discord in Religion dissolues not the vnitie of faith. And Lord Conterburie sec. 38. p. 355. saieth: That to err in Not fundamentals, is no breach vpon the one sauing saith. And p. 360. In things not necessarie, though they be di∣uine truths also, Christian men maie differ, and yet preserue the one necessarie faith. And Chilling worth c. 3. pag. 159. saieth there be certaine propo∣sitions or doctrins, which integrate and make vp the bodie of Christian Reli∣gion.

3. But this error, that the essence of sauing faith; and of the true Church of God, consisteth only in-certaine principal points, and the substantial* 1.115 vnitie of them, is clearely confuted out of what hath been saied. For the total obiect of true sauing faith, is no parte only of Gods reuealed word, or

anie part only of Christs doctrin, but Gods whole reuealed word, Christs whole doctrin, as is euident by itselfe, and is proued before, and also con∣fessed* 1.116 by Doctor Potter sect. 7. p. 71. and sec. 2. p. 39. where he alloweth the diuisio of the obiect of faith made by Saint Thomas; into primarie, and into Secundarie, as that Abraham had 2. Sonns. And both he, and Chilling∣worth cited in the third chaptern. 5. 6. confes, that it is fundamental to faith, to beleue Not fundamental points suf∣ficiently proposed, and so far funda∣mental, that to denie them, is infide∣litie, and to giue God the Lie. But what is fundamental to faith, is es∣sential to faith, as is euident by itself, and Protestants confessed aboue l. 1. c. 7. num. 5. And besids they confes∣sed * 1.117 l. 1. c. 7. num. 6. and 7. That by fundamental, they meane Essential. And if Not fundamental sufficiently proposed, be essential to faith, fals it is, that the essence of sauing faith con∣sisteth only in certaine principal arti∣cles. And if the essence of faith consist

not in them only, nether doth the vnitie of it consist in them only; but whosoeuer are deuided in anie points of faith sufficiently proposed, are de∣uided in the verie substance, and sub∣stantial vnitie of faith. And sith the substance of faith, is but one, the one of the parties deuided, hath no true sauing faith.

4. Their second error, is: That (as Lord Canterburie saieth sec. 39. p. 376. The Protestant and the Roman Re∣ligion are the same. Potter sec. 3. p. 58. Reformation did not change the substance of Religion. So also white Defens. c. 38.* 1.118 For the substance of the Roman Re∣ligiō (as of al true Christian Religion) is profession of al Christs doctrin suf∣ficiently proposed to vs, and essential∣ly includeth Romish doctrin, as is euident by that Epitheton Roman.* 1.119 And the substance of the Protestant Religion, are only certaine principal articles of his doctrin. Therfore the substance of both of them is not the same. Besids, who differ in not fun∣damentals sufficiētly proposed, differ

in some essential point of faith, becaus (as is now rehearsed out of Protestāts) such points are fundamental to faith, and haue the formal obiect of faith which is diuine reuelation. But the Roman and Protestant Religion dif∣fer at least in Not fundamental points sufficiently proposed; Therfore they differ in some essential points, and in some formal obiect of faith, and con∣sequently are not the same. And this Lord Canterburie seemeth to confes when p. 125. he saieth. The time was, that you and we were al of one beleef. As if now we were not. And p. 285. There are no meane differences that are bee∣tweene vs.

5. The third error is, that they haue not left the Church of Rome in her essence, as speaketh. Lord Canterburie* 1.120 sec. 25. p. 192. Doctor Potter sec. 3. p. 62. 66. and others commonly. For sith they haue left the Church of Ro∣me in profession of some not funda∣mentals sufficiently proposed, they haue left her in her essence: becaus her essence includeth al points of faith

sufficiently proposed. And therefore who leaueth the Church of Rome in profession of some points of faith suf∣ficiently proposed, leaueth her in her essence. Besids, Protestants saie (as is related l. 1. c. 6. num. 5.) That the Church of Rome erreth in funda∣mental points, holdeth errors of themselues damnable, hath corrup∣ted faith in the principal points, is fallen into substantial corruptions: How then can they saie, They haue not left her in her essence? Since they saie, That she herself hath not the essence of the Church. Moreouer, seeing the Protestant Church diffe∣reth* 1.121 from the Roman in al the for∣mal essential parts of a Church, to wit, in profession of faith, (and that in great matters, as in sacrifice, Sacra∣ments, parte of Gods written word, and such like;) and in communion of Sacraments, and finally in officers of the Church, or ministers of the word and Sacraments, how can they think, that their Church differeth not in es∣sence from ours, or that they haue

not left our Church in her essence, hauing left her in al her formal parts? Finally they haue left her in her com∣munion of Sacraments, which is an essential part of her.

6. Their fourth error is, that* 1.122 they haue not left the Church of Rome, but only her corruptiōs. For thos points, are essential points of the Church of Rome, and held of her as such, be∣caus they are part of Gods reuealed word sufficiently proposed to her.

7. Their fift error is, that they haue* 1.123 not left the Church of Rome anie farther, then she hath left herself, to wit, in some* 1.124 points of faith. For if she had sinfully left herself in anie point of faith suffi∣ciently proposed, she had left her owne essence, and so had destroied herself. And so Protestants must haue left her altogether, as she had left herself altogether, in destroing her∣self by going from some points of faith sufficiently proposed to her.

8. Their sixt error is, that there are some things, which separate from

the Church in parte only, and not simply, as saieth Lord Canterburie sec. 10. p.* 1.125 26. For if he meane (as he doth) of points of faith sufficiently pro∣posed, nothing can separate from the Church in part, but it separateth simply. Becaus (as is often saied) euerie such point, is of the essence of the Church, separates simply from her. For (as Aristotle wel saieth) the essences of things consist in indiuisi∣bili, and are like numbers, which are changed by anie addition or substra∣ction, whatsoeuer. And it is the whole word of God, whose profession is of the essence of the true Church, and therfore who separates from a true Church in profession of anie part of Gods word, separates from her sim∣ply.* 1.126 And one thing it is, to separate simply, or in part, from the word of God: an other: to separate simply or in part, from the true Church of God. Heretiks separate not simply from the word of God, becaus they beleiue some part of it. But they separate themselues simply from the true

Church of God, of whos essence it is, to profès the whole reuealed word of God. And Heretiks separating from profession of the whole word of God, separate from this essence of the Church of God, and consequently separate simply from her. For to se∣parate from her essence, is to separate from her, simply.

9. But al thes points wil be yet more cleare, by what we shal saie of the essence, and vnitie of the true Church of God. And both by what we haue saied of the essence and vnitie of true sauing faith, and shal saie of the essence and vnitie of the true Church of God, it wil easily appeare to be true, what Aristotle saieth, that* 1.127 out of a true definition, al difficulties maie be solued, which arise about the thing defined. For if Protestāts would constantly agree with us (as some∣times,* 1.128 being conuicted by euidencie of truth, they doe) that true sauing faith, is essentially beleif of al Gods* 1.129 reuealed word, sufficiently proposed, they would neuer denie, but al and

euerie part of Gods reuealed word sufficiently proposed, is essential to sauing faith, and denial of anie part of such word of God, is denial of sauing faith; and that diuision in profession of such word of God, is a substantial diuision in faith. It wil also appeare, that al the errors of Protestants about* 1.130 the essence or vnitie of sauing faith, or of the true Church of God, rise of their Not knowing, or rather of their not constant obseruing, the true defi∣nitions of sauing saith, and of the true Church of God, which themselues sometimes giue. But being set bet∣weene two opposites, to wit, true faith, and the Protestant faith; the true Church, and the Protestant* 1.131 Church, when they consider the na∣ture of true sauing faith, and true Church, they agree with vs in defi∣ning or describing them: But when they consider the nature of the Pro∣testant faith, and Church, they are faine to saie that, which is clearely refuted out of their owne definitiōs of true sauing faith, and true Church.

And so in effect recal their owne defi∣nitions of a true Church, or of sauing faith, and therby quite alter the que∣stion, and make the dispute of quite different things. For whiles they de∣fend the Protestant faith or Church,* 1.132 by the names of faith or Church, they meane quite other things, then Scrip∣ture, Fathers, we, or themselues other whiles, doe. But it maie suffice to rea∣sonable men, louers of trut, hand not wranglers about words, that if by faith, Protestants wil meane, as Scrip∣ture, Fathers, we, and themselues sometimes, doe, they cannot saie, that the essence of it consisteth only in some principal points, but in al Gods reuealed word sufficiently proposed: nor the vnitie of sauing faith, in vnitie of only some principal points, but in vnitie of beleuing al Gods words suf∣ficiētly proposed, and that who differ in beleif of anie point of Gods word sufficiētly proposed, differ substātially* 1.133 in faith. And if by Faith, they wil meane some other thing, then Scrip∣ture, Fathers, we, and themselues

also sometimes, doe, they maie if they wil; for words are ad placitum; But it shal not be true sauing faith, (For that is that, wherof the Scripture, and Fathers meane) but a faith of their owne inuention, whos essence and vni∣tie they maie put in what points they please. And thus hauing proued, that voluntarie or sinful denial of anie point of faith, or of Gods word re∣uealed, and sufficiently proposed to vs, destroieth both the substance, and vnitie of true sauing faith: Now let vs shew, that it also destroieth the substance, and vnitie of Gods true Church.

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* 1.134 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* 1.135 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* 1.136 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* 1.137 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.* 1.138 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* 1.139 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* 1.140 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,* 1.141 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* 1.142 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* 1.143 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* 1.144 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* 1.145 Sacraments, was essential to the Church. Vrsinus in Catechis. q. 2. In which the entire and vncorrupt doctrin of the Law* 1.146 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* 1.147 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* 1.148 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* 1.149 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* 1.150 Church: And much les can they ex∣pound this definition, of profession* 1.151 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* 1.152 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)* 1.153

there are no fundamental points in* 1.154 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* 1.155 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* 1.156 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* 1.157 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* 1.158 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* 1.159 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* 1.160 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.* 1.161 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* 1.162 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* 1.163 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* 1.164 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,* 1.165 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,* 1.166 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,* 1.167 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.* 1.168 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* 1.169 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.

That sinful error in anie point of faith sufficiently proposed, destroieth the true vnitie of the Church of Christ. SEAVENTH CHAPTER.

1. THat sinful error in anie point of faith sufficiently proposed, destroieth the true vnitie of Christs Church, followeth euidently out of what I haue before proued, that such error destroieth the substance of his true Church. For if it destroie the substance of the true Church, it must needs destroie her vnitie, which flo∣weth from her substance, and depen∣deth of it. But we wil proue it also in particular, out of Scripture, Fathers, reason, and confession also of Pro∣testants.

2. Ar for holie Scripture, it not only absolutly saieth, that the Church is one, but also, that it is so one, as thos

are, which are wholy one, and alto∣gether* 1.170 vndeuided. Cantic. 6. v. 8. Christ saith: My doue, is one. Which place both Fathers teach; and Pro∣testants confès, to be meant of the* 1.171 true Church. Ioan. 10. v. 16. Christ saieth of his Church: There shal be made one flock, and one shepheard. Rom.* 1.172 12. v. 5. we manie, are one bodie in Christ. But a doue, a flock, a bodie, are wholy one vndeuided at al. Therfore such is the true Church of Christ. Besids, the Scripture calleth the Church, the* 1.173 Kingdom of God, and addeth Mat. 12. that euerie Kingdom deuided it self, shal perish. Wherfore seing the true Church cannot perish, it is not deui∣ded in itself. But who are sinfully de∣uided in points of faith, are not wholy* 1.174 one, but truly manie, and deuided in themselues. And Ioan. 11. Iesus should die, to gather into one the children of God that were dispersed. The like is Ioan. 17. and Actor 2.

3. The holie Fathers also teach, that the true Church is wholy one and vndeuided in points of faith. Saint

Cyprian lib. de vnitate saieth: The Church, is people ioined together in solid* 1.175 vnitie of a bodie, by the glue of concord, and addeth, vnitie cannot be cut, nor anie bodie separated by diuision of ioints. But solid vnitie of a bodie, and such, as cannot be cut or deuided, is perfect and entire vnitie.

4. Saint Augustin in Psal. 54. after he had recounted manie things, in which the Donatists were one with the Catholik Church, addeth: They* 1.176 were there with me, but not wholy with me, in manie things with me, in few, not with me. But by thes few, in which they are not with me, the manie, in which they* 1.177 are with me, profit them not. Lo how he exacteth, that men must be wholy one with the Catholik Church, and professeth, that it profits them no∣thing, to be with her in manie mat∣ters, if they be not in al. And yet the Donatists (wherof he speaketh) were* 1.178 with Catholiks in fundamētal points, as appeareth by thes his words Epist. 48. Yee are with vs in baptisme, in the Creed, in the rest of Gods Sacraments: in

Spirit of vnitie, in bond of peace, finaly in the verie Catholik Church, ye are not with vs. And lib. 1. de Baptismo c. 8. and 13. saieth. That an heretik, is in parte ioined to the Church. And yet no* 1.179 heretik is truly in the Church. Saint Optatus also lib. 4. saieth of the same Donatists: Ye see, that we are not wholy separated one from the other. So that by the iudgment of the Fathers, it is not enough, to be in parte ioined to her. See S. Leo epist. 4. c. 2.

5. Hereupon the Fathers saie, The* 1.180 Church is one. So the Nicen Creed, Saint Cyprian Epist. 46. and 64. S.* 1.181 Optatus lib. 1. & 2. Saint Augustin de vnitate c. 2. lib. 1. contra Crescon c. 29. and others cōmonly. Sometimes* 1.182 they saie: She is one only. So Saint Au∣gustin lib. 3. contra Petilian. c. 5. and epistle 120. Saint Hilarie l. 7. de Tri∣nitate.* 1.183 Sometimes, she is not manie: So Optatus lib. 1. S. Augustin lib. de vnitate c. 16. and in collat. 3. diei c. 10. Sometimes, that she cannot be de∣uided.* 1.184 So Saint Cyprian epist. 47. and Saint Hierom in Psal. 51. And out of

this whole and entire vnitie of the Church, Saint Cyprian epist. 76. in∣ferreth: If the Church be with Nouatian it was not with Cornelius. And yet No∣uatian was not deuided from Corne∣lius in fundamētal or principal points. For thus Doctor Potter sec. 4. p. 127. The error of Nouatian was not it itself heretical, especially in the proper and most heauie sense of that word. Saint Augu∣stin also lib. 18. de ciuit Dei c. 51. The Diuel raised heretiks, who vnder Chri∣stian name, should resist Christian doc∣trin, as if they might be permitted in the* 1.185 cittie of God without correption, as the cittie of confusion had indifferently philo∣sophers, thinking both different and con∣trarie things: who therfore in Christs Church haue anie vnsound and naughtie opinion, if being corrected for to beleue* 1.186 aright do obstinatly resist, and wil not amend their pestiferous opinions, but persist, to defend them, become heretiks, and going out, are held for exercising enimies. Lib. de haeres. after he had reckoned manie heresies, saieth: who∣soeuer shal hold anie one of them, shal be

no Catholik Christian. And yet diuers of them are not against anie funda∣mental or principal point of faith: And l. 2. ad Gaudent. c. II. If ours be Religion, yours is superstition. And epi∣stle ad Donatistas post Collat. and epistle 152. If our Church be true, yours is false. Al which sayings, and infe∣rences of the Fathers, were false, if the Church could be sinfully deuided in points of faith. For being so deui∣ded, she were not absolutly one, nor one only, nor Not manie: but truly not one, and truly manie: nether would it follow, that if the Church were with thos who denie the Not fundamen∣tals, that it were not with them, who beleue them: nor that, whosoeuer hold anie of the heresies related by S. Augustin, were no Cath. Christians, as is euident.

6. Reason also conuinceth the same: For the true Church of Christ is a societie in profession of the faith or doctrin of Christ. But the faith or doctrin of Christ, signifieth his whole faith and doctrin. Ther∣fore

the Church is a Societie in pro∣fession of Christs whole doctrin. But* 1.187 where there is profession of Christs whole doctrin, there can be no diui∣sion in his doctrin. Nether durst euer anie Protestant yet, define the Church to be a societie in profession of anie parte of his doctrin. For the name of a parte of Christs doctrin, sheweth, that it is not absolutely Christs Church, but in parte only. Besids, the Church* 1.188 (before defined of Protestants) is a Societie in profession of Christs pure, sin∣cere, vncorrupt, and entire doctrin. But where there is vnion in profession of Christs pure, and entire doctrin, there can be no diuision at al in doctrin. For his pure doctrin, excludeth al mixture of doctrin: and his entire doctrin, in∣cludeth al his whole doctrin. And if Protestants wil constantly stand to their foresaied definitions, it is im∣possible for them to imagin, anie sin∣ful diuision in the true Church, in points of Christs doctrin.

7, If anie obiect, that hence it would follow, that a particular Church

or person, erring inuincibly in some point of faith, is no true Church, or true member of the Church, becaus they agree not with the Church in profession of the whole doctrin of Christ: I answer, what Church or person inuincibly erreth in some se∣cundarie point of faith, doth virtual∣ly or implicitly beleue that verie* 1.189 truth, against which he erreth: becaus he explicitly beleueth the Catholik Church, which teacheth that truth. And implicit beleif of secundarie points not sufficiently proposed, suf∣ficeth to a true particular Church, and to a true member of the Church. Hervpon Doctor Potter sec. 7. p. 75. saieth: By virtual faith, an erring person maie beleue the truth contrarie to his owne error, in as much as he yeelds his assent implicitly to that Scriptare, which conteines the truth, and ouerthrowes his error, though yet he vnderstand it not, And Chillingworth in Answer to the Preface p. 18. They beleue implicitly thos* 1.190 verie truths, against which they err. But this is not true of such Churohes or

persons, who sinfully err against anie points sufficiently proposed: and therfore they are not at al ether ex∣plicitly, or implicitly vnited or so∣ciated in the profession of Christs en∣tire doctrin. And consequently are not of his true Church, which is a so∣cietie in profession (ether explicitly, or implicitly) of his whole doctrin.* 1.191

8. And this argument is confir∣med, by what before we shewed, that the faith or doctrin of Christ, is an indiuisible Copulatiue: And therfore al the points of it must be professed, or it is not professed. For an indiuisible, must be al had, or none. And who professeth only some parte of Christs doctrin, doth not profès the doctrin of Christ, but some parte, and no parte is the whole. And as they pro∣fès but some parte of his doctrin, and not the whole, so they are but in parte Christians, and indeed not Christians. For a whole or entire Christian pro∣fesseth Christs doctrin wholy and en∣tirely: and who professeth it but in parte, and in parte reiecteth it, (as do

they, who reiect anie point of his* 1.192 doctrin fufficiently proposed) is but in parte a Christian, and indeed no Christian. And hence it is, that holie Fathers saie that heretiks are no Chri∣stians, as indeed they are not, if by Christians, we meane, not men Chri∣stened, but followers of Christs doc∣trin. For they follow not Christs doc∣trin,* 1.193 but only some parte of it, and reiect the rest. Moreouer, Churches voluntarily differing in profession of Christs faith or doctrin, differ in the essence of the Church, and conse∣quently essentially. For profession of Christs faith or doctrin, is of the es∣sence of his Church, and as such, is put of al men in the definition therof. But Churches, wherof one professeth al points of Christs doctrin, funda∣mental and Not fundamental, and the other, professeth only funda∣mentals, and sinfully reiecteth Not fundamentals (though they be suffi∣ciently proposed) differ in profession of Christs doctrin. For his doctrin includeth as wel Not fundamentals,

as fundamentals: they being equally reuealed by him, and equally pro∣posed to vs, as I suppose. Therfore the one of thes, is no true Church. For Christ hath not two Churches essen∣tially differing.

