YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

THE WORKS

OP

W. CHILLINGWOKTH, M.A.

CONTAINING HIS BOOK, ENTITLED

THE RELIGION OF PROTESTANTS
A SAFE WAY TO SALVATION,

TOGETHER WITH

HIS SERMONS, LETTERS, DISCOURSES, CONTROVERSIES, &c. &c.

FIRST AMERICAN, FROM THE TWELFTH ENGLISH EDITION,
COMPLETE IN ONE VOLUME.
WITH LIFE BY BIRCH.

Rex arbitrator, rerum absolute necessariarom ad salutem non magnum esse numerum. Quare existimat ejus Majes-
taa, nullum ad ineundam concordiam breviorem viam fore, quam si diligenler separentur necessaria a non necessariis,
el ut in necessariia conveniat, omnia opera insumatur : Id non necessariis libertati Christiana locua detur. Simpliciter
necessaria Rex appellat, quae vel exprease verbum Dei prscipit credenda faciendave, vel ex verbo Dei necesaaria
consequentia veins Eccleaia elicuit. — Si ad decidendas hodieraaa Controversias haec diatinctio adhiberetur, et job
divinum a positivo seu Ecclesiastico candide separaretur ; non videtur de iis quae sunt absolute necessaria, inter pios
et moderates viros, louga aut acris contentio futura. Nam et pauca ilia aunt, ut modo dicebamua, et fere ex aequo
omnibua probantur, qui se Christianos dici postulant. Atque istam diatinclionem Sereniss. Rex tanti putat esse
momenti ad miuuendaa Controversias, quae hodie Ecclesiam dei tantopere exercent, ut omnium pacis etudiosorum
judicet officium esse, diligentissime banc explicare, docere, urgere.  ISAAC. CASAUBON, in Epiit. ad Card.
PERRON. Besii JACOBI nomine scripta.

PHILADELPHIA:
PUBLISHED BY HERMAN HOOKER,
FIFTH AND CHESNUT STREETS,
FOR
ROBERT DAVIS.
MDCCCXL.
Stereotyped by J. Fagan  Philadelphia.

TO THE
MOST HIGH AND MIGHTY PRINCE CHARLES,
By the Grace of God, King of Great Britain, France, and Ireland,
Defender of the Faith, Sfc. dpc.

MAY IT PLEASE TOUR MOST EXCELLENT MAJESTY,
I present with all humility, to your most sacred hands, a defence of that
cause, which is, and ought to be, infinitely dearer to you, than all the world ;
not doubting but upon this Dedication I shall be censured for a double bold
ness : both for undertaking so great a work, so far beyond my weak abilities;
and again, for presenting it to such a patron, whose judgment I ought to fear
more than any adversary. But, for the first, it is a satisfaction to myself,
and may be to others, that I was not drawn to it out of any vain opinion
of myself, (whose personal defects are the only thing which I presume to
know) but undertook it in obedience to him who said, tu conversus con-
firma fratres, not to St. Peter only, but to all men : being encouraged
also to it by the goodness of the cause, which is able to make a weak man
strong. To the belief hereof I was not led partially, or by chance, as
many are, by the prejudice and prepossession of their country, education,
and such like inducements ; which, if they lead to truth in one place, per
haps lead to error in a hundred ; but having with the greatest equality and
indifferency, made inquiry and search into the grounds on both sides, I
was willing to impart to others that satisfaction which was given to myself.
For my inscribing to it your Majesty's sacred name, I should labour much
in my excuse of it from high presumption, had it not some appearance of
title to your Majesty's patronage and protection, as being a defence of that
book, which by special order from your Majesty was written some years
since, chiefly for the general good, but peradventure not without some aim
at the recovery of one of your meanest subjects from a dangerous devia
tion ; and so due unto your Majesty, as the fruit of your own high humility
and most royal charity. Besides, it is in a manner nothing else but a
pursuance of, and a superstruction upon, that blessed doctrine, wherewith
I have adorned and armed the frontispiece of my book, which was so
earnestly recommended by your royal father, of happy memory, to all the
lovers of truth and peace : that is, to all that were like himself, as the
only hopeful means of healing the breaches of Christendom, whereof the
enemy of souls makes such pestilent advantage. The lustre of this bless
ed doctrine I have here endeavoured to uncloud and unveil, and to free it
from those mists and fumes which have been raised to obscure it, by one
of that order, which envenoms even poison itself, and makes the Roman
religion much more malignant and turbulent than otherwise it would be :
whose very rule and doctrine obliges them to make all men, as much as
lies in them, subjects unto kings, and servants unto Christ, no farther than
it shall please the pope. So that whether your Majesty be considered,
either as a pious son towards your royal father, King James, or as a ten
der-hearted and compassionate son towards your distressed* mother, the
catholic church, or as a king of your subjects, or as a servant unto Christ,
this work (to which I can give no other commendation, but that it was
intended to do you service in all these capacities) may pretend, not unrea
sonably, to your gracious acceptance. Lastly, being a defence of that
a 2 (3)

IV DEDICATION.
whole church and religion you profess, it could not be so proper to any
- patron as to the great defender of it ; which style your Majesty hath ever
so exactly made good, both in securing it from all dangers, and in vindi
cating it (by the well-ordering and rectifying this church) from all the foul
aspersions both of domestic and foreign enemies, of which they can have
no ground, but their own want of judgment, or want of charity. But it
is an argument of a despairing and lost cause, to support itself with these
impetuous outcries and clamours, the faint refuges of those that want bet
ter arguments ; like that Stoic in Lucian, that cried, 'O xorfapcwt .' " O
damned villain !" when he could say nothing else. Neither is it credible
the wiser sort of them should believe this their own horrid assertion, that
a God of goodness should damn to eternal torments those that love him
and love truth, for errors which they fall into through human frailty ! but
this they must say, otherwise their only great argument from their damn
ing us, and our not being so peremptory in damning them, because we
hope unaffected ignorance may excuse them, would be lost : and, there
fore, they are engaged to act on this tragical part, to fright the simple and
ignorant, as we do little children, by telling them that bites, which we
would not have them meddle with. And truly that herein they do but act
a part, and know themselves to do so, and deal with us here, as they do
with the King of Spain at Rome, whom they accurse and excommunicate
for fashion-sake on Maundy Thursday, for detaining part of St. Peter's
patrimony, and absolve him without satisfaction on Good Friday : me
thinks their faltering and inconstancy herein makes it very apparent : for
though, for the most part, they speak nothing but thunder and lightning
to us, and damn us all without mercy or exception ; yet sometimes, to
serve other purposes, they can be content to speak to us in a milder strain,
and tell us, as my adversary does more than once, that they allow pro-
testants as much charity as protestants allow them. Neither is this the
only contradiction which I have discovered in this uncharitable work ; but
have showed that, by forgetting himself, and retracting most of the prin
cipal grounds he builds upon, he hath saved me the labour of a confuta
tion ; which yet I have not in any place found any such labour or dif
ficulty, but that it was undertakable by a man of very mean, that is, of
my abilities. And the reason is, because it is truth I plead for ; which is
so strong an argument for itself, that it needs only light to discover it;
whereas it concerns falsehood and error to use disguise and shadowings,
and all the fetches of art and sophistry ; and, therefore, it stands in need
of abler men to give that a colour at least which hath no real body to
subsist by. If my endeavours in this kind may contribute any thing to
this discovery, and the making plain that truth (which my charity per.
suades me the most part of them disatfect, only because it hath not been
well represented to them) I have the fruit of my labour, and my wish,
who desire to live to no other end, than to do service to God's church,
and your most sacred Majesty, in the quality of
Your Majesty's Most faithful subject,
And most humble and devoted Servant,
T ,„„„ W. Chillingworth.
January, 1638.

CONTENTS.

The Life of the Author  ix
The Preface to the Author of Charity Maintained : with an Answer to his Pamphlet,
intituled a Direction to N. N.  17
The Author of Charity Maintained, his Preface to the Reader  40
The Answer to the Preface  48
THE FIRST PART.
Chapter I. — The state of the question ; with a summary of the reasons for which,
amongst men of different religions, one side only can be saved  68
Answer I. — Shewing, that the adversary grants the former question, and proposeth
a new one : and that there is no reason why, among men of different opinions
and communions, one side only can be saved  74
Chapter II. — What is that means, whereby the revealed truths of God are conveyed
to our understanding, and which must determine controversies in faith and religion 87
Answer II. — Concerning the means whereby the revealed truths of God are con-
veyed to our understanding ; and which must determine controversies in faith ~
and religion  105
Chapter III. — That the distinction of points fundamental and not fundamental,
is neither pertinent nor true in our present controversy : and that the catholic
visible church cannot err in either kind of the said points  174
Answer III. — Wherein is maintained, that the distinction between points funda
mental and not fundamental, is in this present controversy good and pertinent :
and that the catholic church may err in the latter kind of the said points .... 192
Chapter IV. — To say that the Creed contains all points necessarily to be believed,
is neither pertinent to the question in hand, nor in itself true  249
Answer IV. — Wherein is showed, that the Creed contains all necessary points of
mere belief  264
Chapter V. — That Luther, Calvin, their associates, and all who began or continue
the separation from the external communion of the Roman church, are guilty
of the proper and formal sin of schism  307
Answer V. — The separation of protestants from the Roman church, being upon
just and necessary causes, is not any way guilty of schism  345
Chapter VI. — That Luther and the rest of protestants have added heresy unto
schism  405
Answer VI. — That protestants are not heretics  438
Chapter VII. — In regard of the precept of charity towards one's self, protestants
are in a state of sin, as long as they remain separated from the Roman church 487
Answer VII. — That protestants are not bound by the charity which they owe to
themselves to re-unite themselves to the Roman church  495
Conclusion  517
Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy demonstrated  522
Reasons against popery, in a Letter from Mr. Chillingworth to Mr. Lewgar .... 525
SERMONS.
I. This know also, &c. 2 Tim. iii. 1—5  529
II. The fool hath said in his heart, &c. Psa. xiv. 1  548
III. Same subject continued  566
IV: Let him deny himself. Luke ix. 23  580
V. Who is he that condemneth, &c. Rom. viii. 34  595
VI. Make to yourselves friends, &c. Luke xvi. 9  614
VII. And if I have defrauded, &c. Luke xix. 8  631
VIII. For we through the Spirit, &c. GaL v. 5  446
IX. God is faithful, &c. 1 Cor. x. 13  671
NINE ADDITIONAL DISCOURSES  686
I. A Conference betwixt Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar. — II. A Discourse
against the Infallibility of the Roman Church, with an Answer, &c. — III. A
Conference concerning the Infallibility of the Roman Church, &c. — IV. An Argu
ment against the Church's Infallibility. — V. An Argument drawn from the doc
trine of the Millenaries against Infallibility. — VI. A Letter relating to the same
subject. — VII. An Argument against Infallibility taken from the contradictions
in the doctrine of Transubstantiation. — VIII. An Account of what moved the
Author to turn Papist. — IX. A Discourse against Tradition. (5)

The annexed subscription to the thirty-nine articles of religion of the
church of England, added to Mr. Chillingworth's known reputation for
veracity and christian sincerity, is an abundant evidence, that, upon
motives of conscience only, he joined as heartily with our church in dis
owning the unitarian principles, as in condemning the errors of the church
of Rome. Extract from the register of the church of Salisbury.
I, William Chillingworth, clerk, M. A. to be admitted to the chan-
cellorship of the cathedral church of Sarum, &c. do willingly and heartily
subscribe these articles, and every thing contained in them, and do give
my consent thereto. William Chillingworth.

RECOMMENDATIONS.

Archbishop Tillotson styles our author " incomparable, and the glory of his age and
nation." Mr. Locke recommends the reading of his Religion of Protestants, in several of his
works, particularly in a piece "Concerning Reading and Study for a Gentleman,"
wherein, after setting forth the great importance of perspicuity, in the art of speaking,
he says — " There must also be right reasoning, without which, perspicuity serves but
to expose the speaker. And for attaining this, I should propose the constant reading
of Chillingworth, who by his example will teach both perspicuity, and the way of
right reasoning better than any book that I know ; and therefore will deserve to be
read upon that account over and over again ; not to say any thing of his argument."
Gibbon, the historian, alluding to Chillingworth, on his recantation from popery,
says — " His new creed was built on the principle, that the Bible is our sole judge, and
private reason our sole interpreter, and he most ably maintains this principle in the
'Religion of a Protestant,' a book which, after startling the doctors at Oxford, is still
esteemed the most solid defence of the Reformation. The learning, the virtue, and
merits of the author, entitled him to fair preferment."
" Those who are desirous of acquiring a thorough knowledge of the doctrines,
government, laws, and present state of the church of England, will do well to read
especially Chillingworth's admirable book already mentioned, I mean ' The Religion
of Protestants a safe way to Salvation.' " — Moshcim's Ecclesiastical History, Notes,
Vol. V. »• ¦
(6)

THE LIFE
OF

MR. CHILLINGWORTH.

Mr. William Chillingworth was son of William Chillingworth,
citizen, and afterwards mayor of Oxford, and was born in St. Martin's
parish in that city, in October, 1602, and on the last of that month
received baptism there.* William Laud, afterwards archbishop of Can
terbury, and then fellow of St. John's College, and master of arts,b was
his godfather." He became a scholar of Trinity College, under the
tuition of Mr. Robert Skinner, on the 2d of June, 1618, being then about
two years standing in the university.11 June the 28th, 1620, he took the
degree of bachelor of arts ;e and March the 16th, 1623-4, that of mas
ter;' and June the 10th, 1628, became fellow of his college.5 "He was
then," says Mr. Wood,' " observed to be no drudge to his study ; but,
being a man of great parts, would do much in a little time when he
settled to it." He did not confine his studies to divinity, but applied him
self with great success to mathematics ; and, what shows the extent of
his genius, he was esteemed likewise a good poet, in which capacity he is
mentioned by Sir John Suckling, in his Sessions of the Poets.' His inti
mate friends were Sir Lucius Cary, afterwards Lord Viscount Falkland ;
Mr. John Hales, of Eton, &c, but more particularly Mr. Gilbert Sheldon,
who succeeded Dr. Juxon in the see of Canterbury.11 The study and con
versation of the university scholars at that time turned chiefly upon the
controversies between the church of England and that of Rome ; the
great liberty, which had been allowed the popish missionaries in the end
of the reign of King James I. being continued under King Charles I. upon
the account of his marriage with Henrietta, daughter to Henry IV. of
France.1 There was among them a famous Jesuit, who went under the
name of John Fisher, though his true name was John Perse, or Percey,"'
and was very busy in making converts, particularly at Oxford ; and,
attacking Mr. Chillingworth upon the necessity of an infallible living
judge in matters of faith, the latter forsook the communion of the church
of England, and with an . incredible satisfaction of mind embraced the
Romish religion," and soon after wrote the following letter to his friend
Mr. Gilbert Sheldon."
0 Wood, Athen. Oxon. vol. ii. col. 40, 2d edit. Lond. 1721.
b Diary of Archbishop Laud, published by Mr. H. Wharton, p. 1, 2.
c Wood, ubi supra, col. 42. " Id. col. 40.
e Id. Fasti Oxon. vol. i. col. 215. ' Id. ibid. col. 226.
8 Wood, Athen. Oxon. vol. ii. col. 40. h Ibid.
1 Fragmenta aurea. A Collection of all the incomparable Pieces written by Sir John
Suckling, p. 7, edit. London, 1646.
* Des Maizeaux's Historical and Critical Account of the Life and Writings of Wil
liam Chillingworth, p. 3, edit. London, 1725, in octavo.
¦Id. ibid.
m See Bibliotheca Scriptorum Societatis Jesu : A Nathaniele Sotvello ejusdem Socie-
tatis Presbytero, p.. 487, 488. Edit. Roma?, 1676.
¦ Wood, Athen. Oxon. vol. ii. col. 40. ° Des Maizeaux, ubi supra, p. 7.

viii LIFE OF CHILLINGWORTH.
» Good Mr. Sheldon.— Partly mine own necessities and fears, and
partly charity to some others, have drawn me out of London into the
country. One particular cause, and not the least, was the news of your
sickness, which had I found it had continued with you with any danger,
no danger of my own should have kept me from you. I am very glad
to hear of your recovery, but sorry that your occasions do draw you so
suddenly to London. But, I pray, leave a direction with Charles Green,
where you may be spoke with, and how I may send to you ; and you
shall very shortly hear further from me. Meanwhile let me entreat you
to consider most seriously of these two quseries :
" 1. Whether it be not evident from scripture, and fathers, and reason ;
from the goodness of God and the necessity of mankind, that there must
be some one church infallible in matters of faith ?
" 2. Whether there be any society of men in the world, besides the
church of Rome, that either can, upon good warrant, or indeed at all,
challenge to itself the privilege of infallibility in matter of faith ?
" When you have applied your most attentive consideration upon these
questions, I do assure myself your resolution will be affirmative in the
first, and negative in the second. And then the conclusion will be, that
you will approve and follow the way, wherein I have had the happiness
to enter before you ; and should think it infinitely increased, if it would
please God to draw you after. I rest your assured friend, &c."
Mr. Fisher, in order to secure his conquest, persuaded Mr. Chillingworth
to go over to the college of the Jesuits at Doway ; and the latter was
desired to set down in writing the motives or reasons, which had engaged
him to embrace the Romish religion. But Dr. William Laud, then bishop
of London, hearing of this affair, and being extremely concerned at it,
wrote to him ; and Mr. Chillingworth's answer expressing a great deal of
moderation, candour, and impartiality, that prelate continued to corre
spond with him, pressing him with several arguments against the doctrine
and practice of the Romanists. This set Mr. Chillingworth upon a new
inquiry, which had the desired effect. But the place where he was, not
being suitable to the state of a free impartial inquirer, he resolved to come
back to England, and left Doway in 1631, after a short stay there."
Upon his return to England he was received with great kindness and
affection by Bishop Laud, who approved of his design of retiring to
Oxford, (of which that prelate was then chancellor,) in order to complete
the important work, in which he was engaged, a free inquiry into religion.
At last, after a thorough examination, the protestant principles appearing
to him the most agreeable to the holy scripture and reason, he declared
for them ; and about the year 1634, wrote a confutation of the motives,
which had induced him to go over to the church of Rome. This paper
is now lost. It is true, we have a paper of his on the same subject, first
published in 1687, in the additional discourses of Mr. Chillingworth ; but
it seems to be written upon some other occasion, probably at the desire
of some of his friends.1'
As in his forsaking the church of England, as well as in his return to
it, he was solely influenced by a sincere love of truth, so he constantly
persevered in that excellent temper of mind ; and even after his return to
protestantism, he made no scruple to examine the grounds of it, as appears
'Des Maizeaux, ubi supra, p. 9. See likewise The History of the Troubles and
Trial of William Laud, &c, published by Mr. H. Wharton, p. 227 : and Wood Athen
Oxon. vol. ii. col. 40. ' ¦"""="
b Id. ibid, p. 13—17.

LIFE OF CHILLINGWORTH. IX
by a letter of his to Dr. Sheldon, containing some scruples he had about
leaving the church of Rome and returning to the church of England.
These scruples, which he freely declared to his friends, seem to be the
occasion of a groundless report, that he had turned papist a second .time,
and then protestant again."
His returning to the protestant religion making a great deal of noise,
he was engaged in several disputes with those of the Romish religion,
and particularly with Mr. John Lewgar, Mr. John Floyd, a Jesuit, who
went under the name of Daniel, or Dan a Jesu,b and Mr. White, author
of the Dialogues published under the name of Rushworth ; with whom,
at the desire of Lord George Digby, afterwards earl of Bristol, he had a
conference at the lodgings of Sir Kenelm Digby, a late convert to the
church of Rome.0 But in 1635, he was engaged in a work which gave
him a far greater opportunity to confute the principles of that church,
and to vindicate the protestant religion, upon the following occasion. A
Jesuit, who went by the name of Edward Knott, though his true name
was Matthias Wilson,d had published in 1630, in 8vo. a little book, called
Charity Mistaken, with the want whereof Catholics are unjustly charged,
for affirming, as they do with grief, that Protestancy unrepented destroys
Salvation. This was answered by Dr. Christopher Potter, provost of
Queen's College, in Oxford; and his answer came out in 1633, with this
title : Want of Charity justly charged on all such Romanists, as dare
(without truth or modesty) affirm, that Protestancy destroyeth Salvation,
In answer to a late popish pamphlet, intituled, Charity Mistaken, &c.
The Jesuit replied in 1634, under this title : Mercy and Truth, or Charity
maintained by Catholics. By way of reply upon an answer lately framed
by Dr. Potter to a treatise, which had formerly proved, that Charity was
mistaken by Protestants ; with the want whereof Catholics are unjustly
charged for affirming, that Protestancy unrepented destroys Salvation.
Divided into two parts. Mr. Chillingworth undertaking to answer that
reply, and Mr. Knott being informed of his design, resolved to prejudice
the public both against our author and his book, in a libel, entitled, A
Direction to be observed by N. N. if he mean to proceed in answering
the book, entitled, Mercy and Truth, or Charity maintained by Catholics,
&c. printed in 1636, in 8vo. pag. 42. Permian superiorum. — In this
piece he represents Mr. Chillingworth as a socinian ; whose answer was
very near finished in the beginning of the year 1637 ; and, having been
examined, at Archbishop Laud's request, by Dr. John Prideaux, after
wards bishop of Worcester, Dr. Richard Baylie, vice-chancellor of the
university of Oxford, and Dr. Samuel Fell, Lady Margaret's professor of
divinity, it was published with their approbation in the latter end of that
year, with this title : The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation ;
or, an answer to a book, entitled, Mercy and Truth, or Charity maintain
ed by Catholics. Which pretends to prove the contrary. By William
Chillingworth, Master of Arts of the university of Oxford. — This book
was received with a general applause ; and, what perhaps never happen
ed to any other controversial work of that bulk, two editions were pub
lished within less than five months. On the other hand, Mr. Knott,
seeing that he had not been able to deter our author from publishing his
answer, tried once more to prejudice the public against it ; wherein he
¦ Id. ibid, p. 18, and remark [F.] " Id. ibid, p. 39, 40.
' Id. p. 40 — 43, and Letters between the Lord George Digby, and Sir Kenelm Digby,
Knt. concerning religion, p. 84, 85, edit. London, 1651.
' Bibliotheca Patrum Societatis Jesu, p. 185.

X LIFE OF CHILLINGWORTH.
was seconded by some Jesuits : for in 1638, Mr. Knott published a
pamphlet, entitled, Christianity Maintained; or, a discovery ot sundry
Doctrines tending to the overthrow of the Christian Religion, contained
in the answer to a book, intituled, Mercy and Truth ; or, Charity main
tained by Catholics : printed at St. Omers, in 4to. pag. 86. In this piece*
he promises a larger volume in answer to Mr. Chillingworth. To this
pamphlet is subjoined a little piece under the title of Motives Maintained ;
or, a Reply unto Mr. Chillingworth's answer to his own Motives of his
Conversion to the Catholic Religion. The next pamphlet against our
author was likewise printed at St. Omers in 1638, in 4to. pag. 193, with
this title : The Church conquerant over Human Wit ; or, the Church's
authority demonstrated by Mr. William Chillingworth, (the Proctor for
wit against her) his perpetual Contradictions in his book, intituled, The
Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation. The author was a
Jesuit, called John Floyd, who, in 1639, published likewise another piece,
in 4to. pag. 104, entitled, The Total Sum ; or, no danger of Damnation
unto Roman Catholics for any errors in Faith ; nor any hope of Salva
tion for any Sectary whatsoever, that doth knowingly oppose the doctrine
of the Roman Church. This is proved by the Confessions and Saying
of Mr. Chillingworth's book. The third pamphlet, which appeared
against Mr. Chillingworth, was printed in 1639, most probably at St.
Omers, in 4to. pag. 158, and entitled, The Judgment of an University-
man concerning Mr. William Chillingworth's late Pamphlet, in answer to
Charity Maintained. It was written by Mr. William Lacy, a Jesuit. To
this piece is subjoined another, entitled, Heautomachia. Mr. Chilling
worth against Himself, pag. 46. It hath no title-page, nor preface, being
the sequel of the other, and printed at the same time. The style is also
the same. In 1652, nine years after our author's death, Mr. Knott pub
lished a large answer to him, entitled, Infidelity Unmasked ; or, the Con
futation of a book published by Mr. William Chillingworth, under this
title, The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Salvation : printed at
Ghent, in 4to. pag. 949, besides the preface and index.
While Mr. Chillingworth was employed in the excellent work above-
mentioned, he wrote a letter to one of his friends, who had desired to
know, what judgment might be made of arianism from the sense of
antiquity. It is without date; and, the cover being lost, it doth not
appear to whom it was written. The original is in the library of the
Royal Society, and is as follows :
" Dear Harry,— I am very sorry it was my ill fortune not to see thee,
the day that I went out of Oxford ; otherwise I should have thanked thee
very heartily for the favour thou didst the night before, especially for Mr.
Coventry's company and discourse, whose excellent wit I do very much
admire ; and had I so much interest in him as you have, I should desire
him often (though I hope I need not) to remember what our Saviour says,
' To whom much is given, of them much shall be required.'
" Mr. Taylor did much confirm my opinion of his sufficiency ; but let
me tell you in your ear, methinks he wants much of the ethical part of a
discourser, and slights too much many times the arguments of those he
discourses with. But this is a fault he would quickly leave, if he had a
friend that would discreetly tell him of it. If you or Mr. Coventry would
tell him, that you heard one, that knows him, magnify him exceedingly for
other things, but censure him for this, you might do him a very friendly
office; and my writing to you thus much gives you ground enough to say
"Preface, p. 11.