9. Lastly I proue, that vnitie in onely fundamental points of faith, is not sufficient to the vnitie of the Church. For then the certaine vnitie of the Church could not be known, as Protestants profès they know not the certaine number of fundamental points: nor giue anie certaine mark, to know which are they. And so we could not be certaine, who were of the Church, who not, with whom we maie communicate, with whom not: as we cannot know certainely, which are the fundamental points, which are not: Seing we can nether haue a Cata∣logue of them, nor anie certaine mark to know them. But Catholiks, who* 1.194 measure not the vnitie of the Church, by fundamental points only, but by beleif of al points of faith sufficiently proposed to them, clearely see, who

are of the true Church who are not, and with whom they maie communi∣cate, with whom not.

10. Protestants also sometimes* 1.195 confès, that the true Church is wholy one, and vndeuided in profession of faith. For first they saie simply and absolutly, that the Church is one: So the confession of Auspurg art. 7. The Apologie of the Church of England, and Protestants generally. Also, that it is one only: So confessio Heluetica* 1.196 c. 17. Belgica art. 27. Perkins vpon the Creed art. de Eccles. Iames Res∣pons. ad Peron p. 384. Beza de pun. haeret. p. 25. Sadeel praefat. ad artic. Abiurat. likewise, that the Church is not manie: Luther l. contra Papatum* 1.197 tom. 7. p. 461. Christ knoweth not two kinds of vnlike Churches, but one only Church. Melancton in Hospin parte 2. hist. fol. 81. we spake sharply to them in this point, that we maruailed, with what conscience, they (Sacramentaries) could hold vs for Brethren, whom they thought to err in doctrin. And fol. 82. Luther spake grauely to them, saying: he

much maruailed, how they could haue him for a brother, if they thought their doc∣trin true. Caluin 4. instit. c. 1. paragr. 4. we cannot haue two or three Churches, but Christ must be deuided. See him Ioan. 10. v. 17. Musculus loco de Eccles. sec. 2. The true Church of Christ, is not ma∣nifold, but one only. And Whitaker controuer. 2. q. 1. c. 10. taketh it so il, that we should saie, They put two Churches, as he saieth; It is a mere slaunder. And ibid. q. 3. c. 3. auoucheth: That it is impossible, the Church should consist of them, who profès cōtrarie faiths. Serauia de gradibus Ministrorum c. 2. The Church is one, which cannot be cut* 1.198 or deuided. Lord Canterburie sec. 35. p. 284. Tis true, There is but one true faith, and but one true Church. Ib p. 310. It is as necessarie to beleue one God our fa∣ther, as one Church our Mother, P. 366. There is but one Baptisme, as welas but one Church. Sec. 23. p. 147. Christgaue his natural bodie to be rent and torne* 1.199 vpon the Cros, that his mystical bodie might be one. Chillingworth in Answer to the preface p. 7. D. Potter tels him:

His labour is lost, in prouing the vnitie of the Catholik Church, wherof there is no doubt or controuersie. D. Potter sec. 2. p. 22. No Protestant denies the Catholik Church to be one. Confessio Heluet. c. 17. The Church is not deuided or seuered in itself. But how can thos Churches be simply and absolutly saied to be one, only one, not manie, not two or three, not deuided, which are not one,* 1.200 are manie, are deuided in profession of points of faith sufficiently propo∣sed? Doth not want of vnitie, or diui∣sion in profession of such points, make want of vnitie, or substantial diuision in Churches? Why should Luther or Melancthon maruaile, that Sacra∣mentaries would account them bre∣thren, and yet condemn their doctrin, if men holding obstinatly false doc∣trin, maie be brethren of the same Church?

11. Moreouer, sometimes they* 1.201 confès, that diuision in faith or Reli∣giō, is a certaine note of a false Church. Spalatensis lib. 7. de Repub. c. 10. nu. 63. Negatiuely, this Note (of vnitie)

hath ful force. For if this vnitie (in faith) be anie waie wanting, the true forme of a true Church wil be wanting. Alsted l. de Notis Eccles. c. 10. Dissention in Reli∣gion, is a certaine Note of a false and Anti-Christian Church. Wesphalus in Caluin in consens. de re Sacramenta∣ria p. 756. It is proper to heretiks, to disagree: to which Caluin: Be it so; what is that to vs? But where is want of vni∣tie in not fundamental points of faith, there is want of vnitie in faith, and where there is dissention in Not fun∣damental points, there is dissention in Religion. For Not fundamental points, are points of faith and Reli∣gion, as is before proued. Therfore* 1.202 want of vnitie, or dissention in them, is a certaine signe of a false Church.

12. Furthermore, sometimes they teach absolutly (without making di∣stinction of heresie in fundamental or Not fundamental points) that heresie is a departure from the Church, and* 1.203 that heretiks are out of the Church. Apologie of the Church of England

parte 1. Heresie is a departure from the Bodie and Spirit of Christ. Whitaker controu. 2. qu. 1. cap. 12. No heretiks, though secret, belong to the Church of God. Item. An heretik cannot be a member of the Church. Ibid. c. 4. That (Bellarmin) proueth, heretiks Apostataes, and Schis∣matiks, not to be members of the true Church, maketh not against vs. For none of vs euer saied so. And q. 5. c. 18. It can∣not hold an heretical opinion, and yet be a Church. And c. 6. It is false, that hereti∣cal and schismatical Churches, are true Churches. Morton lib. 1. Apolog. c. 3. Heretiks are not truly, but in name only, of the Church: not indeed, but equiuocally. Moulins lib. 1. contra Peron c. 26. The true Church is opposit to heretiks and Schismatiks. Sutcliff l. 1. de Eccles. c. 16. No societie of heretiks doth deserue the name of a Church. And yet (as we pro∣ued before) al are heretiks, who ob∣stinatly* 1.204 denie anie point of Christs faith sufficiently proposed. Therfore voluntarie breach, in anie point of faith sufficiently proposed, destroieth the vnitie of the true Church.

13. King Iames also Respons. ad* 1.205 Peron p. 388. Durstone, but lightly cor∣rupt the faith approued through the world? It was easie for a Child to discouer the new Master by his Noueltie. And the Theef of truth being found, al the pastors of the whole world, if need were, were moued, and being moued, did not rest, til they had remoued the il, and prouided for the securitie of the sheep of Christ. Lo, how the Church would not suffer* 1.206 anie, who, euen but lightly, corrupted Christs faith. And ibid. p. 385. He kno¦wes, that the supreame law in the howse of God, is puritie of heauenly doctrin. And if this be the supreme law in Gods howse, none that teacheth impure doctrin, is to be suffered in Gods howse.

14. And out of that which we haue proued here, and before, appeareth* 1.207 how fals the comparison is, which Protestants cōmonly make betweene* 1.208 heresie and sicknes; and betweene in∣gritie of faith, and health in men. For health and sicknes are accidents to men, and those also separable from

them: wheras integritie in faith is essential to the Church, and heresie, destructiue of its essence, as is euident out of their owne definitions of the Church before related. And therfore* 1.209 they thould rather compare integritie in faith to life, and heresie, to mans death. Secondly, how vntruly they teach, that diuision in points Not-fun∣damental (if they be sufficiently pro∣posed) destroieth not the vnitie of the Church. For such diuision is quite op∣posit to the vnitie of the true Church, which (as hath been clearly proued)* 1.210 consisteth in actual, and explicit vni∣tie of professing al points of faith suf∣ficiēntly proposed, and in virtual, or implicit vnitie of professing al what∣soeuer Christ taught. Thus haue we proued, that sinful denial of anie point of Christs faith, destroieth sauing faith, Church, and saluation. Now let vs proue, that it destroieth also Christs veracitie.

That not to beleue, or disbeleue anie point of Christs doctrin, sufficiently proposed, is to denie his veracitie, and consequently his deitie. EIGHT CHAPTER.

1. THat to denie Christs veracitie in anie point, is to denie his Deitie, is euident, For he cannot be God, or Prima Veritas, The first ve∣ritie, who in anie point can deceaue, or be deceaued. And that to denie anie point of his doctrin sufficiently pro∣posed, is to denie his veracitie in that point, is also euident out of that which before we said of faith. For, as to beleue or profès anie point of his doctrin for his authoritie sufficiently proposed, is implicitly to beleue or profès his veracitie therin: so not be∣leue anie point of his doctrin for his authoritie sufficiently proposed, is im∣plicitly to denie his veracitie therin.

For as beleif and disbeleif are opposit acts, the one affirming, the other denying: so what, beleif implicitly affirmeth, disbeleif, implicitly de∣nieth. If therfore beleif of a thing for Christs authoritie sufficiently propo∣sed, implicitly professeth his veracitie therin: Not beleif of the same for his authoritie sufficiently proposed, implicitly denieth his veracitie in that point. Besids, diuine veracitie being the formal obiect of diuine faith, as* 1.211 long as that remaineth, and is no waie remoued, diuine faith remaineth. Therfore what taketh awaie diuine faith in one point, must needs take awaie diuine veracitie in that point.* 1.212 But Christs veracitie maie be denied in two manners. First, explicitly and directly, and so it is denied by Iewes,* 1.213 Turks, and Infidels, who profès not to beleue in Christ. Secondly, impli∣citly and indirectly, and so it is denied by al heretiks, who though they ex∣plicitly and directly profès Christs veracitie, yet in not beleuing al which he taught, though it be sufficiently

proposed to them as taught by him, implicitly and indirectly denie his diuine veracitie. For who denieth that to be true, which one hath re∣ported, and is sufficiently proposed as from him, implicitly and indirectly denieth that mans veracitie. For di∣rectly to denie the veracitie of the report, though it be sufficiently pro∣posed as from the reporter, is indi∣rectly to denie the veracitie of the re∣porter: Nether can anie Iuditious man conceaue the contrarie. Who ther∣fore sinfully denie the truth of anie point of Christs doctrin, sufficiently proposed for his, indirectly denie Christs veracitie.

2. Moreouer of two points* 1.214 equally taught by Christ, and equally proposed to vs, as from him, it is impossible to beleue for Christs authoritie, the one, and not both: becaus Christs authoritie is equally in both, and where is equally the same motiue of beleif, there must needs equally be the same beleif, wherfore if we beleue not them both, we beleue

nether for Christs authoritie, but for some other motiue humane. Againe, not to beleue Christs authoritie suffi∣ciently proposed, to be a sufficient and iust Motiue to beleiue euerie thing taught by him, is to denie his vera∣citie: But they who beleue not euerie thing taught by him, and sufficiently proposed to them as from him, do so.* 1.215 Therfore they denie his veracitie. The Maior is euident: the Minor I proue: For not to beleue euerie thing that Christ taught, and is sufficiently proued to haue been taught by Christ, is implicitly to denie his authoritie sufficiently proposed, to be a sufficient and iust motiue to beleue whatsoeuer he taught. And surely to denie Christs authoritie sufficiently proposed, to be a iust and sufficient motiue to beleue, is to denie his veracitie to be sufficient for beleif.

3. Hereupon rightly said S. Au∣gustin to the Manichees: You who in* 1.216 Scriptures beleue what you list, and what you list not, beleue not Scriptures, but yourselues. And so I saie, who in points

of Christs doctrin, equally taught by him; and equally proposed to them, beleue what seemes true to them, and what seemes not true to them, beleue not, beleue not Christ, but themselues. For if they beleued ether for Christs authoritie, they would equally beleue both, becaus his authoritie is equal to both. But becaus the motiue of their beleif, is seeming truth, and seeming truth is to them more in one, then in the other, they beleue the one, and not the other. And to this purpos Chillingworth in Answer to the Pre∣face p. 23. said. He that doth not beleue al the vndoubted parts of the vndoubted books of Scripture, can hardly beleue anie: nether haue we reason to beleue he doth. And he might haue said so of al points of Christs doctrin sufficiently propo∣sed, that who beleueth not them al, beleueth none, to wit, with diuine faith and for Christs authoritie: be∣caus this is equal in al such points, and therfore if it effectually work diuine faith for one point, it wil work the same for al. Wherfore thus I argue.

Where is equally the total cause of di∣uine beleif, there is equally diuine beleif. In al points of Christs doctrin equally taught of him, and equally proposed to vs, equally is the total cause of diuine beleif. Therfore in them al is equally diuine beleif, The Maior is euident. The Minor is cleare. For the total motiue cause of diuine beleif, is Christs authoritie, and that is equally in al points of his doctrin, which haue been equally taught by him, and are equally proposed to vs, whether they be principal points, or secondarie.

4. Finally, what it opposit to faith, is Infidelitie. Denial of anie point of faith sufficiently proposed is opposit to faith. Therfore it is infidelitie The Maior is euident, and the Minor pro∣ued l. 2. c. 4. But infidelitie denieth Christs veracitie, ether directly, as in thos, who profès not to beleue in Christ: or indirectly, as in thos, who beleue not what he clearely taught, and is sufficiently proposed to them for his doctrin. Besids, he that denieth

some or al the fundamental points of Christs doctrin sufficiently proposed to him, denieth Christs veracitie, and hath not sauing faith. And why not he also, who denieth some or al Not fun∣damental points of his doctrin suffi∣ciently proposed? seeing Christs au∣thoritie as equally testifieth thes, as thos. Why is not his authoritie equally denied in al points, which he equally testifieth? What doth the greatnes of the matter, ad to the greatnes of Christs authoritie? or what doth the smallnes of the matter, diminish of his authoritie? seeing it is not the greatnes of the matter, for which we ought to beleue it, but merely Christs authoritie.

5. This also is confirmed out of what we related, out of the holie Fa∣thers, that al, who denie anie point of Christs faith sufficiently proposed, are heretiks: and that al heretiks, are no Christians, haue no faith, but are in∣fidels. For surely, whosoeuer are no Christians, haue no faith, and are in∣fidels, doe in effect and (at the least)

implicitly and indirectly denie Christs veracitie. And Protestants add here to (as we shewed before c. 4.) that Heretiks are Apostates, AntiChrists, and Diuels: and surely such) at least in effect and indirectly) denie Christs veracitie. Moreouer S. Augustin (as we rehearsed before) affirmeth, that Christ is in name only with anie here∣tiks. And so heretiks profès Christ in name only, and in effect denie his ve∣racitie.

6. And this truth is so manifest, as Protestants sometimes confès it. For thus Doctor Potter sec. 7. p. 74. It is true, whatsoeuer is reuealed in Scrip∣ture,* 1.217 or propounded by the Church out of Scripture, is in some sense fundamental, in regard of the diuine authoritie of God and his word, by which it is recommen∣ded;* 1.218 that is, such, as maie not be denied or contradicted without infidelitie. Lo, that to denie whatsoeuer is reuealed in Scripture, or propounded by the Church out of Scripture, is funda∣mental to faith: so that faith cannot be without beleif of euerie such thing,

becaus faith cannot be without al that, which is fundamental to it: And also, that it is infidelitie to denie anie such thing, and infidelitie denieth diuine veracitie. Chillingworth also in An∣swer to the Preface p. 11. For a man to denie or disbeleue anie point of faith suf∣ficiently presented to his vnderstanding, as a truth reuealed by God, is to giue God* 1.219 the lie. And to giue God the lie, surely is to denie his veracitie. By which is refuted what he saith c. 3. p. 135 without anie the lest dishonor to Gods vera∣citie, I maie doubt of, or denie some truth reuealed by him, If I nether know, nor beleue it to be reuealed by him. And p. 136. He only, in fact affirmes, that God doth deceaue or is deceaued, who denies some things, which himself knowes or beleues to be reuealed by God. which he oftentimes repeateth. For if to de∣nie or disbeleue anie point of faith sufficiently presented to his vnder∣standing as a truth reuealed by God, be to giue God the lie, he dishonoreth Gods veracitie, and in effect affirmes that he doth deceaue, or is deceaued,

who denieth or disbeleueth a point of faith sufficiently presented in his vnderstanding, as a truth reuealed by God, though he nether know, nor beleue it to be reuealed by God. For merely to denie or disbeleue a point of faith sufficiently presented to his vnderstanding, is (as he said truly) to giue God the lie, whether he know or beleue it to be reuealed by God, or no. And otherwise affected ignorāce, that God hath reuealed a point, which is sufficiently presented or proposed to our vnderstanding as reuealed by God, should be no dishonour to Gods veracitie, nor a giuing the lie in effect to him. And hence it is euident, that albeit onely the principal points of Gods reuealed word be so in the co∣uenant betweene him and men, as it is necessarie in al ordinarie course to be actually beleued of al, that can so beleue: yet Gods whole reuealed word is so included in the same coue∣nant, as it is also necessarie to be bele∣ued at least virtually, becaus who doth nether actually nor virtually beleue

his whole reuealed word, doth not beleue him to be the prime veritie, or true in al his words: And surely they doe nether actually nor virtually be∣leue al Gods reuealed word, who wil not beleue some parte of it, when it is sufficiently proposed to them for Gods word.

7. And out of al that hitherto I haue said, it appeareth (I hope) suf∣ficiently, that to teach, that some points of Christian saith are not neces∣sarie to sauing faith, to a member of Christs Church, and to saluation; to be actually beleued, when they are sufficiently proposed, and virtually and in purpose of minde, whether they be proposed or no, is damnably to deceaue soules, is to excuse manie damnable heresies from damnable sin, is to introduce an indifference or libertinisme in Christian Religion, for beleuing or not beleuing the most points of Christian faith, is to destroie the verie substance and vnitie of Christian faith, is to destroie the substance and vnitie of Christs

Church, and to destroie Gods vera∣citie, to introduce infidelitie, the giuing of the lie to God, and atheisme. Now wil I also shew, that to com∣municate in Sacraments and publik Liturgie, with anie such as sinfully err in anie point of Christian faith, is damnable, and that to defend such communion to, be lawful, is damna∣bly to deceaue soules.