LIFE OF CHILLINGWORTH. XI
so truly. But you must not give the least suspicion, that I am the man,
and therefore not do it yet a good while.
" When Dr. Sheldon comes to Oxford, I will be there again, and then
will be very ready to do any service in the business you imparted to me.
" I was mistaken in my directing you to Eusebius for the matter you
wot of. You shall find it in a witness much farther from exception herein
than Eusebius, even Athanasius himself, the greatest adversary of that
doctrine, and Hilary, who was his second. See the first in Ep. de Syno-
dis Arim. et Seleuc. p. 917. D. tom. i. edit. Paris, 1627. See the second
de Synodis, fol. 97. In the first you shall find, that the eighty fathers,
which condemned Samosatenus, affirmed expressly, that the Son is not
of the same essence of the Father ; which is to contradict formally the
council of Nice, which decreed the Son co-essential to the Father. In
the second you shall find these words to the same purpose, Octoginta
Episcopi dim respuerunt to Homousion. See also, if you please, Justin.
cont. Tryph. p. 283, 356, 357. Tertull. against Praxeas, c. 9. Nova-
tian de Trinit. in fine, who is joined with Tertullian. Athanas. Ep. de
Fide Dion. Alex. t. i. p. 551. Basil, t. ii. p. 802, 803, edit. Paris, 1618.
See St. Jerome, Apol. 2, cont. Ruffinum, t. ii. p. 329, Paris, 1579. See
Petavius upon Epiph. his Panar. ad Hse. 69, quae est. Arii, p. 285 ; and
consider how well he clears-Lucian the martyr from arianism, and what
he there confesses of all the ancient fathers.
" If you could understand French, I would refer to Perron, p. 633, of
his reply to King James, where you should find these words : ' If a man
should demand of an arian, if he would submit to the judgment of the
church of the ages precedent to that of Constantine and Marcian, he
would make no difficulty of it, but would press himself, that the contro
versy might be decided by that little which remains to us of the authors
of that time. For an arian would find in Irenseus, Tertullian, and others,
which remain of those ages, that the Son is the instrument of the Father ;
that the Father commanded the Son in the works of creation ; that the
Father and the Son are aliud et aliud ; which things he that should now
hold, now when the language of the church is more examined, would be
esteemed a very arian.'
" If you read Bellarmine touching this matter, you should find, that he
is troubled exceedingly to find any tolerable glosses for the speeches of
the fathers before the council of Nice, which are against him ; and yet
he conceals the strongest of them ; and, to counterpoise them, cites
authors that have indeed ancient names, but such, whom he himself has
stigmatized for spurious, or doubtful, in his book De Script. Eccles.
" Were I at leisure, and had a little longer time, I could refer you to
some, that acknowledge Origen's judgment to be also against them in this
matter. And Fishar, in his answer to Dr. White's nine questions," has a
place almost parallel to that above cited out of Perron.
" In a word, whosoever shall freely and impartially consider of this
thing, and how on the other side the ancient fathers' weapons against the
arians are in a manner only places of scripture (and those now for the
most part discarded as impertinent and unconcluding), and how in the
argument drawn from the authority of the ancient fathers, they are almost
always defendants, and scarce ever opponents ; he shall not choose but
confess, or at least be very inclinable to believe, that the doctrine of Arius
is either a truth, or at least no damnable heresy.
•P. 106, 107.

Xii LIFE OF CHILLINGWORTH.
« But the carrier stays for my letter, and I have now no more time than
to add, that I am thy very true and loving friend, &c.
« See Facundus Hermianensis, lib. 10, c. 15. Remember always the
words of our Saviour, ' If you will do the will of my Father, you shall
know of the doctrine, whether it be of God.'
" If you can, send me Mr. Digges's speech. I pray thee go to Dr.
Littleton, and desire him to send me all that he has of Vorstius : for in
the epistles of his, which I borrowed of him, he refers me to some other
books of his, which I shall have especial occasion to use, especially his
book against Pistorius, the Jesuit."
In the year 1635, Sir Thomas Coventry, lord keeper of the great seal,
offering Mr. Chillingworth some preferment, he refused to accept it, on
account of his scruples with regard to the subscription to the thirty-nine
articles of the church of England ;' and wrote a letter upon this subject
to Dr. Sheldon. Mr. Des Maizeaux observes,11 that he had two transcripts
of it, one of which (that hath a postscript) was communicated to him by
Dr. White Kennet, lord bishop of Peterborough ; to which, and to the
copy of the other letter of Mr. Chillingworth, upon his going over to the
Romish religion, his lordship had subjoined the following memorandum :
" To the copies of these two letters to Mr. Gilbert Sheldon and Dr. Shel
don, Mr. Wharton, who procured the transcripts, gave this attestation
under his own hand — Ex autographis Uteris penes Danielem Sheldon
Armigerum, archiepiscopi nepotem. It is dated from Tew,c Sept. 21,
1635, and directed — To the right worshipful and his much honoured
friend Dr. Sheldon,- and is as follows : —
" Good Dr. Sheldon, — I do here send you news, as unto my best
friend, of a great and happy victory, which at length, with extreme dif
ficulty, 1 have scarcely obtained over the only enemy that can hurt me,
that is, myself.
" Sir, so it is, that though I am in debt to yourself and others of my
friends above twenty pounds more than I know how to pay ; though I
am in want of many conveniences ; though in danger of falling into a
chronical infirmity of my body ; though in another thing, which you
perhaps guess at what it is, but I will not tell you, which would make
more joyful of preferment than all these things (if I could come honestly
by it) ; though money comes to me from my father's purse like blood
from his veins, or from his heart ; though I am very sensible, that I have
been too long already an unprofitable burden to my Lord, and must not
still continue so ; though my refusing preferment may perhaps (which
fear, I assure you, does much afflict me) be injurious to my friends and
intimate acquaintance, and prejudicial to them in the way of theirs ;
though conscience of my own good intention and desire suggests unto me
many flattering hopes of great possibility of doing God and his church
service, if I had the preferment, which I may fairly hope for ; though I
may justly fear, that by refusing those preferments, which I sought for, I
shall gain the reputation of weakness and levity, and incur their displea
sure, whose good opinion of me, next to God's favour, and my own good
opinion of myself, I do esteem and desire above all things : though all
these, and many other terribiles msuformm, have represented themselves
.to my imagination in the most hideous manner that may be ; yet I am at
length firmly and immoveably resolved, if I can have no preferment
without subscription, that I neither can, nor will have any.

¦ Des Maizeaux, ubi supra, p. 58, &c. » p gg
0 In Oxfordshire, the seat of Lucius, Lord Viscount Falkland.

LIFE OF CHILLINGWORTH. XUI
" For this resolution I have but one reason against a thousand tempta
tions to the contrary ; but it is w f«ya, against which if all the little rea
sons in the world were put in the balance, they would be lighter than
vanity. In brief, this it is :. as long as I keep that modest and humble
assurance of God's love and favour, which I now enjoy, and wherein I
hope I shall be daily more and more confirmed ; so long, in despite of all
the world, I may, and shall, and will be happy. But if I once lose this,
though all the world should conspire to make me happy, I shall and must
be extremely miserable. Now this inestimable jewel, if I subscribe (with
out such a declaration as will make the subscription no subscription,) I
shall wittingly, and willingly, and deliberately throw away. For though
I am very well persuaded of you and my other friends, who do so with a
full persuasion, that you may do it lawfully ; yet the case stands so with
me, and I can see no remedy but for ever it will do so, that if I subscribe,
I subscribe my own damnation. For though I do verily believe the church
of England a true member of the church ; that she wants nothing neces
sary to salvation, and holds nothing repugnant to it ; and had thought,
that to think so had sufficiently qualified me for a subscription ; yet now
I plainly see, if I will not juggle with my conscience, and play with God
Almighty, I must forbear.
" For, to say nothing of other things, which I have so well considered,
as not to be in a state to sign them, and yet not so well as to declare my
self against them ; two points there are, wherein I am fully resolved, and
therefore care not who knows my mind. One is, that to say, the fourth
commandment is a law of God appertaining to christians is false and
unlawful. The other, that the damning sentences in St. Athanasius's
creed (as we are made to subscribe it) are most false, and also in a high
degree presumptuous and schismatical. And therefore I can neither sub
scribe, that these things are agreeable to the word of God, seeing I believe
they are certainly repugnant to it ; nor that the whole Common Prayer
is lawful to be used, seeing I believe these parts of it certainly unlawful ;
nor promise, that I myself will use it, seeing I never intend either to
read these things, which I have now excepted against, or to say amen to
them. " I shall not need to entreat you, not to be offended with me for this my
most honest, and (as I verily believe) most wise resolution ; hoping rather,
you will do your endeavour, that I may neither be honest at so dear a
rate, as the loss of preferment, nor buy preferment at so much dearer a
rate, the loss of honesty.
"I think myself happy, that it pleased God, when I was resolved to
venture upon a subscription, without full assurance of the lawfulness of
it, to cast in my way two unexpected impediments to divert me from
accomplishing my resolution. For I profess unto you, since I entertained
it, I have never enjoyed quiet day nor night, till now that I have rid my
self of it again. And I plainly perceive, that if I had swallowed this
pill, howsoever gilded over with glosses and reservations, and wrapt up
in conserves of good intentions and purposes ; yet it would never have
agreed nor stayed with me, but I would have cast it up again, and with it
whatsoever preferment I should have gained with it as the wages of
unrighteousness ; which would have been a great injury to you and to my
lord keeper. Whereas now res est Integra ; and he will not lose the gift
of any preferment by bestowing it on me, nor have any engagement to
Mr. Andrews for me.
" But however this would have succeeded, in case I had then subscrib
ed, I thank God, I am now so resolved, that I will never do that while I

§

xiv LIFE OF CHILLINGWORTH.
am living and in health, which I would not do, if I were dying ; and this
I am sure I would not do. I would never do any thing for prelerment,
which I would not do but for preferment ; and this, I am sure, 1 should
not do. I will never undervalue the happiness, which God s love brings
to me with it, as to put it to the least adventure m the world, for the gain-
ing of any worldly happiness. I remember very well, qutsnte primum
regnum Dei, et cmtera omnia adjicientur tibi : and therefore whenever I
make such a preposterous choice, I will give you leave to think I am out
of my wits, or do not believe in God, or at least am so unreasonable, as
to do a thing, in hope I shall be sorry for it afterwards, and wish it
undone. " It cannot be avoided, but my lord of Canterbury must come to know
this my resolution ; and, I think, the sooner the better. Let me entreat
you to acquaint him with it (if you think it expedient) ; and let me hear
from you as soon as possibly you can. But when you write, I pray
remember, that my foregoing preferment (in this state wherein I am) is
grief enough to me ; and do not you add to it, by being angry with me
for doing that, which I must do, or be miserable.
" I am your most loving and true servant, &c.
" So much of my defence of Dr. Potter as I have done, I intend to
review and perfect before I proceed ; and, if it shall be thought fit, to
publish it, annexing a discourse to this effect, that if this be answered, all
the rest is so, which by the strict dependence of that which follows on
that which goes before, I shall be able very easily to demonstrate."
Dr. Sheldon's answer to this letter of Mr. Chillingworth has not yet
been discovered ; but by a paper containing the heads or hints of another
answer of his to our author, it appears, that there passed several letters
between them on that subject ; some, for greater secresy, written in a
third person. For Mr. Chillingworth being intent upon a full inquiry into
the sense of the articles, every new examination afibrded him new
scruples. Dr. Sheldon's paper is as follows : —
" God forbid I should persuade any to do against his conscience : be it
in itself good or bad, it must be a sin to lie.
" It was in a third person ; else 1 would not have told you what I did.
" I must deal plainly with you ; I am much afraid it will ruin you here,
and not advantage you at the last day.
" I put not the title of conscience upon an humour of contradiction.
" According] if not against, for it is according to scripture, that the
church hath power to establish ceremony or doctrine, if occasion require,
not against the scripture.
" The end of these general forms of peace, if capable of any construc
tion, lies against the papists.
" No evangelical counsels, as the papists, such as presuppose a fulfill-
ing of the law, and going beyond it, to satisfy and merit for us, that is
according to scripture. In this sense the article condemns them. Con
sider it well.
"No such offering of Christ in the scripture, where you will find it
once afford for all: in that manner they did it, against whom the article
was framed; taken with all aggravating circumstances of corporal pre
sence, as if another satisfaction for sin : the consequences, which may be
drawn from transubstantiation, amount to little less than blasphemy
"Works done by bare nature are not meritorious de congruo • nature
of sin they must have, if sin be in them ; and so it is, for maUm ex
quahbet causa. Unless a downright pelagian, you may eive it a fof, »nA
safe, and true interpretation. '8 u" Iair' ana

LIFE OF CHILLINGWORTH. XV
" Upon these reasons, I presume, did that reverend prelate Andrews,
and that learned Mountague subscribe, when they publicly taught evan
gelical counsels in their writings. What you have sent to me in a third
person, &c. Be not forward, nor possessed with a spirit of contradic
tion. Thus you may  "
However, at last Mr. Chillingworth surmounted his scruples ; and,
being promoted to the chancellorship of the church of Sarum, July 20th,
1638, with the prebend of Brixworth, in Northamptonshire, annexed to it,
he complied with the usual subscription.
About the same time he was appointed master of Wigstan's hospital in
Leicester ; " both which," says Mr. Wood," " and perhaps other prefer
ments, he kept to his dying day." In 1640, he was deputed by the chap- »
ter of Salisbury for their proctor in convocation. In 1642, he was put
into the roll with some others by his majesty to be created doctor of
divinity ; but he came not to take that degree, nor was he diplomated.b
At the siege of Gloucester, begun August 10, 1643, he was in the king's
army before that city ; and observing, that they wanted materials to carry
on the siege, he suggested the making of some engines after the manner
of the Roman testudines cum pluteis, in order to storm the place." * That
siege being raised by the earl of Essex, and the war continuing with
great vigour on each side, the king appointed the lord Hopton general of
his troops in the west, who forced Arundel castle, in Sussex, to surren
der : but that castle was retaken by Sir William Waller, and Mr. Chilling
worth, among the rest, made prisoner of war ; who, out of respect to my
lord Hopton, " had accompanied him in that march, and being indisposed
by the terrible coldness of the season, chose to repose himself in that
garrison, till the weather should mend."d Mr. Chillingworth's illness
increased to such a degree, that not being able to go to London with the
garrison, he was conveyed to Chichester ; which favour he obtained at
the request of his great adversary, Mr. Francis Cheynell, a bigoted
presbyterian divine, who accidentally met him in Arundel castle, and fre
quently visited him at Chichester till he died. He has given us an
account of our author's sickness, and his own behaviour towards him, in
a book printed at London, 1644, in 4to. entitled, Chillingworthi Novis-
sima ; or, the Sickness, Heresy, Death, and Burial of William Chilling
worth, (in his own phrase) Clerk of Oxford, and in the Conceit of his
fellow-Soldiers, the Queen's arch Engineer and grand Intelligencer. Set
forth in a Letter to his eminent and learned friends : a Relation of his
Apprehension at Arundel ; a Discovery of his Errors in a brief Cate
chism ; and a short Oration at the Burial of his Heretical Book. By
Francis Cheynell, late Fellow of Merton College. Published by Au
thority. — Mr. Chillingworth died about January 30, 1643-4, and was
interred in the cathedral of Chichester.
¦ Athen. Oxon. vol. ii. col. 42. b Id. Fasti Oxon. vol. ii. col. 30.
"Rushworth, Histor. Collect vol. ii. part. 3, ad ann. 1643, tom. iv. p. 288, 289.
11 Clarendon, History of the Rebellion, B. viii. tom. iv. p. 472, 473.

THE
RELIGION OF PROTESTANTS, A
SAFE WAY TO SALVATION.

THE PREFACE
TO THE AUTHOR OF "CHARITY MAINTAINED:" WITH AN ANSWER TO HI3
PAMPHLET, INTITULED, A " DIRECTION TO N. N."
Sir, — Upon the first news of the publication of your book, I
used all diligence with speed to procure it ; and came with
such a mind to the reading of it, as St. Austin, before he was
a settled catholic, brought to his conference with Faustus,
the Manichee. For, as he thought, that if any thing more than
ordinary might be said in defence of the Manichean doctrine,
Faustus was the man from whom it was to be expected: so
my persuasion concerning you was, Si Pergama deoctra defendi
possunt, certe hac defensa videbo. For I conceived, that among the
champions of the Roman church, the English in reason must be
the best, or equal to the best, as being by most expert masters
trained up purposely for this war, and perpetually practised in it.
Among the English, I saw the Jesuits would yield the first place
to none ; and men so wise in their generation as the Jesuits were,
if they had any Achilles among them, I presumed, would make
choice of him for this service. And besides, I had good assurance that
in the framing of this building, though you were the only architect,
yet you wanted not the assistance of many diligent hands to bring you
in choice materials towards it ; nor of many careful and watchful
eyes to correct the errors of your work, if any should chance to escape
you. Great reason therefore had I to expect great matters from
you, and that your book should have in it the spirit and elixir of all
that can be said in defence of your church and doctrine ; and to
assure myself, that if my resolution not to believe it, were not built
upon the rock of evident grounds and reasons, but only upon some
sandy and deceitful appearances, now the wind and storm and
floods were coming, which would undoubtedly overthrow it.
2. Neither truly were you more willing to effect such an altera
tion in me, than I was to have it effected. For my desire is to go
b 0-r)

18 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :"
the right way to eternal happiness. But whether this way lie on
the right hand, or the left, or straight forward ; whether it be by
following a living guide, or by seeking my direction in a book, or
by hearkening to the secret whisper of some private spirit, to me
it is indifferent. And he that is otherwise affected, and hath not
a traveller's indifference, which Epictetus requires in all that would
find the truth, but much desires, in respect of his ease, or pleasure,
or profit, or advancement, or satisfaction of friends, or any human
consideration, that one way should be true rather than another ; it
. is odds but he will take his desire that it should be so, for an assu
rance that it is so. But I, for my part, unless I deceive myself,
was, and still am so affected, as I have made profession, not
willing, I confess, to take any thing upon trust, and to believe it
without asking myself why, no, nor able to command myself
(were I never so willing) to follow, like a sheep, every shepherd
that should take upon him to guide me ; or every flock, that should
chance to go before me : but most apt and most willing to be led
by reason to any way, or from it, and always submitting all other
reasons to this one, God hath said so, therefore it is true. Nor yet
was I so unreasonable, as to expect mathematical demonstrations
from you in matters plainly incapable of them, such as are to be
believed, and, if we speak properly, cannot be known ; such there
fore I expected not. For, as he is an unreasonable master, who
requires a stronger assent to his conclusions than his arguments
deserve ; so I conceive him a fro ward and undisciplined scholar,
who desires stronger arguments for a conclusion than the matter
will bear. But, had you represented to my understanding such
reasons of your doctrine, as, being weighed in an even balance,
held by an even hand, with those on the other side, would have
turned the scale, and have made your religion more credible than
the contrary ; certainly I should have despised the shame of one
more alteration, and with both mine arms, and with all my heart,
¦most readily have embraced it ; such was my expectation from you,
and such my preparation, which I brought with me to the reading
of your book.
8. Would you know now what the event was, what effect was
wrought in me, by the perusal and consideration of it ? To deal
truly and ingenuously with you, I fell somewhat in my good
opinion, both of your sufficiency and sincerity ; but was exceed
ingly confirmed in my ill opinion of the cause maintained by you.
I found every where snares that might entrap, and colours that
might deceive the simple ; but nothing that might persuade, and
very little that might move an understanding man, and one that
can discern between discourse and sophistry : in short, I was verily
persuaded that I plainly saw, and could make it appear to all dis
passionate and unprejudicate judges, that a vein of sophistry and
calumny did run clean through it from the beginning to the end.
And letting some friends understand so much, I suffered myself
to be persuaded by them, that it would not be either improper for
me, or unacceptable to God, nor peradventure altogether unser
viceable to his church, nor justly offensive to you (if you indeed

with an Answer to his " Direction to N. N." 19
were a lover of truth, and not a maintainer of a faction), if setting
aside the second part, which was in a manner wholly employed in
particular disputes, repetitions and references, and in wranglings
with Dr. Potter about the sense of some supernumerary quotations,
and whereon the main question no way depends ; I would make a
fair and ingenuous answer to the first, wherein the substance of the
present controversy is confessedly contained ; and which, if it were
clearly answered, no man would desire any other answer to the
second. This therefore I undertook with a full resolution to be an
adversary to your errors, but a friend and servant to your person :
and so much the more a friend to your person, by how much the
severer and more rigid adversary I was to your errors.
4. In this work my conscience bears me witness, that I have, ac
cording to your advice, " proceeded always with this consideration,
that I am to give a most strict account of every line, and word,
that passeth under my pen :" and therefore have been precisely
careful, for the matter of my book, to defend truth only, and only
by truth : and then scrupulously fearful of scandalizing you or any
man with the manner of handling it. From this rule, sure I am,
I have not willingly swerved in either part of it : and, that I might
not do it ignorantly, I have not only myself examined mine own
work (perhaps with more severity than I have done yours, as con
ceiving it a base and unchristian thing to go about to satisfy others
with what I myself am not fully satisfied) but have also made it
pass the fiery trial of the exact censures of many understanding
judges, always heartily wishing that you yourself had been of the
quorum. But they who did undergo this burthen, as they wanted
not a sufficiency to discover any heterodox doctrine, so I am sure,
they have been very careful to let nothing slip dissonant from truth,
or from the authorised doctrine of the church of England; and
therefore whatsoever causeless and groundless jealousy any man
may entertain concerning my person, yet my book, I presume, in
reason and common equity should be free from them ; wherein I
hope that little or nothing hath escaped so many eyes, which
being weighed in the balance of the sanctuary, will be found too
light: and in this hope I am much confirmed, by your strange
carriage of yourself in this whole business. For though, by some
crooked and sinister arts, you have got my answer into your hands
now a year since and upwards, as I have been assured by some
that profess to know it, and those of your own party ; though
you could not want every day fair opportunities of sending to me,
and acquainting me with any exceptions, which you conceived,
might be justly taken to it, or any part of it (than which nothing
could have been more welcome to me) ; yet hitherto you have not
been pleased to acquaint me with any one ; nay more, though you
have been at sundry times, and by several ways, entreated and so
licited, nay pressed and importuned by me, to join with me in a pri
vate discussion of the controversy between us, before the publication
of my answer (because I was extremely unwilling to publish any
thing which had not passed all manner of trials ; as desiring, not
that I, or my side, but that truth might overcome, on which side
b2

20 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :"
soever it was) though I have protested to you, and set it under my
hand (which protestation by God's help I would have made good)
if you or any other, who would undertake your cause, would give
me a fair meeting, and choose out of your whole book any one ar
gument whereof you was most confident, and by which you would
be content the rest should be judged of, and make it appear, that
I had not, or could not answer it, that 1 would desist from the
work which I had undertaken, and answer none at all : though by
all the arts which possibly I could devise, I have provoked you to
such a trial ; and in particular, by assuring you, that if you refuse-
it, the world should be informed of your tergiversation ; notwith
standing all this, you have perpetually and obstinately declined it ;
which to my understanding is a very evident sign, that there is not
any truth in your cause, nor (which is impossible there should be)
strength in your arguments ; especially considering what our
Saviour hath told us, " Every one that doth evil hateth the light,
neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved : but
he that doth truth, cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made
manifest that they are wrought in God."
5. In the mean while, though you despaired of compassing your
desire this honest way ; yet you have not omitted to tempt me, by
base and unworthy considerations, to desert the cause which I
had undertaken ; letting me understand from you, by an acquaint
ance common to us both, how, that " in case my work should come
to light, my inconstancy in religion (so you miscall my constancy
in following that way to heaven, which for the present seems to
me the most probable) should be to my great shame painted to
the life; that my own writings should be produced against myself;
that I should be urged to answer my own motives against protest
antism; and that such things should be published to the world
touching my belief (for my painter I must expect should have
great skill in perspective) of the doctrine of the Trinity, the deity
of our Saviour, and all supernatural verities, as should endanger all
my benefices, present and future : that this warning was given me
not out of fear of what I could say (for that catholics, if they
might wish any ill would beg the publication of my book, for
respects obvious enough) ; but out of a mere charitable desire of
my good and reputation : and that all this was said upon a sup
position that I was answering or had a mind to answer Charity
Maintained ; if not, no harm was done." To which courteous
premonition, as I remember, I desired the gentleman, who dealt
between us, to return this answer, or to this effect : That I believed
the doctrine of the Trinity, the deity of our Saviour, and all other
supernatural verities revealed in scripture, as truly and as heartily
as yourself, or any man ; and therefore herein your charity was very
much mistaken ; but much more, and more uncharitably, in conceiv
ing me a man that was to be wrought upon with these terribiles
msu forma, those carnal and base fears which you presented to me-
which were very proper motives for the devil and his instruments
to tempt poor-spirited men out of the way of conscience and
honesty, but very incongruous, either for teachers of truth to

with an answer to his "Direction to N. N." 21
make use of, or for lovers of truth (in which company I had been long
agone matriculated) to hearken to with any regard. But if you were
indeed desirous, that I should not answer Charity Maintained, one
way there was, and but one, whereby you might obtain your desire ;
and that was, by letting me know when and where I might attend
you ; and by a fair conference, to be written down on both sides,
convincing mine understanding (who was resolved not to be a
recusant if I were convicted) that any one part of it, any one argu
ment in it, which was of moment and consequence, and whereon
the cause depends, was indeed unanswerable. This was the effect
of my answer, which I am well assured was delivered : but reply
from you I received none but this, that you would have no con
ference with me but in print : and soon after finding me of proof
against all these batteries, and thereby (I fear) very much enraged,
you took up the resolution of the furious goddess in the poet,
madded with the unsuccessfulness of her malice, Flectere si nequeo
superos, Acheronta movebo !
6. For certainly those indign contumelies, that mass of porten
tous and execrable calumnies, wherewith in your pamphlet of
Directions to N. N. you have loaded not only my person in par
ticular, but all the learned and moderate divines of the church of
England, and all protestants in general ; nay all wise men of all
religions but your own, could not proceed from any other fountain.
7. To begin with the last : you stick not, in the beginning of 1
your first chapter, to fasten the imputation of atheism and irreligion!
upon all wise and gallant men that are not of your own religion.]
In which uncharitable and unchristian judgment, void of all colour
or shadow of probability, I know yet by experience, that very many
of the bigots of your faction are partakers with you. God forbid
I should think the like of you ! Yet, if I should say that in your
religion there want not some temptations unto, and some principles
of irreligion and atheism, I am sure I could make my assertion
much more probable than you have done, or can make this horrible
imputation. 8. For to pass by, first, that which experience justifies, that
where and when your religion hath most absolutely commanded,
there and then atheism hath most abounded. To say nothing.
secondly, of your notorious and confessed forging of so many false
miracles, and so many lying legends, which is not unlikely to make
suspicious men to question the truth of all ; nor to object to you,
hirdly, the abundance of your weak and silly ceremonies and
ridiculous observances in your religion ; which, in all probability,
cannot but beget secret contempt and scorn of it in wise and con
sidering men ; and, consequently, atheism and impiety, if they have
this persuasion settled in them (which is too rife among you, and
which you account a piece of wisdom and gallantry) that if they
be not of your religion, they were as good be of none at all : nor to
trouble you, fourthly, with this, that a great part of your doctrine,
especially in the points contested, makes apparently for the tem
poral ends of the teachers of it ; which yet I tear, is a great scandal
to many beaux esprits among you : only I should desire you to con-