THAT COMMVNION in Sacraments vvith anie heretical Church, or Church erring sinfully in anie point of faith suffi∣ciently proposed, is damnable. NINTH CHAPTER.

1. ONE great motiue for Protes∣tants to teach, that there are some Not fundamental points of faith in their sense, that is, not at al neces∣sarie to a true Church, is to mainteine their communion in Sacraments and Liturgie with Churches and sinfully erring in some points of faith suffi∣ciently proposed, or for their fault, not so proposed to them. For though perhaps euerie Protestant wil not con∣fès himself to err in anie point of faith, yet they confés (as we haue seene

before lib. 1. c. 2. nu. 10.) that euerie one of their Churches, erreth in some points of faith. And if they saie, thos errors haue not been sufficiently she∣wed to their Churches, they condemn themselues of great negligence of their dutie, of want of sufficient zeale of Gods honour, and of his truth, and of want of charitie to their Chur∣ches. At least their Churches might be rightly informed, if they would, and therfore doe err sinfully and vinci∣bly. To thes therfore I wil proue, that their communion with a Church sin∣fully erring in points of faith, is damnable.

2. And first, I proue it out of Scrip∣ture. S. Paul Tit. 3. v. 10. An heretik, after the first and second admonition,* 1.220 auoid. 2. Thessal 3. v. 6. we denounce vnto ye, brethren, in the name of our Lord Iesus Christ, that ye withdraw* 1.221 yourselues from euerie brother walking inordinatly, and not according to the tra∣dition which they haue receaued from vs. Rom. 16. v. 17. I desire ye brethren, to* 1.222 mark them, that make dissentions and

scandals contrarie to the doctrin, which ye haue learned, and auoid them. Saint Iohn Epist. 2. v. 10. If anie man come to ye, and bring not this doctrin, receaue him not into the howse, nor saie, God saue you, vnto him. For he that saieth, God saue you, communicateh with his wicked works. And Christ himself Ioan. 10. v. 5. saieth, That his sheep follow not a Stranger, but flie from him: And v. 8.* 1.223 that the sheep heare not theeues and rob∣bers. And Math. 7. v. 15. Take great heed of fals Prophets. And whom we are to flie, to auoid, and not to salute, we are not to communicate withal. And Numbers 16. v. 24. God said to Moises. Commaund al the people to depart from the Tabernacles of Core, Dathan, and* 1.224 Abiron. v. 26. And Moises saied to the people, depart from the Tabernacles of wicked men, and touch not the things which belong to them, least ye be iuuolued in their sinns, Thus God forbad com∣munion with Schismatiks, and the same reason is of heretiks. For thes deuide the profession of the Church of God, as thos deuide her cōmunion.

3. The Fathers also teach the same. For thus Saint Ireneus lib. 3. c. 4. Al the rest (besids the Church) are theeues and robbers, for which we ought to auoid them. And c. 3. after he had told how Saint Iohn ran out of the roome, where an heretik was, and Saint Policarp would not salute an heretik, he addeth. So great feare had* 1.225 the Apostles and their disciples, not to communicate, so much as in word, with anie of them, who had corrupted the truth. Tertull. l. praescrip. c. 12. we are forbiden to goe to heretiks. And c. 7. what haue heretiks and Christiās to doe togea∣ther? And c. 41. Noted it as a propertie of heretiks, that they communicate with al. S. Cyprian Epist. 40. Goe far from the contagion of thes kinde of men, and by flying, auoid their speeches, as a canker and plague. And epist. 55. Let there be no commerce with such, and let vs be as much separated from them, as they are from the Church. S. Hilarie l. de Syno∣dis. Ye illoue wals, ye il reuerence the Church in howses and buildings, ye il in∣culcate the name of peace vnder thes.

Mountaines, and forests, and lakes, and prisons, and gulfes, are safer for me. And lib. contra Auxentium. The name of peace is specious, and the opinion of vni∣tie is faire, but who doubteth, but the* 1.226 only vnitie of the Church and Gospel, is that peace, which is Christs. Saint Au∣gustin lib. 7. de Baptismo c. 45. Iohn saied, that to men of strange doctrin, we* 1.227 should not saie: God saue ye. And lib. 2. contra Crescon c. 2. Ye are heretiks, and therfore most warily to be auoided. And lib. de vera Religione c. 5. con∣demneth Philosophers, becaus teaching different things of God, yet they frequen∣ted the same Sacrifices: and addeth. So it is beleued and taught, that it is the* 1.228 principal point of mans saluation, that there is no other Philosophie, that is, studie of wisdome, when they, whos doc∣trin we approue not, communicate not in Sacraments with vs. S. Hierom. in 2. Thessal. 3. plainely by the authoritie of this place, we must withdraw ourselues from euerie Christian, who walketh not according to the precepts of the Apostle, S. Cyrillus Catech. 18. And in one Catholik

Church: that thou maist flie the filthie Conuenticles of them (heretiks) and perseuer in the Church. And the Catho∣liks being beaten of Arians, cried (as* 1.229 reporteth saint Athanase Epist. ad Solitarios) Beate, as ye please, we com∣municate not with heretiks.

4. Reason also sheweth, that we maie not communicate with heretiks or anie false Church. Becaus commu∣nion in Sacraments and Liturgie with* 1.230 a Church, is a real profession, that she is true: And to profès, that a false Church is a true Church of God, is damnable. For it is to profès, that a false Church is a Spouse, and Mi∣stical Bodie of Christ, hath the keyes of heauen, and that in a false Church, there maie be saluation. Nay, it is by consequence, a denial of the true Church. For there being but one true Church, if the false Church be true, the true Church is false. Besids it is a real forsaking of the true Church, who euer thrust them out of her communion, who communicated with heretiks. And as one cannot

serue two opposit masters, be of two opposit common wealths, so can he not be of tow opposit Churches. Moreouer cōmunion in Sacraments is an essential part of the Church, as profession of faith, is, Who therfore ioine with heretiks in communion of Sacraments, ioine with them in an essential part of their Church. Chari∣tie we must haue with al, but com∣munion, with Catholiks onely.

5. Protestants also confés the* 1.231 same. For thus the French Confes∣sion art, 18. we think, al that communi∣cate with Papists, to separate themselues from the bodie of Christ. The Scotts Confession art. 16. It is necessarie, that the true Church be discerned from filthie Synagogs, by cleare and perfect Notes, least being deceaued to our damnation, we take the false for the true. The Holan∣ders Confession art. 28. It is the dutie of al faithful, according to the word of God, to separate themselues from al them, that are out of the Church. Whitaker in Praefat. controu. If we be heretiks, it is reason, that they warne al theirs, to flie

vs. And controu. 2. q. 5. c. 1. we must flie and forsake the Churches of Anti-Christ, and of heretiks. Spalatensis l. 7. de Repub. c. 10. n. 82, There is no doubt but that heretiks are to be auoided and separated. Luther also and Melancthon (as before we related) wondered, why the Sacramentaries would account them brethren, and yet denie their doctrin. Chillingworth c. 5. p. 276. Your corruptions in doctrin in themselues may induce an obligation to forsake your communion. Morton in his imposture p. 372. obstinacie of error in teachers, affected ignorance and obduration of peo∣ple, &c. may be iudged necessarie causes of separation from anie particular Chur∣ches. And Lord Canterburie sec. 35. p. 296. He that beleues, as that (Rom.) Church beleues, is guiltie of the Schisme, which that Church hath caused by her cor∣ruptions, and of al her damnable opinions to. And yet often times he saieth, that the Rom. Church hath not erred fundamentally, is a true Church in essence, and her Religion the same with that of Protestants. And Caluin

hath diuers treatises in his Opuscules* 1.232 for to proue, that it is not lawful to communicate with a false Church. And al are false Churches, which vo∣luntarily err against anie point of Christian faith sufficiently proposed,* 1.233 as before is proued.

6. Hence appeareth, that vntruly saied Chillingworth c. 5. p. 281. Ne∣ther* 1.234 for sin, nor for errors, ought a Church to be forsaken, if she do not impose and inioine them. Which he hath also p. 209. 307. and Lord Canterburie sec. 26. p. 196. and Potter sec. 2. p. 39 if* 1.235 they meane (as doubtles they doe) of sinful errors, or of errors in mat∣ters of faith sufficiently proposed. For euerie such Church, is a false Church, and beside the authorities of Scripture, Fathers, and confessions of Protestāts before rehearsed, the verie remaining in her, is a real profession, that shee is a true Church, and that saluation maie be had in her. Which to profés of a false Church, is damnable. And hence also appeareth, that it is* 1.236 damnable for anie Protestant, to communicate with anie Protestant

Church, becaus they confés, that al their Churches err in some points of faith: And they must also confés, that they sinfully err in points suffi∣ciently proposed to them, or els con∣demn themselues, (especially if they be Ministers of the word) of damna∣ble negligence of their dutie, towards God, and their Churches, in not she∣wing sufficiently to their Churches their errors. At least their Churches might be sufficiētly informed of their errors, if they would: which is al one, as if they were sufficiently informed.* 1.237 As themselues confessed c. 3. n. 6.

7. Hence also is refuted, what Lord Canterburie saieth sec. 35. p. 296. It is one thing to liue in a Schismatical Church, and not communicate with it in the Schisme, or in anie false worship, that attends it. For so Elias liued among the ten Tribes, and was not Schismatical. For to liue in a Schismatical Church,* 1.238 is to liue in a Schismatical commu∣nion. And Elias liued not in a Schis∣matical communion, but only liued among men, that were Schismatical.

And this error proceedeth of not distinguishing, betweene men, and a Church. One maie liue in companie of men, who are Schismatiks: but not in a Schismatical Church: for that is to liue in a Schismatical societie, or communion.

8. And thus haue we sufficiently proued, that there be no fundamen∣tal, or not fundamental points of faith in the Protestants sense, that is, none sufficient alone to sauing faith, to con∣stitute a Church, or to saluation, nor none not necessarie, ether actually, or virtually to the constitution of a Church, to sauing faith and saluation. But that this distinction in this sense bringeth in formal heresie, destroieth true faith, true Church and saluation, and is the verie ground of Atheisme, denying Gods veracitie, and giuing* 1.239 him the lie, euen according to the confession of some Protestants. Now we wil shew, that this their distinction in their sēse, hath no ground in Scrip∣ture, Fathers, Reason, or doctrin of Catholiks, as they pretend it hath.

That the distinction of fundamental and not fundamental points in the Protestants sense, hath no ground in Scripture, Fathers, reason, or doctrin of Catholiks. TENTH CHAPTER.

1. DOctor Potter sec. 7. p. 70. saieth: The distinction betweene doctrins fundamental and not funda∣mental, hath ground in reason, and Scripture. True: but not in his sense: His reason is, becaus as in humane sciences, there be principles, and conclusions drawne out of them: So in Religion, there be degrees of truth. For some, of it self, is the obiect of faith, some, but by accident or secundarily. And it is the common doc∣trin of Schoolmen and Casuists, that there is a certaine measure and quantitie of faith, without which none can be saued: but euerie thing reuealed, belongs not to

this measure. It is enough to beleue, some things by a virtual faith, or by a general and as it were, a negatiue faith, whereby they are not denied or contradicted. This reason indeed proueth that this distin∣ction in some sense is good, that some points of faith are more principal, then others: some more necessarie to be proposed to al, then others, and sim∣ply more necessarie to be actually beleued of al, then others: about al which there is no controuersie. But it doth not proue, that there are anie points of faith sufficient to sauing faith, Church, and saluation, though others be proposed and not beleued: or anie Not necessarie to be actually beleued of al, if they be sufficiently proposed to al: or not virtually to be beleued of al, whether they be suffi∣ciently proposed or no: which is al the question: Nay it insinuateth clea∣rely, that al points of faith are to be* 1.240 beleued virtually, and not to be de∣nied or contradicted, and surely they doe not beleue them virtually who denie them, when they are sufficiently

proposed, or are in fault, that they are not sufficiently proposed to them, Let him shew therfore, how Papists or Lutherans, (whom he accounteth* 1.241 true Churches) haue a virtual, gene∣ral, or negatiue faith of the Sacra∣mentaries truths, and doe not denie or contradict them; or els this his distinction of fundamental and not fundamental points, wil so little help him to defend the saied Churches to be true Churches, as it wil rather con∣demne them, and him also, for de∣fending them: or let him shew, how anie, who denie or contradict some points of faith sufficiently proposed to them, (as Papists and Lutherans denie and contradict the points of Caluinists faith, so sufficiently pro∣posed to them, as Caluinists can pro∣pose them) haue such a virtual, gene∣ral, or negatiue faith, wherby they doe not denie, or contradict thos points: or let him confes, that whoso∣uer denie or contradict anie point of faith sufficiētly proposed, haue not so much faith, as is sufficient to saluatiō.

His ground out of Scripture, is be∣caus, saieth he, sec. 7. p. 76. The dogma∣tical ground of the Church, are thos grand and capital doctrines, which make vp our faith in Christ, that is, that common faith Tit. 1. 4. which is alike pretious in al 2. Petri 1. which the Apostlc. Hebr. 5. 12. cals the first principles of the Oracle of God: And 2. Tim. 1. 13. forme of sound words (Thes are his fundamentals) the materials, laied vpon this foundation, whether they be sound or vnsound, are named by Saint Paul 1. Cor. 3. 12. super∣structions, which are conclusions, ether in truth, or appearance. And thes, (if they be sound) are his not funda∣mental points. I answer. First, that the grand and capital doctrins maie wel be the ground of the Church, and yet* 1.242 not make vp the common faith of Christians. For more is required to a building, then the ground or founda∣tion. Secondly, they maie make vp al the common faith of Christians, which is absolutly necessarie to be be∣leued actually of al, and yet not make vp al the faith, which absolutly is ne∣cessarie

so be beleued virtually and implicitly of al, and cōditionally also actually of al, if it be sufficiently pro∣posed vnto them. So that thes places proue not his fundamentals, which are so sufficiēt to sauing faith, Church and saluation, as others need not so much as to be virtually or implicitly beleued, for to haue sauing faith, Church and saluation. And for his Not fundamentals, I saie, that the place 1. Cor. 3. affordeth no solid ground to proue them. First, becaus the place is verie obscure and hard to be vnder∣stood,* 1.243 as Saint Augustin witnesseth l. de fide & operibus c. 15. and 16. quest. 1. ad Dulcitium, and Enarrat. in Psal. 80. And Morton tom. 2. Apolog. l. 5. cap. 44. saieth: It is metaphorical, and entangled with manie difficulties. And the place itself doth euidently shewit. And an obscure and difficult place can giue no sufficient ground of so maine a point, as this is: That there be some points of faith, which are not neces∣sarie to saluation to be beleued virtually or implicitly, or also actually, if they be

sufficienily proposed. Wil D. Potter ven∣ture his owne, or other mens saluatiō, in so great a matter, vpon an obscure or difficult text? We with Saint Augu∣stin lib. de vnitate demaund, aliquid* 1.244 manifestum, quod interprete non eget. And you giue vs a place for Not fun∣damentals in your sense, which no interpretation can make cleare.

3. Moreouer, how can you think it certaine, that Saint Paul here by superstructions, meaneth anie doctrin at al, seing Saint Augustin de fide c. 16. Enchir. c. 68. and Enarrat. in Psal. 38. 80. and S. Gregorie l. 4. Dialog. c. 39. expound it only of works, nor you conuince the contrarie? Finally, admit, that by superstructions S. Paul meaneth doctrins, how is it certaine, that he meaneth doctrins of faith? and not rather humane doctrins in∣uented by men? becaus he calleth them our work, and points of faith are not our work. Admit also, that by superstructures, he meaneth some points of faith, how proueth D. P. that S. Paul meaneth, they are not

necessarie to sauing faith, Church, or saluation, when they are sufficiently proposed, seing he nether speaketh of sufficient proposal, nor saieth, that such superstructures are not necessa∣rie, not yet calleth them superstru∣ctures in respect of faith, or Church, but in respect of the foundation, as walls and roofe may be called super∣structures in respect of the foundatiō, and yet are necessarie parts of the house. And so secondarie points of faith may be called superstructures in respect of the principal points, on which they relie as vpon their foun∣dation, and yet be necessarie parts of the spiritual building of faith and Church.

4. So that this superstruction of* 1.245 D. Potter wanteth sufficient founda∣tion for his not foundamentals in his sense, and is a not fundamental foun∣dation for diuers causes. First, becaus the place is obscure, and so vnfit to found anie infallible certaintie, espe∣cially of this so weightie a point. Se∣condly, becaus it is not certaine, that

the Apostle by superstructions, mea∣neth doctrines, and not only works. Thirdly, becaus though he called some doctrins, superstructions, it is not certaine, that he meant doctrins of faith; or if he meant doctrins of faith, that he called them superstructions in respect of sauing faith, Church or sal∣uation, and not in respect only of other points of faith, on which they are built. And we denie not, but in respect of themselues, some points of faith maie be termed fundamental, other not fundamental. Fourthly, becaus though we graunt, that Saint Paul called some points of faith, su∣perstructions in respect of the Church, or of saluation, how proueth D. Pot∣ter, that he meant so, euen when they are sufficiently proposed? we denie not, but some points maie be termed superstructiōs in respect of sauing faith, Church or saluation, becaus they are not so absolutly necessarie to sauing faith, Church, or saluation, to be actually beleued, as some other points are. But this wil not proue, that

they are not necessarie to sauing faith Church, and saluation, to be actually beleued, if they be sufficiently pro∣posed, and necessarie virtually to be beleued, howfoeuer. 5. Admit, that he called them superstructions, euen when* 1.246 they are sufficiently proposed, how proueth Do. Porter, that he meant, they were not then essential to sauing faith, Church, or saluation? Is no∣thing, that is laied vpon the founda∣tion, essential or necessarie to the building? And in this is the contro∣uersie, whether, anie articles, which maie be termed superstructions, be es∣sential to sauing faith, Church, or saluation, or no? we see the walls and roof are superstructions to the foun∣dation, and yet essential to the house. So on euerie hand falleth down Do∣ctor Potters ground out of Scripture, for not fundamental points in the Protestants sense; which is, that to haue sauing faith, Church, and salua∣tion,* 1.247 they need not be beleued actual∣ly, though they be proposed suffi∣ciently, not at al, virtually. For if he

only would, that some points of faith* 1.248 are so not fundamētal to sauing faith, Church, or saluation, as they need not be actually beleued, vnles they be sufficiently proposed, and are not absolutly necessarie, as some others are, there would be no question. But this kinde of not fundamentals, wil not help him, to iustifie his Churches, erring sinfully in some points of faith sufficiently proposed, or his commu∣nion with such Churches.

5. Other Protestants would proue, that* 1.249 true Churches maie err insome points of faith sufficiently proposed, becaus the Galathiās were turned to an other Ghospel, and the Corinthians denied the Resurrection: and neuertheles Saint Paul calleth them Churches of God. But this argument, if it were good, would proue more then Pro∣testants commonly do teach. For it would proue that true Churches maie err euen in fundamental points, which Protestants commonly denie. For doubtles, such were the aforesaied errors. Secondly, it is euident out of

Saint Paul himself. 1. Cor. 15. vers. 12. That only some of the Corinthiās de∣nied the Resurrection. For his words are. Some among ye saie, there is no Re∣surrection of the dead. And the same, Protestants confés of the Galathians. For thus Sadeel Resp. ad Arthurum c. 5, There was a Church among the Ga∣lathians, which is denominated of the better parte Whitaker controuer. 2. q. 5. c. 18. Some of the Galathians fel from pure faith, not al. And. c. 19. The Galathians, that failed, were no Church. Morton l. 2. Apologi c. 39. Not al the Corinthians or Galathians, but verie few were drowned in thos errors. And as Saint Augustin saieth l. de Anima c. 17. and els where often: The holie Scripture vseth signifie by a part, the whole, and by the whole, a part.

6. Doctor Potter sec. 7. cit. p. 79.* 1.250 89. & seqq. citeth diuers Fathers and Catholikes calling the Creed the foundation. But this maketh not to his purpose, which is, that the Creed alone is essential to a true Church, and so sufficient to saluation, as no∣thing* 1.251

els need be virtually or impli∣citly beleued, or also actually and ex∣plicitly, if it be sufficiently proposed: and in this sense, no Catholik calleth* 1.252 the Creed the foundation. In other senses, the Creed maie wel be called the foundation, ether becaus it con∣teineth al the most principal and most capital articles: or becaus al other points of faith depend on it: or becaus it must be actually beleued of al, ne∣ther sufficeth it that it be only virtual∣ly beleued: Nether wil it follow, that the Creed alone is essential or suffi∣cient to a Church, becaus it alone is the foundation therof, better then it wil follow, that the foundation alone is essential or sufficient to a house, be∣caus* 1.253 it alone is the foundation. At most wil follow, that it is the cheif es∣sential parte of the Church, on which the rest essential parts depend, becaus it alone is the foundation: which we willingly graunt. And vpon such weak foundations as thes: depend D. Potters proofes, that the Creed alone is essential to the Church. And that

who beleveth the Creed, hath sauing faith, is in the true Church, and in true waie of saluation, though he be∣leue not, or disbeleue other points of faith sufficiently proposed. Hence it* 1.254 appeareth also, why (as I saied be∣fore) they rather saie some articles alone, are fundamental or the foun∣dation, then that some alone, are ne∣cessarie; becaus some articles are in some sense the only foundation of the Church and of saluation, but in no* 1.255 sense are only necessarie. For al poins of faith are two waies necessarie. First, absolutly necessarie, to be virtually and implicitly beleued. Secondly, conditionally, to be beleued also actually, if they be sufficiently propo∣sed. Thus we haue seene, that Doctor Potter hath not so much as anie pro∣bable ground, much les certaine and infallible (as he ought to haue for so weightie a matter) for the distinction of fundamental and not fundamental points in his sense, ether in Scripture, Fathers, reason, or Catholiks doc∣trin. Now let vs shew that though we

granted him his distinctiō in his sense, yet it would not, suffice to mainteine the Protestants Churches, for main∣teining wherof, it was deuised, as Rouse confessed, sup. c. 1. and is most certaine.

THAT THOVGH THE Protestants distinction of funda∣mental and not fundamental articles vvere admitted in their sense, it vvould not suffice to their purpose. ELEVENTH CHAPTER.

1. THat though the Protestants distinction of fundamental and not fundamental articles were admitted euen in their owne sēse, yet it would not suffice to their purpose, is euident. For the cheif end, for which they deuised this distinction is their sense, was therby to defend, that Protestant Churches, though they be

sinfully deuided in matters of faith, yet be true Churches, and haue sauing faith, and meanes of saluation, becaus (forsooth) they differ but in not fun∣damental points, and such points are no waie essential, nor necessarie to a true Church, nor to sauing faith, or saluation. For Lutheran Protestants are deuided from Caluinists, not only in not fundamental, or not principal points of faith, but also in fundamen∣tal and principal points: nor only in points of faith, but also in commu∣nion of Liturgie and publik service: both which diuisions destroie a true Church.

2. That diuision in fundamental points destroieth a Church, is the common doctrin of Protestants, as is before shewed lib. 1. c. 7. nu. 5. 6. 7. Nether can they denie it, becaus by fundamental, they profés to vnder∣stand essential: And euident it is, that diuision in essential parts destroieth the whole, becaus the whole is no∣thing but al its essential parts ioined together. And that Lutherans are

deuided from Caluinists in funda∣mental points, both Lutherans and Caluinists profés.

3. For thus Luther disput. contra Louanienses Tom. 2. fol. 203. In ear∣nest, we iudge to be heretiks, and out of the Church of God, Zuinglians, and al Sacramentaries, who denie the bodie* 1.256 and Blood of Christ to be receaued with carnal mouth in the venerable Eucharist. And this sentence he pronounced a∣gainst the Sacramentaries anno 1545. as Hospinian 2. parte histor. writeth in that yeare; and died the next yeare, 18. Feb. as he testifieth anno 1546. And in anno 1544. he relateth thes words of Luther. I, who am now neare* 1.257 my deatb, wil carrie with me this testi∣monie and this glorie to the Tribunal of Iesus Christ, that with al my heart I haue damned and auoided the Swarmers, enemies of the Sacraments, Carolstadius, Zuinglius, Oecolampadius, and their disciples, and we stil damn them in Ser∣mons. And their lying and blasphemous heresie. And tom. 7. in defen. verb. Cenae fol. 381. he thus speaketh: I wil

cal God and the whole world to witnes, that I do not think with Sacramentaries, nor euer did think, nor for euer, (God willing) wil think. And fol. 382. Cursed for euer be that charitie and concord (with* 1.258 Sacramentaries.) The one partie must needs be set on by the diuel, we wil auoid them to the last breath, we wil reproue and damn them, for Idolaters, corrupters of Gods word, blasphemers, and deceauors. And there calleth them masked Diuels, who bring in the diuel in steed of God. And that, he should recal this iudg∣ment of the Sacramentaries before his death, is feigned by some without al sufficient proof.

3. And this his sentence, our En∣glish Protestants should feare, becaus in the Apologie of their Church, they profés to hold him for a most excellent man, and sent from God to lighten the world. And Caluin l. 1. de libero ar∣bit. calleth him, a Notable Apostle of Christ: and saieth, that God thundered by his mouth. D. Potter sec. 3. p. 83. we esteme of Luther as a worthie man. So Field l. 2. de Eccles. c. vlt. l. 3. c. 42.

And did this worthie man, who thus seuerely condemned the Sacramen∣taries doctrin, differ rather in formes or phrases of speech, then in substance of doctrin, as D. Potter affirmeth sec. 3. p. 89. or onely in disputable opinions, as he saieth sec. 6. p. 54.

4. Nether did Luther only, but euen the publik confessions of Luthe∣rans condemn the Sacramentaries doctrin. For thus the Confession of Auspurg in Hospin l. cit. anno 1530, Of the Lords Supper, thus we teach: That* 1.259 the true Bodie and Blood of Christ, is truly vnder the forme of bread and wine present in the Supper, and there distributed and receaued. wherfore the contrarie doctrin, is reiected. Confession of Bohemia art. 11. Certaine phanatical Spirits, not abiding in the words of Christ, denie the bread and chalice of the Supper, to be the Bodie and Blood of Christ. And in like manner do the Lutherans in their Confession of Swed, (which was put forth 1563.) of Mansfeld, and of Antwerp, condemne the Sacramen∣taries.

5. And the Sacramentaries doe the same to Lutherans. For thus the* 1.260 Czengerin Confession, placed in the Syntagme of Protestant Confessions p. 194. As we damne the Papistical dotage of Transubstantiation: so we also damne their madnes, who mainteine fleashea∣ting, that is, that Christs natural and bloodie bodie is receaued with carnal mouth, without anie mutation or tran∣substantiation. And they add: This is contrarie to the rule of faith, and nature. The Confession of Swisers art. 21. The flesh of Christ cannot be corporally eaten,* 1.261 without wickednes and crueltie. The Pa∣latines Confession: Christ cannot now, without manifest and horrible Idolatrie, be saught in the bread of the Supper.* 1.262 Item, we see a horrible distraction raised in the Church, becaus some wil eate and drink the bodie and Blood of Christ, na∣turally, essentially, with their corporal mouthes, and who refuse to beleue and profés this, are proclamed sacrilegious and blasphemous Sacramentaries.

6. Thus Protestants in their pu∣blik Confessions of faith, condemne

one the other. And that the cheifest* 1.263 Maisters of the Caluinists condemne the Lutherans of error in fundamen∣tal matters, I haue shewed l. 1. c. 6. nu. 8. and more maie be seene l. 1. of the Author of Protestancie c. 3. nu. 5. Here I wil relate the Confession of the Tigurins, in their preface to the Orthodox consent, set forth 1585. Of* 1.264 the great and manifold contentions betweene Protestants. For thus they Nether of the Lords Supper only, but also of Christs person, of the vnion of the di∣uine and humane nature, of the vbiquitie of his bodie, of the corporal (and which is made with mouth and teeth, and com∣mon to good and bad) eating of his bo∣die, of his ascension into heauen, and sitting at the right hand of his Father, is contended with such earnest dispute, that not few of the old heresies, which were long since condemned and extinguis∣hed, begin againe to life vp their heads, as recalled out of hel. And did not thes men know, what diuision there is among Lutherans and Caluinists, as wel as D. Potter sect. 3. pag. 89. Doe

Thes differ rather in formes or phra∣ses* 1.265 of speech then in substāce of doc∣trin? or as others saie, they differ not in fundamental points? Are not the person of Christ, his hypostatical vnion, his ascension to heauen, and sitting at the right hand of his father, fundamental points! Are they not in the Creed, which commonly is saied to be the foundation of Christianitie?* 1.266 or did not the Tigurins know, wherin Protestants dissent, as wel as he? wil Protestants not only make funda∣mental or not fundamental what they* 1.267 please, as Donatists made crimes, but also when, or in whom they list? Thus we see, that the distinction of funda∣mental and not fundamental points, wil not mainteine the Protestants Churches. For they condemne one the other of fundamental errors. Now let vs see, that it wil not serue them, for want of Communion in Sacra∣ments, and in publik seruice of God.

That the Protestants distinction of fundamental and not fundamental Articles, vvil not suffice to main∣teine such Churches, as they would, for vvant of communion. TWELFT CHAPTER.

1. ALbeit we should grant to Protestants, both, that some* 1.268 articles are so sufficient to constitute à Church, as no other articles were necessarie thervnto, and also, that their Churches doe hold al thos ar∣ticles, which are so sufficient; (nether of which we shal euer grant) yet ne∣uertheles, would it not follow, that* 1.269 their Churches are true Churches. For nether anie certaine articles, nor al articles together, are sufficient to constitute a true Church of Christ, without communion in Sacraments, Liturgie, and publik worship of God.

Which communion, because Protes∣tants Churches want, both with themselues (as is euident in Lutherans and Caluinists) and also with al other* 1.270 such Churches, as they account true Churches: Therfore when they wil proue, ether their owne, or anie other Church, to he a true Church, they make no mention at al of cōmunion, but only of fundamental articles: and infer, their owne, or other Churches, (whom they please) to be true Chur∣ches, only becaus they hold the fun∣damental articles: wherin they com∣mit a Triple fallacie. For nether are* 1.271 anie principal articles alone, sufficient to the constitution of a Church: ne∣ther doe Protestants hold al principal articles: nether though they held al articles whatsoeuer, would that suffice to constitute a true Church, without communion in Sacramēts and publik worship of God. Which we proue to be essential to a true Church, out of the definitions of a true Church, giuen by Scripture, Fathers, and Protestants themselues, and cōfirme it by reason.

2. The Scripture Acts 2. vers. 42. describing the true Church, or true* 1.272 disciples of Christ, saieth: They were perseuering in the doctrin of the Apostles, and communication of breaking bread, and praier. Where communication in Sacraments and praier, is put as essen∣tial a parte of the true Church, as per∣seuerance in the doctrin of the Apo∣stles is. And Caluin vpon this place expoundeth it of communication of the Supper, and publik praiers: And saieth: we must be such, if we wil be truly accounted the Church before God. And 1. Cor. 1. when there was a Schisme among the Corinthiās, and one saied he was of Paul, an other of Apollo, an other of Cephas, The Apostle re∣prouing them, faied v. 13. Is Christ deuided? As if it should follow, that Christ were deuided, if his mystical Bodie the Church, were deuided. Besids, al the places of Scripture,* 1.273 which before we brought to proue, that the Church of Christ is absolutly one, proue, that she cannot be deui∣ded in communion of Sacraments.

For such a deuided Church, is not ab∣solutly one, but in parte, or in some sort only. The same also is euident out of our Creed: where we profés to beleue the Catholik Church, the cōmuniō of Saints. Where communion of Saints, is ether an explication of Cath. Church, as * 1.274 Protestants commonly teach, or a thing necessarily required to it. For it makes no distinct article.

3. The Fathers also (as Moulins confessed * 1.275 before) by the Church, vnderstand the whole societie of Christian* 1.276 Churches, orthodox and sound in faith, vnited together in communion, and oppose it to heretiks and Schismatiks. So that they make vnion in communion, (which excludeth Schismatiks, who are deuided in cōmunion) as essential a part of the Church, of which they meane, as orthodoxie or soundnes in faith, which excludeth heretiks. And* 1.277 it is manifest by al Fathers, that they exclude, as wel Schismatiks, out of the Church, who yet want nothing but communion in Sacraments: as heretiks, who want soundnes in faith.

And their testimonies maie be seene l. 2. of the Author of Protestancie c. 15. And namely Saint Augustin l. 19. contra Faustum c. 11. saieth: Men can∣not* 1.278 be ioined into anie name of Religion, true or false, vnles they be linked with some signe or fellowship of visible Sacra∣ments. So that there can be nether true nor false Religion, without com∣munion in Sacraments. And epist 118. saieth. God hath ioined the societie of his new people by Sacraments.

4. Reason also conuinceth, that* 1.279 cōmunion in Sacraments and publik worship of God, is essential to the true Church of Christ. For his Church, is* 1.280 a Societie in profession of his faith and vse of his Sacraments, as al men conceaue and define. And it implieth contradiction, that there should be a Societie, without cōmunion in mat∣ters essentially belonging to the so∣cietie: as Sacramēts belong to Christs Church. For if there be no commu∣nion in vse of Sacraments, there is no societie in vse of Sacraments: And if no Societie in vse of Sacraments, no

Church. For a Church is essentially a societie in profession of faith and vse of Sacraments. And Protestants, who profés to giue none but essential No∣tes of the Church, giue right vse of* 1.281 the Sacraments for a note of her. Wherfore what Churches are deuided in vse of Sacraments, are deuided in an essential parte, and consequently essentially. Moreouer, without com∣munion* 1.282 in Sacraments and publik* 1.283 worship of God, the Church should not differ essentially from a Schisma∣tical Church. And it implieth contra∣diction, that the true Church should not differ essentially from a false Church. For els a false Church should substantially be a true Church. Fur∣thermore,* 1.284 vse of Sacraments and pu∣blik worship of God, was the external end for which the Church was insti∣tuted, and vse of the Baptisme and of the Eucharist are commanded by Christ, Ioan. 3. Luc 22. How then can the true Church be deuided in her principal external end? Besids, the* 1.285 true Church, is the mystical Bodie of

Christ, and therfore, as al the mem∣bers of a natural bodie communicate one with an other, so must the mem∣bers of the true Church. Nether did* 1.286 Christ institute a Church deuided in communion. Therfore a Church so deuided, is no Church of Christs in∣stitution. Finally, al the arguments,* 1.287 wherwith before we proued, the true* 1.288 Church to be simply and absolutly one, proue that she cannot be deui∣ded in communion of Sacraments, and publik worship of God. For a Church so deuided, in not simply one.

5. The same also is manifest by Confessions of Protestants. For Con∣fessio* 1.289 Argentinensis c. 12. saieth: God would haue his to haue external societie together, for which cause he gaue them Sacraments. Confessio Heluetica c. 21. we are admonished by the Celebration of the Lords Supper, that we remember of what bodie we be members, and therfore agree with al brethren. Mulhusina art. 5. The Lords Supper is vsed in the Church, to testifie faith and fraternal charitie.

Consensus Poloniae: The Lord would haue his Supper to be the Sinew of publik Congregation. Saxonica c. 15. God would haue this receauing of the Eucharist, to be the band of publik congregation, and the band of mutual charitie among the mem∣bers* 1.290 of the Church. Caluin 4. instit. c. 1.* 1.291 §. 7. The Church, by participation of the Supper, doth testifie vnitie in true doctrin and charitie. See him also ibid. §. 8. Whitaker also controuer. 2. q. 5. c. 20. Approueth the definition of the Church, giuen by Bellarm. thus far.* 1.292 The Church is a companie of men, ioint together in profession of the same faith, and communion of Sacramēts, vnder law∣ful Pastors. Where cōiunction in Com∣munion of Sacraments, is put, as an essential parte of the Church. And* 1.293 ibid. 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. Moulins lib. 1. contra Perō c. 26. That is the true Church, which is ioined together by profession of true faith, and communion of Sacraments. And cap. 25. The question (which is the

true Church) is, touching the entire bo∣die* 1.294 of the Orthodox Church, ioint in Com∣munion: we ask, by what external Notes, we maie discerne this Church. Spalaten∣sis lib. 7. de Repub. cap. 12. num. 132. To the true Church, twoe things only are required, to wit, entire faith in Christ, and communion with al faithful that pro∣fes this faith. Confession of Auspurg art. 7. To the true vnitie of the Church, it is enough, to consent in the doctrin of the Ghospel, and ministration of Sacraments. Sadeel cont. Tur. loc. 30. True vse of* 1.295 Sacraments, is essential to the Church. Caluin 4. iustit. c. 1. §. 2. Vnles vnder Christ our Head, we be vnited to al the other members, we can haue no hope of heauen. There cannot be twoe or three Churches, but Christ must be deuided. And §. 10. Ib. departure from the Church is denial of God and Christ. God so much esteemeth the communion of his Church, as he accounteth him a Renegate and For∣saker of his Religion, who obstinatly se∣parateth himself from anie Christian so∣cietie, which hath the true ministerie of the word and Sacraments. See him also

in Ioa 9. Plessie de Eccl. c. 1. We cōfés in the Creed, that the Church is the Cōmunion* 1.296 of Saints. So also Confessio Heluetica c. 17. Mulhusina art. 5. Argetinensis c. 15. How then, can the Church, which we profés in our Creed, be without Communion? King Iames Resp. ad Peron p. 384. Damneth and detesteth thos, who haue left the Communion of the* 1.297 Church, and become Schismatiks. Ca∣saubon exercitat. 15. It is an vndoubted truth, that whiles pious people adhere to a lawful and true Bishop, that is a true Church of God. So that if anie separate himself from that companie, it cannot be doubted, but he is out of the Church. D. Potter sec. 3. p. 74. Whosoeuer professeth himself to forsake the communion of anie one member of the bodie of Christ, must confés himself consequently to forsake the whole. Musculus loco de Eccles. sec. 3.* 1.298 The true Church, is a Communion and so∣cietie of true beleuers. Perkins in expli∣cat. Symboli col. 794. As long as anie Church goeth not from Christ, we maie not separate from it. The same he hath in his Reformed Catholik tract. 21.