22 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :"
sider, attentively, when you conclude so often from the differences of
protestants, that they have no certainty of any part of their religion,
no not of those points wherein they agree; whether you do not that,
which so magisterially you direct me not to do, that is, proceed "a de
structive way, and object arguments against your adversaries, which
tend to the overthrow of all religion1?" And whether, as you argue
thus, "protestants differ in many things, therefore they have no cer
tainty of any thing :" So an atheist or sceptic may not conclude as
well, christians and the professors of all religions differ in many
things, therefore they have no certainty in any thing. Again, I
should desire you to tell me ingenuously, whether it be not too pro
bable, that your portentous doctrine of transubstantiation, joined
with your forementioned persuasion of, " No papists, no christians,"
hath brought a great many others, as well as himself, to Averroes his
resolution, quandoquidem christian i ador ant quod comedunt, sit anima
mea cumphilosophis? Whether your requiring men, upon only pro
bable and prudential motives, to yield a most certain assent unto
things in human reason impossible ; and telling them, as you do too
often, that they were as good not believe at all, as believe with any
lower degree of faith, be not a likely way to make considering men
scorn your religion (and consequently all, if they know no other) as
requiring things contradictory, and impossible to be performed 1
Lastly, whether your pretence, that there is no good ground to be
lieve scripture, but your church's infallibility, joined with your
pretending no ground for this but some texts of scripture, be not a
fair way to make them that understand themselves, believe neither
church nor scripture 1
9. Your calumnies against protestants in general are set down
in these words, chap. ii. § 2. " The very doctrine of protestants,
if it be followed closely, and with coherence to itself, must of
necessity induce socinianism. This I say confidently; and evi
dently prove, by instancing in one error, which may well be termed
the capital, and mother-heresy, from which all other must follow
at ease ; I mean their heresy in affirming, that the perpetual visible
church of Christ, descended by a never-interrupted succession from
our Saviour to this day, is not infallible in all that it proposeth to
be believed as revealed truths. For if the infallibility of such a
public authority be once impeached, what remains, but that every
man is given over to his own wit and discourse ? And talk not
here of holy scripture : for if the true church may err, in defining
what scriptures be canonical, or in delivering the sense and mean
ing thereof; we are still devolved, either upon the private spirit
(a foolery now exploded out of England, which, finally leaving every
man to his own conceits, ends in socinianism) or else upon natural
wit and judgment, for examining and determining what scriptures
contain true or false doctrine, and, in that respect, ought to be re
ceived or rejected. And indeed, take away the authority of God's
church, no man can be assured, that any one book, or parcel of
scripture was written by divine inspiration ; or that all the con
tents are infallibly true ; which are the direct errors of socinians
If it were but for this reason alone, no man, who regards the eternal

with an Answer to his " Direction to N. N." 23
salvation of his soul, would live or die in protestancy, from which
so vast absurdities as these of the socinians must inevitably follow.
And it ought to be an unspeakable comfort to all us catholics, while
we consider, that none can deny the infallible authority of our
church, but jointly he must be left to his own wit and ways ; must
abandon all infused faith, and true religion, if he do but understand
himself right." In all which discourse, the only true word you
speak is, " This I say confidently :" as for " proving evidently," that
I believe you reserved for some other opportunity : for the present,
1 am sure you have been very sparing of it.
10. You say, indeed, confidently enough, that " the denial of the
church's infallibility is the mother-heresy, from which all other must
follow at ease." Which is so far from being a necessary truth, as
you make it, that it is indeed a manifest falsehood. Neither is it
possible for the wit of man, by any good, or so much as probable
consequence, from the denial of the church's infallibility, to deduce
any one of the ancient heresies, or any one error of the socinians,
which are the heresies here entreated of. . For who would not laugh
at him that should argue thus ; neither the church of Rome, nor
any other church is infallible ; ergo, the doctrine of Arius, Pelagius,
Eutyches, Nestorius, Photinus, Manichaeus, was true doctrine ?
On the other side it may be truly said, and justified by very good
and effectual reason, that he that affirms with you, the pope's in
fallibility, puts himself into his hands and power, to be led by him, at
his ease and pleasure, into all heresy, and even to hell itself; and
cannot with reason say (so long as he is constant to his grounds)
Domine, cur ita fads? but must believe white to be black and black
to be white ; virtue to be vice, and vice to be virtue ; nay (which
is an horrible, but a most certain truth) Christ to be antichrist, and
antichrist to be Christ, if it be possible for the pope to say so :
which, I say, and will maintain, however you daub and disguise it,
is indeed to make men apostatize from Christ to his pretended
vicar, but real enemy. For that name and no better (if we may
speak truth without offence) I presume he deserves, who, under
pretence of interpreting the law of Christ (which authority, with
out any word of express warrant, he has taken upon himself) doth
in many parts evacuate and dissolve it : so dethroning Christ from
his dominion over men's consciences, and instead of Christ, setting
up himself; inasmuch as he that requires, that his interpretations of
any law should be obeyed as true and genuine, seem theyrfo men's
understandings never so dissonant and discordant from it (as the".
bishop of Rome does) requires indeed, that his interpretations
should be the laws ; and he that is firmly prepared in mind to
believe and receive all such interpretations without judging of
them, and though to his private judgment they seem unreasonable,
is indeed congruously disposed to hold adultery a venial sin, and
fornication no sin, whensoever the pope and his adherents shall so
declare. And whatsoever he may plead yet either wittingly or
ignorantly, he makes the law and the law-maker both stales, and
obeys only the interpreter. As if I should pretend that I should
submit to the laws of the king of England, but should indeed re-

24 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained ."
solve to obey them in that sense which the king of France should
put upon them, whatsoever it were ; I presume every understanding
man would say, that I did indeed obey the king of France, and not
the king of England. If I should pretend to believe the bible, but
that I would understand it according to the sense which the chief
mufti should put upon it ; who would not say, that I were a christian
in pretence only, but indeed a mahometan 1
11. Nor will it be to purpose for you to pretend, that the precepts
of Christ are so plain, that it cannot be feared that any pope should
ever go about to dissolve them, and pretend to be a christian : for,
not to say that you now pretend the contrary ; to wit, " that the
law of Christ is obscure even in things necessary to be believed and
done ;" and by saying so, have made a fair way for any foul inter
pretation of any part of it : certainly, that which the church of
Rome hath already done in this kind, is an evident argument, that
(if once she had this power unquestioned, and made expedite and
ready for use, by being contracted to the pope) she may do what
she pleaseth with it. Who that had lived in the primitive church,
would not have thought it as utterly improbable, that ever they
should have brought in the worship of images, and picturing of God
as now it is that they should legitimate fornication ? Why may
we not think, they may in time take away the whole communion
from the laity, as well as they have taken away half of it 1 Why
may we not think, that any text and any sense may not be ac
corded as well as the whole fourteenth chapter of the first Epistle
of St. Paul to the Corinthians is reconciled to the Latin service 1
How is it possible any thing should be plainer forbidden than the
worship of angels, in the Epistle to the Colossians 1 than the teach
ing for doctrines men's commands in the gospel of St. Mark ? And
therefore seeing we see these things done, which hardly any man
would have believed that had not seen them, why should we not fear,
that this unlimited power may not be used hereafter with as little
moderation, seeing devices have been invented how men may
worship images without idolatry, and kill innocent men, under
pretence of heresy, without murder ? Who knows not, that some
tricks may not be hereafter devised, by which lying with other
men's wives shall be no adultery, taking away other men's goods
no theft 1 I conclude, therefore, that if Solomon himself were
here, and were to determine the difference, which is more likely
J to be mother of all heresy, the denial of the church's, or the
affirming of the pope's infallibility, that he would certainly say,
" This is the mother, give her the child."
12. You say again confidently, that " if this infallibility be once
impeached, every man is given over to his own wit and discourse :"
which, if you mean discourse not guiding itself by scripture, but
only by principles of nature, or perhaps by prejudices and popular
errors, and drawing consequences, not by rule, but chance, is by
no means true. If you mean by discourse, right reason grounded
on divine revelation and common notions written by God in the
hearts of all men, and deducing according to the never-failing rules
of logic, consequent deductions from them; if this be it which

with an Answer to his "Direction to N. N." 25
you mean by discourse, it is very meet and reasonable and neces
sary, that men, as in all their actions, so especially in that of the
greatest importance, the choice of their way to happiness, should be
left unto it ; and he that follows this in all his opinions and actions,
and does not only seem to do so, follows always God ; whereas he
that followeth a company of men, may oft-times follow a company
of beasts: And in saying this, I say.no more than St. John to all
christians in these words; "Dearly beloved, believe not every
spirit ; but try the spirits, whether they be of God or no." And
the rule he gives them to make this trial by, is to consider whether
they " confess Jesus to be the Christ ;" that is, the guide of their
faith, and lord of their actions ; not, whether they acknowledge the
pope to be his vicar : I say no more than St. Paul, in exhorting
all christians " to try all things, and hold fast that which is good :"
than St. Peter, in commanding all christians " to be ready to give
a reason of the hope that is in them :" than our Saviour himself,
in forewarning all his followers, that " if they blindly follow blind
guides, both leaders and followers should fall into the ditch:"
and again, in saying even to the people, " yea, and why of your
selves judge ye not what is right?" And though by passion, or
precipitation, or prejudice, by want of reason, or not using what
they have, men may be, and are oftentimes, led into error and mis
chief ; yet, that they cannot be misguided by discourse, truly so
called, such as I have described, you yourself have given them
security. For what is discourse, but drawing conclusions out of
premises by good consequence? Now, the principles which we
have settled, to wit, the scriptures, are on all sides agreed to be
infallibly true. And you have told us in the fourth chapter of this
pamphlet, that "from truth no man can, by good consequence,
infer falsehood :" therefore, by discourse no man can possibly be
led to error ; but if he err in his conclusions, he must of necessity
either err in his principles (which here cannot have place) or com
mit some error in his discourse ; that is indeed, not discourse, but
seem to do so.
13. You say, thirdly, with sufficient confidence, " that if the true
church may err in defining what scriptures be canonical, or in the
delivering the sense thereof, then we must follow either the private
spirit, or else natural wit and judgment ; and by them examine
what scriptures contain true or false doctrine, and in that respect
ought to be received or rejected." All which is apparently untrue ;,
neither can any proof of it be pretended. For though the present
church may possibly err in her judgment touching this matter,
yet have we other directions in it besides the private spirit and
the examination of the contents (which latter way may conclude
the negative very strongly, to wit, that such or such a book can
not come from God, because it contains irreconcilable contradic
tions ; but the affirmative it cannot conclude, because the contents
of a book may be all true, and yet the book not written by divine
inspiration) ; other directions therefore I say we have besides
either of these three, and that is the testimony of the primitive
christians.

26 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :"
14. You say, fourthly, with convenient boldness, that "this
infallible authority of your church being denied, no man can be
assured, that any parcel of scripture was written by divine in
spiration:" which is an untruth, for which no proof is pretended;
and besides, void of modesty, and full of impiety : the first, be
cause the experience of innumerable christians is against it, who
are sufficiently assured, that the scripture is divinely inspired, and
yet deny the infallible authority of your church, or any other : the
second, because if I cannot have ground to be assured of the divine
authority of scripture, unless I first believe your church infallible,
then 1 can have no ground at all to believe it ; because there is no
ground, nor can any be pretended, why I should believe your
church infallible, unless I first believe the scripture divine.
15. Fifthly and lastly, you say with confidence in abundance,
that " none can deny the infallible authority of your church, but
he must abandon all infused faith and true religion, if he do but
understand himself :" which is to say, agreeable to what you had
said before, and what out of the abundance of your heart you
speak very often, that all christians besides you, are open fools, or
concealed atheists. All this you say with notable confidence (as the
manner of sophisters is to place their confidence of prevailing in
their confident manner of speaking) ; but then for the evidence you
promised to maintain this confidence, that is quite vanished and
become invisible.
16. Had I a mind to recriminate now, and to charge papists (as
you do protestants) that they lead men to socinianism, I could
certainly make a much fairer shew of evidence than you have
done : for I would not tell you, you deny the infallibility of the
church of England ; ergo, you lead to socinianism, which yet is alto
gether as good an argument as this ; protestants deny the infallibility
of the Roman church ; ergo, they induce socinianism : nor would I
resume my former argument, and urge you, that by holding the
pope's infallibility, you submit yourself to that capital and mother-
heresy, by advantage whereof, he may lead you at ease to believe
virtue vice, and vice virtue ; to believe antichristianity christianism,
and Christianity antichristianism : he may lead you to socinianism,
to turcism, nay, to the devil himself if he have a mind to it : but
I would shew you, that divers ways the doctors of your church
do the principal and proper work of the socinians for them, un
dermining the doctrine of the Trinity, by denying it to be sup
ported by those pillars of the faith, which alone are fit and able
to support it, I mean scripture, and the consent of the ancient
doctors. 17. For scripture, your men deny very plainly and frequently,
that this doctrine can be proved by it. See, if you please, this
plainly taught, and urged very earnestly by Cardinal Hosius, De
Author, bac. 1. 3. p. 53. By Gordonius Huntlaeus, tom. 1. controv 1
De verbo Dei, c. 19. By Gretserus and Tannerus, in Colloquio
Ratisbon ; and also by Vega, Possevin, Wickus, and others.
18. And then for the consent of the ancients: that that also
delivers it not; by whom are we taught, but by papists only?

with an Answer to his " Direction to N. N." 27
Who is it that makes known to all the world, that Eusebius, that
great searcher and devourer of the christian libraries, was an arian ?
Is it not your great Achilles, Cardinal Perron, in his third book
and second chapter of his reply to King James 1 Who is it that
informs us, that Origen (who never was questioned for any error in
this matter in or near his time) "denied the divinity of the Son and
the Holy Ghost 1" Is it not the same great cardinal, in his book
of the Eucharist against M. du Plessis, 1.2. c. 7? Who is it that
pretends, that " Irenasus hath said those things, which he that should
now hold, would be esteemed an arian ?" Is it not the same person
in his reply to King James, in the fifth chapter of his fourth ob
servation ? And doth he not in the same place peach Tertullian
also, and in a manner give him away to the arians ? And pro
nounce generally of the fathers before the Council of Nice, that
" arians would gladly be tried by them V And are not your
fellow Jesuits also, even the prime men of your order, prevari
cators in this point as well as others 1 Doth not your friend Mr.
Fisher, or Mr. Floyd, in his book of the nine questions proposed
to him by King James, speak dangerously to the same purpose,
in his discourse of the resolution of faith, towards the end ? Giv
ing us to understand, " that the new reformed arians bring very
many testimonies of the ancient fathers, to prove, that in this point
they did contradict themselves, and were contrary one to another :
which places whosoever shall read, will clearly see, that to com
mon people they are unanswerable, yea, that common people are
not capable of the answers that learned men yield unto such ob
scure passages." And hath not your great antiquary Petavius, in
his notes upon Epiphanius, in Haer. 69. been very liberal to the
adversaries of the doctrine of the Trinity, and in a manner given
them for patrons and advocates, first Justin Martyr, and then
almost all the fathers before the Council of Nice ; whose speeches,
he says, touching this point, cum orthodoxce fidei regula minime con-
sentiunt ? Hereunto I might add, that the dominicans and Jesuits
between them in another matter of great importance, viz. God's
prescience of future contingents, give the socinians the premises
out of which their conclusion doth unavoidably follow: for the
dominicans maintain on the one side, that God can foresee nothing
but what he decrees : the Jesuits on the other side, that he doth not
decree all things : and from hence the socinians conclude (as it is
obvious for them to do) that he doth not foresee all things. Lastly,
I might adjoin this, that you agree with one consent, and settle for
a rule unquestionable, that no part of religion can be repugnant to
reason ; whereunto you in particular subscribe unawares in saying,
"From truth no man can by good consequence infer falsehood;"
which is to say, in effect, that reason can never lead any man to
error. And after you have done so, you proclaim to all the world
(as you in this pamphlet do very frequently) that, " if men follow
their reason and discourse," they will (if they understand them
selves) be led to socinianism. And thus you see with what probable
matter I might furnish out and justify my accusation, if I should
charge you with leading men to socinianism : yet do I not con-

28 The Preface to the Author of « Charity Maintained :"
ceive that I have ground enough for this odious imputation. And
much less should you have charged protestants with it, whom
you confess to abhor and detest it, and who fight against it, not with
the broken reeds, and out of the paper fortresses of an imaginary
infallibility, which were only to make sport for their adversaries;
but with the sword of the Spirit, the word of God : oi which we
may say most truly, what David said of Goliah's sword, offered
him by Abimelech, Non est sicut iste, " There is none comparable
to it." . i
'• i 19. Thus protestants in general I hope are sufficiently vindi-
c ited from your calumny. I proceed now to do the same service
for the divines of England; whom you question, first, in point of
learning and sufficiency, and then in point of conscience and
honesty, as prevaricating in the religion which they profess, and
inclining to popery. Their learning (you say) consists only in
" some superficial talent of preaching, languages, and elocution ;
and not in any deep knowledge of philosophy, especially of meta
physics; and much less of that most solid, profitable, subtle,
and (0 rem ridiculam, Cato, et jocosam !) succinct method of
school-divinity." Wherein you have discovered in yourself the
true genius and spirit of detraction. For taking advantage from
that wherein envy itself cannot deny but they are very eminent,
and which requires great sufficiency of substantial learning, you
disparage them as insufficient in all things else. As if, forsooth,
because they dispute not eternally, Utrum chimera bombinans in
vacuo, possit comedere secundas intentiones? "Whether a million
of angels may not sit upon a needle's point?" Because they
fill not their brains with notions that signify nothing, to the utter
extermination of all reason and common sense, and spend not an
age in weaving and unweaving subtil cobwebs, fitter to catch
flies than souls, therefore they have no deep knowledge in the
acroamatical part of learning. But I have too much honoured
the poorness of this detraction, to take notice of it.
20. The other part of your accusation strikes deeper, and is
more considerable : and that tells us, that " protestantism waxeth
weary of itself; that the professors of it, they especially of
greatest worth, learning, and authority, love temper and modera
tion ; and are at this time more resolved where to fasten, than
at the infancy of their church : that their churches begin to look
with a new face : their walls to speak a new language : their
doctrine to be altered in many things, for which their progenitors
forsook the then visible church of Christ ; for example, the pope
not antichrist: prayer for the dead: limbus patrum : pictures:
that the church hath authority in determining controversies of faith,
and to interpret scripture : about free-will, predestination, univer
sal grace: that all our works are not sins: merit of good works:
inherent justice; faith alone doth not justify: charity to be pre
ferred before knowledge: traditions: commandments possible to
be kept : That their thirty-nine articles are patient, nay ambitious
of some sense wherein they may seem catholic; that to allege
the necessity of wife and children in these days, is but a weak plea

with an answer to his "Direction to N. N." 29
for a married minister to compass a benefice : that Calvinism is at
length accounted heresy, and little less than treason : that men in
talk and writing use willingly the once fearful names of priests
and altars : that they are now put in mind, that for exposition of
scripture, they are by canon bound to follow the fathers ; which if
they do with sincerity, it is easy to tell what doom will pass against
protestants, seeing, by the confessions of protestants, the fathers
are on the papist's side, which the anwerer to some so clearly de
monstrated, that they remained convinced :" in fine, as the Sama
ritans saw in the disciples' countenances, that they meant to go to
Jerusalem, so you pretend that it is even legible in the foreheads of
these men, that they are even going, nay, making haste to Rome.
Which scurrilous libel, void of all truth, discretion and honesty,
what effect it may have wrought, what credit it may have gained
with credulous papists (who dream what they desire, and believe
their own dreams) or with ill-affected, jealous, and weak protestants,
I cannot tell : but one thing I dare boldly say, that you yourself did
never believe it.
21. For did you indeed conceive, or had any probable hope,
that such men as you describe, men of worth, of learning, and
authority too, were friends and favourers of your religion, and
inclinable to your party ; can any man imagine, that you would
proclaim it, and bid the world take heed of them? Sic notus
Ulysses ? Do we know the Jesuits no better than so ? What, are
they turned prevaricators against their own faction? Are they
likely men to betray and expose their own agents and instruments,
and to awaken the eyes of jealousy, and to raise the clamour of
the people against them ? Certainly, your zeal to the see of Rome,
testified by your fourth vow of special obedience to the pope, pro
per to your order, and your cunning carriage of all affairs for the
greater advantage and advancement of that see, are clear demon
strations, that if you had thought thus, you would never have said
so. The truth is, they that can run to extremes in opposition against
you ; they that pull down your infallibility, and set up their own ;
they that declaim against your tyranny, and exercise it themselves
over others, are the adversaries that give you greatest advantage,
and such as you love to deal with : whereas upon men of temper
and moderation, such as will oppose nothing because you maintain
it, but will draw as near to you, that they may draw you to them,
as the truth will suffer them ; such as require of christians to be
lieve only in Christ, and will damn no man nor doctrine without
express and certain warrant from God's word ; upon such as these
you know not how to fasten : but if you chance to have conference
with any such (which yet as much as possible you can you avoid
and decline) you are very speedily put to silence, and see the inde
fensible weakness of your cause laid open to all men. And this
I verily believe, is the true reason, that you thus rave and rage
against them ; as foreseeing your time of prevailing, or even of
subsisting, would be short, if other adversaries gave you no more
advantage than they do.
22. In which persuasion also I am much confirmed by considera-

30 Tlie Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained ."
tion of the silliness and poorness of those suggestions, and partly
of the apparent vanity and falsehood of them, which you ofler in
justification of this wicked calumny. For what, if our devotion
towards God out of a desire, that he should be worshipped as in
spirit and in truth in the first place, so also in the beauty ot holi
ness ? What if out of fear that too much simplicity and naked
ness in the public service of God, may beget in the ordinary sort
of men a dull and stupid irreverence ; and out of hope, that the out
ward state and glory of it, being well-disposed, and wisely moderated,
may engender, quicken, increase, and nourish the inward reverence,
respect and devotion, which is due unto God's sovereign majesty
and power? What if out of a persuasion and desire that papists
may be won over to us the sooner, by the removing of this scandal
out of their way ; and out of an holy jealousy, that the weaker sort
of protestants might be the easier seduced to them by the magni
ficence and pomp of their church-service, in case it were not re
moved ? I say, what if out of these considerations, the governors
of our church, more of late than formerly, have set themselves to
adorn and beautify the places where God's honour dwells, and to
make them as heaven-like as they can with earthly ornaments ? Is
this a sign, that they are warping towards popery ? Is this devo
tion in the church of England an argument that she is coming over
to the church of Rome ? Sir Edwin Sands, I presume, every man
will grant, had no inclination that way ; yet he, forty years since,
highly commended this part of devotion in papists, and makes no
scruple of proposing it to the imitation of protestants ; little think
ing, that they who would follow his counsel, and endeavour to
take away this disparagement of protestants, and this glorying of
papists, should have been censured for it, as making way, and in
clining to popery. His* words to this purpose are excellent words ;
and because they shew plainly, that what is now practised was ap
proved by zealous protestants so long ago, I will here set them
down. 23. " This one thing I cannot but highly commend in that sort
and order ; they spare nothing which cost can perform in enriching
or skill in adorning the temple of God, or to set out his service,
with the greatest pomp and magnificence that can be devised
And although, for the most part, much baseness and childishness
is predominant in the masters and contrivers of their ceremonies,
yet this outward state and glory, being well disposed, doth engen
der, quicken, increase, and nourish the inward reverence, respect
and devotion which is due unto sovereign majesty and power.
And although I am not ignorant that many men, well reputed,
have embraced the thrifty opinion of that disciple, who thought
all to be wasted that was bestowed upon Christ in that sort,
and that it were much better bestowed on the poor (yet with an
eye perhaps that themselves would be his quarter-almoners) ; not
withstanding, I must confess, it will never sink into my heart, that
in proportion of reason, the allowance for furnishing out of the
* Survey of religion, init.

with an Answer to his "Direction to N. N." 31
service of God should be measured by the scant and strict rule
of mere necessity (a proportion so low, that nature to other most
bountiful, in matter of necessity hath not failed, no not the most
ignoble creatures of the world) ; and that for ourselves, no measure
of heaping, but the most we can get ; no rule of expense, but to
the utmost pomp we list : or that God himself had so enriched the
lower parts of the world with such wonderful varieties of beauty
and glory, that they might serve only to the pampering of mortal
man in his pride ; and that in the service of the high Creator, Lord
and Giver (the outward glory of whose higher palace may appear
by the very lamps that we see so far off burning gloriously in it),
only the simpler, baser, cheaper, less noble, less beautiful, less
glorious things should be employed : especially seeing, as in
princes' courts, so in the service of God also, this outward state and
glory, being well disposed doth (as I have said) engender, quicken,
increase and nourish the inward reverence, respect, and devotion
which is due to so sovereign majesty and power; which those
whom the use thereof cannot persuade into, would easily, by the
want of it, be brought to confess. For which cause I crave leave
to be excused by them herein, if in zeal to the common Lord of all,
I choose rather to commend the virtue of an enemy, than to flatter
the vice and imbecility of a friend." And so much for this matter.
" 24. Again ; what if the names of priests and altars, so frequent
in the ancient fathers, though not now in the popish sense, be
now resumed and more commonly used in England than of late
times they were ; that so the colourable argument of their confor
mity, which is but nominal, with the ancient church, and our in-
conformify, which the governors of the church would not have so
much as nominal, may be taken away from them ; and the church
of England may be put in a state, in this regard more justifiable
against the Roman than formerly it was, being hereby enabled to
say to papists (whensoever these names are objected) we also use
the names of priests and altars, and yet believe neither the corpo
ral presence, nor any proper and propitiatory sacrifice ?
25. What if protestants be now put in mind, that for exposition
of scripture, they are bound by a canon to follow the ancient
fathers; which whosoever doth with sincerity, it is utterly im
possible he should be a papist? and it is most falsely said by you,
that you know, that to some protestants I clearly demonstrated, or
ever so much as undertook, or went about to demonstrate the con
trary. What if the centurists be censured somewhat roundly by a
protestant divine, for affirming, that the keeping of the Lord's-day
was a thing indifferent for two hundred years ? Is there in all this,
or any part of it, any kind of proof of this scandalous calumny 1
certainly, if you can make no better arguments than these, and
have so little judgment as to think these any, you have great
reason to decline conferences, and Signor Con to prohibit you from
writing books any more.
26. As for the points of doctrine, wherein you pretend that these
divines begin of late to falter, and to comply with the church of
Rome ; upon a due examination of particulars, it will presently ap-