And Protestants commonly, who ex∣clude* 1.299 Schismatiks out of the Church, as is to be seene l. 1. of the Author of Protestancie c. 1. and yet confés, they want nothing but communion, as is to be seene ibidem lib. 2. cap. 15. I wil here ad the Confession of D. Potter sec. 2. p. 42. Schisme is no les damnable,* 1.300 then heresie. P. 47. Voluntarie and vn∣grounded separation from the Catholik Communion, is without doubt à damna∣ble schisme. And p. 56. Whosoeuer per∣uersly deuides himself from the Catholik Communion, as doe Schismatiks, his con∣dition is damnable. Finally, Whitaker controuer. 2. qu. 5. c. 17. p 541. saieth: Almost al our men put thes twoe Notes of the Church, to wit, pure preaching of the word, and lawful administration of Sacra∣mēts. And thes twoe we affirme to be true* 1.301 and certaine Notes of the Church, and essential and perpetual Symboles of the Church. And if lawful ministration of Sacraments, be a true and essential Symbol of the Church, how can Churches be deuided in ministration of Sacraments, and not be deuided

in an essential parte?

6. Hence it is euident, that the Protestant Church, which is deuided in communion of Sacraments, and publik worship of God, not only in itself, but also from al other Chur∣ches, which they account true Chur∣ches, is no such Church, as Scripture, Fathers, Reason, and themselues sometimes, propose vnto vs. Nether wil it help, which Doctor Potter saieth sec. 3. p. 67. and sec. 1. p. 19. and Chil∣lingworth c. 5. p. 274. That they are vnited to al members of the vniuersal Church, in faith and charitie. For to omit, that Protestants cannot pre∣tend vnion in faith with al members of the vniuersal Church, but only vnion in parte of faith; becaus they pretend vnion only in fundamental* 1.302 points; which are but a parte of faith; Vnion in charitie cannot be that vnion, which the Scripture, and Fa∣thers, put in the descriptions of the Church For the * 1.303 Scripture speaketh of vnion in Sacraments and praier.

The * 1.304 Fathers speak of such a vnion, as is opposit to schisme, which is breach in communion of Sacraments and pu∣blik worship. And Saint Augustin ex∣presly speaketh of vnion in Sacra∣ments, which he saieth is necessarie to anie kinde of Religion, true or false: and also of vnion in praier. For thus * 1.305 he speaketh to a Schismatik: Doe not saie, I haue charitie: proue it, we haue one Father, let vs praie together. Besids, Protestants themselues put the com∣munion of the Church in external* 1.306 things. Confessio Heluetica cap. 17. The true concord of the Church consisteth in doctrins, and rites expresly giuen by God. Whereby Rites they vnderstand* 1.307 Sacraments. King Iames Respon. ad Peron pag. 403. Communion among the faithful, cheifly consisteth in publik exer∣cises of pietie. And Chillingworth c. 5. p. 265. To leaue the external communion of a Church, is by refusing to communicate with anie Church, in her Liturgie, and publik worship of God. Field lib. 1. c. 15. The communion of the Church consisteth in praiers and dispensation of Sacraments.

And l. 2. c. 2. saieth, communion in sa∣craments is essential to the Church. So al∣so ibid. c. 4. and Hooker lib. 3. p. 130. The communion therfore, which is essential to the visible Church, is in rites or Sacraments, publik exercises of pietie, Liturgie, and publik wors∣hip of God. Nether euer yet did anie Protestant define the visible Church, to be a societie in profession of faith, and communion of charitie: which they both would, and must haue done, if they had thought cōmunion in charitie, to be an essential parte of the visible Church.* 1.308

7. But indeed it cannot be essential to a visible Church. First, becaus it is no waie proued, but merely affirmed, by reason that Protestants can pre∣tend* 1.309 no other communion with the vniuersal Church. For it is euident,* 1.310 they haue no communion with her, in Sacraments, and publik worship of God. Secondly, becaus the essen∣tial* 1.311 parts of the visible Church must be visible, as profession of faith, is: otherwise, not the external Church it∣self,

self, but only some parte of it, should be visible. And communion in cha∣ritie is nether visible by itself, nor by anie vndoubted acts therof; as the soule of man is visible by her vndoub∣ted vital acts. Thirdly, becaus if com∣munion in charitie were an essential* 1.312 parte of the visible Church, none that want charitie, should be true mēbers of the visible Church. And so wicked men should be nether of the inuisible nor visible Church. Which is contra∣rie* 1.313 to the Confessions of faith of Pro∣testants. And Chillingworth cap. 5. p. 255. When his Aduersarie had saied: That al the mēbers of the visible Church, are by charitie vnited into one mystical Bodie, replieth thus: which is mani∣festly vntrue, for manie of them haue no charitie. How then can vnion in cha∣ritie, be that communion, which is es∣sential to the visible Church; seing they, that want charitie, maie be true members of the visible Church, who cannot be vnited in charitie, which they haue not? True it is, that who break the cōmunion of the Church,

as Schismatiks doe, haue not charitie, and charitie hindereth that breach: But yet not al, that want charitie, break communion. And one thing it is, to want charitie, an other to make Schisme in the Church: And charitie is lost by Schisme, but not only by Schisme. Besids, what charitie haue* 1.314 Protestants to al the members of the vniuersal Church, but such as they must haue to Iewes, Turks, Infidels, and generally to al that are out of the Church, that is, to praie for them, and wish and doe them good? A singular cōmunion surely, with the members of the vniuersal Church, which they haue common to al Infidels, and men whatsoeuer. Is there no communion peculiar to the mēbers of the vniuer∣sal Church, which they haue among themselues, and one to an other, more thē they haue to Infidels? If Protestāts had indeed true charitie ether toward God, or the vniuersal Church, they would not separate themselues from her communion in Sacraments, and publik worship of God. For as S. Aug.

lib. 1. de Sermone Domini c. 3. If they had charitie, they would not teare in peeces the Bodie of Christ, which is the Church. But they doe external acts against charitie, and vainely pretend inward charitie. And it is contrarie to charitie both towards themselues and others, to forsake the communion in Sacraments, and publik worship of God, of the vniuersal Church. For so (as is before shewed) they put them∣selues* 1.315 out of al Churches, and be∣come in none. And out of al that hath bene saied hitherto of faith and Communion, appeareath euidently how fondly Protestants infer them∣selues or other Churches or persons, whom they please, to be true Chur∣ches, or true members of the Church, or in the way of saluation, onely be∣caus they beleue al the fundamen∣tal points. For that is not enough to a true Church, or to a true member therof, or to the way of saluation. But they should add also, that they doe not sinfully err in anieother point of faith, or in Communion. Becaus

if they sinfully err in anie point of faith, they are Heretiks: and if they sinfully err in Communion, they are Schismatiks: and so no true Chur∣ches, nor true mēbers of the Church, nor in the way of saluation. But becaus Protestants despaire to proue, that such Churches or persons, as they mainteine, doe not err sinfully at al in faith or communion, they speak not of this: and damnably deceaue thos that beleue onely fundamētal points. But now, out of that which we haue saied of the Communion of the Church, let vs refel the Protestants errors concerning it.

Protestants errors about communion, refuted outof vvhat vvas saied in the former Chapter. THIRTEENTH CHAPTER.

1. OVt of that, which we have saied of Communion, are clearly refuted the errors of Protes∣tants touching the same: their first, and radical error, and the foundation of the rest, is, that * 1.316 Communion is not essential to a true Church, or to a true member of the Church. For Communion is put in the definitions of the Church taken out of Scrip∣ture, and giuen by Fathers, and Pro∣testants themselues: and therfore es∣sential to a true Church, and to euerie true member of it: If anie aske, how then can a true mēber of the Church, be without Communion, as if he be in a Desert or be by force hindered

from Communion? I answer, that na∣tural or material things cannot be without natural or material existence of euerie essential parte of them: But* 1.317 moral things (such as a member of the Church is, depending of mans wil) maie be when some essential parte is only morally, and by effec∣tual wil. And so Communion of a man in a Desert, or held by force, mo∣rally maie be. For it is in his wil to be done, when he can, and ought to com∣municate: and neuer leaueth to be, til he haue a wil the contrarie, as Schis∣matiks have. And it is essential, and sufficient to a true member of the Church, when he cannot actually communicate with the Church, to profés to haue this wil to commu∣nicate whensoeuer he can, and ought.

2. An other error of Protestans is, that to leave the external commu∣nion of the Church, is not to leave the Church: as one maie leave the custome of the Colledg, yet not the Colledg: so Chillingworth,

c. 5. p. 265. 269. For Communion* 1.318 is essential to the Church, and to leaue an essential parte of a thing, is to leave the thing itself: wheras the custome of a Colledg is accidental to a Colledg, and to leave the acci∣dent of a thing, is not to leave the thing it self.

3. An other error is, which D. Potter hath sec. 3. p. 74. that they forsake not the Communion of the Church of Rome, no more then the Bodie of Christ: For to refuse to communicate with her in vse of Sacraments, Liturgie, and pu∣blik worship, is to forsake her com∣munion. And he that meanes other∣wise by Communion, speaks a new lan∣guage as indeed à new doctrin, needs à new language, or equivocation to vphold it Wherfore Chillingworth c. 5. p. 261. saieth. It needs no proof, that Luther and his followers forsook the external communion of the Roman Church.

4. An other error, which Chilling∣worth hath c. 5. p. 270. is, that the whole Church being corrupted, some parts of it,

might, and did reforme themselues, and yet might, and did continue parts of the Church, though separated from the exter∣nal communion of the other parts, which would not reforme. As a man maie re∣nounce a vice of a societie, and yet be stil of the Societie. And p. 271. It is certainly false, that no twoe men or Churches, deuided in external commu∣nion, can be both true parts of the Cath. Church. This I saie is easily refuted. For to omit, that blasphemie (that the whole Church can be corrupted) whosoever volūtarily separate them∣selues from the external cōmunion of the whole Church, separate them∣selues from an essential part of her.* 1.319 For external communion is as essen∣tial to the visible Church, as is profes∣sion of faith. And al thes errors rise, of not considering or remembring wel, the former definitions of the true Church, giuen by Scripture, Fathers, and themselues, and confirmed by reason. In al which, Communion, is put as an essētial part of that true Church, which Scripture, Fathers, Reason, and

(somtimes) also Protestans, propose* 1.320 vnto vs.

5. And herevpon it is evident, that Chillingworth in confessing c. 5. cit. p. 273. That as for the external commu∣nion of the visible Church, we haue without scrupule formerly granted, that Protestants did forsake it. And p. 274. Though Luther forsooke the external com∣munion of the Cath. Church, it wil not follow, he was a Scismatike: Plainely confesseth, that Luther and Protes∣tants are true Scismatiks, and by for∣saking the external communion of the * 1.321 whole visible or Catholik Church, ether made a new visible Church, or are in no visible Church at al: For the external communion of the whole visible Church, was an essential parte of her, as wel as profes∣sion of faith: And none can leaue an essential parte of the whole visible Church, but he must leaue the* 1.322 whole visible Church, which is to make a formal schisme For he can∣not leaue the whole visible Church, but he must be in no visible Church,

seing the whole visible Church, in∣cludeth al visible Churches; or he must be in a new substantial vi∣sible Church, which must be, of his* 1.323 owne making. And hence it is euidēt, why there can be no iust cause to leaue the communion of the whole visible Church, becaus there can be no iust cause to put onesself out of al visible Churches, and to be in no visible Church at al. There maie be iust cause of separation from the communion of some particular Church, becaus she maie inuincibly err in some points of faith, and exact profession of her* 1.324 errors, for a condition of her commu∣nion. And nether is it necessarie to saluation, or to a member of the true Church, to be in communion of eue∣rie particular Church; nor the going out of anie particular Church (if there be iust cause for it) is the going out of the whole true Church: But the whole true Church, is not fallible, vincibly or inuincibly, in anie point of faith, by reason of Christs promise, and the holie Ghostsassistance. So that, for

pretence of errors, there can be no iust cause to go out of her cōmunion. And the going out of her, is the going out of al Churches whatsoeuer, be∣caus* 1.325 the whole Church includeth al, and who is out of al, is in none. And there cannot be imagined anie iust cause, to goe out of al Churches, and to be in none at al: And hereby we* 1.326 see, how the infallibilitie of the whole Church, and necessitie of being in the whole Church, do mutually infer each the other. For if she were not in∣fallible in matters of faith, but sinful∣ly* 1.327 taught errors, one might iustly goe out of her. And becaus there can be no iust cause to goe out of the whole Church (for then we should be in none at al) it must needs be, that she is infallible in matters of faith.

6. Wherfore, when Chillingworth* 1.328 c. 5. p. 264. 271. 274. 284. and Protes∣tants commonly define, Schisme, to be a Causeles separation from the commu∣nion of the Church, they voluntarily* 1.329 ad that particle (Causeles) nether do they finde it in anie definition of Fa∣thers,

who neuer admit anie iust cause of separatiō from the whole Church: but Protestants merely ad it, to excuse themselues from Schisme, becaus they haue some pretence of cause for sepa∣ration,* 1.330 but no colour al at, to denie their separation from the whole* 1.331 Church: yea they plainly confés it, as is to be seen l. 2. of the Author of Pro∣testancie c. 1. and 3. Out of which it is euident, that ether they are in no Church, becaus there is none besid the whole, or in a new made Church. Let them shew, that anie Father euer put that particle (Causeles) in the definition of Schisme, or saied, that there can be iust cause of separation from the communion of the whole visible Church: or they must confés, that according as the* 1.332 Fathers vse the word, Scisme, they are guiltie of Scisme, in separating them∣selues from the external communion of the whole visible Church: and so in iudgment of the Fathers (as they vse the word) are Scismatiks. And if they be not Scismatiks, as themselues

please to vse the word, it little impor∣teth, let them equiuocate as they please, and vse words without mat∣ter.

7. Let not therfore Chillingworth c. 5. cit. p. 272. advise men, to look that their cause of separation from anie Churches communion be iust, becaus it is as much as their soule is worth: but let him look, that he make no separation at al from the communion of the whole Church, becaus hereof no cause can be iust. For (as I saied) to goe out of the whole Church, is* 1.333 to be in no Church at al. Herevpon S. Augustin l. 2. contra Petil. c. 16. saied. I obiect to thee the sin of Scisme, which thou wilt denie, but I wil streigt proue. For thou doest not comunicate with al nations: which proof were none, if there could be iust cause of not com∣municating with al Nations: but he* 1.334 should haue added, that causelesly he he did not communicate. And lib. de vnitate c. 4. whosoeuer beleue that Ie∣sus Christ came in flesh, in which he suffered, was borne, &c. yet so dissent

from bis Bodie, which is the Church, as* 1.335 their communion is not with the whole, whersoeuer it is spread, but is found separate in some part, it is manifest, that they are not in the Catholik Church. Which were not manfest, if there* 1.336 could be iust cause of not communi∣cating with the whole. And euident it is, out of what we related before out of Saint Augustin: that he meaneth of communion in Sactaments, and publik praier. And therfore vntruely saied Doctor Potter sec. 2. p. 33. That Protestants cōmunicate (as Saint Augu∣stin meant) with the Catholik Church, in what parte or place of the world soeuer. For they communicate not at al with her in Sacraments and publik praier. And so according to Saint Augustins doctrin, manifestly are out of the Ca∣tholik Church. Besids, Doctor Potter speaketh not consequently, when sec. 2 p. 66. he faieth: we do not communi∣cate with Rome in her publik Liturgie: in that, our communion is dissolued. And yet sec. 3. p. 74. Her cōmunion we forsake not, no more then the Bodie of Christ. For how

doth he not forsake the communion of Rome, who doth not communi∣cate with her in Liturgie, and whose communion in that, is dissolued: But to returne to Saint Augustin: he epist. 48. affirmeth: we are certaine, that none can iustly separate himself from the com∣munion* 1.337 of al Nations. Item: None can haue iust cause to separate their cōmunion from the communion of al Nations: lib. 2. contra Parmen. cap. 11. There is no iust necessitie to break vnitie. And l. 3. c. 4.* 1.338 The world doth securely iugde, that they are not good, who separate themselues from the world, in what parte of land soeuer. And ib. c. 5. Let vs hold it firme and sure, that no good men can deuide* 1.339 themselues from the Church: lib. 3. de Baptis. c. 16. It is charitie, which they haue not, who are cut from the communion of the Catholik Church. And epist. 152. whosoeuer is separated from this Catholik Church, albeit he think, he liues lawda∣bly, by this only wickdnes, that he is se∣parated from the vnitie of Christ, he hath not life, but the wrath of God remaineth vpon him. Lo, to be separated from

the Catholik Church, is to be sepa∣ted from the vnitie of Christ. And what iust cause can there be, to be se∣parated from the vnitie of Christ? And epist. 48. Relateth, that certaine* 1.340 Donatists saied: we thought it made no matter, where we held Christs faith. So that it is an error of Donatists, to think, that faith wil suffice without communion. Finally S. Cyprian l. de vnitate. Let none think, that good men can leaue the Church.

8. Protestants also sometimes con∣fés, that there can be no iust cause to leaue the communion of the whole Church. For Caluin 4. inst it. c. 1. §. 10. saieth: Departure from the Church of God, is denial of Christ, which were not true, if there were iust cause of de∣parture. And lib. de Neces. Reform. Eccles. p. 68. being vrged, that there is no iust cause, for which we maie* 1.341 break the vnitie of the Church; he doth not answer, that there can be iust cause hereof: but (as supposing that) denieth that they are out of the communion of the Church. And

againe: But we are put back with this only engin. That no cause excuseth de∣parture from the Church. But we denie, that we do so. Surely, if he had thought, that there could be iust cause to break the vnitie of the whole Church, or to goe out of her communion, he would here haue saied it. But he did not then dreame, that there could be a iust or causeful separation from the cōmu∣nion of the whole Church, which some Protestants since haue found out. Lord Canterburie p. 139. There can be no iust cause, to make à Schisme from the whole Church. Item p. 192. D. Potter sec. 3. p. 74. There nether was, nor can be, anie iust cause to depart from the Church of Christ, no more then from* 1.342 Christ himself. Chillingworth sect. 5. p. 170. and 272. alloweth thes words of D. Potter, and addeth p. 298. It is most true, that there can be no iust cause to depart from the Church: That is, to cease being a member of the Church, no more then to depart from Christ himself. And surely, he ceaseth being a member of the Church, who separateth himself

from the communion of the whole* 1.343 visible Church. Becaus communion (as I haue proued) is an essential parte of the visible Church: And he can be no member of the visible Church, who wanteth an essential parte of it. And to depart from the communion of the visible Church, is not (as Chil∣lingworth speaketh p. 269. 283. 298. 302.) te depart frō some opiniōs or practises of the Church. But it is to depart from some point of faith, or from commu∣nicating with the Church, in vse of Sacraments, Liturgie, and publick worship of God, as is euident, and himself confesseth ib. p. 265. and we related his words c. 13. nu. 4. In which to communicate, is most substantial to the Church. For Sacraments, Li∣turgie, and publik worship of God, are a principal external end of the Church. And namely Sacraments are put in the definition of the Church by Protestants. Wherfore, to be as∣sociated* 1.344 and communicate in them, is most substantial to her, who is a So∣cietie in vse of them, and in profession

of Christs faith. And therfore to de∣part from her communion in them, is clearely to depart from the so∣cietie.

9. And here is to be Noted, that* 1.345 Protestants cannot make distinction of fundamental and Not fundamen∣tal communion, as they did of funda∣mental and Not fundamētal articles. For separating themselues from com∣munion in Sacraments, Liturgie, and publik worship of God, they separa∣ted themselues most fundamentally in communion, and condemning the communion in thes, of the Church, frō which they separated, they must condemne the fundamental commu∣nion, and so saie, she is substantially no Church. Whervpon it must needs follow, that ether they must make a new Church, substantially different from the whole visible Church, or els be in no Church at al. For (as I haue saied) There can be no Church besids the whole Church: Wheras, deuiding articles into fundamental and Not fundamental, and saying, that the

Church, from which they separated themselues, retained the fundamen∣tal articles, which cōstitute a Chureh, and that they feparated themselues from her only in Not fundamental points, they had, some colour to saie, that they stil remained in the substāce of the Church, frō which they made separation; And therfore an Argumēt, taken from Protestants separation in communion from the whole Church, is more forcible against them, then taken from their separation in faith from the whole visible Church. For her faith they leaft but partly: but her Communion they leaft wholy.

10. Nether helpeth it which Chil∣lingworth: saieth: c. 5. p. 274. and 295. Though the whole Church were corrupted, yet Luther and his Followers forsook not the whole corrupted Church, or the exter∣nal* 1.346 communion of it, but only forsook that parte which was corrupted, and stil would be so, but forsook not themselues, and their owne communion. For though Luther and his followers forsook not them∣selues, yet they forsook their com∣munion

which they had with the whole Church in her Sacraments, Li∣turgie, and publik seruice, and insteed of that, began a new communion a∣mong themselues, in an other Litur∣gie. For they ioined not themselues in communion to anie Church pre∣existent, in her Liturgie and publik seruice: and so they forsooke the com∣munion* 1.347 of the whole visible Church, euen their owne communion, which before they had with her, and therby ceased to be anie formal parte of the whole preexistēt Church, becaus they wholy leaft her communion in Sacra∣ments and Liturgie, which was essen∣tial to her: and began a new Church, as they began wholy a new commu∣nion, in new vse of Sacraments, in a new Liturgie, and new publik seruice. Howsoeuer therfore, Chillingworth c. 6. p. 334. and D. Potter saie sec. 3. p. 58. Protestants neuer intended to erect a* 1.348 new Church, seing they intended to erect a new cōmunion in Sacraments, and publik worship of God, they in∣tended to erect a new Church. Ne∣ther

is the example of some leauing the disease of a Societie, and yet not the Societie itself, to the purpose. For a disease is an accident to a Socie∣tie, but communion in Sacraments is essential to a Church, becaus she is a Societie in vse of Sacraments, Litur∣gie, and publik seruice of Christ. And therfore this communion being leaft, the Societie itself is leaft.

11. Perhaps some maie saie, that* 1.349 Luther and his Followers leaft not the communion of the whole Church in Sacraments, becaus he retained the same Sacraments, which the whole Church had. But besids, that Luther retained no Sacrament which the whole Church had, beside baptisme, and so had not Sacraments, but only one Sacrament cōmon with the whole Church: It is one thing, to haue some Sacraments common with the whole Church, which Schismatiks haue, and an other, to haue communion in Sa∣craments, which Schismatiks haue not, nor Luther had: For he did not participate with the whole Church in

Sacraments. As anie maie eate the same meate which an other doth, and yet not dine or sup with him: So Lu∣ther might receaue the same Sacra∣ments, which the whole Church did, yet not communicate with the whole Church in Sacraments.

12. By what hath been saied, we* 1.350 maie see, that thes, and the like errors shew wel, that Protestants are of the number of thos, whom the Apostle saieth, know not what they speak of. For if they knew, what true sauing faith is, They would neuer saie, The essence of it consisteth only in beleif of some principal points; or the vnitie of it, in vnitie only of such points: or if they knew, what a true Church is, they would neuer saie, that some principal points only, con∣stitute the essence of it, or that the substantial vnitie of the Church, con∣sisteth onely in vnitie of such points: nor would they compare integritie in faith or in communion, to health, and defect in faith or in communion, to diseases or vice: nor saie, that they

haue communion with al Catholiks in the world, becaus they haue (as they saie) loue or charitie to them al: nor saie, that thos can be of the same Church, who communicate not in vse of Sacraments, Liturgie, and publik worship of God. For al thes errors, and the like, rise of their not knowing or not marking, what is true sauing faith, what is a true Christian Church, what is true Christian Communion, as is euident by what hath been saied and proued: If they would cōstantly agree with vs, in the definitions of sauing faith, true Church, and her commu∣nion, giuen by the Scripture, Fathers, and by themselues sometimes, and confirmed by reason, thes errors of theirs, about fundamental and Not fundamētal points, about the essence, and vnitie of true sauing faith, and about the true Christian Church, and her communion, would presently vanish. And if they wil mainteine thes errors, they must needs re∣iect the definitions of true sauing faith, true Church, and her commu∣nion,

giuen by Scripture, Fathers, and* 1.351 themselues sometimes, and giue new definitions, and confés, that they dispute not with vs of such a faith, Church, or communion, as Scripture, Fathers, and themselues sometimes, propose: but of an other faith, Church, and communion, of which nether Scripture, nor Fathers euer dreamed, described, or proposed to vs; but is inuented by themselues. And if they wil confés this, I wil not dispute with them, whether there be anie fundamental or Not fundamen∣tal articles to such a faith, or Church, or whether in ward charitie wil suffice to such a communion, as they haue deuised, different from the faith, Church, and communion described by Scripture, and Fathers, and them∣selues sometimes. This I am sure, That no other faith, Church, or commu∣nion, wil help them to saluation, but such a faith, Church, and commu∣nion, as Scripture, and Fathers pro∣pose. And such faith, and Church, I haue clearly shewed, cannot admit

anie Not fundamental points in the Protestants sense, nor anie sinful diui∣sion in points of faith, or in commu∣nion of Sacraments, Liturgie, or pu∣blik worship of God. But such faith, such Church, such communion, is perfectly and entirely one (at least virtually and implicitly) in al points of faith, in al vse of Sacraments, and al publik worship of God: and can only differ in some rites or ceremo∣nies; which being accidental, and therfore by none put into the defini∣tion of the Church, (as profession of faith and communion) cannot deuide substance of the Church. And such a Church, none is, but the Roman Catholik Church. And who careful of his saluation, wil not prefer a Church, which is entirely one in al points of faith, and communion, be∣fore a Church, which confessedly is deuided both in some points of faith, and altogether in communion? If one ask, why can not the Church admit diuision in faith or communion, as wel as in other matters: I answer,

becaus Faith and Communion are es∣sential partes of the Church, and, as such, put in her definition: and no∣thing can admit diuision in its essen∣tial partes. For diuision of a thing in essential parts, is destruction of it. In other matters, which are not essen∣tial to her, she may be deuided, and not destroied.

The aforesaied doctrin of Catholikes and Protestants, and their Defenders, compared together. FOVRTEENTH CHAPTER.

1. HItherto (Gentle Reader) haue we refuted the distinction of fundamental and Not fundamental* 1.352 points in the Protestants sense, and clearely shewed, that in their sense, it introduceth formal heresie, destroieth true sauing faith, Catholik Church, and saluation, conteineth Infidelitie,

and denieth Gods veracitie, and so is the verie ground of Atheisme. We haue also shewed, that this distinctiō,* 1.353 euen in the Protestants sense, sufficeth them not, for that purpose for which they deuised it: which was, to main∣teine some such Churches, as are sin∣fully* 1.354 deuided in points of faith: be∣caus some of them are deuided euen in fundamental points, and al are wholy deuided in communion of Sa∣craments and publik worship of God: which diuision, as wel destroieth the Church, as diuision in fundamental points, doth.

2. Now it resteth, out of that which hath been saied, to compare the faith and Church of Catholiks, and of Pro∣testants together: and also the cer∣taintie, or vncertaintie of their defen∣ders, that thou maist the better iudge, whether of thes seueral faithes, or Churches, is of God, and which of their Defenders defend their doc∣trin for truth, or conscience sake, whether, to make a shift for a Time.

3. The Catholiks faith, essentially* 1.355 embraceth al Gods reuealed word sufficiently proposed: The * 1.356 Protes∣tants faith, essentially embraceth* 1.357 only the fundamental points. The* 1.358 Catholiks faith, can stand with no heresie, or sinful denial of anie point of faith sufficiently proposed: Pro∣testants faith, can stand with anie heresie, or sinful denial of anie point* 1.359 of faith, which is not fundamental, how sufficiently so euer it be propo∣sed, which is (as Protestants someti∣mes* 1.360 confés) infidelitie, and a giuing the Lie to God. Catholikes faith, is* 1.361 perfectly and entirely one, and the same in euerie one, beleuing actually euerie parte of Gods word sufficiently proposed, and virtually, euerie parte whatsoeuer: Protestants faith, is ne∣cessarily* 1.362 one, only in fundamental points, and maie be various or deui∣ded in al other points, how sufficient∣ly soeuer they be proposed, which vnitie, is merely in parte, and is true multiplicitie. Catholik faith, is ap∣proued* 1.363 of Protestants, to conteine* 1.364

al that is essential to true faith: Pro∣testants* 1.365 faith, is proued of Catholiks, to want manie things essential to true faith.

4. Likewise the Catholik Church,* 1.366 embraceth only thos, who actually beleiue euerie point of faith suffi∣ciently* 1.367 proposed to them, and vir∣tually what other points of faith soeuer. Protestants Church, embra∣ceth sometimes al that are Christians,* 1.368 or al, that profés Christs name, what heretiks so euer they be: Sometimes, al that beleiue the fundamētal points, howsoeuer they sinfully denie other points sufficiently proposed: which is to include Infidels, and Giuers of* 1.369 the Lie to God. The Catholik Church, is perfectly and entirely one, both in* 1.370 profession of faith, and in commu∣nion of Sacraments, and publik wors∣hip of God: Protestants Church is at most, one in profession of funda∣mental* 1.371 points, and various in al other points: And no waie one (but wholy deuided) in communion of Sacra∣ments, and publik worship of God.

Which is to be one in a smal parte, and to be simply and truly manie. The* 1.372 Catholik Church, is approued of Pro∣testants, to be a true a 1.373 Church, a mem∣ber of the Catholik Church, A mem∣ber of the Bodie of Christ. Her Reli∣gion, a possible waie of saluation, a* 1.374 safe b 1.375 waie for them that beleue as they profés, and safest for the igno∣rants: and euen thos, who are most obstinat in her, members of the Ca∣tholik Church. The Protestāts Church is condemned of al Catholiks, for a false Church, guiltie both of heresie, and schisme, and to haue no possible waie of saluation, but assured waie of damnation to al that wittingly liue and die in her.

5. Seing therfore, by the testi∣monie of holie Scripture, Fathers, and Reason, and Confession of Pro∣testants, the faith, and Church of God, is both one and holie, iudge, whether of thes two faiths, or Churches, be more one, or more holie; whether* 1.376 that faith be not more one, which ad∣mitteth no voluntarie diuision in anie

point of faith whatsoeuer, then that, which admitteth voluntarie diuision in al points of faith; besids thos, which are fundamental. And whether that faith be not more holie, which ad∣mitteth* 1.377 no sinful denial of Gods word whatsoeuer, then that, which admit∣teth sinful denial of al his word, be∣sids that which is fundamental how sufficiently soeuer it be proposed: which kinde of denial, is * 1.378 Infidelitie, and a giuing of the lie to God. And whether that faith, be not more se∣cure,* 1.379 which is approued of its Aduer∣saries to conteine al that is * 1.380 essential to true faith, then that, which is proued of Catholiks, to want manie things essential to true faith.

6. Likewise, whether that Church* 1.381 be not more one, which is entirely one, both in profession of al points of faith, and in communion of Sacra∣ments: then that, which requireth no more vnitie, but in fundamental points which euerie one is actually to beleue, and admitteth sinful diuision in al other points, and whole diuision

in communion of Sacraments, and publik worship of God. And whether* 1.382 that be not more holie, which admit∣teth no heresie in points of faith, nor no schisme in diuision of communion, then that which admitts al heresies, except in fundamental points, and al schime in diuision of communion. And whether that Church be not the* 1.383 safer waie to saluation, which is ap∣proued of its Aduersaries for * 1.384 safe, then that which is approued only of its followers, and vtterly condemned by al aduersaries.

7. And as for the Defenders* 1.385 of thes different faiths and Chur∣ches, it is euident, that Catholiks constantly and resolutly condemne the distinction of fundamental and Not fundamental articles in the Pro∣testants* 1.386 sense, and auouch, that there are no certaine points so sufficient to sauing faith, to a Church, or to salua∣tion, that others maie be denied, or not beleued, though they be suffi∣ciently proposed. None so Not fun∣damental, as they must not necessarily

be beleued of a Church, and for sal∣uation, if they be sufficiently propo∣sed: That there be more points of* 1.387 faith, then thos, which must be actual∣ly beleued of euerie one: That it is* 1.388 true heresie, to denie anie point of faith sufficiently proposed: That sinful* 1.389 denial of anie such point of faith, de∣stroieth true sauing faith, and salua∣tion, the substance, and vnitie of the true Church: That communion in* 1.390 Sacraments and publik worship of God, is essential to a true Church: That though there were such distin∣ction* 1.391 in points of faith, as Protestants make, yet that would not saue some of their Churches, which err euen in fundamental articles, and want al communion in Sacraments, and in publik worship of God; and that seing* 1.392 the Protestants faith doth not essen∣tially embrace al Gods reuealed word sufficiently proposed, but only some parte of it, nor is opposit to heresie in al points, nor is one in al Gods word, but onely in some part, that it is not* 1.393 true sauing faith. And seing their

Church doth not profés Gods entire word, nor is one at most, more then in fundamental points, nor is at al one in communion of Sacraments and pu∣blik worship of God, it cannot be the true Church of God: And seing it did* 1.394 leaue the communion of the whole visible Church, and therby leaft the whole visible Church, and leauing the whole, leaft al visible Churches, and leauing al, that it can be in no vi∣sible Church, vnles at their separa∣tion there were some new visible Church made. These points (I saie) Catholiks constantly teach.

8. Wheras Protestants, most vn∣constantly teach almost al that we haue rehearsed of their doctrin. For sometimes they teach, that their Not fundamental points a 1.395 are points of faith: Sometimes they b 1.396 are not. So∣metimes sinful denial of them is c 1.397 he∣resie: Sometimes it is d 1.398 not. Some∣times sinful denial of them, is a suffi∣cient e 1.399 cause of separation: Sometimes it is f 1.400 not. Sometimes Protestants can giue a Catalogue g 1.401 of fundamen∣tals:

Sometime they cannot. h 1.402 Some∣times the Roman Church, is a i 1.403 true Church in essence: Sometimes she is k 1.404 not. Sometimes her errors are l 1.405 fundamental: Sometimes they are m 1.406 not. Sometimes n 1.407 heretiks are in the Church. Sometimes they are o 1.408 not. Sometimes heretiks p 1.409 maie be saued: Sometimes they q 1.410 cannot. Sometimes a true Church r 1.411 can err in fundamentals: Sometimes it s 1.412 can∣not. Sometimes al t 1.413 points of faith are necessarie to sauing faith: Some∣times they are u 1.414 not. Sometimes de∣nial of anie point sufficiently propo∣sed, x 1.415 destroieth true faith: Someti∣mes it doth y 1.416 not. Sometimes sinful denial of anie point of faith z 1.417 de∣stroieth the substance of the Church. Sometimes it doth a 1.418 not. Sometimes diuision in anie point of faith b 1.419 de∣stroieth the vnitie of the Church: Sometimes it doth c 1.420 not. Sometimes there is d 1.421 iust cause of separation from the whole visible Church: Sometimes there is e 1.422 not. Sometimes cōmunion in Sacraments and publik worship of

God is f 1.423 essential to the Church: So∣metimes it is g 1.424 not. Sometimes to leaue the communion of the Church, is to h 1.425 leaue the Church: Sometimes it is i 1.426 not. Sometimes wilful error in faith k 1.427 is iust cause to forsake a Church: Sometimes it is l 1.428 not.