32 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained ."
pear; first, that part of them always have been, and now are,
held constantly one way by them, as the authority of the church in
determining controversies of faith, though not the infallibility of
it : that there is inherent justice, though so imperfect, that it can
not justify : that there are traditions, though none necessary : that
charity is to be preferred before knowledge : that good works are
not properly meritorious: and, lastly, that faith alone justifies,
though that faith justifies not which is alone; and, secondly, for
the remainder, that they every one of them have been accidently,
without breach of charity, disputed among protestants ; such, for
example, were the questions about the pope's being the antichrist ;
the lawfulness of some kind of prayers for the dead : the estate of
the fathers' souls before Christ's ascension: free-will, predestina
tion, universal grace : the possibility of keeping God's command
ments : the use of pictures in the church : wherein that there hath
been anciently diversity of opinion amongst protestants, it is jus
tified to my hand by a witness with you, beyond exception, even
your great friend Mr. Breerly, " whose care, exactness, and fidelity
(you say in your preface) is so extraordinary great." Consult him
therefore, tract 3. sect. 7. of his apology, and in the 9, 10, 11, 14,
24, 26, 27, 37, subdivisions of that section, you shall see, as in a
mirror, yourself proved an egregious calumniator, for charging pro
testants with innovation, and clinging to popery ; under pretence,
forsooth, that their doctrine begins of late to be altered in these
points. Whereas Mr. Breerly will inform you, they have been
anciently, and even from the beginning of the reformation, contro
verted amongst them, though perhaps the stream and current of
their doctors run one way, and only some brook or rivulet of them
the others.
27. And thus my friends, I suppose, are clearly vindicated from
your scandals and calumnies. It remains now, in the last place, I
bring myself fairly off from your foul aspersions, that so my person
may not be (as indeed howsoever it should not be) any disadvan
tage or disparagement to the cause, nor any scandal to weak
christians. 28. Your injuries then to me (no way deserved by me, but by dif
fering in opinion from you, wherein yet you surely differ from me as
much as I from you) are especially three. For, first, upon hearsay,
and refusing to give me opportunity of begetting in you a better
understanding of me, you charge me with a great number of false
and impious doctrines, which I will not name in particular, because
I will not assist you so far in the spreading of my own undeserved
defamation: but whosoever teaches or holds them, let him be
anathema ! The sum of them all cast up by yourself, in your first
chapter, is this; "Nothing ought or can certainly be believed, far
ther than it may be proved by evidence of natural reason" (where I
conceive, natural reason is opposed to supernatural revelation) ; and
whosoever holds so, " let him be anathema !" And moreover to clear
myself once for all from all imputations of this nature, which
charge me injuriously with denial of supernatural verities, I pro
fess, sincerely, that I believe all those books of scripture which the

with an Answer to his "Direction to N. N." 33
church of England accounts canonical, to be the infallible word
of God. I believe all things evidently contained in them ; all
things evidently, or even probably deducible from them : I acknow
ledge all that to be heresy, which by the act of parliament primo of
Queen Elizabeth is declared to be so, and only to be so: and though
in such points which may be held diversly of divers men salvafidei
compage, I would not take any man's liberty from him, and humbly
beseech all men, that they would not take mine from me ; yet thus
much I can say (which I hope will satisfy any man of reason) that
whatsoever hath been held necessary to salvation, either by the
catholic church of all ages, or by the consent of fathers, measured
by Vincentius Lyrinensis his rule, or is held necessary, either by
the catholic church of this age, or by the consent of protestants,
or even by the church of England, that, against the socinians, and
all others whatsoever, I do verily believe and embrace.
29. Another great and manifest injury you have done me, in
charging me to have forsaken your religion, " because it conduced
not to my temporal ends," and suited not with my desires and
designs ; which certainly is an horrible crime, and whereof if you
could convince me, by just and strong presumptions, I should then
acknowledge myself to deserve that opinion, which you would fain
induce your credents unto, that I changed not your religion for
any other, but for none at all. But of this great fault my con
science acquits me, and God, who only knows the hearts of all men,
knows that I am innocent : neither doubt I, but all they who know
me, and amongst them many persons of place and quality, will say
they have reason in this matter to be my compurgators. And for
you, though you are very affirmative in your accusation, yet you
neither do, nor can produce any proof or presumption for it; but
forgetting yourself (as it is God's will oft-times that slanderers should
do) have let fall some passages, which being well weighed will
make considering men apt to believe, that you did not believe your
self. For how is it possible you should believe that I deserted
your religion for ends, and against the light of my conscience; out of
a desire of preferment ; and yet, out of scruple of conscience, should
refuse (which also you impute to me) to subscribe the thirty-nine
articles, that is, refuse to enter at the only common door, which
here in England leads to preferment? Again, how incredible is it,
that you should believe that I forsook the profession of your religion,
as not suiting with my desires and designs, which yet reconciles
the enjoying of the pleasures and profits of sin here, with the hope
of happiness hereafter, and proposes as great hope of temporal
advancements to the capable servants of it, as any, nay more than
any religion in the world ; and, instead of this, should choose soci
nianism, a doctrine, which howsoever erroneous in explicating the
mysteries of religion, and allowing greater liberty of opinion in
speculative matters, than any other company of christians doth, or
they should do ; yet certainly, which you, I am sure, will pretend
and maintain to explicate the laws of Christ with more rigour, and
less indulgence and condescendence to the desires of flesh and blood
than your doctrine doth : and, besides, such a doctrine, by which

34 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :"
no man, in his right mind, can hope for any honour and preferment,
either in this church or state, or any other : all which clearly de
monstrates, that this foul and false aspersion, which you have cast
upon me, proceeds from no other fountain, but a heart abounding
with gall and bitterness of uncharitableness, and blinded with
malice towards me ; or else from a perverse zeal to your superstition,
which secretly suggests this persuasion to you ; that for the catholic
cause nothing is unlawful, but that you may make use of such in
direct and crooked arts as these to blast my reputation, and to
possess men's minds with disaffection to my person ; lest otherwise
perad venture, they might with some indifference hear reason from me.
God, I hope, which bringeth light out of darkness, will turn your
counsels to foolishness, and give all good men grace to perceive,
how weak and ruinous that religion must be, which needs support-
ance from such tricks and devices : so I call them, because they
deserve no better name. For what are all these personal matters
which hitherto you spoke of, to the business in hand ? If it could
be proved that Cardinal Bellarmine was indeed a Jew, or that
Cardinal Perron was an atheist; yet I presume you would not accept
of this for an answer to all their writings in defence of your religion.
Let then my actions, intentions, and opinions be what they will,
yet I hope, truth is nevertheless truth, nor reason ever the less
reason, because I speak it. And therefore the christian reader know
ing that his salvation or damnation depends upon his impartial
and sincere judgment of these things, will guard himself, I hope,
from these impostures, and regard not the person, but the cause
and the reasons of it ; not who speaks, but what is spoken : which
is all the favour I desire of him, as knowing, that I am desirous not
to persuade him, unless it be truth whereunto I persuade him.
30. The third and last part of my accusation was, that I answer
out of "principles which protestants themselves will profess to
detest :" which indeed were to the purpose, if it could be justified.
But besides that it is confuted by my whole book, and made ridic
ulous by the approbations premised unto it ; it is very easy for me
out of your own mouth and words to prove it a most injurious
calumny. For what one conclusion is there in the whole fabric of
my discourse, that is not naturally deducible out of this one prin
ciple,' that all things necessary to salvation are contained in the
scripture ? Or, what one conclusion almost of importance is there
in your book, which is not by this one clearly confutable ?
31. Grant this, and it will presently follow, in opposition to your
first conclusion, and the argument of your first chapter, that amongst
men of different opinions, touching the obscure and controverted
questions of religion, such as may with probability be disputed on
both sides (and such are the disputes of protestants) good men and
lovers of truth on all sides may be saved : because all necessary
things being supposed evident concerning them, with men so quali
fied, there will be no difference : there being no more certain sign,
that a point is not evident, than that honest and understanding and
indifferent men, and such as give themselves liberty of judgment
after a mature consideration of the matter, differ about it.

with an Answer to his "Direction to N. N." 35
32. Grant this, and it will appear, secondly, that the means
whereby the revealed truths of God are conveyed to our understand
ing, and which are to determine all controversies in faith necessary
to be determined, may be, for any thing you have said to the con
trary, not a church, but the scripture ; which contradicts the doc
trine of your second chapter.
33. Grant this, and the distinction of points fundamental and
not fundamental, will appear very good and pertinent. For those
truths will be fundamental, which are evidently delivered in scrip
ture, and commanded to be preached to all men ; those not funda
mental, which are obscure. And nothing will hinder but that the
catholic church may err in the latter kind of the said points ; be
cause truths not necessary to the salvation, cannot be necessary to
the being of a church ; and because it is not absolutely necessary
that God should assist his church any farther than to bring her to
salvation ; neither will there be any necessity at all of any infallible
guide, either to consign unwritten traditions, or to declare the ob
scurities of the faith : not for the former end, because this principle
being granted true, nothing unwritten can be necessary to be con
signed ; nor for the latter, because nothing that is obscure can be
necessary to be understood, or not mistaken. And so the discourse
of your whole third chapter will presently vanish.
34. Fourthly, for the creeds containing the fundamentals of sim
ple belief, though I see not how it may be deduced from this prin
ciple ; yet the granting of this, plainly renders the whole dispute
touching the creed unnecessary. For if all necessary things of all
sorts whether of simple belief or practice, be confessed to be clearly
contained in scripture, what imports it, whether those of one sort
be contained in the creed ?
35. Fifthly, let this be granted, and the immediate corollary in
opposition to your fifth chapter, will be and must be, that not pro
testants for rejecting, but the church of Rome, for imposing upon
the faith of christians, doctrines unwritten and unnecessary, and
for disturbing the church's peace, and dividing unity for such mat
ters, is in a high degree presumptuous and schismatical.
36. Grant this, sixthly, and it will follow unavoidably, that pro
testants cannot possibly be heretics, seeing they believe all things
evidently contained in scripture, which are supposed to be all
that is necessary to be believed: and so your sixth chapter is clearly
confuted. 37. Grant this, lastly, and it will be undoubtedly consequent, in
contradiction of your seventh chapter, that no man can show more
charity to himself than by continuing a protestant ; seeing protes
tants are supposed to believe, and therefore may accordingly prac
tise, at least by their religion are not hindered from practising
and performing all things necessary to salvation.
38. So that the position of this one principle is the direct over
throw of your whole book; and therefore I needed not, nor indeed
have I made use of any other. Now this principle, which is not
only the corner-stone, or chief pillar, but even the basis, and the
adequate foundation of my answer; and which, while it stands
c2

36 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :"
firm and unmoveable, cannot but be the supporter of my book,
and the certain ruin of yours, is so far from being, according to
your pretence, detested by all protestants, that all protestants
whatsoever, as you may see in their harmony of confessions, una
nimously profess and maintain it. And you yourself, Chap. VI. §
30, plainly confess as much, in saying, " The whole edifice of the
faith of protestants is settled on these two principles : These par
ticular books are canonical scripture ; and the sense and meaning
of them is plain and evident, at least, in all points necessary to
salvation." 39. And thus your venom against me is in a manner spent, saving
only that there remain two little impertinencies, whereby you
would disable me from being a fit advocate for the cause of pro
testants. The first, because I refuse to subscribe the articles of
the church of England : the second, because I have set down in
writing, motives which sometime induced me to forsake protest
antism, and hitherto have not answered them.
40. By the former of which objections, it would seem, that
either you conceive the thirty-nine articles the common doctrine of
all protestants ; and if they be, why have you so often upbraided
them with their many and great differences ? or else, that it is the
peculiar defence of the church of England, and not the common
cause of all protestants, which is here undertaken by me ; which
are certainly very gross mistakes. And yet why he who makes
scruple of subscribing the truth of one or two propositions, may
not yet be fit enough to maintain, that those who do subscribe them
are in a saveable condition, I do not understand. Now though I
hold not the doctrine of all protestants absolutely true (which with
reason cannot be required of me, while they hold contradictions),
yet I hold it free from all impiety, and from all error destructive of
salvation, or in itself damnable : and this I think in reason may
sufficiently qualify me for a maintainer of this assertion, that pro
testancy destroys not salvation. For the church of England, I am
persuaded, that the constant doctrine of it is so pure and orthodox,
that whosoever believes it, and lives according to it, undoubtedly
he shall be saved; and that there is no error in it, which may
necessitate or warrant any man to disturb the peace, or renounce
the communion of it. This in my opinion is all intended by sub
scription ; and thus much, if you conceive me not ready to sub
scribe, your charity I assure you is much mistaken.
41. Your other objection against me is yet more impertinent
and frivolous than the former; unless perhaps it be a just excep
tion against a physician that himself was sometimes in, and re
covered himself from that disease which he undertakes to cure; or
against a guide in a way, that at first, before he had experience
himself, mistook it, and afterwards found his error and amended
it. That noble writer, Michael de Montaigne, was surely of a far
different mind; for he will hardly allow any physician competent,
but only for such diseases as himself had passed through ¦ and a
far greater than Montaigne, even he that said, Tu conversus
confirma fratres, gives us sufficiently to understand, that they
which have themselves been in such a state as to need conversion,

with an Answer to his " Direction to N. N." 37
are not thereby made incapable of, but rather engaged and obliged
unto, and qualified for this charitable function.
42. Neither am I guilty of that strange and preposterous zeal
(as you esteem it) which you impute to me ; for having been so
long careless, in removing this scandal against protestants, and an
swering my own motives, and yet now showing such fervour in
writing against others. For neither are they other motives, but the
very same for the most part with those that abused me, against
which this book, which I now publish, is in a manner wholly em
ployed: and besides, though you Jesuits take upon you to have
such large and universal intelligence of all state affairs and matters
of importance ; yet I hope such a contemptible matter, as an
answer of mine to a little piece of paper, may very probably have
been written and escaped your observation. The truth is, I made
an answer to them three years since and better, which perhaps
might have been published, but for two reasons ; one, because the
motives were never public until you made them so; the other,
because I was loth to proclaim to all the world so much weak
ness as I shewed, in suffering myself to be abused by such silly
sophisms: all which proceeds upon mistakes and false supposi
tions, which unadvisedly I took for granted ; as when I have set
down the motives in order by subsequent answers to them, I shall
quickly demonstrate, and so make an end.
43. The motives then were these.
1. Because perpetual visible profession, which could never be
wanting to the religion of Christ, or any part of it, is apparently
wanting to protestant religion, so far as concerns the points in
contestation. 2. Because Luther and his followers, separating from the church
of Rome, separated also from all churches, pure and impure, true
or false, then being in the world ; upon which ground I conclude
that either God's promises did fail of performance, if there were
then no church in the world, which held all things necessary, and
nothing repugnant to salvation : or else, that Luther and his sec
taries, separating from all churches then in the world, and so from
the true, if there were any true, were damnable schismatics.
3. Because, if any credit may be given to as creditable records
as any are extant, the doctrine of catholics hath been frequently
confirmed, and the opposite doctrine of protestants confounded,
with supernatural and divine miracles.
4. Because many points of protestant doctrine, are the damned
opinions of heretics, condemned by the primitive church.
5. Because the prophecies of the Old Testament, touching the
conversion of kings and nations to the true religion of Christ, have
been accomplished in and by the catholic Roman religion, and the
professors of it ; and not by protestant religion, and the professors
of it.
6. Because the doctrine of the church of Rome is conformable,
and the doctrine of protestants contrary to the doctrine of the
fathers of the primitive church, even by the confession of pro
testants themselves; I mean, those fathers who lived within the

38 The Preface to the Author of " Charity Maintained :"
compass of the first 600 years ; to whom protestants themselves do
very frequently and very confidently appeal.
7. Because the first pretended reformers had neither extraor
dinary commission from God, nor ordinary mission from the church,
to preach protestant doctrine.
8. Because Luther, to preach against the mass (which contains
the most material points now in controversy), was persuaded by
reasons suggested to him by the devil himself, disputing with him.
So himself professeth, in his book de missa privata ; that all men
might take heed of following him, who professeth himself to follow
the devil.
9. Because the protestant cause is now, and hath been from
the beginning, maintained with gross falsifications and calumnies;
whereof their prime controversy writers are notoriously, and in
high degree, guilty.
13. Because by denying all human authority, either of pope, or
council, or church, to determine controversies of faith, they have
abolished all possible means of suppressing heresy, or restoring the
unity to the church.
These are the motives. Now my answers to them follow briefly
and in order.
44. To the first : God hath neither decreed nor foretold, that his
true doctrine should de facto be always visibly professed, without
any mixture of falsehood.
To the second: God hath neither decreed nor foretold, that
there shall be always a visible company of men free from all error
in itself damnable. Neither is it always of necessity schismatical
to separate from the external communion of a church, though
wanting nothing necessary : for if this church, supposed to want
nothing necessary, require me to profess against my conscience,
that I believe some error, though never so small and innocent,
which I do not believe, and will not allow me her communion but
upon this condition ; in this case the church for requiring this con
dition is schismatical, and not I for separating from the church.
To the third : If any credit may be given to records, far more
creditable than these, the doctrine of protestants, that is, the
bible, hath been confirmed, and the doctrine of papists, which is
in many points plainly opposite to it, confounded, with superna
tural and divine miracles, which, for number and glory, outshine
popish pretended miracles, as much as the sun doth an ignis fatuus ;
those 1 mean, which were wrought by our Saviour Christ and his
apostles. Now this book, by the confession of all sides, confirmed
by innumerable miracles, foretels me plainly, that in after ages
great signs and wonders shall be wrought in confirmation of false
doctrine ; and that I am not to believe any doctrine, which seems
to my understanding repugnant to the first, though an angel from
heaven should teach it; which was certainly as great a miracle
as any that was ever wrought in attestation of any part of the
doctrine of the church of Rome But, that true doctrine should
in all ages have the testimony of miracles, that I am no where
taught ; so that I have more reason to suspect, and be afraid of

with an Answer to his " Direction to N. N." 39
pretended miracles, as signs of false doctrine, than much to regard
them as certain arguments of the truth. Besides, setting aside the
bible, and the tradition of it, there is as good story for miracles
wrought by those who lived and died in opposition to the doctrine
of the Roman church (as by S. Cyprian, Colmannus, Columbanus,
Aidanus, and others), as there is for those that are pretended to be
wrought by the members of that church. Lastly, it seems to me
no strange thing, that God in his justice should permit some true
miracles to be wrought to delude them, who have forged so many
as apparently the professors of the Roman church have, to abuse
the world.
To the fourth : all those were not heretics,* which, by Phila-
strius, Epiphanius, or St. Austin, were put into the catalogue of
heretics. To the fifth ; kings and nations have been and may be converted
by men of contrary religions.
To the sixth : the doctrine of papists is confessed by papists, con
trary to the fathers in many points.
To the seventh : the pastors of a church cannot but have authority
from it to preach against the abuses of it, whether in doctrine or
practice, if there be any in it : neither can any christian want an
ordinary commission from God to do a necessary work of charity
after a peaceable manner, when there is nobody else that can or
will do it. In extraordinary cases, extraordinary courses are not
to be disallowed. If some christian layman should come into a
country of infidels, and had ability to persuade them to Chris
tianity, who would say he might not use it for want of commis
sion? To the eighth : Luther's conference with the devil might be, for
aught I know, nothing but a melancholy dream. If it were real,
the devil might persuade Luther from the mass, hoping, by doing
so, to keep him to it : or that others would make his dissuasion
from it an argument for it, (as we see papists do) and be afraid of
following Luther, as confessing himself to have been persuaded by
the devil.
To the ninth : iliacos intra muros peccatur et extra. Papists are
more guilty of this fault than protestants. Even this very author
in this very pamphlet hath not so many leaves as falsifications and
calumnies. To the tenth : let all men believe the scripture, and that only,
and endeavour to believe it in the true sense and require no more
of others, and they shall find this not only a better, but the only
means to suppress heresy, and restore unity. For he that believes
the scripture sincerely, and endeavours to believe it in the true sense,
cannot possibly be an heretic. And if no more than this were re
quired of any man, to make him capable of the church's communion,
then all men so qualified, though they were different in opinion, yet,
notwithstanding any such difference, must be of necessity one in
communion. * See this acknowledged by Bellar. de Script. Eccles. in Philastrio. By Petaviua
Animad. in Epiph. de incript. operis. By St. Austin, Lib. de Haer. 80.

40

THE AUTHOR OF CHARITY MAINTAINED,
HIS PREFACE TO THE READER.

" Give me leave (good reader) to inform thee, by way of preface,
of three points : the first concerns D. Potter's Answer to Charity
Mistaken. The second relates to this reply of mine. And the
third contains some premonitions, or prescriptions, in case D. Pot
ter, or any in his behalf, think fit to rejoin.
" 2. For the first point, concerning D. Potter's Answer, I say in
general, reserving particulars to their proper places, that in his
whole book he hath not so much as once truly and really fallen
upon the point in question ; which was, whether both catholics and
protestants can be saved in their several professions ? And there
fore Charity Mistaken, judiciously pressing those particulars, where
in the difficulty doth precisely consist, proves in general, that there
is but one true church ; that all christians are obliged to hearken
to her ; that she must be ever visible, and infallible ; that to sepa
rate one's self from her communion is schism ; and to dissent from
her doctrine is heresy, though it be in points never so few, or never
so small in their own nature; and therefore, that the distinction of
points fundamental, and not fimdamental, is wholly vain, as it is
applied by protestants. These (I say) and some other general
grounds, Charity Mistaken handles ; and out of them doth clearly
evince, that any the least difference in faith cannot stand with salva
tion on both sides. And therefore since it is apparent that catholics
and protestants disagree in very many points of faith, they both
cannot hope to be saved without repentance : and consequently, as
we hold that protestancy unrepented destroys salvation, so must
they also believe, that we cannot be saved, if they judge their own
religion to be true, and ours to be false. And whosoever disguiseth
this truth, is an enemy to souls, which he deceives with ungrounded
false hope of salvation in different faiths and religions. And this
Charity Mistaken performed exactly, according to that which
appears to have been his design, which was not to descend to
particular disputes, as D. Potter affectedly does; namely, whe
ther or no the Roman church be the only church of Christ ; and
much less, whether general councils be infallible: whether the
pope may err in his decrees common to the whole church : whe
ther he be above a general council : whether all points of faith
be contained in scripture : whether faith be resolved into the au
thority of the church, as into its last formal object and motive :
and least of all did he discourse of images, communion under
both kinds, public service in an unknown tongue, seven sacra
ments, sacrifice of the mass, indulgencies, and Index Expurga-
torius. All which, and divers other articles, D. Potter (as I said)
draws by violence into his book : and he might as well have brought
in Pope Joan, or antichrist, or the Jews who are permitted to live

The Preface to the Reader. 41
in Rome ; which are common themes for men that want better
matter, as D. Potter was forced to fetch in the aforesaid con
troversies, that so he might dazzle the eyes, and distract the mind
of the reader, and hinder him from perceiving, that in his whole answer
he uttereth nothing to the purpose and point in question ; which
if he had followed closely, I dare well say, he might have dis
patched his whole book in two or three sheets of paper. But the
truth is, he was loth to affirm plainly, that generally both catholics
and protestants may be saved. And yet seeing it to be most evi
dent, that protestants cannot pretend to have any true church
before Luther, except the Roman, and such as agreed with her;
and consequently, that they cannot hope for salvation, if they deny
it to us ; he thought best to avoid this difficulty by confusion of
language, and to fill up his book with points, which make nothing
to the purpose : wherein he is less excusable, because he must
grant, that those very particulars to which he digresseth, are not
fundamental errors, though it should be granted that they be errors,
which indeed are catholic verities : for since they be not funda
mental, nor destructive of salvation, what imports it, whether we
hold them or no, for as much as concerns our possibility to be
saved ? ,
" 3. In one thing only he will perhaps seem to have touched the
point in question ; to wit, in his distinction of points fundamental,
and not fundamental ; because some may think, that a difference
in points which are not fundamental, breaks not the unity of
faith, and hinders not the hope of salvation in persons so disagree
ing. And yet, in this very distinction, he never speaks to the
purpose indeed, but only says, that there are some points so funda
mental, as that all are obliged to know and believe them ex
plicitly ; but never tells us, whether there be any other points of
faith, which a man may deny or disbelieve, though they be suf
ficiently presented to his understanding as truths revealed or tes
tified by Almighty God ; which was the only thing in question.
For if it be damnable, as certainly it is, to deny or disbelieve any
one truth witnessed by Almighty God, though the thing be not in.
itself of any great consequence or moment ; and since of two dis
agreeing in matters of faith, one must necessarily deny some such
truth ; it clearly follows, that amongst men of different faiths, or
religions, one only can be saved, though their difference consist of
divers, or but even one point, which is not in its own nature funda
mental, as I declare at large in divers places of my first part. So
that it is clear, D. Potter even in this his last refuge and distinc
tion, never comes to the point in question ; to say nothing, that he
himself doth quite overthrow it, and plainly contradict his whole
design, as I show in the third chapter of my first part.
" 4. And as for D. Potter's manner of handling those very points,
which are utterly beside the purpose, it consists only in bringing
vulgar mean objections, which have been answered a thousand
times : yea, and some of them are clearly answered even in Charity
Mistaken ; but he takes no knowledge at all of any such answers,
and much less does he apply himself to confute them. He