9. Surely, it must be a verie il cause, that driueth such wittie and Learned men thus often, and thus plainely to contradict themselues, about one question of their fundamental and Not fundamental points. For it is ne∣ther want of wit, nor of learning, that maketh them in this sort to contra∣dict themselues: but whiles they wil ioine truth with falshood, faith with heresie, Gods Church with a false Church, they cannot doe otherwise. For the euidence of truth, of faith, and of Gods Church, forceth them to saie one thing, and falshood, he∣resie, and their false Church maketh them to saie the quite contrarie. Wher∣fore we must no more expect of he∣retiks to speake agreably to themsel∣ues, then of Drunken men to goe

streight. For heretiks be (as the Pro∣phet speaketh) drunk, and not with wine: heresie, is a spiritual drunkenes,* 1.429 which maketh men to reele betweene truth and falshood, as drunkenes ma∣keth* 1.430 men reele from one side to an other. It maie be, that Catholik wri∣ters in some greate work, and writing vpon different matters, maie contra∣dict themselues by forgetfulnes: but that wittie and learned men, in so smal works, and in one kinde of mat∣ter, should so often, and so plainely contradict themselues, cannot pro∣ceed, but of the nature of the matter, which they would mainteine, and of* 1.431 their spiritual drunkenes, or that spi∣rit of giddines, which (as the afore∣saied Prophet saieth) our Lord hath mingled in the midst of Egipt, and made Egipt to err in al her worke, as a drunken and vomiting man erreth.

10. And finally, out of al hitherto saied, I conclude, that it is not against* 1.432 charitie, but rather most agreable to Christian faith and true charitie, to admonish al Churches or persons,

that they are in a damnable state, who err sinfully ether becaus they wil not beleue some point of Christian faith, or part of Gods word, sufficient∣ly proposed to them, or through their fault, haue it not sufficiently proposed: For (as Protestants confessed cap. 10.) The difference is not great, betweene him,* 1.433 that is wilfully blinde, and him, that knowingly gainsaieth the truth: and who, were it not for their owne auoidable fault, might and should see truth, and do not, their error is damnable: And if anie be negligent in seeking truth, vnwilling to finde it, or might see it, and wil not, his case, without repentance, is desperate; Wherfore thus I argue in forme.

11. It is charitie to admonish them, that they are in a damnable state, who* 1.434 err damnably, committ an act of In∣fidelitie, and giue God the Lie. But al that err against points of faith suffi∣ciently proposed to them, do so; and the like case is of al, who for their fault haue not such points sufficiently* 1.435 proposed to them. Therfore it is cha∣ritie, to admonish al who err against

points of faith sufficiently proposed to them, or who (for their fault) haue them not sufficiently proposed to thē, that they are in damnable state. The Maior is euident, and the Minor pro∣ued, and confessed also by Protestants, c. 10.

12. Secondly, it is true charitie, to admonish alformal heretiks, that they* 1.436 are in state of damnation: But al that beleue not some points of faith suffi∣ciently proposed to them, or for their fault haue them not sufficiently pro∣posed, are formal heretiks. Therfore it is charitie to tel al such, that they are in state of damnation. The Maior is proued c. 9. and the Minor c. 10.

13. Thirdly, it is true charitie, to* 1.437 tel al, that destroie true sauing faith, and the vnitie therof, that they are in state of damnation: But al that beleue not fome points of faith sufficiently proposed to them, or, through their fault, haue not them so proposed to them, doe so. Therfore it is true cha∣ritie to tel them, that they are in state of damnation. The Maior is euident,

for with out faith, it is impossible to please God. And the Minor is proued cap. 11.

14. Fourthly, it is true charitie to* 1.438 tel al such, as destroie the nature or substance of Christs true Church, that they are in damnable state: but al such as beleue not some points of faith suf∣ficiētly proposed to them, or through their fault, haue them not sufficient∣ly proposed, doe so. Therfore, &c. The Maior is euident; and the Minor is proued c. 13.

15. Fiftly, it is true charitie, to tel al* 1.439 such as destroie the vnitie of Christs Church, that they are in state of dam∣nation: But al such as beleue not some points of faith sufficiently proposed to them, or through their fault haue them not sufficiently proposed, doe so. Therfore it is true charitie to tel al such, that they are in state of damna∣nation. The Maior is euident: And the Minor is proued c. 14.

16. Sixtly, it is true charitie to tel al* 1.440 such, as by deeds profés a fals Church, to be a true Church, that they are in

damnable state: But al that communi∣cate in Sacraments, or Liturgie, with a fals Church, doe so. Therfore it is true charitie to tel them, that they are in a damnable state. The Maior, and Minor are proued c. 15.

17. Seauenthly, it is true charitie, to* 1.441 tel such as put thēselues out of euerie true Church, That they are in a dam∣nable state: But al such, as ether put themselues out of the communion in Sacraments, and Liturgie, of the whole Church, (as did Luther and his first followers) or doe themselues liue out of that communion (as thos doe that yet follow him) doe so. Therfore it is charitie, to tel al such, that they are in a damnable state. The Maior is euident: and the Minor pro∣ued c. 18. and 19.

18. Eightly, becaus the contrarie doctrin, to wit, that it is not charitie,* 1.442 to warne a man, that is in stare of dam∣nation (as al are, that sinfully erra∣gainst anie point of faith or commu∣nion) is so abhominable, as no Chri∣stian (I think) wil dare to auouch it in

plaine and expres termes.

19. And that Protestant Churches* 1.443 sinfully err against points of faith sufficiently proposed, or, through their fault, haue not them sufficient∣ly proposed, is likewise manifest. For that al Protestants Churches err in points of faith, is confessed by Pro∣testants themselues cap. 2. And that thos points are sufficiently proposed to them, or that it is their fault, that they are not so proposed, is like∣wise euident. Besids the Protestants Church went out of the whole Chur∣ches Communion in Sacraments and* 1.444 Liturgie, and began a new Commu∣nion of their owne. And so is in no Church, or is a new Church c. 19.

20. Innumerable more, and most eui∣dent proofes, might be brought, that Protestants Churches sinfully err a∣gainst points of faith sufficiently pro∣posed to them, or which (if it were not their fault) would be so proposed to them: But I wil not goe out of the compas of what hath been saied in this Treatise. Who wil see at large the

errors of Protestants sufficiently disproued, euen by the expres word of God, maie read the Collation of the Catholik and Protestant doctrin, by the expres word of God. Which hath beene twentie yeares agoe pu∣blished, and not yet answered by anie Protestant. Which is an euident ar∣gument that they can not answer it with anie probabilitie, seing they haue no pretense but the word of God.

FINIS.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Manie mat∣ters of faith in Scripture, besid funda∣mentals.
• * 1.2

  Matters of faith are to be measured by the for∣mal obiect of faith.
• * 1.3

  In faith are both great and lesser matters.
• * 1.4

  Difference betwene matters to be done and to be beleued.
• * 1.5

  differēce bet∣wixt Faith and charitie touching smal mat∣ters.
• * 1.6

  See Chillin. infra c. 4. n. 3. Potter sec. 5. p. 3. The principal ground on which faith relies, is di∣uine reuela∣tion. So al∣so p. 10.
• * 1.7

  Theodoret l. 4. c. 17.
• * 1.8

  Not funda¦mentals, are heads, parts, and points of faith, and Religion.
• * 1.9

  Matters of faith.
• * 1.10

  Points of Religion.
• * 1.11

  Of the obiect of faith. So also Chil∣ling. c. 4. p. 193.
• * 1.12

  Are reuealed and to be be∣leued. The like he hath sec. 6. p. 58. See white in his Def. c. 17.
• * 1.13

  Belong to the vnitie of faith, though not primarily.
• * 1.14

  Are so fun∣damental to faith, as it is infidelitie to denie them.
• * 1.15

  How al re∣uealed tru∣thes are fū∣damentals.
• * 1.16

  Maniepoints of faith be∣sids funda∣mentals.
• * 1.17

  Fundamētal points are not simply al points of faith.
• * 1.18

  Not funda∣mentals de∣liuered by the same authoritie, that funda∣mentals.
• * 1.19

  See him ib. p. 218.
• * 1.20

  Manie things (be∣sids funda∣mentals) which are defide.
• * 1.21

  Perteine to diuine faith
• * 1.22

  L. 1. e. 5. n. 4. c. 2. n. 1.
• * 1.23

  L. Canterb. p. 198. here∣sies properly cannot be, but in doc∣trin of faith.
• * 1.24

  See S. Tho∣mas 2. 2. q. 11. a. 2.
• * 1.25

  Heresie con∣trarie to do∣ctrin lear∣ned.
• * 1.26

  Contrarieto Tradition.
• * 1.27

  Contrarie to Saint Pauls preaching
• * 1.28

  C. 8. l. 1.
• * 1.29

  An heresie described by the Fathers.
• * 1.30

  Contrarie to sense of Scripture.
• * 1.31

  To Christiā doctrin.
• * 1.32

  And so doth Chilling. c. 7. p. 398.
• * 1.33

  Donatists heretiks, yet hold the foundation.
• * 1.34

  L. Canterb. p. 315. Potter p. 103.
• * 1.35

  Contrarie to Christs doctrine.
• * 1.36

  Fathers put heresie in corruption of faith.
• * 1.37

  In dissētion of doctrin.
• * 1.38

  Obstinat er∣ror in one point is hresie.
• * 1.39

  In anie fals doctrin.
• * 1.40

  See VVitak. cont. 2. q. 5. c. 17.
• * 1.41

  In not yeel∣ding to the Church.
• * 1.42

  Definition of an here∣tik by Scri∣pture.
• * 1.43

  By the Par∣lament.
• * 1.44

  In not yeel∣ding to ma∣nifest truth.
• * 1.45

  In oppositiō to faith.
• * 1.46

  In oppositiō to the Ca∣tholik visi∣ble Church.
• * 1.47

  In not yeel∣ding to Scri∣pture.
• * 1.48

  In oppositiō to anie point of faith sufficiently conuinced.
• * 1.49

  Sup. c. 2. n. 2. l. 1.
• * 1.50

  Al sin a∣gainst faith is ether he∣resie, or infi∣delitie.
• * 1.51

  Some hera∣sies though not funda∣mental.
• * 1.52

  VVhitak. cont. 2. q 4. c 2. non om∣nes errores, circa fidem sunt latha∣les, sicut noc omnes mor∣bi.
• * 1.53

  Heresie numbred by the Apostle Among dam nable sinns.
• * 1.54

  Heretiks condemned by their own iudg∣ment.
• * 1.55

  C. 9. n. 2.
• * 1.56

  Heresie brings dam∣nation.
• * 1.57

  Heretiks no Christians.
• * 1.58

  Are Anti-Christs.
• * 1.59

  False Chri∣stians.
• * 1.60

  VVorse then infidels.
• * 1.61

  Al that die heretiks, are damned.
• * 1.62

  The lest mixture corrupteth faith.
• * 1.63

  See here n. 5. 6.
• * 1.64

  Note this. Sinful igno∣rance excu∣seth not frō heresie or sin. See also Chilling. c. 7. p. 404.
• * 1.65

  No heretik saued.
• * 1.66

  Caluin Act. 24. Detesta∣biles iubet haberi haere∣ticos, Spiri∣tus Dei. Bezadepun. haer. p. 21. non potest non esse gra∣uissimū hae∣reseos crimē. see p. 119. See Iuel. p. 43. 314.
• * 1.67

  One heresie damneth.
• * 1.68

  Condition of heretiks, damnable.
• * 1.69

  whatsoeuer is reuealed, is funda∣mental.
• * 1.70

  Infidelitie, to denie anie point suffi∣ciently pro∣posed.
• * 1.71

  See Andrews cont. Apol. Bellar. c. 6. p. 132.
• * 1.72

  Fundamen∣tal to faith and salua∣tion.
• * 1.73

  Fundamētal to saluation to beleue al sufficiently proposed.
• * 1.74

  To disbeleue what is suf∣ficiētly pro∣posed, is to giue God, the Lie.
• * 1.75

  A damnable fault.
• * 1.76

  To maie, and wil not see truth, is damnable. See Morton Impo. p. 372.
• * 1.77

  Alike neces∣sitie to be∣leue not fū∣damentals, as funda∣mentals.
• * 1.78

  Negligence in seeking truth, is damnable.
• * 1.79

  None sin∣fully erro∣neous, is secure.
• * 1.80

  Al error alike dam∣nable, if the preposal be alike.
• * 1.81

  See also p. 41.
• * 1.82

  A matter of faith, is a matter of saluation.
• * 1.83

  Points to be noted.
• * 1.84

  1.
• * 1.85

  2.
• * 1.86

  3.
• * 1.87

  4.
• * 1.88

  5.
• * 1.89

  Protestants some times grant al the question. Magna est veritas & praeualet.
• * 1.90

  C. 2.
• * 1.91

  Protestants saie that he∣retiks are no Christians.
• * 1.92

  The questiō is of sauing faith.
• * 1.93

  Heretiks make ship∣wrack of faith.
• * 1.94

  Formal ob∣iect of faith, is diuine re∣uelatiō suf¦ficiētly pro∣posed.
• * 1.95

  See S. Tho∣mas 2. 2. q. 1.
• * 1.96

  See Vsher Serm. before K. Iames p. 39 Morton Appeal. l. 1. c. 1. see 1.
• * 1.97

  He that be∣leueth not al Scripture, truly bele∣ueth none.
• * 1.98

  Scripture saieth that faith is wholy one.
• * 1.99

  L. Cāt. p. 36. whatsoever is fundamē∣tal in the faith, is fū∣damental to the Church, which is one by the vni∣tie of faith.
• * 1.100

  Likwise Fathers.
• * 1.101

  See s. Chry∣stom in Gal. 1. to. 4. col. 812.
• * 1.102

  Vna sides ab haereticorū erroribus separatur.
• * 1.103

  N. 3.
• * 1.104

  And Protes∣tants also.
• * 1.105

  Faith bele∣ues little matters.
• * 1.106

  Entire eue∣rie waye.
• * 1.107

  VVho dis∣senteth in anie point.
• * 1.108

  Al Gods words of equal au∣thoritie.
• * 1.109

  Faith is an entire copu∣latiue.
• * 1.110

  No Church, without en∣tire faith.
• * 1.111

  Al points sufficiently proposed are fundamētal to faith.
• * 1.112

  Sup c 3. n. 6.
• * 1.113

  Sup. l. 1. c. 7. n. 6. 7.
• * 1.114

  Protestants put the es∣sence, and vnitie, of faith and Church, in some points only.
• * 1.115

  The total obiect of faith is al Gods reuea∣led word.
• * 1.116

  C. 4. n. 9.
• * 1.117

  Protestants by funda∣mental meane es∣sentials.
• * 1.118

  The substāce of Rom. Re∣ligion diffe∣rent, from the substāce of Protes∣tants.
• * 1.119

  See sup. n. 2. Perkins Gal s. v. 9. Poli∣ticus, qui nullius est Religionis, dicit nos & Pontificias non differre in substātia.
• * 1.120

  The essence of the Rom, and Protest. Church is different.
• * 1.121

  Protest. and Ro. Church differ in al the formal partes of a Church.
• * 1.122

  Chillingw. p. 273. 132. L. Cant. p. 192.
• * 1.123

  Potter sec. 1. p. 7.
• * 1.124

  Change in faith is not reformation but a new formation of the Church.
• * 1.125

  VVhat se∣parates frō the Church in part, se∣parates sim∣ply.
• * 1.126

  VVho sepa∣rates from a part of gods word, sepa∣rates wholy from his Church.
• * 1.127

  A true defi∣nition solues al difficul∣ties.
• * 1.128

  See sup. c. 3. n. 5. 6.
• * 1.129

  what is true diuine faith
• * 1.130

  Errors of Protestants about faith and Church, arise of not obseruing their true definitions.
• * 1.131

  VVhat Pro∣testants can not be con∣stant in doctrin.
• * 1.132

  Protestants in defeding their faith and Church, meane quite other things by Faith and Church.
• * 1.133

  Protestants equiuocate in the names of Faith and Church.
• * 1.134

  L. Canterb. sec. 10. p. 36. what is sub∣stantial in faith, is substantial to the Church.
• * 1.135

  Description of the Church by Scripture.
• * 1.136

  The doctrin of the Apo∣stles, inclu∣deth al their doctrin.
• * 1.137

  Description of the Church by Fathers.
• * 1.138

  Catholik holdeth al.
• * 1.139

  Description of the Church, by Protestants.
• * 1.140

  Hiremias P. C. Resp. 1 ad VVirtenb. Qui se non totos veri∣tati dedide∣runt, nè in Christi qui∣dem Ecclesia sunt.
• * 1.141

  Entire true doctrin is the Note of the Church.
• * 1.142

  Field l. 2. c. 2. Entire profession of the truth re∣uealed by Christ dis∣tinguisheth right bele∣uers from heretiks.
• * 1.143

  The Church professeth the pure, en∣tire, an vn∣corrupt word of God.
• * 1.144

  Caluin 4. instit. c. 2 §. 3. vbi ad de∣finitionem Ecclesiae vē∣tum est, hae∣rent in suo luto.
• * 1.145

  Puritie of doctrin es∣sētial to the Church.
• * 1.146

  Entire.
• * 1.147

  vncorrupt.
• * 1.148

  Forme of the Church, is entire pro∣fession of Christs faith.
• * 1.149

  Protest. can not answer without cō∣fession that they equiua¦cate.
• * 1.150

  See c. 2. nu. 5. l. 1.
• * 1.151

  Protest. ex∣pound pure by impure Entire by a parte.
• * 1.152

  VVhat is pure, hath no mixture, and what entire, is no part.
• * 1.153

  C. 2. 4.
• * 1.154

  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.
• * 1.155

  Al points of faith essen∣tial to a true Church.
• * 1.156

  Not funda∣mentals be∣long to the essence of a Church.
• * 1.157

  See Chil∣ling. p. 209. 291.
• * 1.158

  How Not-fundamen∣tals may be∣long secun∣darily
• * 1.159

  Al points Christs doc∣trin howsoe∣uer must be professed at least vir∣tually or implicitly.
• * 1.160

  C. 3. §. 5. 6. l. 2.
• * 1.161

  C. 3. § 5. 6. l 2.
• * 1.162

  Catholik Church in∣cludeth not al Christiās.
• * 1.163

  Tertul. praescrip. c. 41. haeretici pacē passim cum omni∣bus miscent.
• * 1.164

  C. 6. n. 3. l. 2.
• * 1.165

  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.
• * 1.166

  A mon∣struous Church of Protestants.
• * 1.167

  Protestants equiuocate in the name of the Church.
• * 1.168

  Propertie of the vniuer∣sal Church, not to err at al.
• * 1.169

  Essential, not to err vincibly, or sinfully.
• * 1.170

  Cyprian. de vnit. Aug. tract. 6. in Ioan. Opta∣tus l 1. & 2.
• * 1.171

  The true Church is absolutly one.
• * 1.172

  Perkins in symbal VVitak. Cont. 2. q. 1. c. 9.
• * 1.173

  Galat. 3. v. 28. omnes vos vnum estis in Christo.
• * 1.174

  Not deui∣ded.
• * 1.175

  One in solid vnitie.
• * 1.176

  The Church is wholy one.
• * 1.177

  Not in par∣te only.
• * 1.178

  Donatists were one in the creed and Sacra∣ments. Sic etiā Opta∣tus l. 3. & 5.
• * 1.179