42 The Preface to the Reader.
allegeth also authors with so great corruption and fraud as I
would not have believed, if I had not found it by clear and irequent
experience. In his second edition he has indeed left out one or
two gross corruptions, amongst many others no less notorious:
having, as it seems, been warned by some friends, that they could
not stand with his credit : but even in this his second edition he
retracts them not at all, nor declares that he was mistaken in the
first ; and so his reader of the first edition shall ever be deceived
by him, though withal he read the second. For preventing of which
inconvenience, I have thought it necessary to take notice of them,
and discover them in my Reply. e
" 5. And for conclusion of this point I will only say, that D.
Potter might have well spared his pains, if he had ingenuously
acknowledged where the whole substance, yea, and sometimes the
very words and phrases of his book, may be found in a far briefer
manner, namely, in a sermon of D. Usher's, preached before our
late sovereign lord King James, the 20th of June, 1624, at Wan-
stead ; containing a declaration of the universality of the church
of Christ, and the unity of faith professed therein : which sermon
having been roundly and wittily confuted by a catholic divine,
under the name of Paul us Veridicus, within the compass of about
four sheets of paper, D. Potter's answer to Charity Mistaken was in
effect confuted before it appeared. And this may suffice for a
general censure of his answer to Charity Mistaken.
" 6. For the second, touching my reply ; if you wonder at the bulk
thereof, compared either with Charity Mistaken, or D. Potter's
answer ; I desire you to consider well of what now I am about to say,
and then I hope you will see that I was cast upon a mere necessity
of not being so short as otherwise might peradventure be desired.
Charity Mistaken is short, I grant, and yet very full and large, for
as much as concerned his design, which you see was not to treat of
particular controversies in religion, no not so much as to debate
whether or no the Roman Church be the only true church of Christ,
which indeed would have required a large volume, as I have under
stood there was one then coming forth, if it had not been prevented
by the treatise of Charity Mistaken, which seemed to make the
other intended work a little less seasonable at that time. But
Charity Mistaken proves only in general out of some universal
principles, well backed and made good by choice and solid autho
rities, that of two disagreeing in points of faith, one only without
repentance can be saved ; which aim exacted no great bulk. And
as for D. Potter's answer, even that also is not so short as it may
seem. For if his marginal notes, printed in a small letter, were
transferred into the text, the book would appear to be of some bulk:
though indeed it might have been very short, if he had kept himself
to the point treated by Charity Mistaken, as shall be declared anon.
But contrarily, because the question debated betwixt Charity Mis
taken and D. Potter, is a point of the highest consequence that can
be imagined ; and in regard, that there is not a more pernicious
heresy, or rather indeed ground of atheism, than a persuasion that
men of different religions may be saved, if otherwise, forsooth ' they

The Preface to the Reader. 43
lead a kind of civil and moral life : I conceive, that my chief endea
vour was not to be employed in answering D. Potter ; but that it
was necessary to handle the question itself somewhat at large, and not
only to prove in general, that both protestants and catholics can
not be saved ; but to show also, that salvation xannot be hoped for
out of the catholic Roman church ; and yet withal, not to omit to
answer all the particulars of D. Potter's book, which may any
ways import. To this end I thought it fit to divide my reply into
two parts ; in the former whereof the main question is handled by
a continued discourse, without stepping aside to confute the parti
culars of D. Potter's answer ; though yet so, as that even in this
first part, I omit not to answer such passages of his, as I find directly
in my way, and naturally belong to the points whereof I treat; and
in the second part, I answer D. Potter's treatise, section by section,
as they lie in order. I here therefore entreat the reader, that if he
heartily desires satisfaction in this so important question, he do
not content himself with that which I say to D. Potter in my second
part, but that he take the first before him, either all, or at least so
much as may serve most to his purpose of being satisfied in those
doubts which press him most. For which purpose, I have caused
a table of the chapters of the first part, together with their titles
and arguments, to be prefixed before my reply.
" 7. This was then a chief reason why I could not be very short :
but yet there wanted not also divers other causes of the same effect.
For there are so several kinds of protestants through the difference
of tenets which they hold, as that if a man convince but one kind
of them, the rest will conceive themselves to be as truly unsatisfied
and even unspoken to, as if nothing had been said therein at all.
As for example : some hold a necessity of a perpetual visible
church, and some hold no such necessity. Some of them hold it
necessary to be able to prove it distinct from ours ; and others,
that their business is dispatched, when they have proved ours to
have been always visible : for then they will conceive, that theirs
hath been so : and the like may be truly said of very many other
particulars. Besides, it is D. Potter's fashion (wherein as he is
very far from being the first, so I pray God he prove the last of
that humour) to touch in a word many trivial old objections, which
if they be not all answered, it will and must serve the turn, to make
the ignorant sort of men believe and brag, as if some main unan
swerable matter had been subtilly and purposely omitted : and
every body knows, that some objection may be very plausibly
made in few words, the clear and solid answer whereof will require
more leaves of paper than one. And, in particular, D. Potter doth
couch his corruption of authors within the compass of a few lines,
and with so great confusedness and fraud, that it requires much
time, pains and paper, to open them so distinctly, as that they may
appear to every man's eye. It was also necessary to show what
D. Potter omits in Charity Mistaken, and the importance of what is
omitted, and sometimes to set down the very words themselves that
are omitted ; all which could not but add to the quantity of my
reply. And as for the quality thereof, I desire thee (good reader)

44 The Preface to the Reader.
to believe, that whereas nothing is more necessary than books for
answering of books; yet I was so ill furnished in this land, that I
was forced to omit the examination of divers authors cited by D.
Potter, merely upon necessity; though I did very well perceive by
most apparent circumstances, that I must probably have been sure
enough to find them plainly misalleged, and much wronged : and
for the few which are examined, there hath not wanted some difti-
culty to do it. For the times are not for all men alike ; and D.
Potter hath much advantage therein. But truth is truth, and
.will ever be able to justify itself in the midst of all difficulties
which may occur. As for me, when 1 allege protestant writers as
well domestical as foreign, I willingly and thankfully acknowledge
myself obliged for divers of them, to the author of the book inti
tuled, The Protestant's Apology for the Roman Church, who calls
himself John Brerely ; whose care, exactness, and fidelity, is so ex
traordinary great, as that he doth not only cite the books, but the
editions also, with the place and time of their printing, yea, and
often the very page and line, where the words are to be had. And
if you happen not to find what he cites, yet suspend your judgment
till you have read the corrections placed at the end of this book,
though it be also true, that after all diligence and faithfulness on
his behalf, it was not in his power to amend all the faults of the
prints : in which prints we have difficulty enough, for many evident
reasons, which must needs occur to any prudent man.
" 8. And forasmuch as concerns the manner of my reply, I have
procured to do it without all bitterness or gall of invective words,
both forasmuch as may import either protestants in general, or
D. Potter's person in particular ; unless, for example, he will call
it bitterness for me to term a gross impertinency a slight, or a cor
ruption, by those very names, without which I do not know how
to express the things : and yet therein I can truly affirm, that I
have studied how to deliver them in the most moderate way, to
the end I might give as little offence as possible I could, without
betraying the cause. And if any unfit phrase may peradventure
have escaped my pen (as I hope none hath) it was beside and
against my intention ; though I must needs profess, that D. Potter
gives so many and so just occasions of being round with him, as
that perhaps some will judge me to have been rather remiss than
moderate. But since in the very title of my reply, I profess to
maintain charity, I conceive the excess will be more excusable
amongst all kinds of men, if it fall to be in mildness, than if it had
appeared in too much zeal. And if D. Potter have a mind to
charge me with ignorance, or any thing of that nature, I can and
will ease him of that labour, by acknowledging in myself as many
and more personal defects than he can heap upon me. Truth only,
and sincerity I so much value and profess, as that he shall never
be able to prove the contrary in any one least passage or particle
against me.
" 9. In the third and last place, I have thought fit to express my
self thus. If D. Potter or any other resolve to answer my reply,
I desire that he would observe some things which may tend to his

The Preface to the Reader. 45
own reputation, the saving of my unnecessary pains, and especially
to the greater advantage of truth. I wish then that he would be
careful to consider wherein the point of every difficulty consists,
and not impertinently to shoot at rovers, and affectedly mistake
one thing for another. As for example, to what purpose (foras
much as concerns the question between D. Potter and Charity
Mistaken) doth he so often and seriously labour to prove, that
faith is not resolved into the authority of the church, as into the
formal object and motive thereof? Or that all points of faith are
contained in scripture? Or that the church cannot make new
articles of faith ? Or that the church of Rome, as it signifies that
particular church or diocese, is not all one with the universal
church ? Or that the pope as a private doctor may err ? With
many other such points as will easily appear in their proper places.
It will also be necessary for him not to put certain doctrines upon
us, from which he knows we disclaim as much as himself.
"10. I must in like manner entreat him not to recite my reasons
and discourses by halves, but to set them down faithfully and en
tirely, forasmuch as in very deed concerns the whole substance of
the thing in question ; because the want sometime of one word,
may chance to make void, or lessen the force of the whole argu
ment. And I am the more solicitous about giving this particular
caveat, because I find how ill he hath complied with the promise
which he made in his preface to the reader, not to omit without
answer any one thing of moment in all the discourse of Charity
Mistaken. Neither will this course be a cause that his rejoinder
grow too large, but it will be occasion of brevity to him, and free
me also from the pains of setting down all the words which he
omits, and himself of demonstrating, that what he omitted was not
material. Nay, I will assure him, that if he keep himself to the
point of every difficulty, and not weary the reader, and overcharge
his margin with unnecessary quotations of authors in Greek and
Latin, and sometimes also in Italian and French, together with
proverbs, sentences of poets, and such grammatical stuff; nor
affect to cite a multitude of our catholic school-divines to no
purpose at all; his book will not exceed a competent size, nor
will any man in reason be offended with that length which is regu
lated by necessity. Again, before he come to set down his answer,
or propose his arguments, let him consider very well what may be
replied, and whether his own objections may not be retorted against
himself, as the reader will perceive to have happened often to his
disadvantage in my reply against him. But especially I expect,
and truth itself exacts at his hand, that he speak clearly and dis
tinctly, and not seek to walk in darkness, so to delude and deceive
his reader, now saying, and then denying, and always speaking
with such ambiguity, as that his greatest care may seem to con
sist in a certain art to find a shift, as his occasions might chance
either now or hereafter to require, and as he might fall out to be
urged by diversity of several arguments. And to the end it may
appear that I deal plainly, as I would have him also do, I desire
that he declare himself concerning these points.
" 11. First, whether our Saviour Christ have not always had, and

46 The Preface to the Reader.
be not ever to have, a visible true church on earth? And whether
the contrary doctrine be not a damnable heresy •
" 12. Secondly, what visible church there was before Luther,
disagreeing from the Roman church, and agreemg with the pre
tended church of protestants.
" 13. Thirdly, since he will be forced to grant, that there can be
assigned no visible true church of Christ, distinct from the church
of Rome, and such churches as agreed with her when Luther first
appeared: whether it doth not follow, that she hath not erred
fundamentally ? Because every such error destroys the nature and
being of the church, and so our Saviour Christ should have had no
visible church on earth.
" 14. Fourthly, if the Roman church did not fall into any funda
mental error, let him tell us how it can be damnable to live in her
communion, or to maintain errors which are known and confessed
not to be fundamental or damnable.
" 15. Fifthly, if her errors were not damnable, nor did exclude
salvation, how can they be excused from schism, who forsook her
communion upon pretence of errors which were not damnable ?
" 16. Sixthly, if D. Potter have a mind to say, that her errors
are damnable, or fundamental, let him do us so much charity, as
to tell us in particular, what those fundamental errors be. But he
must still remember (and myself must be excused for repeating it)
that if he say, the Roman church erred fundamentally, he will not
be able to shew, that Christ our Lord had any visible church on
earth when Luther appeared : and let him tell us, how protestants
had, or can have, any church which was universal, and extended
herself to all ages, if once he grant that the Roman church ceased
to be the true church of Christ ; and consequently, how they can
hope for salvation, if they deny it to us.
" 17. Seventhly, whether any one error maintained against any
one truth, though never so small in itself, yet sufficiently pro
pounded as testified or revealed by Almighty God, do not destroy
the nature and unity of faith, or at least is not a grievous offence
excluding salvation ?
" 18. Eighthly, if this be so, how can lutherans, calvinists, zwing-
lians, and all the rest of disagreeing protestants, hope for salvation,
since it is manifest, that some of them must needs err against some
such truth as is testified by Almighty God, either fundamental, or
at least not fundamental ?
" 19. Ninthly, we constantly urge, and require to have a par
ticular catalogue of such points as he calls. fundamental : a cata
logue, I say, in particular, and not only some general definition or
description, wherein protestants may perhaps agree, though we see
that they differ, when they come to assign what points in particular
be fundamental ; and yet upon such a particular catalogue much
depends : as, for example, in particular, whether or no a man doth
not err in some points fundamental or necessary to salvation 1 and
whether or no lutherans, calvinists, and the rest, do disagree in
fundamentals ? which if they do, the same heaven cannot receive
them all.
"20. Tenthly, and lastly, I desire that in answering to these

The Preface to the Reader. 47
points he would let us know distinctly, what is the doctrine of the
protestant English church concerning them, and what he utters
only as his own private opinion.
"21. These are the questions, which, for the present, I find it fit
and necessary for me to ask of D. Potter, or any other who will
defend his cause, or impugn ours. And it will be in vain to speak
vainly, and to tell me, that a fool may ask more questions in an
hour, than a wise man can answer in a year ; with such idle pro
verbs as that : for I ask but such questions as for which he gives
occasion in his book, and where he declares not himself, but after
so ambiguous and confused a manner, as that truth itself can
scarce tell how to convince him so, but that with ignorant and ill
judging men, he will seem to have somewhat left to say for him
self, though papists (as he calls them) and puritans should press
him contrary ways at the same time : and these questions concern
things also of high importance, as whereupon the knowledge of
God's church, and true religion, and consequently salvation of the
soul depends. And now, because he shall not tax me with being
like those men in the gospel, whom our blessed Lord and Saviour
charged with laying heavy burdens upon other men's shoulders,
who yet would not touch them with their finger ; I oblige myself to
answer upon any demand of his, both to all these questions, if he
find that I have not done it already, and to any other, concerning
matter of faith that he shall ask. And I will tell him very plainly,
what is catholic doctrine, and what is not ; that is, what is defined,
or what is not defined, and rests but in discussion amongst divines.
" 22. And it will be here expected, that he perform these things
as a man who professeth learning should do ; not flying from ques
tions which concern things as they are considered in their own na
ture, to accidental or rare circumstances of ignorance, incapacity,
want of means to be instructed, erroneous conscience, and the like ;
which being very various and different, cannot be well compre
hended under any general rule. But in delivering general doctrines,
we must consider things as they be ex natura rei, or per se loquendo,
(as divines speak) that is, acccording to their natures, if all cir
cumstances concur proportionable thereunto. As for example, some
may for a time have invincible ignorance even of some fundamental
article of faith, through want of capacity, instruction, or the like ;
and so not offend either in such ignorance or error ; and yet we
must absolutely say, that error in any one fundamental point is
damnable ; because so it is, if we consider things in themselves,
abstracting from accidental circumstances in particular persons : as
contrarily, if some man judge some act of virtue, or some indifferent
action to be a sin, in him it is a sin indeed, by reason of his erroneous
conscience ; and yet we ought not to say absolutely, that virtuous
or indifferent actions 'are sins ; and in all sciences we must distin
guish the general rules from their particular exceptions. And
therefore when, for example, he answers to our demand, whether we
hold that catholics may be saved, or whether their pretended errors
be fundamental and damnable ? he is not to change the state of
the question, and have recourse to ignorance, and the like ; but to

48 The Answer to the Preface.
answer concerning the errors being considered what they are apt
to be in themselves, and as they are neither increased or diminished
by accidental circumstances. T
" 23. And the like I say of all the other points, to which I once
again desire an answer without any of these or the like ambiguous
terms, in some sort, in some sense, in some degree, which may be
explicated afterward, as strictly or largely as may best serve his
turn ; but let him tell us roundly and particularly in what sort, in
what sense, in what degree he understands those, and the like
obscure mincing phrases. If he proceed solidly after this manner,
and not by way of mere words, more like a preacher to a vulgar
auditory, than like a learned man with a pen in his hand; thy
patience shall be less abused, and truth will also receive more right.
And since we have already laid the grounds of the question, much
may be said hereafter in few words, if (as I said) he keep close to
the real point of every difficulty, without wandering into imper
tinent disputes, or multiplying vulgar and thread-bare objections
and arguments, or labouring to prove what no man denies, or
making a vain ostentation, by citing a number of schoolmen, which
every puny brought up in schools is able to do ; and if he cite his
authors with such sincerity, as no time need be spent in opening
his corruptions; and finally, if he set himself at work with this
consideration, that we are to give a most strict account to a
most just and impartial judge, of every period, line, and word that
passeth under our pen. For if at the latter day we shall be ar
raigned for every idle word which is spoken, so much more will
that be done for every idle word which is written, as the delibera
tion wherewith it passeth makes a man guilty of more malice;
and as the importance of the matter which is treated of in books
concerning true faith and religion, without which no soul can be
saved, makes a man's errors more material, than they would be if
the question were but of toys."

THE ANSWER TO THE PREFACE.

Ad. 1. and 2 §. If beginnings be ominous (as they say they are)
D. Potter hath cause to look for great store of uningenuous dealing
from you ; the very first words you speak of him, viz. that he hath
not so much as once truly and really fallen upon the point in ques
tion, being a most unjust and immodest imputation.
2. For first ; the point in question, was not that which you pre
tend, whether both papists and protestants can be saved in their
several professions? but whether you may without uncharitable
ness affirm, that protestancy unrepented destroys salvation 1 And
that this is the very question is most apparent and unques
tionable, both from the title of Charity Mistaken, and from the
arguments of the three first chapters of it, and from the title of
your own reply. And therefore if D. Potter had joined issue

Tlie Answer to the Preface. 49
with his adversary only thus far ; and, not meddling at all with
papists, but leaving them to stand or to fall to their own master,
had proved protestants living and dying so, capable of salvation,
I cannot see how it could justly be charged upon him, that he had
not once truly and really fallen upon the point in question. Nei
ther may it be said, that your question here, and mine, are in effect
the same, seeing it is very possible, that the true answer to the
one might have been affirmative, and to the other negative. For
there is no incongruity, but it may be true, that you and we cannot
both be saved ; and yet as true, that without uncharitableness you
cannot pronounce us damned. For, all ungrounded and unwar
rantable sentencing men to damnation, is either in a propriety of
speech uncharitable, or else (which for my purpose is all one) it
is that which protestants mean, when they say, papists for damning
them are uncharitable. And therefore, though the author of
C. M. had proved as strongly as he hath done weakly, that one
heaven could not receive protestants and papists both ; yet cer
tainly, it was very hastily and unwarrantably, and therefore un
charitably, concluded, that protestants were the part that was to
be excluded. As, though Jews and Christians cannot both be saved,
yet a Jew cannot, justly, and therefore not charitably, pronounce a
christian damned.
3. But, then, secondly, to show your dealing with him very
injurious ; I say, he doth speak to this very question very largely,
and very effectually ; as by confronting his work and Charity M.
together, will presently appear. Charity M. proves, you say in
general, " that there is but one church." D. Potter tells him, '| his
labour is lost in proving the unity of the catholic church, whereof
there is no doubt or controversy :" and here I hope, you will grant,
he answers right and to purpose. C. M. proves (you say) secondly,
" that all christians are obliged to hearken to the church." D. Pot
ter answers, " It is true : yet not absolutely in all things, but only
when she commands those things which God doth not countermand."
And this also, I hope, is to his purpose, though not to yours. C.
M. proves, you say, thirdly, " that the church must be ever visi
ble and infallible." For her visibility, D. Potter denies it not;
and as for infallibility, he grants it in fundamentals, but not in
superstructures. C. M. proves, you say, fourthly, " that to separate
one's self from the church's communion is schism." D. Potter grants
it, with this exception, unless there be necessary cause to do so ;
unless the conditions of her communion be apparently unlawful.
C. M. proves, you say, lastly, " that to dissent from her doctrine is
heresy though it be in points never so few, and never so small j
and therefore that the distinction of points fundamental and un-
fundamental, as it is applied by protestants, is wholly vain." This
D. Potter denies; shows the reasons brought for it weak and
unconcluding ; proves the contrary, by reasons unanswerable:
and therefore, that " the distinction of points into fundamental and
not fundamental, as it is applied by protestants, is very good."
Upon these grounds you say, C. M. clearly evinces, " that any least
difference in faith cannot stand with salvation ; and therefore see-
D

50 The Answer to the Preface.
ing catholics and protestants disagree in very many points of faith,
they both cannot hope to be saved without repentance ; you must
mean, without an explicit and particular repentance, and dere
liction of their errors ; for so C. M. hath declared himself, p. 14,
where he hath these words; " We may safely say, that a man who
lives in protestancy, and is so far from repenting it, as that he will
not so much as acknowledge it to be a sin, though he be suf
ficiently informed thereof," &c. From whence it is evident, that
in his judgment there can be no repentance of an error, without
acknowledging it to be a sin. And to thisD. Potter justly opposes;
that " both sides, by the confession of both sides, agree in more
points than are simply and indispensably necessary to salvation,
and differ only in such as are not precisely necessary : that it is
very possible a man may die in error, and yet die with repentance,
as for all his sins of ignorance, so, in that number, for the errors
in which he dies ; with a repentance though not explicit and par
ticular, which is not simply required, yet explicit and general,
which is sufficient : so that be cannot but hope, considering the
goodness of God, that the truths retained on both sides, especially
those of the necessity of repentance from dead works and faith
in Jesus Christ, if they be put in practice, may be an antidote
against the errors held on either side ; to such he means, and says,
as being diligent in seeking truth, and desirous to find it, yet miss
of it through human frailty and die in error." If you will but
attentively consider and compare the undertaking of C. M. and
D. Potter's performance in all these points, I hope, you will be
so ingenuous as to acknowledge, that you have injured him much,
in imputing tergiversation to him, and pretending, that through
his whole book he hath not once truly and really fallen upon the
point in question. Neither may you or C. M. conclude him from
hence (as covertly you do) an enemy to souls, by deceiving them
with ungrounded false hopes of salvation ; seeing the hope of sal
vation cannot be ungrounded, which requires and supposes belief
and practice of all things absolutely necessary unto salvation, and
repentance of those sins and errors which we fall into by human
frailty : nor a friend to indiffcrency in religion, seeing he gives
them only hope of pardon of errors who are desirous, and, accor
ding to the proportion of their opportunities and abilities, indus-
trious to find the truth ; or at least truly repentant, that they have
not been so. Which doctrine is very fit to excite men to a con
stant and impartial search of truth, and very far from teaching
them, that it is indifferent what religion they are of; and, without
all controversy, very honourable to the goodness of God, with
which how it can consist, not to be satisfied with his servants' true
endeavours to know his will, and to do it, without full and exact
performance, I leave it to you and all good men to judge.
4. As little justice methinks you show, in quarrelling with him
for descending to the particular disputes here mentioned by you.
For to say nothing, that many of these questions are immediately
and directly pertinent to the business in hand, as the 1 2 3 5 6
and all of them fall in of themselves into the stream of ' his dis-

Ttie Answer to the Preface. 51
course, and are not drawn in by him, and besides, are touched for
the most part, rather than handled ; to say nothing of all this,
you know right well, if he conclude you erroneous in any one of
all these, be it but in the communion in one kind, or the language
of your service, the infallibility of your church is evidently over
thrown : and this being done, I hope there will be " no such neces
sity of hearkening to her in all things : it will be very possible
to separate from her communion in some things, without schism;
and from her doctrine, so far as it is erroneous, without heresy ;
then all that she proposes will not be, eo ipso, fundamental, be
cause she proposes it ;" and so presently all Charity Mistaken will
vanish into smoke, and clouds, and nothing.
5. You say he was loth to affirm plainly, that generally both
catholics and protestants may be saved : which yet is manifest he
doth affirm plainly of protestants throughout his book ; and of
erring papists, that "have sincerely sought the truth, and failed of
it, and die with a general repentance," pp. 77, 78. And yet you
deceive yourself, if you conceive he had any other necessity to do
so, but only that he thought it true. For we may and do pretend,
that before Luther there were many true churches besides the Ro
man, which agreed not with her : in particular, the Greek church.
So that what you say is evidently true, is indeed evidently false.
Besides, if he had any necessity to make use of you in this matter,
he needed not for this end to say, that now in your church salva
tion may be had, but only that before Luther's time it might be.
Then when your means of knowing the truth were not so great,
and when your ignorance might be more invincible, and therefore
more excusable. So that you may see, if you please, it is not for
ends, but for the love of truth, that we are thus charitable to you.
6. Neither is it material, that these particulars he speaks
against are not fundamental errors; for though they be not de
structive of salvation, yet the conviction of them may be, and is,
destructive enough of his adversary's assertion ; and if you be the
man I take you for, you will not deny they are so. For certainly,
no consequence can be more palpable than this: the church of
Rome doth err in this or that, therefore it is not infallible. And
this, perhaps, you perceived yourself, and therefore demanded
not since they be not fundamental, what imports it whether we
hold them or no, simply; but, forasmuch as concerns our possi
bility to be saved. As if we were not bound by the love of God
and the love of truth to be zealous in the defence of all truths,
that are any way profitable, though not simply necessary to salva
tion ! Or, as if any good man could satisfy bis conscience without
being so affected and resolved ! Our Saviour himself having as
sured us, that* " he that shall break one of his least commandments
(some whereof you pretend are concerning venial sins, and conse
quently the keeping of them not necessary to salvation) and shall
so teach men, shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven."
7. But then it imports very much, though not for the possibility
that you may be saved, yet for the probability that you will be so.
* Matt. v. 19.
D2