  L. 1. Cātho∣licus non es foris estis In Catholica non estis l. 3. pars vestra, Catholica non est.
• * 1.180

  The Church is one.
• * 1.181

  Praeter vnā altera non est.
• * 1.182

  One only.
• * 1.183

  Not manie.
• * 1.184

  Cannot be deuided.
• * 1.185

  The Church can not ha∣ue men of contrarie beleifs.
• * 1.186

  Note.
• * 1.187

  None dare define the Church, by profession of part of Christs doctrin.
• * 1.188

  C. 6. n. 5. l 2.
• * 1.189

  who inuin∣cibly err in not funda∣mētals vir∣tually and implicitly beleue them.
• * 1.190

  But who vincibly err, doe not vir∣tually be∣leue.
• * 1.191

  C. 5. n. 7. l. 2.
• * 1.192

  Heretiks but in part, Christians.
• * 1.193

  what Chur∣ches differ in profession of faith, differ essentially.
• * 1.194

  Catholiks know who are of their Church: and Protes∣tants, not.
• * 1.195

  Protestants sometimes confes the vnitie of the Church in matters of faith, to be entire. The Church is one.
• * 1.196

  One onely.
• * 1.197

  Not manie.
• * 1.198

  The Church can not be deuided.
• * 1.199

  Elien. in Tortura p. 398. Ecclesia vnum cor∣pus.
• * 1.200

  Vnitie in some points, is but vni∣tie, secundū quid, and is true mul∣tiplicitie.
• * 1.201

  Diuision in Religion, is a Note of a false Church
• * 1.202

  L. 2. c. 1.
• * 1.203

  Al heretiks are out of the Church.
• * 1.204

  C. 2. l. 2.
• * 1.205

  The Church wil suffer no light cor∣ruption in faith.
• * 1.206

  Puritie of doctrin, su∣preme law in the Church.
• * 1.207

  See c. 2. l. 1.
• * 1.208

  Integritie of faith is like life, and he∣resie, like death.
• * 1.209

  C. 6. n 5.
• * 1.210

  C. 7.
• * 1.211

  Sup. c. 4. n. 3.
• * 1.212

  So S. Tho. 22. q. 11. art. 1.
• * 1.213

  Beza de pu∣niend. haeret. p. 99. Christi doctrinā re∣ijciēdo Chri∣stum ipsum repudiant. p. 105. haeretici Christi no∣men nō pro∣fitentur.
• * 1.214

  Chillingw. c. 3. p. 138. Gods reue∣lation is an equal mo∣tiue to in∣duce vs to beleue al obiects re∣uealed by him.
• * 1.215

  Tertul. l. de carne Chri∣sti, vt quid dimidiatis mendatio Christum, totus veri∣tas est.
• * 1.216

  Z. 17. cont. Faust. c. 3.
• * 1.217

  VVhat is sufficiently proposed is fundamētal to faith.
• * 1.218

  And it is infidelitie to denie it.
• * 1.219

  And to giue God the lie.
• * 1.220

  Heretiks to be auoided.
• * 1.221

  VVho walk not accor∣ding to tra∣dition.
• * 1.222

  VVho make dissentiōs in doctrin.
• * 1.223

  Christs sheep flie from strangers.
• * 1.224

  Schismatiks to be forsa∣ken.
• * 1.225

  S. Iohn and his disciples, would not speak with heretiks.
• * 1.226

  Vnitie in Church and Gospel only, is vnitie in Christ.
• * 1.227

  L de vnit. c. 4. Quicun{que} de ipso capi∣te scripturis consentiuns & vnitati Ecclesiae non cōmunicant non sunt in Ecclesiae.
• * 1.228

  Principal point of sal∣uation, not to cōmuni∣cate with heretiks.
• * 1.229

  Catholiks cōmunicate not with heretiks.
• * 1.230

  Comunion with a Church, is real appro∣bation of her.
• * 1.231

  Protestants command separation from fals Churches.
• * 1.232

  See him also in Ioan. 10. v. 1.
• * 1.233

  C. 6.
• * 1.234

  Anie church voluntarily erring is to be forsaken.
• * 1.235

  See c. 2. n. 1. l. 1 and Cal∣uin cont∣versipel. p. 357.
• * 1.236

  C. 2. nu. 10. l. 1.
• * 1.237

  None can to liue in a Church, and not cōmunicate with her.
• * 1.238

  To liue a∣mong Schis∣matical peo∣ple, is not liue in a Schismati∣cal Church.
• * 1.239

  C. 3. n. 5. 6.
• * 1.240

  VVho hau no virtua or general faith.
• * 1.241

  Note this.
• * 1.242

  The founda∣tion maketh not vp the building.
• * 1.243

  Superstru∣ctions, are not Protes∣tants not fundamen∣tals. S. Aug. epist. 48. Quis nō impudētissi∣me nititur aliquid in allegoria po∣situm pro se interpreta∣ri, nisi ha∣beat mani∣festa testi∣monia quo∣rum lumi∣ne illustren∣tur obscura.
• * 1.244

  No expres text, nor ne∣cessarie con∣sequence for Protestants not funda∣mentals.
• * 1.245

  Protestants not funda∣mentals want foun∣dation.
• * 1.246

  Superstru∣ctions may be essential.
• * 1.247

  See 6. 2.
• * 1.248

  How some points of faith may be called not fundamen∣tal.
• * 1.249

  Perkins and others cited c. 7. n. 1.
• * 1.250

  Catholiks calling the Creed the foundation, is not for D. Potters pur∣pos.
• * 1.251

  See c. 5. n. 2. l. 2.
• * 1.252

  How the Creed may be called the foundation.
• * 1.253

  VVhat is alone the foundation, is not alone essential or necessarie.
• * 1.254

  L. Cant. p. 29. Deduc∣tions are ne∣cessarie to some, but not fundamen∣tal.
• * 1.255

  Some arti∣cles be the foundation, but not alone necessarie.
• * 1.256

  Luther con∣demnes the Sacramen∣taries.
• * 1.257

  Luthers glorie before God, to con∣dēne Sacra∣mentaries.
• * 1.258

  He curseth agreement with them.
• * 1.259

  Confession of Auspurg damneth Sacramen∣taries.
• * 1.260

  Sacramen∣taries con∣demn Lu∣therans.
• * 1.261

  Of wicked∣nes.
• * 1.262

  Of horrible idolatrie.
• * 1.263

  See P. Mar∣tyr in epis. ad Eccles. Aug. Per∣kins in Symb. col. 781, 793. Caluin 4. instit. c. 4. §. 19.
• * 1.264

  Tigurins confés dis∣sentions of Protestants.
• * 1.265

  Potter sec. 4. p. 119. The errors of vbiquitie consubstan∣tiation and the like, are gross and palpable.
• * 1.266

  C 6. n. 2. l. 1.
• * 1.267

  Aug. de vni∣co Baptis. c. 14.
• * 1.268

  No certaine articles are sufficient without others.
• * 1.269

  Nor none at al without communion.
• * 1.270

  Roman, Grecian, &c.
• * 1.271

  Triple fal∣lacie of Pro∣testants.
• * 1.272

  Scripture puts cōm u∣nion in the definition of the Church.
• * 1.273

  C. 7 nu. 2. l 2.
• * 1.274

  Caluin 4. c. 1. parag. 3. Confessio Scotica art. 16. Catech. Gal. Domi. 15 Plessie de Eccles. c. 1. Kemnit. loc. de Eccles c. 1. See Potter sec. 7. p. 88.
• * 1.275

  c. 6. n. 3. l. 2
• * 1.276

  Fathers put such cōmu∣nion, as is opposit to Scismatiks.
• * 1.277

  S. Aug. Ep. 50 Dona∣tistae de sola cōmunione litigant. See him 4. cōt. Crescon. c. 66.
• * 1.278

  s. August. puts cōmu∣nion in Sa∣craments, of the essence of Religion.
• * 1.279

  Reason also.
• * 1.280

  Confessio Anglicaart. 19. Scotica c. 18. Saxonica c. 12. VVitten∣bergica c. de Eccles.
• * 1.281

  See c. 6. n. 5. l. 2.
• * 1.282

  2.
• * 1.283

  VVithout communion the Church differs not from schis∣matiks.
• * 1.284

  3.
• * 1.285

  4.
• * 1.286

  5.
• * 1.287

  6.
• * 1.288

  C. 7. l. 2.
• * 1.289

  Protestants confés that the Church is a societie in Sacra∣ments.
• * 1.290

  So Potter sec. 7. p. 98.
• * 1.291

  Caluin in Ioan. 9. Pes∣simū in Ec∣clesia, & maxime no∣xium malū, est schisma.
• * 1.292

  Protestants put commu∣nion in Sa∣craments, in definition of the Church.
• * 1.293

  VVhere is not lawful vse of Sa∣craments the Church is not.
• * 1.294

  The questiō about the Church, is about the entire bodie Orthodox, and ioint in communion.
• * 1.295

  Vse of Sa∣craments is essential.
• * 1.296

  The Church of the Creed is a commu∣nion.
• * 1.297

  See Iunius in sub Eccle∣siastico c. 4.
• * 1.298

  The Church is a Cōmu∣nion of be∣leuers.
• * 1.299

  Protestants exclude schismatiks who want but commu∣nion.
• * 1.300

  Schisme as damnable as heresie.
• * 1.301

  Lawful vse of sacra∣ments, is essential.
• * 1.302

  Vnion in charitie is not the es∣sential vnion of the Church
• * 1.303

  Cōmuniō, in Scripture, is in Sacra∣ments, and praier; also by Fathers.
• * 1.304

  sup. n. 2. sup. n. 3.
• * 1.305

  Cōcion. de Gestis cum Emerito.
• * 1.306

  And by Pro∣testants
• * 1.307

  Cōmuniō of the Church, is in sacra∣ments, and Luturgie.
• * 1.308

  Cōmunion in charitie cannot be essential for a Church.
• * 1.309

  1.
• * 1.310

  See c. 13. n 5. l. 2.
• * 1.311

  2.
• * 1.312

  3.
• * 1.313

  August art 7. 8. Saxon art. 12. Caluin 4. c. 1. parag. 13. whitak. cōt. 2. q. 5. c. 3.
• * 1.314

  4.
• * 1.315

  Protestant inference absurd.
• * 1.316

  King Ia∣mes resp. ad Peron p. 384
• * 1.317

  Moral things may haue their partes but morally.
• * 1.318

  To leaue an essential par¦te, is to leaue the whole.
• * 1.319

  Roote of the Protestants errors.
• * 1.320

  Protestants forsake the external communion of the visible Church.
• * 1.321

  Chilling. p 263. The visible Ch. signifieth the whole Church.
• * 1.322

  VVho is out of the whole visible Ch. is in none.
• * 1.323

  VVhy no iust cause, to goe out of the whole visible Church.
• * 1.324

  VVhy may be iust cause, to goe out of a particular Church.
• * 1.325

  L. Canterb. p. 311. out of the Cath. Church there is no saluation.
• * 1.326

  Infallibili∣tie, and ne∣cessitie to be in the whole Church, proue out the other.
• * 1.327

  Canterb. p. 240. Al the members of the militant Church can not err. So Mortō Imp. c. 15. sec. 3. and 4.
• * 1.328

  Potter sec. 2. p. 47. Canterb. p. 143.
• * 1.329

  Protestants false defini∣tion, of Schisme.
• * 1.330

  See also su∣pra n. 5.
• * 1.331

  Caluin Ep. 141. disces∣sionē a toto mūdo facere concti su∣mus.
• * 1.332

  Protestants, Schismatiks as the Fa∣thers vse that word.
• * 1.333

  S. Augustin, puts schisme merely in se∣paration frō the whole.
• * 1.334

  Schisme simply, not to communi∣cate with the whole Church.
• * 1.335

  Schisme, not to commu∣nicate with the whole.
• * 1.336

  C. 3. n. 3. 6. l. ••.
• * 1.337

  None can iustly sepa∣rate.
• * 1.338

  No iust cause to for∣sake the Church.
• * 1.339

  No good men can se∣parate.
• * 1.340

  Donatists thought faith, would suffice with∣out commu∣nion.
• * 1.341

  Vsher serm to House of Com. No cause why We should make a rent in the Church of God.
• * 1.342

  no iust cause to goe from the whole Church.
• * 1.343

  VVho lea∣ueth to be of the whole Church lea¦ueth to be of anie Church
• * 1.344

  C. 12. nu. 5. l. 2.
• * 1.345

  Protestants make not a distinctiō of fundamētal and not fun∣damental Cōmunion.
• * 1.346

  Luther and his fellowes forsook the∣ir owne cō∣munion, which they had with the whole Church.
• * 1.347

  And began a new com∣munton.
• * 1.348

  VVho intēd new commu∣nion, intend a new Church.
• * 1.349

  To commu∣nicate in Sa∣craments, is more then to vse common Sacraments.
• * 1.350

  Protestants errors rise of ignorance of the defini∣tions.
• * 1.351

  Protestants must make new defini∣tions and so change the question.
• * 1.352

  How fals the Protes∣tants distin∣ction is.
• * 1.353

  How vnsuf∣ficient for their pur∣pose.
• * 1.354

  Rouse of Cath. Cha∣ritie c. 9.
• * 1.355

  Difference betweene their faithes
• * 1.356

  c. 5. n. 2.
• * 1.357

  1.
• * 1.358

  2.
• * 1.359

  C. 2. n 2. l. 1.
• * 1.360

  C. 3. n. 5. 6. l. 2.
• * 1.361

  3.
• * 1.362

  C. 5. n 2. l. 2.
• * 1.363

  4.
• * 1.364

  C. 5. n. 7. l. 1.
• * 1.365

  C. 5. n. 7.
• * 1.366

  Differēce be∣tweene their Churches.
• * 1.367

  1.
• * 1.368

  C. 6. n. 8. l. 2.
• * 1.369

  C. 3. n. 5. 6. l. 2.
• * 1.370

  2.
• * 1.371

  C. 5. n. 2. l. 2.
• * 1.372

  3.
• a 1.373

  C. 2. nu. 3. c. 7. nu. 9.
• * 1.374

  4.
• b 1.375

  c. 7. n. 3. 7. c. 2. n. 3.
• * 1.376

  Cath faith more one, then Pro∣testants.
• * 1.377

  And more holie.
• * 1.378

  C. 3. nu. 5. l. 2.
• * 1.379

  And more secure.
• * 1.380

  c. 5. n. 5. l 1.
• * 1.381

  Catholik Church more one then Pro∣testants.
• * 1.382

  And more holie.
• * 1.383

  And more safe.
• * 1.384

  c. 7. n 3. 6. 2 n. 3. l. 1.
• * 1.385

  Catholiks constant in in their doctrin.
• * 1.386

  1.
• * 1.387

  2.
• * 1.388

  3.
• * 1.389

  4.
• * 1.390

  5.
• * 1.391

  6.
• * 1.392

  7.
• * 1.393

  8.
• * 1.394

  9
• a 1.395

  C. 1. n. 5. 6. 7.
• b 1.396

  C. 5. n. 8.
• c 1.397

  C. 2. n. 4. l. ••.
• d 1.398

  C. 2. n 5.
• e 1.399

  c. 6. n. 8.
• f 1.400

  c. 2. n. 3. 6. 5. n 5.
• g 1.401

  c. 6. n. 2.
• h 1.402

  c. 6 n. 3. 4.
• i 1.403

  c 2. n. 6 c. 7. n. 3. 4.
• k 1.404

  c 6 n. 5. c. 5. n. 7.
• l 1.405

  c. 5 n. 7. c. 6. n 5.
• m 1.406

  c 5. n. 7.
• n 1.407

  c. 2. n. 5.
• o 1.408

  c. 7. n. 12. 13. l. 2.
• p 1.409

  c 6. n. 4. 5.
• q 1.410

  c 1. n. 12. c. 10. n. 4 5.
• r 1.411

  c. 7. n. 2. 3. 4.
• s 1.412

  c 7. nu, 5. 6. 7.
• t 1.413

  c 3 n. 5. 6. 7. l. 2.
• u 1.414

  c. 2. n. 2
• x 1.415

  c. 4. n. 6. 7. l. 2.
• y 1.416

  c. 2. n. 3.
• z 1.417

  c. 6. n. 4. 5. l. 2.
• a 1.418

  c. 3. nu. 2. l. 2.
• b 1.419

  c. 7. n. 10. l. 2.
• c 1.420

  c. 5. nu. 2. l. 2.
• d 1.421

  c. 13. n. 4. l. 2.
• e 1.422

  c. 12. nu. 8. l. 2.
• f 1.423

  c. 12. n. 5. l. 2.
• g 1.424

  c. 11. n. 1. l. 2.
• h 1.425

  c 12. n. 5. l 2.
• i 1.426

  c. 12 n. 4. 5. l 2.
• k 1.427

  c. 11. n. 5. l 2.
• l 1.428

  c 9 nu. 6. c. 2. n. 3.
• * 1.429

  Esaiae 51.
• * 1.430

  Caluin. Cō∣futat. Hol∣landi. Spiri∣tus vertigi∣nis quo mi∣natur Deus se verbi sui cōtemptores potaturum, brutam om∣nium ebrio∣sorū amen∣tiam supe∣rat.
• * 1.431

  Athal orat, 2. cōt. Arian Qui incidūt in heresim mentis ver∣tigine labo∣rant. C. 19.
• * 1.432

  Charitie, to tell Churches sinfully er∣ring, of their damnable state.
• * 1.433

  Sinfulmant of sufficient proposing, excuseth not.
• * 1.434

  Becaus they err damna∣bly. See Chilling. c. 6. p. 359.
• * 1.435

  Al sinful er∣rāts in faith are damna∣ble.
• * 1.436

  Becaus they are true he∣retiks.
• * 1.437

  Becaus they destroie faith
• * 1.438

  Becaus they destroie the Church.
• * 1.439

  Becaus they destroie the vnitie of the Church. See L. Lauda sec. 35 p. 284
• * 1.440

  Becaus they profés a fal∣se Church.
• * 1.441

  Becaus they put thēsel∣ues out of al Churches.
• * 1.442

  Abhomina∣ble that sin∣ful error in faith is not damnable.
• * 1.443

  Protestants Churches sinfully err in points of faith.
• * 1.444

  And in Cō∣munion.