52 Tlie Answer to the Preface.
Because the holding of these errors, though it did not merit,
might yet occasion damnation: as the doctrine of indulgences
may take away the fear of purgatory, and the doctrine of purga
tory the fear of hell ; as you do well know it does too frequently.
So that though a godly man might be saved with these errors, yet
by means of them, many are made vicious, and so damned. By
them, I say, though not for them. No godly layman, who is
verily persuaded that there is neither impiety nor superstition in
the use of your Latin service, shall be damned, I hope, for being
present at it ; yet the want of that devotion, which the frequent
hearing the offices understood, might happily beget in them, the
want of that instruction and edification which it might afford
them, may very probably hinder the salvation of many which
might otherwise have been saved. Besides, though the matter
of an error may be only something profitable, not necessary, yet
the neglect of it may be a damnable sin ; as not to regard venial
sins is in the doctrine of your schools mortal. Lastly, as venial
sins, you say, dispose men to mortal ; so the erring from some
profitable, though lesser truth, may dispose a man to error in
greater matters. As for example, the belief of the pope's infal
libility is, I hope, not unpardonably damnable to every one that
holds it ; yet if it be a falsehood (as most certainly it is) it puts a
man into a very congruous disposition to believe antichrist, if he
should chance to get into that see.
8. Ad. § 3. " In his distinctions of points fundamental and not
fundamental, he may seem," you say, " to have touched the point,
but does not so indeed : because, though be says, there are some
points so fundamental, as that all are obliged to believe them ex
plicitly ; yet he tells you not whether a man may disbelieve any
other points of faith, which are sufficiently presented to his un
derstanding, as truths revealed by Almighty God." Touching
which matter of sufficient proposal, I beseech you to come out of
the clouds, and tell us roundly and plainly, what you mean by
" points of faith sufficiently propounded to a man's understanding,
as truths revealed by God." Perhaps you mean such as the per
son to whom they are proposed, understands sufficiently to be
truths revealed by God. But how then can he possibly choose
but believe them?. Or how is it not an apparent contradiction,
that a man should disbelieve what himself understands to be a
truth ; or any christian what he understands or but believes to be
testified by God? D. Potter might well think it superfluous to
tell you this is damnable ; because indeed it is impossible. And
yet one may very well think, by your saying as you do hereafter,
" that the impiety of heresy consists in calling God's truth in ques
tion," that this should be your meaning. Or do you esteem all
those things sufficiently presented to his understanding as divine
truths, which by you or any other man, or any company of men
whatsoever, are declared to him to be so? I hope you will not
say so ; for this were to oblige a man to believe all the churches,
and all the men in the world, whensoever they pretended to pro
pose divine revelations. D. Potter, I assure you from him, would

The Answer to the Preface. 53
never have told you this neither. Or do you mean by sufficiently
propounded as divine truths, all that your church propounds for
such? That you may not neither; for the question between us is
this: whether your church's proposition be a sufficient proposi
tion ? And therefore to suppose this, is to suppose the question ;
which you know in reasoning is always a fault. Or lastly, do you
mean (for I know not else what possibly you can mean) by suffi
ciently presented to his understanding as revealed by God ; that
which, all things considered, is so proposed to him, that he might
and should and would believe it to be true and revealed by God,
were it not for some voluntary and avoidable fault of his own that
interposeth itself between his understanding and the truth pre
sented to it ; this is the best construction that I can make of your
words ; and if you speak of truths thus proposed and rejected, let
it be as damnable as you please, to deny or disbelieve them. But
then I cannot but be amazed to hear you say, that D. Potter
never tells you whether there be any other points of faith, besides
those which we are bound to believe explicitly, which a man may
deny or disbelieve, though they be sufficiently presented to his
understanding as truths revealed or testified by Almighty God;
seeing the light itself is not more clear than D. Potter's declara
tion of himself for the negative in this question, pp. 245, 246,
247, 248, 249, 250 of his book, where he treats at large of this
very argument, beginning his discourse thus. " It seems funda
mental to the faith, and for the salvation of every member of the
church, that he acknowledge and believe all such points of faith,
as whereof he may be convinced that they belong to the doctrine
of Jesus Christ. To this conviction he requires three things :
clear revelation, sufficient proposition, and capacity and under
standing in the hearer. For want of clear revelation, he frees the
church before Christ, and the disciples of Christ, from any dam
nable error, though they believed not these things, which he that
should now deny were no christian. To sufficient proposition, he
requires two things : 1. That the points be perspicuously laid
open in themselves. 2. So forcibly, as may serve to remove rea
sonable doubts to the contrary, and satisfy a teachable mind con
cerning it, against the principles in which he hath been bred to
the contrary. This proposition, he says, is not limited to the
pope or church, but extended to all means whatsoever, by which
a man may be convinced in conscience, that the matter proposed
is divine revelation ; which he professes to be done sufficiently,
not only when his conscience doth expressly bear witness to the
truth ; but when it would do so, if it were not choked, and
blinded by some unruly and unmortified lust in the will : the
difference being not great between him that is wilfully blind, and
him that knowingly gainsayeth the truth. The third thing he re
quires, is capacity and ability to apprehend the proposal, and the
reasons of it : the want whereof excuseth fools and madmen, &c.
But where there is no such impediment, and the will of God is
sufficiently propounded, there (saith he) he that opposeth is con
vinced of error ; and he who is thus convinced is an heretic ; and

54 The Answer to the Preface.
heresy is a work of the flesh, which excludeth from salvation (he
means without repentance). And hence it followeth, that it is
fundamental to a christian's faith, and necessary for his salvation,
that he believes all revealed truths of God, whereof he may be
convinced that they are from God." This is the conclusion of D.
Potter's discourse ; many passages whereof you take notice of in
your subsequent disputations, and make your advantage of them.
And therefore I cannot but say again, that it amazeth me to hear
you say, that he declines this question, and never tells you whe
ther or no there be any other points of faith, which being suffi
ciently propounded as divine revelations, may be denied and dis
believed. He tells you plainly there are none such; and there
fore you cannot say that he tells you not whether there be any
such. Again, it is almost as strange to me, why you should say
this was the only thing in question, whether a man may deny or
disbelieve any point of faith, sufficiently presented to his under
standing as a truth revealed by God. For to say, that any thing
is a thing in question, methinks, at the first hearing of the words,
imports, that it is by some affirmed, and denied by others. Now
you affirm, I grant ; but what protestant ever denied, that it was
a sin to give God the lie ? which is the first and most obvious sense
of these words. Or, which of them ever doubted, that to dis
believe is then a fault, when the matter is so proposed to a man,
that he might and should, and were it not for his own fault,
would believe it? Certainly, he that questions either of these,
justly deserves to have his wits called in question. Produce any
one protestant that ever did so, and I will give you leave to say,
it is the only thing in question. But then I must tell you, that
your ensuing argument, viz. To deny a truth witnessed by God
is damnable, but of two that disagree, one must of necessity deny
some such truth, therefore one only can be saved, is built upon a
ground clean different from this postulate. For though it be al
ways a fault to deny what either I do know, or should know, to
be testified by God ; yet that, which by a cleanly conveyance you
put in the place hereof, to deny a truth witnessed by God simply,
without the circumstance of being known or sufficiently proposed,
is so far from being certainly damnable, that it may be many
times done without any the least fault at all. As if God should
testify something to a man in the Indies, I that had no assurance
of this testification should not be obliged to believe it. For in
such cases the rule of the law hath place, idem est non esse et non
apparere ; not to be at all, and not to appear to me, is to me all
one. " If I had not come and spoken unto you," saith our Saviour,
" you had had no sin."
10. As little necessity is there for that which follows: that of
two disagreeing in a matter of faith, one must deny some such
truth. Whether by [such] you understand testified at all by
God ; or, testified or sufficiently propounded. For it is very
possible the matter in controversy may be such a thing where
God hath not at all declared himself, or not so fully and clearly,
as to oblige all men to hold one way ; and yet be so overvalued

The Answer to the Preface. 55
by the parties in variance, as to be esteemed a matter of faith,
and one of those things of which our Saviour says, " he that be-
lieveth not shall be damned." Who sees not, that it is possible
two churches may excommunicate and damn each other for keep
ing Christmas ten days sooner or later ; as well as Victor, excom
municated the churches of Asia for differing from him about
Easter-day? And yet I believe you will confess, that God had
not then declared himself about Easter, nor hath now about
Christmas. Anciently some good catholic bishops excommu
nicated and damned others for holding there were antipodes ;
and in this question I would fain know on which side was the
sufficient proposal. The contra-remonstrants differ from the re
monstrants about the point of predetermination as a matter of
faith ; I would know in this thing also, which way God hath
declared himself : whether for predetermination, or against it.
Stephen, bishop of Rome, held it as a matter of faith and apos
tolic tradition, that heretics gave true baptism : others there
were, and they as good catholics as he, that held that this was
neither matter of faith, nor matter of truth. Justin Martyr, and
Irenaeus, held the doctrine of the millenaries as a matter of faith :
and though Justin Martyr deny it, yet you, I hope, will affirm,
that some good Christians held the contrary. St. Augustin, I
am sure, held the communicating of infants as much apostolic
tradition, as the baptizing of them : whether the bishop and the
church of Rome of his time, held so too, or held otherwise, I
desire you to determine- But, sure I am, the church of Rome
at this present holds the contrary. The same St. Augustin held
it no matter of faith, that the bishops of Rome were judges of
appeals from all parts of the church catholic, no not in major
causes and major persons : whether the bishop or church of Rome
did then hold the contrary, do you resolve me ; but now I am
resolved, that they do so. In all these differences, the point in
question is esteemed and proposed by one side at least as a matter
of faith, and by the other rejected, as not so : and either this is
to disagree in matters of faith, or you will have no means to show
that we do disagree. Now then to show you how weak and sandy
the foundation is, on which the whole fabric both of your book
and church depends, answer me briefly to this dilemma : either
in these oppositions, one of the opposite parts erred damnably,
and denied God's truth sufficiently propounded, or they did not.
If they did, then they which do deny God's truth sufficiently pro
pounded, may go to heaven ; and then you are rash and uncha
ritable in excluding us, though we were guilty of this fault. If
not, then there is no such necessity, that of two disagreeing about
a matter of faith, one should deny God's truth sufficiently pro
pounded. And so the major and minor of your argument are
proved false. Yet though they were as true as gospel, and as
evident as mathematical principles, the conclusion (so impertinent
is it to the premises) might still be false. For that which natu
rally issues from these propositions is not, therefore one only can
be saved: but, therefore one of them does something that is

56 The Answer to the Preface.
damnable. But with what logic, or what charity you can infer
either as the immediate production of the former premises, or as
a corollary from this conclusion, therefore one only can be saved,
I do not understand ; unless you will pretend, that this con
sequence is good ; such a one doth something damnable, therefore
he shall certainly be damned : which whether it be not to over
throw the article of our faith, which promises remission of sins
upon repentance ; and consequently to ruin the gospel of Christ, I
leave it to the pope and cardinals to determine. For if against this
it be alleged, that no man can repent of the sin wherein he dies; this
much I have already stopped, by showing, that if it be a sin of igno
rance, this is no way incongruous.
1 1 . Ad. § 4. You proceed in slighting and disgracing your ad
versary, pretending his objections are mean and vulgar, and such as
have been answered a thousand times. But if your cause were
good, these arts would be needless. For though some of his ob
jections have been often shifted, by men* that make a profession
of devising shifts and evasions to save themselves and their religion
from the pressure of truth, by men that are resolved they will say
something, though they can say nothing to purpose ; yet I doubt
not to make it appear, that neither by others have they been truly
and really satisfied ; and that the best answer you can give them,
is to call them mean and vulgar objections.
12. Ad. § 5. But his pains might have been spared ; for the sub
stance of his discourse is in a sermon of Dr. Usher's, and confuted
four years ago by Paulus Veridicus. It seems then, the substance
of your reply is in Paulus Veridicus, and so yoUr pains also might
well have been spared. But had there been no necessity to help
and piece out your confuting his arguments with disgracing his
person (which yet you cannot do) you would have considered, that
to them who compare D. Potter's book, and the archbishop's
sermon, this aspersion will presently appear a poor detraction, not
to be answered, but scorned. To say nothing, that in D. Potter,
being to answer a book by express command from royal authority,
to leave any thing material unsaid, because it had been said before,
especially being spoken at large, and without any relation to the
discourse which he was to answer, had been a ridiculous vanity,
and fond prevarication.
13. Ad. § 6. In your sixth parag. I let all pass saving only this,
" that a persuasion, that men of different religions (you must mean,
or else you speak not to the point, christians of divers opinions
and communions) may be saved, is a most pernicious heresy, and
even a ground of atheism." What strange extractions chemistry
can make I know not ; but sure I am, he that by reason would
infer this conclusion, that there is no God ; from this ground, that
God will save men in different religions, must have a higher strain
* I mean the divines of Doway ; whose profession we have in your Beleic Expur*a-
tonus, p. 12, m ccnsura Bertrami in these words : " Seeing in other ancient catholics,
we tolerate, extenuate, and excuse very many errors, and devising some shift often
deny them, and put upon them a convenient sense when they are objected to us 'in dis
putations and conflicts with our adversaries ; we see no reason why Bertram mav not
deserve the same equity." ' -1

The Answer to the Preface. 57
in logic, than you or I have hitherto made shew of. In my appre
hension, the other part of the contradiction, that there is a God,
should much rather follow from it. And whether contradictions
will flow from the same fountain, let the learned judge. Perhaps
you will say, you intended not to deliver here a positive and
measured truth, and which you expected to be called to account
for ; but only a high and tragical expression of your just detesta
tion of the wicked doctrine against which you write. If you mean
so, I let it pass ; only I am to advertise the less wary reader, that
passionate expressions, and vehement asseverations are no argu
ments, unless it be of the weakness of the. cause that is defended
by them, or the man that defends it. And to remember you of
what Boethius says of some such things as these,  Nubila mens
est, hcec ubi regnant. For my part, I am not now in a passion ;
neither will I speak one word, which I think I cannot justify to the
full : And I say, and will maintain, that to say, that christians of
different opinions and communions (such I mean, who hold all those
things that are simply necessary to salvation) may not obtain par
don for the errors wherein they die ignorantly, by a general re
pentance, is so far from being a ground of atheism, that to say the
contrary, is to cross in diameter a main article of our creed, and to
overthrow the gospel of Christ.
14. § 7 & 8. To the two next paragraphs, I have but two words
to say. The one is, that I know no protestants that hold it neces
sary to be able to prove a perpetual visible church distinct from
yours. Some perhaps undertake to do so, as a matter of courtesy ;
but I believe you will be much to seek for any one that holds it
necessary. For though you say, that Christ hath promised there
shall be a perpetual visible church ; yet you yourselves do not pre
tend, that he hath promised there shall be histories and records
always extant of the professors of it in all ages ; nor that he hath
any where enjoined us to read those histories, that we may be able
to show them.
15. The other is, that Brerely's great exactness, which you
magnify so, and amplify, is no very certain demonstration of his
fidelity. A romance may be told with as much variety of circum
stances, as a true story.
16. Ad. 9 & 10 §. Your desires that I would in this rejoinder,
avoid impertinencies: not impose doctrines upon you which you
disclaim : set down the substance of your reasons faithfully and
entirely : not weary the reader with unnecessary quotations : object
nothing to you which I can answer myself, or which may be re
turned upon myself: And lastly (which you repeat again at the
end of your preface), speak as clearly and distinctly and univocally
as possibly I can, are all very reasonable, and shall be by me most
punctually and fully satisfied. Only I have reason to complain,
that you give us rules only, and not good example in keeping them.
For in some of these things I shall have frequent occasion to show,
that medice,cura teipsum, may very justly be said unto you ; espe
cially for objecting what might very easily have been answered by
you, and may be very justly returned upon you.

58 The Answer to the Preface.
17. To your ensuing demands, though some of them be very
captious and ensnaring ; yet I will give you as clear and plain and
ingenuous answers as possibly I can.
18 Ad. 11. &. To the first then, about the perpetuity of the
visible church; my answer is: That I believe our Saviour, ever
since his ascension, hath had in some place or other a visible true
church on earth; I mean a company of men, that professed at
least so much truth as was absolutely necessary for their salvation.
And I believe, that there will be somewhere or other such a church
to the world's end. But the contrary doctrine, I do at no hand
believe to be a damnable heresy.
19. Ad. § 12. To the second, what visible church there was be
fore Luther, disagreeing from the Roman ? I answer, that before
Luther there were many visible churches, in many things dis
agreeing from the Roman. But not that the whole catholic church
disagreed from her, because she herself was a part of the whole,
though much corrupted. And to undertake to name a catholic
church disagreeing from her, is to make her no part of it, which
we do not, nor need not pretend. And for men agreeing with pro
testants in all points, we will then produce them, when you shall
either prove it necessary to be done, which you know we absolutely
deny ; or when you shall produce a perpetual succession of pro
fessors, which in all points have agreed with you, and disagreed
from you in nothing. But this my promise, to deal plainly with
you, I conceive, and so intended it to be, very like his, who under
took to drink up the sea, upon condition, that he to whom the pro
mise was made, should first stop the rivers from running in. For
this unreasonable request which you make to us, is to yourselves
so impossible, that in the next age after the apostles, you will never
be able to name a man, whom you can prove to have agreed with
you in all things, nay, (if you speak of such, whose works are ex
tant, and unquestioned) whom we cannot prove to have disagreed
from you in many things. Which I am so certain of, that 1 will
venture my credit and my life upon it.
20. Ad. § 13. To the third, whether, seeing there cannot be
assigned any visible true church distinct from the Roman, it fol
lows not that she erred not fundamentally ? I say, in our sense
of the word fundamental, it does follow. For if it be true, that
there was then no church distinct from the Roman, then it must
be, either because there was no church at all, which we deny ; or
because the Roman church was the whole church, which we also
deny ; or, because she was a part of the whole, which we grant.
And if she were a true part of the church, then she retained
those truths which were simply necessary to salvation, and held no
errors which were inevitably and unpardonably destructive of it.
For this is precisely necessary to constitute any man or any church
a member of the church catholic. In our sense therefore of the
word fundamental, I hope she erred not fundamentally; but in
your sense of the word, I fear she did ; that is, she held some
thing to be divine revelation, which was not ; something not to be,
which was.

The Answer to the Preface. 59
21. Ad. § 14. To the fourth, how could it be damnable to
maintain her errors, if they were not fundamental ? I answer :
1. Though it were not damnable, yet if it were a fault, it was not
to be done. For a venial sin with you is not damnable ; yet you
say, it is not to be committed for the procuring any good : non est
faciendum malum vel minimum, ut eveniat bonum vel maximum. It
is damnable to maintain an error against conscience, though the
error in itself, and to him that believes it, be not damnable. Nay,
the profession not only of an error, but even of a truth, if not be
lieved, when you think on it again, I believe you will confess to
be a mortal sin ; unless you will say, hypocrisy and simulation in
religion is not so. 3. Though we say, the errors of the Roman
church were not destructive of salvation, but pardonable even to
them that died in them, upon a general repentance ; yet we deny
not, but in themselves they were damnable. Nay, the very saying
they were pardonable, implies they need pardon, and therefore in
themselves were damnable : damnable meritoriously, though not
effectually. As a poison may be deadly in itself, and yet not kill
him, that together with the poison takes an antidote : or as felony
may deserve death, and yet not bring it on him that obtains the
king's pardon.
22. Ad. § 15. To the fifth, how can they be excused from
schism, who forsook her communion upon pretence of errors
which were not damnable ? I answer, all that we forsake in you,
is only the belief and practice, and profession of your errors.
Hereupon you cast us out of your communion : and then with a
strange and contradictious and ridiculous hypocrisy, complain that
we forsake it. As if a man should thrust his friend out of doors,
and then be offended at his departure. But for us not to forsake
the belief of your errors, having discovered them to be errors,
was impossible ; and therefore to do so, could not be damnable,
believing them to be errors. Not to forsake the practice and pro
fession of them, had been damnable hypocrisy; supposing that
(which you vainly run away with, and take for granted) those
errors in themselves were not damnable. Now to do so, and, as
matters now stand, not to forsake your communion, is apparently
contradictious; seeing the condition of your communion is, that
we must profess to believe all your doctrines not only not to be
damnable errors (which will not content you) but also to be cer
tain and necessary and revealed truths. So that to demand, why
we forsook your communion upon pretence of errors which are
not damnable, is, in effect, to demand why we forsook it upon our
forsaking it ? For to pretend that there are errors in your church,
though not damnable, is ipso facto, to forsake your communion,
and to do that which both in your account, and as you think, in
God's account, puts him that does so out of your communion. So
that either you must free your church from requiring the belief of
any error whatsoever, damnable and not damnable; or whether
you will or no, you must free us from schism : for schism there
cannot be, in leaving your communion, unless we were obliged to
continue in it. Man cannot be obliged by man, but to what
either formally or virtually he is obliged by God; for, all just

60 The Answer to the Preface.
power is from God. God, the eternal truth, neither can nor will
oblige us to believe any the least and the most innocent falsehood
to be a divine truth, that is, to err, not to profess a known error,
which is to lie. So that if you require the belief of any error
among the conditions of your communion, our obligation to com
municate with you ceaseth, and so the imputation of schism to us
vanisheth into nothing ; but lies heavy upon you for making our
separation from you just and necessary, by requiring unnecessary
and unlawful conditions of your communion. Hereafter therefore,
entreat you, let not your demand be, how could we forsake your
communion without schism, seeing you erred not damnably ? But,
how could we do so without schism, seeing you erred not at
all : which if either you do prove, or we cannot disprove it, we
will (I at least will for my part) return to your communion, or
subscribe myself schismatic. In the mean time, ji-evupev ugfip
eVjxsv. 23. Yet notwithstanding all your errors, we do not renounce your
communion totally and absolutely,' but only leave communicating
with you in the practice and profession of your errors. The trial
whereof will be to propose some form of worshipping God, taken
wholly out of scripture ; and herein if we refuse to join with you,
then, and not till then, may you justly say, we have utterly and
absolutely abandoned your communion.
24. Ad. § 16. Your sixth demand I have already satisfied in
my answers to the second and the fourth ; and in my reply Ad.
§ 2, toward the end. And though you say, your repeating
must be excused, yet 1 dare not be so confident, and therefore
forbear it.
25. Ad. § 17. To the seventh, whether error against any one
truth sufficiently propounded as testified by God, destroy not the
nature and unity of faith, or, at least, is not a grievous offence
excluding salvation ? I answer, if you propose, as you seem to do,
the proposition so sufficient, that the party to whom it is made is
convinced that it is from God ; so that the denial of it involves
also with it the denial of God's veracity, any such error destroys
both faith and salvation. But if the proposal be only so sufficient,
not, that the party to whom it is made is convinced, but only that
he should, and but for his own fault, would have been convinced
of the divine verity of the doctrine proposed ; the crime then is
not so great ; for the belief of God's veracity may still consist with
such an error. Yet a fault I confess it is, and (without repentance)
damnable, if, all circumstances considered, the proposal be suffi
cient. But then I must tell you, that the proposal of the present
Roman church is only pretended to he sufficient for this purpose,
but is not so; especially all the rays of the divinity, which they
pretend to shine so conspicuously in her proposals, being so darkened
and even extinguished with a cloud of contradiction, from scripture,
reason, and the ancient church.
26. Ad. § 18. To the eighth, how of disagreeing protestants,
both parts may hope for salvation, seeing some of them must needs
err against some truth testified by God ? I answer, the most dis
agreeing protestants that are, yet thus far agree; 1. That those

The Answer to the Preface. 61
books of scripture, which were never doubted of in the church,
are the undoubted word of God, and a perfect rule of faith. 2.
That the sense of them, which God intended, whatsoever it is, is
certainly true; so that they believe implicitly even those very
truths against which they err; and, why an implicit faith in
Christ and his word, should not suffice as well as an implicit
faith in your church ; I have desired to be resolved by many of
your side, but never could. 3. That they are to use their best
endeavours to believe the scripture in the true sense, and to live
according to it. This if they perform (as I hope many on all sides
do) truly and sincerely, it is impossible but that they should be
lieve aright in all things necessary to salvation; that is, in all
those things which appertain to the covenant between God and
man in Christ; for so much is not only plainly, but frequently,
contained in scripture. And believing aright touching the cove
nant, if they for their parts perform the condition required of them,
which is sincere obedience, why should they not expect that God
will perform his promise, and give them salvation ? For, as for
other things which lie without the covenant, and are therefore
less necessary, if by reason of the seeming conflict which is often
times between scripture and reason, and authority on the one side ;
and scripture, reason and authority on the other ; if by reason
of the varieties, tempers, abilities, educations and unavoidable
prejudices, whereby men's understandings are variously formed
and fashioned, they do embrace several opinions, whereof some
must be erroneous; to say, that God will damn them for such
errors, who are lovers of him, and lovers of truth, is to rob man
of his comfort, and God of his goodness ; it is to make man des
perate, and God a tyrant. But they deny truths testified by God,
and therefore shall be damned. Yes, if they knew them to be
thus testified by him, and yet would deny them ; that were to
give God the lie, and questionless damnable. But if you should
deny a truth which God had testified, but only to a man in the
Indies (as I said before) and this testification you had never heard
of, or at least had no sufficient reason to believe that God had
so testified, would you not think it a hard case to be damned for
such a denial ? Yet consider, I pray, a little more attentively the
difference between them, and you will presently acknowledge,
the question between them is not at any time, or in any thing,
whether God says true or no ; or, whether he says this, or no :
but, supposing he says this, and says true, whether he means this
or no. As for example ; between lutherans, calvinists, and zuing-
lians, it is agreed that Christ spake these words, " This is my body ;"
and that, whatsoever he meant in saying so is true : but what
he meant, and how he is to be understood, that is the question.
So that though some of them deny a truth by God intended, yet
you can with no reason or justice accuse them of denying the
truth of God's testimony, unless you can plainly show, that
God hath declared, and that plainly and clearly, what was his
meaning in these words : I say plainly and clearly, for he that
speaks obscurely and ambiguously, and no where declares him
self plainly, sure he hath no reason to be much offended if he

62 Tfie Answer to the Preface.
be mistaken. When therefore you can show, that in this and
all other their controversies, God hath interposed his testi
mony on one side or other ; so that either they do see it, and
will not; or, were it not for their own voluntary and avoidable
fault, might and should see it, and do not ; let all such errors be
as damnable as you please to make them. In the meanwhile, if
they suffer themselves neither to be betrayed into their errors,
nor kept in them by any sin of their will ; if they do their best
endeavour to free themselves from all errors, and yet fail of it
through human frailty; so well am I persuaded of the goodness
of God, that if in me alone should meet a confluence of all such
errors of all the protestants in the world, that were thus quali
fied, I should not be so much afraid of them all, as I should be
to ask pardon for them. For, whereas that which you affright
us with, of calling God's veracity in question, is but a panic fear,
a fault that no man thus qualified is or can be guilty of; to ask
pardon of simple and purely involuntary errors is tacitly to imply,
that God is angry with us for them, and that were to impute to
him the strange tyranny of requiring brick, when he gives no
straw ; of expecting to gather, where he strewed not ; to reap,
where he sowed not ; of being offended with us for not doing
what he knows we cannot do. This I say upon a supposition,
that they do their best endeavours to know God's will and do it;
which he that denies to be possible, knows not what he says ; for
he says in effect, that men cannot do what they can do ; for to do
what a man can do, is to do his best endeavour. But because
this supposition, though certainly possible, is very rare and ad
mirable; I say, secondly, that I am verily persuaded, that Gdd
will not impute errors to them as sins, who use such a measure
of industry in finding truth, as human prudence and ordinary
discretion (their abilities and opportunities, their distractions and
hindrances, and all other things considered) shall advise them
into, in a matter of such consequence. But if herein also we
fail, then our errors begin to be malignant, and justly imputable,
as offences against God, and that love of his truth which he re
quires in us. You will say then, that for those erring protestants,
which are in this case, which evidently are far the greater part,
they sin damnably in erring, and therefore there is little hope of
their salvation. To which I answer, that the consequence of this
reason is somewhat strong against a protestant ; but much weak
ened by coming out of the mouth of a papist. For all sins with
you are not damnable ; and therefore protestant errors might be
sins, and yet not damnable. But yet out of courtesy to you, we
will remove this rub out of your way ; and for the present suppose
them mortal sins : And is there then no hope of salvation for him
that commits them ? Not, you will say, if he die in them without
repentance ; and such protestants you" speak of, who without re
pentance die m their errors. Yea, but what if they die in their
errors with repentance? Then I hope you will have charity
enough to think they may be saved. Charity Mistaken* takes it
* In the place above quoted.

The Answer to the Preface. 63
indeed for granted, that this supposition is destructive of itself;
and that it is impossible and incongruous, that a man should re
pent of those errors wherein he dies ; or die in those whereof he
repents. But it was wisely done of him to take it for granted ;
for most certainly, he could not have spoken one word of sense
for the confirmation of it. For seeing protestants believe, as well
as you, God's infinite and most admirable perfections in himself,
more than most worthy of all possible love : seeing they believe,
as well as you, his infinite goodness to them, in creating them of
nothing ; in creating them according to his own image ; in creat
ing all things for their use and benefit; in streaming down his
favours on them every moment of their lives ; in designing them,
if they serve him, to infinite and eternal happiness ; in redeeming
them, " not with corruptible things," but the precious blood of his
beloved Son ; seeing they believe, as well as you, his infinite good
ness and patience towards them, in expecting their conversion, in
wooing, alluring, leading, and by all means which his wisdom
can suggest unto him, and man's nature is capable of, drawing
them to repentance and salvation : seeing they believe these
things as well as you, and, for aught you know, consider them
as much as you (and if they do not, it is not their religion, but
they that are to blame) what can hinder, but that the consider
ation of God's most infinite goodness to them, and their own
almost infinite wickedness against him, God's Spirit co-operating
with them, may raise them to a true and sincere and cordial
love of God ? And seeing sorrow for having injured or offended
the person beloved, or when we fear we may have offended him,
is the most natural effect of true love ; what can hinder but that
love which hath ofttimes constrained them to lay down their
lives for God (which our Saviour assures us is the noblest sacri
fice we can offer) may produce in them an universal sorrow for
all their sins, both which they know they have committed, and
which they fear they may have ? In which number, their being
negligent, or not dispassionate, or not unprejudicate enough in
seeking the truth, and the effect . thereof, their errors, if they be
sins, cannot be compromised. In a word, what should hinder,
but that the prayer — Delicta sua quis intelligit ? " Who can under
stand his faults ? Lord, cleanse thou me from my secret sins," may
be heard and accepted by God, as well from a protestant that dies
in some errors, as from a papist that dies in some other sins of
ignorance, which perhaps he might more easily have discovered
to be sins, than a protestant could his errors to be errors ? As well
from a protestant, that held some error, which (as he conceived)
God's word, and his reason (which is also in some sort God's word)
led him unto; as from a dominican, who perhaps took up his
opinion upon trust, not because he had reason to believe it true,
but because it was the opinion of his order ; for the same man,
if he had light upon another order, would, in all probability,
have been of the other opinion : For what else is the cause, that
generally all the dominicans are of one opinion, and all the Jesuits
of the other ? I say, from a dominican who took up his opinion
upon trust ; and that such an opinion (if we believe the writers

64 The Answer to the Preface.
of your order) as, if it be granted true, were it not a point-matter
what opinions any man held, or what actions any man did ; for
the best would be as bad as the worst, and the worst as good as
the best. And yet such is the partiality of your hypocrisy, that,
of disagreeing papists, neither shall deny the truth testified by
God, but both may hope for salvation : But of disagreeing pro
testants (though they differ in the same thing) one side must deny
God's testimony, and be incapable of salvation. That a domi
nican through culpable negligence, living and dying in his error,
may repent of it, though he knows it not ; or be saved, though he
do not : but if a protestant do the very same thing, in the very same
point, and die in his error, his case is desperate. The sum of all that
hath been said to this demand, is this : 1. That no erring protestant
denies any truth testified by God, under this formality, as testified by
him ; nor which they know or believe to be testified by him. And
therefore it is an horrible calumny in you to say, they call God's
veracity in question : For God's undoubted and unquestioned vera
city is to them the ground why they do hold all they do hold :
neither do they hold any opinion so stiffly, but they will forego it
rather than this one, that all which God says is true. 2. God hath
not so clearly and plainly declared himself in most of these things
which are in controversy between protestants, but that an honest
man, whose heart is right to God, and one that is a true lover of
God, and of his truth, may, by reason of the conflict of contrary
reasons on both sides, very easily, and therefore excusably mistake,
and embrace error for truth, and reject truth for error. 3. If
any protestant or papist be betrayed into, or kept in any error,
by any sin of his will (as it is to be feared many millions are) such
error is, as the cause of it, sinful and damnable ; yet not exclusive
of all hope of salvation, but pardonable if discovered, upon a par
ticular explicit repentance ; if not discovered, upon a general
and implicit repentance for all sins, known and unknown : in which
number all sinful errors must of necessity be contained.
27. Ad. § 19. To the ninth, wherein you are so urgent for a
particular catalogue of fundamentals : I answer almost in your
own words, that we also constantly urge and require to have a
particular catalogue of your fundamentals, wherein they be written
verities, or unwritten traditions, or church definitions, all which,
you say, integrate the material object of your faith : in a word,
of all such points as are defined and sufficiently proposed ; so that
whosoever denies, or doubts of any of them, is certainly in the
state of damnation. A catalogue I say in particular of the pro
posals; and not only some general definition, or description,
under which you lurk deceitfully, of what and what only is suf
ficiently proposed : wherein yet you do not very well agree.* For
many of you hold the pope's proposal ex cathedra, to be sufficient
and obliging ; some a council without a pope ; some, of neither
of them severally, but only both together ; some not this neither
*This great diversity of opinions among you, touching this matter.if any man doubt
of it, let him read Franciscus Piscus Mirandula in 1. Theorem, in Exposit. Theor.
quarti ; and Th. Waldensis, tom. 3. De Sacramentalibus Doot. 3, fol. 5, and he shall be
fully satisfied that I have done you no injury.

The Answer to the Preface. 65
in matter of manners, which Bellarmine acknowledges, and tells
us, it is all one in effect, as if they denied it sufficient in matter
of faith ; some not in matter of faith neither think this proposal
infallible, without the acceptation of the church universal : some
deny the infallibility of the present church ; and only make the
tradition of all ages the infallible propounder : yet if you were
agreed, what and what only, is the infallible propounder, this
would not satisfy us ; nor yet to say, that all is fundamental which
is propounded sufficiently by him. For though agreeing in this,
yet you might still disagree whether such or such a doctrine were
propounded or not : or, if propounded, whether sufficiently, or
only unsufficiently. And it is so known a thing, that in many
points you do so, that I assure myself you will not deny it.
Therefore we constantly urge and require a particular and per
fect inventory of all those divine revelations, which, you say, are
sufficiently propounded ; and that, such an one to which all of
your church will subscribe, as neither redundant nor deficient:
which when you give in with one hand, you shall receive a par
ticular catalogue of such points as I call fundamental, with the
other. Neither may you think me unreasonable in this demand,
seeing upon such a particular catalogue of your sufficient propo
sals as much depends, as upon a particular catalogue of our fun
damentals. As for example, whether or no a man do not err in
some point defined and sufficiently proposed : and whether or no
those that differ among you, differ in fundamentals ; which if they
do, one heaven (by your own rule) cannot receive them all. Per •
haps you will here complain, that this is not to satisfy your demand,
but -to avoid it, and to put you off, as the Areopagites did hard
causes, ad diem longissimum, and bid you come again an hundred
years hence. To deal truly, I did so intend it should be. Neither
can you say, my dealing with you is injurious, seeing I require
nothing of you, but that, what you require of others, you should
show it possible to be done, and just and necessary to be required.
For, for my part, I have great reason to suspect, it is neither the
one nor the other. For whereas the verities which are delivered
in scripture, may be very fitly divided into such as were written
because they were necessary to be believed; (of which rank are
those only which constitute and make up the covenant between
God and man in Christ;) and then such as are necessary to be
believed not in themselves, but only by accident, because they
were written ; of which rank are many matters of history, of
prophecy, of mystery, of policy, of economy, and such like, which
are evidently not intrinsical to the covenant : now to sever exactly
and punctually these verities one from the other, what is necessary
in itself, and antecedently to the writing, from what is but only
profitable in itself, and necessary only because written, is a busi
ness of extreme difficulty, and extreme little necessity. For, first,
he that will go about to distinguish, especially in the story of our
Saviour, what was written because it was profitable, from what
was written because necessary, shall find an intricate piece of
business of it, and almost impossible that he should be certain he

66 The Answer to the Preface.
hath done it, when he hath done it. And then it is apparently
unnecessary to go about it, seeing he that believes all, certainly
believes all that is necessary ; and he that doth not believe all (I
mean all the undoubted parts of the undoubted books of scripture)
can hardly believe any, neither have we reason to believe he doth
so. So that, that protestants give you not a catalogue of funda
mentals, it is not from tergiversation (as you suspect, who for want
of charity to them always suspect the worst) but from wisdom
and necessity : for they may very easily err in doing it ; because,
though all which is necessary, be plain in scripture ; yet all which
is plain, is not therefore written because it was necessary. For
what greater necessity was there, that I should know St. Paul left
his cloak at Troas, than those worlds of miracles which our Saviour
did, which were never written ? And when they had done it, it
had been to no purpose ; there being, as matters now stand, as
great necessity of believing those truths of scripture which are not
fundamental, as those that are. You see, then, what reason we
have to decline this hard labour, which you, a rigid taskmaster,
have here put upon us. Yet instead of giving you a catalogue of
fundamentals, with which I dare say you are resolved, before it
come, never to be satisfied ; I will say that to you, which, if you
please, may do you as much service ; and this it is ; that it is suf
ficient for any man's salvation, that he believe the scripture ; that
he . endeavour to believe it in the true sense of it, as far as concerns
his duty ; and that he conform his life unto it either by obedience
or repentance. He that does so (and all protestants according to
the dictamen of their religion should do so) may be secure that he
cannot err fundamentally. And they that do so, cannot differ in
fundamentals. So that, notwithstanding their differences, and your
presumption, the same heaven may receive them all.
28. Ad. § 20. Your tenth and last request is, to know distinctly
what is the doctrine of the protestant English church, in these
points; and what my private opinion. Which shall be satisfied
when the church of England hath expressed herself in them; or
when you have told us what is the doctrine of your church in the
question of predetermination, or the immaculate conception.
29. Ad. § 21 and 22. These answers, I hope, in the judgment of
indifferent men, are satisfactory to your questions, though not to
you ; for I have either answered them, or given you a reason why
I have not. Neither, for aught I can see, have I flitted from things
considered in their own nature, to accidental or rare circum
stances ; but told you my opinion plainly what I thought of your
errors in themselves; and what as they were qualified or ma-
lignified with good or bad circumstances. Though I must tell you
truly, that I see no reason, the question being of the damnableness
of error, why you should esteem ignorance, incapacity, want of
means to be instructed, accidental and rare circumstances : as if
knowledge, capacity, having means of instruction concerning the
truth of your religion, or ours, were not as rare and unusual in
the adverse part of either, as ignorance, incapacity, and want of
means of instruction : especially how erroneous conscience can be

The Answer to the Preface. 67
a rare thing in those that err; or how unerring conscience is not
much more rare, I am not able to apprehend. So that to consider
men of different religions (the subject of this controversy) in their
own nature, and without circumstances, must be to consider them,
neither as ignorant, nor as knowing ; neither as having, nor as
wanting means of instruction; neither as with capacity, nor with
out it ; neither with erroneous, nor yet with unerring conscience.
And then what judgment can you pronounce of them, all the
goodness and badness of an action depending on the circumstances?
Ought not a judge, being to give sentence of an action, to consider
all the circumstances of it ? Or is it possible he should judge
rightly, that doth not so ? Neither is it to purpose, that circum
stances being various, cannot be well comprehended under any
general rule : for though under any general rule they cannot, yet
under many general rules they may be comprehended. The ques
tion here is, you say, whether men of different religions may be
saved ? Now the subject of this question is an ambiguous term,
and may be determined and invested with diverse and contrary
circumstances; and, accordingly, contrary judgments are to be
given of it. And who can then be offended with D. Potter for
distinguishing before he defines (the want whereof is the chief
thing that makes. defining dangerous) ; who can find fault with him
for saying, " if, through want of means of instruction, incapacity,
invincible or probable ignorance, a man die in error, he may be
saved. But if he be negligent in seeking the truth, unwilling to
find it, either doth see it, and will not, or might see it, and will
not, that his case is dangerous, and without repentance desperate."
This is all that D. Potter says, neither rashly damning all that are
of a different opinion from him, nor securing any that are in mat
ter of religion sinfully, that is willingly erroneous. The author
of this reply (I will abide by it) says the very same thing ; neither
can I see what adversary he hath in the main question but his own
shadow ; and, yet, I know not out of what frowardness, finds fault
with D. Potter for affirming that which himself affirms : and to
cloud the matter, whereas the question is, whether men by igno
rance, dying in error, may be saved, would have them considered
neither as erring, nor ignorant. And when the question is, whe
ther the errors of the papists be damnable ? to which we answer,
that to them that do or might know them to be errors, they are
damnable; to them that do not, they are not: he tells us that
this is to change the state of the question ; whereas indeed it is to
state the question, and free it from ambiguity before you answer
it ; and to have recourse to accidental circumstances : as if igno
rance were accidental to error, or as if a man could be considered
as in error, and not be considered as in ignorance of the truth from
which he errs ! Certainly, error against a truth must needs pre
suppose a nescience of it ; unless you will say, that a man may at
once resolve for a truth, and resolve against it ; assent to it, and
dissent from it ; know it to be true, and believe it not to be true.
Whether knowledge and opinion touching the same thing may
e2

68 Charity maintained by Catholics.
stand together, is made a question in the schools: but he that
would question whether knowing a thing, and doubting of it,
much more, whether knowing it to be true, and believing it to be
false, may stand together, deserves, without question, no other
answer but laughter. Now if error and knowledge cannot consist,
then error and ignorance must be inseparable. He then that pro
fesseth your errors may well be considered either as knowing or
as ignorant. But him that does err indeed, you can no more con
ceive without ignorance, than long without quantity, virtuous with
out quality, a man and not a living creature, to have gone ten
miles and not to have gone five, to speak sense and not to speak.
For as the latter in all these is implied in the former, so is igno
rance of a truth supposed in error against it. Yet such a man,
though not conceivable without ignorance simply, may be very
well considered either as with, or without voluntary and sinful
ignorance. And he that will give a wise answer to this question,
whether a papist dying a papist may be saved, according to God's
ordinary proceeding, must distinguish him according to these seve
ral considerations, and say, he may be saved ; if his ignorance were
either invincible, or at least unaffected, and probable ; if otherwise,
without repentance he cannot.
To the rest of this preface I have nothing to say, saving what
hath been said, but this ; that it is no just exception to an argu
ment, to call it vulgar and threadbare : truth can neither be too
common nor superannuated, nor reason ever worn out. Let your
answers be solid and pertinent, and we will never find fault with
them for being old or common.

CHARITY MAINTAINED BY CATHOLICS.

PART I.— CHAPTER I.
The state of the question ; with a summary of the reasons for which,
amongst men of different religions, one side only can be saved.
" Never is malice more indiscreet, than when it chargefh others
with imputation of that, to which itself becomes more liable, even
by that very act of accusing others. For though guiltiness be
the effect of some error, yet usually it begets a kind of modera
tion, so far forth, as not to let men cast such aspersions upon
others, as most apparently reflect upon themselves. Thus cannot
the poet endure that Gracchus,* who was a factious and unquiet
man, should be inveighing against sedition : and the Roman orator
rebukes philosophers, who, to wax glorious, superscribed their

* " Quis tulerit Gracchum," &c.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 69
names upon those very books, which they intituled, Of the Con
tempt of Glory. What then shall we say of D. Potter, who in the
title and text of his whole book, doth so tragically charge want of
charity on all such Romanists as dare affirm, that protestancy de-
stroyeth salvation ; while he himself is in act of pronouncing the
like heavy doom against Roman catholics ? For, not satisfied with
much uncivil language, in affirming the Roman church* many
ways to have played the harlot, and in that regard deserved a bill
of divorce from Christ, and detestation of christians ; in styling
her that proudf and curst dame of Rome, which takes upon her
to revel in the house of God ; in talking of an idol J to be wor
shipped at Rome ; he comes at length to thunder out his fearful
sentence against her : ' for that§ mass of errors (saith he) in judg
ment and practice, which is proper to her, and wherein she differs
from us, we judge a reconciliation impossible, and to us (who are
convicted in conscience of her corruptions) damnable.' And in
another place he saith: 'for us who|| are convinced in conscience,
that she errs in many things, a necessity lies upon us, even under
pain of damnation, to forsake her in those errors. By the acer
bity of which censure, he doth not only make himself guilty of that
which he judgeth to be an heinous offence in others, but freeth us
from all colour of crime by this his unadvised recrimination.
For, if Roman catholics be likewise convicted in conscience of the
errors of protestants, they may, and must, in conformity to the
doctor's own rule, judge a reconciliation with them to be also
damnable. And that, all the want of charity, so deeply charged
on us, dissolves itself into this poor wonder, Roman catholics
believe in their conscience, that the religion they profess is true,
and the contrary false.
" 2. Nevertheless, we earnestly desire, and take care, that our
doctrine may not be defamed by misinterpretation. Far be it
from us, by way of insultation, to apply it against protestants,
otherwise than as they are comprehended under the generality of
those, who are divided from the only one true church of Christ
our Lord, within the communion whereof he hath confined salva
tion. Neither do we understand, why our most dear countrymen
should be offended, if the universality be particularized under the
name of protestants, first givenlf to certain lutherans, who pro
testing that they would stand out against the imperial decrees, in
defence of the confession exhibited at Augsburgh, were termed pro
testants, in regard of such their protesting: which Confessio Au-
gustana, disclaiming from, and being disclaimed by calvinists and
zuinglians, our naming or exemplifying a general doctrine under
the particular name of protestantism, ought not in any particular
manner to be odious in England.
" Moreover our meaning is not, as misinformed persons may con
ceive, that we give protestants over to reprobation ; that we offer
no prayers in hope of their salvation ; that we hold their case des-
* Page 11. t Page 4, Edit. 1. || Page 81.
t Ibid. § Page 20. IT Sleidan, 1. 6, fol. 84.

70 Charity maintained by Catholics.
perate ; God forbid ! We hope, we pray for, their conversion ; and
sometimes we find happy effects of our charitable desires. Neither
is our censure immediately directed to particular persons. The tri
bunal of particular judgments is God's alone. When any man, es
teemed a protestant, leaveth to live in this world, we do not instantly
with precipitation avouch that he is lodged in hell. For we are not
always acquainted with what sufficiency or means he was furnished
for instruction ; we do not penetrate his capacity to understand
his catechist ; we have no revelation what light may have cleared
his errors, or contrition retracted his sins, in the last moment
before his death. In such particular cases, we wish more appa
rent signs of salvation, but do not give any dogmatical sentence of
perdition. How grievous sins, disobedience, schism, and heresy
are, is well known. But to discern how far the natural malignity
of those great offences might be checked by ignorance, or by
some such lessening circumstance, is the office rather of prudence
than of faith.
" 4. Thus we allow protestants as much charity, as D. Potter
spares us, for whom in the words above mentioned, and elsewhere,
he* makes ignorance the best hope of salvation. Much less
comfort can we expect from the fierce doctrine of those chief pro
testants, who teach, that for many ages before Luther, Christ
had no visible church upon earth. Not these men alone, or such
as they, but even the thirty-nine articles, to which the English
protestant clergy subscribes, censure our belief so deeply, that
ignorance can scarce, or rather not at all, excuse us from damna
tion. Our doctrine of transubstantiation, is affirmed to be repug
nant to the plain words off scripture; our masses to be blasphemousj
fables, with much more to be seen in the articles themselves. In
a certain confession of the christian faith, at the end of their books
of psalms collected into metre, and printed cum privilegio regis
regali, they call us idolaters and limbs of antichrist ; and having
set down a catalogue of our doctrines, they conclude that for
them we shall after the general resurrection be damned to un
quenchable fire.
" 5. But yet, lest any man should flatter himself with our cha
ritable mitigations, and thereby wax careless in search of the true
church, we desire him to read the conclusion of the second part,
where this matter is more explained.
" 6. And because we cannot determine what judgment may be
esteemed rash, or prudent, except by weighing the reasons upon
which it is grounded, we will here, under one aspect, present a
summary of those principles, from which we infer, that protes
tancy in itself unrepented, destroys salvation; intending after
wards to prove the truth of every one of the grounds, till, by a
concatenation of sequels, we fall upon the conclusion, for which
we are charged with want of charity.
" 7. Now this is our gradation of reasons: almighty God having
ordained mankind to a supernatural end of eternal felicity, hath,
« See page 39. t Art. xxviii. \ Art xxxi.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 71
in his holy providence, settled competent and convenient means
whereby that end may be attained. The universal grand origin
of all such means, is the incarnation and death of our blessed
Saviour, whereby he merited internal grace for us ; and founded
an external visible church, provided and stored with all those
helps, which might be necessary for salvation. From hence it
followeth, that in this church, among other advantages, there
must be some effectual means to beget and conserve faith, to
maintain unity, to discover and condemn heresies, to appease and
reduce schisms, and to determine all controversies in religion.
For without such means the church should not be furnished with
helps sufficient to salvation, nor God afford sufficient means to
attain that end to which himself ordained mankind. This means
to decide controversies in faith and religion (whether it should be
the holy scripture, or whatsoever else) must be endued with an
universal infallibility, in whatsoever it propoundeth for a divine
truth ; that is, as revealed, spoken, or testified by almighty God,
whether the matter of its nature be great or small. For, if it
were subject to error in any one thing, we could not in any other
yield it infallible assent ; because we might with good reason doubt
whether it chanced not to err in that particular.
" 8. Thus far all must agree to what we have said, unless they
have a mind to reduce faith to opinion. And even out of these
grounds alone, without further proceeding, it undeniably follows,
that of two men dissenting in matters of faith, great or small, few
or many, the one cannot be saved without repentance, unless
ignorance accidentally may in some particular person plead excuse.
For, in that case of contrary belief, one must of necessity be held
to oppose God's word or revelation sufficiently represented to his
understanding by an infallible propounder ; which opposition to
the testimony of God is undoubtedly a damnable sin, whether other
wise, the thing so testified, be in itself great or small. And thus we
have already made good what was promised in the argument of this
chapter, that amongst men of different religions, one only is capable
of being saved.
" 9. Nevertheless, to the end that men may know in particular
what is the said infallible means upon which we are to rely in all
things concerning faith, and accordingly may be able to judge in
what safety or danger, more or less, they live ; and because D.
Potter descendeth to divers particulars about scriptures and the
church, &c. we will go forward, and prove, that although scripture
be in itself most sacred, infallible, and divine, yet it alone cannot
be to us a rule, or judge, fit and able to end all doubts and debates
emergent in matters of religion ; but that there must be some ex
ternal, visible, public, living judge, to whom all sorts of persons,
both learned and unlearned, may without danger of error have re
course; and in whose judgment they may rest for the interpreting
and propounding of God's word or revelation. And this living
judge we will most evidently prove to be no other, but that holy
catholic, apostolic, and visible church, which our Saviour purchased
with the effusion of his most precious blood.

72 Charity maintained by Catholics.
" 10. If once therefore it be granted, that the church is that
means which God hath left for the deciding all controversies in
faith, it manifestly will follow, that she must be infallible m all
her determinations, whether the matters of themselves be great or
small ; because, as we said above, it must be agreed on all sides,
that if that means which God hath left to determine controversies
were not infallible in all things proposed by it, it could not settle in
our minds a firm and infallible belief of any one.
"11. From this universal infallibility of God's church, it fol-
loweth, that whosoever wittingly denieth any one point proposed
by her, as revealed by God, is injurious to his divine majesty, as
if he could either deceive, or be deceived in what he testifieth.
The averring whereof were not only a fundamental error, but
would overthrow the very foundation of all fundamental points;
and therefore, without repentance, could not possibly stand with
salvation. " 12. Out of these grounds we will shew, that although the
distinction of points fundamental and not fundamental be good
and useful, as it is delivered and applied by catholic divines, to
teach what principal articles of faith christians are obliged expli
citly to believe ; yet, that it is impertinent to the present purpose
of excusing any man from grievous sin, who knowingly disbe
lieves, that is, believes the contrary of that which God's church
proposeth as divine truth. For it is one thing, not to know
explicitly something testified by God ; and another, positively to
oppose what we know he hath testified. The former may often be
excused from sin, but never the latter, which only is the case in
question. " 13. In the same manner shall be demonstrated, that to allege
the creed, as containing all articles of faith, necessary to be ex
plicitly believed, is not pertinent to free from sin the voluntary
denial of any other point known to be defined by God's church.
And this were sufficient to overthrow all that D. Potter allegeth
concerning the creed ; though yet, by way of supererogation, we will
prove, that there are divers important matters of faith which are
not mentioned at all in the creed.
" 14. From the aforesaid main principle, that God hath always
had, and always will have on earth, a church visible, within
whose communion salvation must be hoped ; and infallible, whose
definitions we ought to believe ; we will prove, that Luther, Calvin,
and all other who continue the division in communion, or faith, from
that visible church, which at and before Luther's appearance, was
spread over the world, cannot be excused from schism and heresy,
although they opposed her faith but in one only point; whereas it
is manifest, they dissent from her in many and weighty matters,
concerning as well belief, as practice.
" 15. To these reasons drawn from the virtue of faith, we will
add one other taken from charitas propria, the virtue of charity, as
it obligeth us not to expose our soul to hazard of perdition, when
we can put ourselves in a way much more secure, as we will prove
that of the Roman catholics to be.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 73
"16. We are then to prove these points: first, that the infal
lible means to determine controversies in matters of faith, is the
visible church of Christ. Secondly, that the distinction of points
fundamental, and not fundamental, maketh nothing to our present
question. Thirdly, that to say the creed contains all fundamental
points of faith, is neither pertinent nor true. Fourthly, that both
Luther, and all they who, after him, persist in division from the
communion and faith of the Roman church, cannot be excused from
schism. Fifthly, nor from heresy. Sixthly and lastly, that in re
gard of the precept of charity towards one's self, protestants be in a
state of sin, as long as they remain divided from the Roman church.
And these six points shall be several arguments for so many ensuing
chapters. " 17. Only I will here observe, that it seemeth very strange,
that protestants should charge us so deeply with want of charity,
for only teaching that both they and we cannot be saved, seeing
themselves must affirm the like of whosoever opposeth any least
point delivered in scripture, which they hold to be the sole rule
of faith. Out of which ground they must be enforced, to let all
our former inferences pass for good. For, is it not a grievous sin,
to deny any one truth contained in holy writ ? Is there in such
denial any distinction between points fundamental, and not fun
damental, sufficient to excuse from heresy ? Is it not impertinent
to allege the creed, containing all fundamental points of faith, as
if, believing it alone, we were at liberty to deny all other points
of scripture ? In a word, according to protestants, oppose not
scripture, there is no error against faith ; oppose it in any least
point, the error, if scripture be sufficiently proposed (which pro
position is also required before a man can be obliged to believe
even fundamental points) must be damnable. What is this, but
'to say with us, of persons contrary in whatsoever point of belief,
one party only can be saved? And D. Potter must not take it ill,
if catholics believe they may be saved in that religion for which
they suffer. And if by occasion of this doctrine, men will still be
charging us with want of charity, and be resolved to take scandal
where none is given, we must comfort ourselves with that grave
and true saying of St. Gregory, ' If scandal* be taken from declar
ing a truth, it is better to permit scandal, than forsake the truth.'
But the solid grounds of our assertion, and the sincerity of our in
tention, in uttering what we think, yields us confidence, that all
will hold for most reasonable the saying of Pope Gelasius to Anas-
tasius the emperor, ' Far be it from the Roman emperor, that he
should hold it for a wrong to have truth declared to him !' Let
us therefore begin with that point which is the first that can be
controverted betwixt protestants and us, forasmuch as concerns
the present question, and is contained in the argument of the next
ensuing chapter " * St. Greg. Horn. 7, in Ezek.

74

THE ANSWER TO THE FIRST CHAPTER.
Showing that the Adversary grants the former Question, and pro-
poseth a new one ; and that there is no reason, why, among men
of different opinions and communions, one side only can be saved.
Ad. § 1. Your first onset is very violent. D. Potter is charged
with malice and indiscretion for being uncharitable to you, while
he is accusing you of uncharitableness. Verily, a great fault
and folly, if the accusation be just : if unjust, a great calumny.
Let us see then how you make good your charge. The effect of
your discourse, if I mistake not, is this: D. Potter chargeth the
Roman church with many and great errors; judgeth reconcilia
tion between her doctrine and ours, impossible ; and that for
them, who were convicted in conscience of her errors, not to for
sake her in them, or to be reconciled unto her, is damnable :
therefore, if Roman catholics be convicted in conscience of the
errors of protestants, they may and must judge a reconciliation
with them damnable ; and consequently to judge so is no more
uncharitable in them, than it is in the doctor to judge as he doth.
All this I grant, nor would any protestant accuse you of want
of charity if you went no further ; if you judged the religion
of protestants damnable to them only who profess it, being con
victed in conscience that it is erroneous. For if a man judge
some act of virtue to be a sin, in him it is a sin indeed. So you
have taught us, p. 19. So if you be convinced, or rather, to
speak properly, persuaded in conscience, that our religion is
erroneous, the profession of it, though itself most true, to you
would be damnable. This therefore I subscribe very willingly,
and withal, that if you said no more, D. Potter and myself
should not be to papists only, but even to protestants as uncha
ritable as you are. For I shall always profess and glory in this
uncharitableness of judging hypocrisy a damnable sin. Let hypo
crites then and dissemblers on both sides pass. It is not towards
them, but good christians ; not to protestant professors but be
lievers that we require your charity. What think you of those
that believe so verily the truth of our religion, that they are
resolved to die in it, and, if occasion were, to die for it ? What
charity have you for them ? What think ye of those that in the
days of our fathers laid down their lives for it ? Are you content
that they should be saved, or do you hope they may be so ? Will
you grant, that, notwithstanding their errors, there is good hope
they might die with repentance ? And if they did so, certainly
they are saved. If you will do so, this controversy is ended.
No man will hereafter charge you with want of charity. This is
as much as either we give you, or expect of you, while you re
main in your religion. But then you must leave abusing silly
people, with telling them, as your fashion is, that protestants con
fess papists may be saved, but papists confess not so much of

Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 75
protestants ; therefore yours is the safer way, and in wisdom and
charity to our own souls we are bound to follow it. For, grant
ing this, you grant as much hope of salvation to protestants,
as protestants do to you. If you will not, but will still affirm,
as Charity Mistaken doth, that protestants, not dissemblers, but
believers, without a particular repentance of their religion cannot
be saved ; this, I say, is a want of charity, into the society
whereof D. Potter cannot be drawn but with palpable and trans
parent sophistry. For, I pray sir, what dependence is there be
tween these propositions: we that hold protestant religion false
should be damned if we should profess it ; therefore, they also shall
be damned that hold it true ? Just as if you should conclude, be
cause " he that doubts is damned if he eat ;" therefore, he that
doth not doubt, is damned also if he eat. And therefore, though
your religion to us, and ours to you, if professed against conscience,
would be damnable ; yet may it well be uncharitable to define it
shall be so, to them that profess either this or that according to
conscience. This recrimination, therefore, upon D. Potter, where
with you begin, is a plain fallacy ; and I fear your proceedings will
be answerable to these beginnings.
2. Ad. § 2. In this paragraph, protestants are thus far comforted,
that they are not sent to hell without company, which the poet tells
us is the miserable comfort of miserable men. Then we in England
are requested not to be offended with the name of protestants,
which is a favour I shall easily grant, if by it be understood those
that protest, not against imperial edicts, but against the corruptions
of the church of Rome.
3. Ad. § 3, 4, 5, 6. That you give us not over to reprobation,
that you pray and hope for our salvation ; if it be a charity, it is
such a one as is common to Turks, and Jews, and pagans with us.
But that which follows is extraordinary, neither do I know any
man that requires more of you than there you pretend to. For
there you tell us, that when any man esteemed a protestant dies,
you do not instantly avouch that he is lodged in hell. Where the
word esteemed is ambiguous; for it may signify esteemed truly,
and esteemed falsely. He may be esteemed a protestant that is
so ; and he may be esteemed a protestant that is not so ; and
therefore I should have had just occasion to have laid to your
charge the transgression of your own chief prescription, which
you say truth exacts at our hands, that is, to speak clearly and
distinctly, and not to walk in darkness; but that your following
words, to my understanding, declare sufficiently that you speak
of both sorts ; for there you tell us, that the reasons why you
damn not any man that dies with the esteem of a protestant, are,
1. because you are not always acquainted with what sufficiency
of means he was furnished for instruction ; you must mean
touching the falsehood of his own religion, and the truth of
yours, which reason is proper to those that are protestants in
truth, and not only in estimation. 2. Because you do not
penetrate his capacity to understand his catechist, which is also
peculiar to those who, for want of capacity (as you conceive)

76 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants.
remain protestants indeed, and are not only so accounted. 3. Be
cause you have no revelation what light might clear his errors,
which belongs to those which were esteemed protestants, but indeed
were not so. 4. Because you have no revelation what contrition
might have retracted his sins, which reason being distinct from the
former, and divided from it by the disjunctive particle, or, insinu
ates unto us, that though no light did clear the errors of a dying
protestant ; yet contrition might, for aught you know, retract his
sins, which appropriates this reason also to protestants truly so
esteemed. I wish, with all my heart, that in obedience to your
own prescription, you had expressed yourself in this matter more
fully and plainly. Yet that which you say doth plainly enough
afford us these corollaries :
i. That whatsoever protestant wanteth capacity, or having it,
wanteth sufficient means of instruction to convince his con
science of the falsehood of his own, and the truth of the
Roman religion, by the confession of his most rigid adver
saries, may be saved, notwithstanding any error in his religion.
ii. That nothing hinders, but that a protestant, dying a pro
testant, may die with contrition for all his sins.
iii. That if he do die with contrition, he may and shall be
saved.
4. All those acknowledgments we have from you while you
are, as you say, stating, but, as I conceive, granting the very point
in question ; which was, as I have already proved out of C. M.,
whether, without uncharitableness, you may pronounce, that pro
testants dying in the belief of their religion, and without particular
repentance and dereliction of it, cannot possibly be saved. Which
C. M. affirms universally, and without any of your limitations.
But this presumption of his you thus qualify, by saying, that this
sentence cannot be pronounced truly, and therefore sure not cha
ritably ; neither of those protestants that want means sufficient to
instruct and convince them of the truth of your religion, and the
falsehood of their own ; nor of those, who, though they have
neglected the means they might have had, died with contrition,
that is, with a sorrow for all their sins, proceeding from the love
of God. So that, according to your doctrine, it shall remain upon
such only as either were, or, but for their own fault, might have
been, sufficiently convinced of the truth of your religion, and the
falsehood of their own, and yet die in it without contrition.
Which doctrine if you would stand to, and not pull down and pull
back with one hand what you give and build with the other, this
controversy were ended ; and I should willingly acknowledge that
which follows in your fourth paragraph, that you allow protestants
as much charity, as D. Potter allows you. But then 1 must en
treat you to alter the argument of this chapter, and not to go
about to give us reasons, why amongst men of different religions,
one side only can be saved absolutely; which your reasons drive
at. But you must temper the crudeness of your assertion, by
saying, one side only can be saved, unless want of conviction, or
else repentance, excuse the other. Besides, you must not only

Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 77
abstain from damning any protestant in particular, but, from
affirming in general, that protestants dying in their religion
cannot be saved : for you must always remember to add this cau
tion, unless they were excusably ignorant of the falsehood of it,
or died with contrition. And then, considering that you cannot
know, whether or no, all things considered, they were convinced
sufficiently of the truth of your religion, and the falsehood of their
own, you are obliged by charity to judge the best, and hope they
are not. Considering again, that, notwithstanding their errors,
they may die with contrition, and that it is no way improbable
that they do so, and the contrary you cannot be certain of, you
are bound in charity to judge and hope they do so. Considering,
thirdly and lastly, that if they die not with contrition, yet it is
very probable they may die with attrition ; and that this pretence
of yours, that contrition will serve without actual confession, but
attrition will not, is but a nicety or fancy, or rather, to give it the
true name, a device of your own, to serve ends and purposes —
God having nowhere declared himself, but that wheresoever he
will accept of that repentance, which you are pleased to call con
trition, he will accept of that which you call attrition : for, though
he like best the bright flaming holocaust of love, yet he rejects
not, he quencheth not, the smoking flax of that repentance (if it
be true and effectual) which proceeds from hope and fear. These
things, I say, considered (unless you will have the charity of your
doctrine rise up in judgment against your uncharitable practice)
you must not only not be peremptory, in damning protestants,
but you must hope well of their salvation ; and, out of this hope,
you must do for them as well as others, those, as you conceive,
charitable offices, of praying, giving alms, and offering sacrifice,
which usually you do, for those of whose salvation you are well
and charitably persuaded (for I believe, you will never conceive
so well of protestants, as to assure yourselves they go directly to
heaven). These things when you do, I shall believe you think as
charitably as you speak ; but until then, as he said in the comedy,
quid verba audiam, cum facta videam ? so may I say to you, quid
verba audiam, cum facta non videam ? To what purpose should
you give us charitable words, which presently you retract again,
by denying us your charitable actions ? And as these things you
must do, if you will stand to and make good this pretended cha
rity, so must I tell you again and again, that one thing you must
not do ; I mean, you must not affright poor people out of their
religion, with telling them, that by the confession of both sides,
your way is safe, but in your judgment, ours undoubtedly
damnable ; seeing neither you deny salvation to protestants
dying with repentance, nor we promise it to you, if ye die with
out it. For to deal plainly with you, I know no protestant that
hath any other hope of your salvation, but upon these grounds,
that unaffected ignorance may excuse you, or true repentance
obtain pardon for you ; neither do the heavy censures, which
protestants (you say) pass upon your errors, any way hinder, but

78 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants.
they may hope as well of you, upon repentance, as I do. For the
fierce doctrine, which God knows who teacheth, that Christ for
many ages before Luther had no visible church upon earth, will be
mild enough, if you conceive them to mean (as perhaps they do)
by no visible church, none pure and free from corruptions, which
in your judgment is all one with no church. But the truth is, the
corruption of the church, and the destruction of it, is not all one.
For, if a particular man or church may (as you confess they may)
hold some particular errors, and yet be a member of the church
universal ; why may not the church hold some universal error, and
yet be still the church ? especially seeing, you say, it is nothing but
opposing the doctrine of the church that makes an error damnable,
and it is impossible, that the church should oppose the church — I
mean, that the present church should oppose itself. And then for
the English protestants, though they censure your errors deeply,
yet, by your favour, with their deepest censure it may well consist,
that invincible ignorance may excuse you from damnation for them.
For you yourself confess, that ignorance may excuse errors, even
in fundamental articles of faith : so that a man so erring shall not
offend at all in such his ignorance or error : — they are your own
words. Pref. § 22. And again, with their heaviest censures it may
well consist, that your errors, though in themselves damnable, yet
may prove not damning to you, if you die with true repentance for
all your sins, known and unknown.
5. Thus much charity therefore, if you stand to what you have
said, is interchangeably granted by each side to the other, that
neither religion is so fatally destructive, but that by ignorance or
repentance salvation may be had on both sides : though with a
difference that keeps papists still on the more uncharitable side.
For whereas we conceive a lower degree of repentance, (that
which they call attrition) if it be true, and effectual, and convert
the heart of the penitent, will serve in them : they pretend (even
this author which is most charitable towards us) that without con
trition there is no hope for us. But, though protestants may not
obtain this purchase at so easy a rate as papists ; yet (even papists
being judges) they may obtain it: and, though there is no entrance
for them but at the only door of contrition, yet they may enter ;
heaven is not inaccessible to them. Their errors are no such im
penetrable isthmuses between them and salvation, but that contri
tion may make a way through them. All their schism and heresy
is no such fatal poison, but that, if a man join with it the antidote
of a general repentance, he may die in it, and live for ever. Thus
much then being acknowledged, I appeal to any indifferent
reader, whether C. M. be not by his hyperaspist forsaken in the
plain field, and the point in question granted to D.Potter, viz.
that protestancy, even without a particular repentance, is not
destructive of salvation. So that all the controversy remaining
now, is not simply, whether protestancy unrepented destroys sal
vation ? as it was at first proposed, but, whether protestancy in

Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 79
itself (that is, abstracting from ignorance and contrition) destroys
salvation ? So that, as a foolish fellow who gave a knight the lie
desiring withal leave of him to set his knighthood aside, was
answered by him, that he would not suffer any thing to be set
aside that belonged unto him : so might we justly take it amiss,
that conceiving as you do, ignorance and repentance such neces
sary things for us, you are not more willing to consider us with
them, than without them. For my part, such is my charity to
you, that considering what great necessity you have, as much as
any christian society in the world, that these sanctuaries of igno
rance and repentance should always stand open, I can very hardly
persuade myself so much, as in my most secret consideration to
divest you of these so needful qualifications : but whensoever your
errors, superstitions, and impieties come into my mind, (and, be
sides the general bonds of humanity and Christianity, my own
particular obligations to many of you, such and so great, that you
cannot perish without a part of myself,) my only comfort is,
amidst these agonies, that the doctrine and practice too of re
pentance, is yet remaining in your church : and that, though you
put on a face of confidence of your innocence in point of doctrine,
yet you will be glad to stand in the eye of mercy as well as your
fellows, and not be so stout, as to refuse either God's pardon or
the king's.
6. But, for the present, protestancy is called to the bar, and
though not sentenced by you to death without mercy, yet ar
raigned of so much natural malignity (if not corrected by igno
rance or contrition) as to be in itself destructive of salvation.
Which controversy I am content to dispute with you, tying my
self to follow the rules prescribed by you in your preface. Only
I am to remember you, that the adding of this limitation [in itself]
hath made this a new question ; and that this is not the conclusion
for which you were charged with want of charity : but that,
whereas, according to the grounds of your own religion, pro
testants may die in their supposed errors, either with excusable
ignorance, or with contrition ; and if they do so, may be saved,
you are still peremptory in pronouncing them damned. Which
position, supposing your doctrine true, and ours false ; as it is
far from charity (whose essential character it is, to judge and
hope the best), so I believe that I shall clearly evince this new,
but more moderate, assertion of yours to be far from verity, and
that it is popery, and not protestancy, which in itself destroys
salvation. 7. Ad. § 7 & 8. In your gradation I shall rise so far with you
as to grant, that Christ founded a visible church, stored with all
helps necessary to salvation, particularly with sufficient means to
beget and conserve faith, to maintain unity, and compose schisms,
to discover and condemn heresies, and to determine all contro
versies in religion, which were necessary to be determined. For
all these purposes he gave at the beginning (as we may see in the
Epistle to the Ephesians) apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors,
and doctors ; who by word of mouth taught their contemporaries,

80 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants.
and by writings (wrote indeed by some, but approved by all of,
them) taught their christian posterity to the world's end, how all
these ends, and that which is the end of all these ends, salvation,
is to be achieved. And these means the providence of God hath
still preserved, and so preserved, that they are sufficient for all
these intents. I say, sufficient, though through the malice of
men, not always effectual ; for that the same means may be suf
ficient for the compassing an end, and not effectual, you must not
deny, who hold, that God gives to all men sufficient means of
salvation, and yet that all are not saved. I said also, sufficient
to determine all controversies which were necessary to be deter
mined. For, if some controversies may for many ages be unde
termined, and yet in the meanwhile men be saved ; why should,
or how can the church's being furnished with effectual means to
determine all controversies in religion, be necessary to salvation ;
the end itself to which these means are ordained, being, as ex
perience shows, not necessary ? Plain sense will teach every man,
that the necessity of the means must always be measured by, and
can never exceed, the necessity of the end. As if eating be ne
cessary, only that I may live ; then certainly, if I have no neces
sity to live, I have no necessity to eat : if I have no need to be
at London, I have no need of a horse to carry me thither : If I
have no need to fly, I have no need of wings. Answer me then
I pray directly, and categorically ; is it necessary that all con
troversies in religion should be determined? or, is it not? If it
be, why is the question of predetermination, of the immaculate
conception, of the pope's indirect power in temporalities, so long
undetermined ? If not, what is it but hypocrisy to pretend such
great necessity of such effectual means for the achieving that end,
which is itself not necessary ? Christians therefore have, and shall
have, means sufficient (though not always effectual) to determine,
not all controversies, but all necessary to be determined. I pro
ceed on farther with you, and grant that this means to decide
controversies in faith and religion, must be endued with an uni
versal infallibility in whatsoever it propoundeth for a divine truth.
For if it may be false in any one thing of this nature, in any thing
which God requires men to believe, we can yield unto it but a
wavering and fearful assent in any thing. These grounds there
fore I grant very readily, and give you free leave to make your
best advantage of them. And yet, to deal truly, I do not per
ceive how from the denial of any of them it would follow, that
faith is opinion ; or, from the granting them, that it is not so.
But, for my part, whatsoever clamour you have raised against me,
I think no otherwise of the nature of faith, I mean historical
faith, than generally both protestants and papists do ; for, I con
ceive it an assent to divine revelations upon the authority of the
revealer ; which though in many things it differ from opinion (as
commonly the word opinion is understood) yet in some things, I
doubt not but you will confess, that it agrees with it. At first, that
as opinion is an assent, so is faith also. Secondly, that as opinion,
so faith, is always built upon less evidence than that of sense or

Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 81
science ; which assertion you not only grant, but mainly contend for,
in your sixth chapter. Thirdly and lastly, that as opinion, so faith,
admits degrees; and that, as there may be a strong and weak opi
nion, so there may be a strong and weak faith. These things if
you will grant (as sure if you be in your right mind you will not
deny any of them) I am well contented that this ill-sounding word,
opinion, should be discarded, and that among the intellectual habits
you should seek out some other genus for faith. For I will never
contend with any man about words, who grants my meaning.
8. But though the essence of faith exclude not all weakness
and imperfection, yet may it be inquired, whether any certainty
of faith, under the highest degree, may be sufficient to please
God, and attain salvation? Whereunto I answer, that though
men are unreasonable, God requires not any thing but reason :
they will not be pleased without a down-weight ; but God is
contented if the scale be turned: they pretend that heavenly
tilings cannot be seen to any purpose, but by the mid-day light ;
but God will be satisfied, if we receive any degree of light which
makes us leave the " works of darkness, and walk as children of
the light :" they exact a certainty of faith above that of sense or
science ; God desires only that we believe the conclusion, as
much as the premises deserve, that the strength of our faith be
equal or proportionable to the credibility of the motives to it.
Now, though I have and ought to have, an absolute certainty of
this thesis — all which God reveals for truth, is true — being a pro
position, that may be demonstrated, or rather so evident to any
one that understands it, that it needs it not ; yet of this hypothesis
— that all the articles of our faith were revealed by God — we cannot
ordinarily have any rational and acquired certainty, more than
moral, founded upon these considerations : first, that the good
ness of the precepts of Christianity, and the greatness of the pro
mises of it, show it, of all other religions, most likely to come
from the Fountain of goodness. And then, that a constant,
famous, and very general tradition, so credible, that no wise man
doubts of any other which hath but the fortieth part of the credi
bility of this ; such and so credible a tradition tells us, that God
himself hath set his hand and seal to the truth of this doctrine,
by doing great, and glorious, and frequent miracles in confirma
tion of it. Now our faith is an assent to this conclusion, that the
doctrine of Christianity is true ; which being deduced from the
former thesis, which is metaphysically certain, and from the
former hypothesis, whereof we can have but a moral certainty,
we cannot possibly by natural means be more certain of it than
of the weaker of the premises; as a river will not rise higher
than the fountain from which it flows. For the conclusion always
follows the worser part, if there be any worse ; and must be ne
gative, particular, contingent, or but morally certain, if any of
the propositions, from whence it is derived, be so: neither can
we be certain of it in the highest degree, unless we be thus cer
tain of all the principles whereon it is grounded. As a man can
not go or stand strongly, if either of his legs be weak. Or, as a
F

82 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants.
building cannot be stable, if any one of the necessary pillars
thereof be infirm and instable. Or, as if a message be brought
me from a man of absolute credit with me, but by a messenger
that is not so, my confidence of the truth of the relation cannot
but be rebated and lessened by my diffidence in the relator.
9. Yet all this I say not, as if I doubted that the Spirit of God,
being implored by devout and humble prayer and sincere obe
dience, may and will by degrees advance his servants higher, and
give them a certainty of adherence, beyond their certainty of evi
dence. But what God gives as a reward to believers, is one thing;
and what he requires of all men as their duty, is another ; and
what he will accept of, out of grace and favour, is yet another.
To those that believe, and live according to their faith, he gives
by degrees the spirit of obsignation and confirmation, which
makes them know (though how they know not) what they did but
believe : and to be as fully and resolutely assured of the gospel
of Christ, as those which heard it from Christ himself with their
ears, which saw it with their eyes, which looked upon it, and
whose hands handled the word of life. He requires all, that their
faith should be, as I have said, proportionable to the motives and
reasons enforcing to it; he will accept of the weakest and lowest
degree of faith, if it be living and effectual unto true obedience.
For he it is that " will not quench the smoking flax, nor break the
bruised reed." He did not reject the prayer of that distressed man
that cried unto him, " Lord, I believe ; Lord, help mine unbelief."
He commands us to receive them that are weak in faith, and
thereby declares that he receives them. And as nothing avails
with him, but faith which worketh by love ; so any faith, if it be
but as a grain of mustard-seed, if it work by love, shall certainly
avail with him, and be accepted of him. Some experience makes
me fear, that the faith of considering and discoursing men, is like
to be cracked with too much straining: and that being possessed
with this false principle, that it is in vain to believe the gospel of
Christ, with such a kind or degree of assent, as they yield to other
matters of tradition ; and finding, that their faith of it is to them
undiscernable^ from the belief they give to the truth of other
stories, are in danger not to believe at all, thinking, not at all as
good as to no purpose ; or else, though indeed they do believe it,
yet to think they do not, and to cast themselves into wretched
agonies and perplexities, as fearing they have not that, without
which it is impossible to please God, and obtain eternal happiness.
Consideration of this advantage, which the devil probably may
make of this fancy, made me willing to insist somewhat largely
on the refutation of it.
10. I return now thither from whence I have digressed, and
assure you, concerning the grounds afore-laid, which were, that
there is a rule of faith whereby controversies may be decided,
which are necessary to be decided ; and that this rule is univer
sally infallible, that notwithstanding any opinion I hold, touching
faith, or any things else, I may, and do believe them, as firmly as
you pretend to do. And therefore you may build on in God's

Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 83
name; for, by God's help, I shall always embrace whatsoever
structure is naturally and rationally laid upon them, whatsoever
conclusion may, to my understanding be evidently deduced from
them. You say, out of them it undeniably follows, that, of two
disagreeing in matter of faith, the one cannot be saved, but by
repentance or ignorance ; I answer, by distinction of those terms,
two dissenting in a matter of faith: for it may be either in a
thing which is indeed a matter of faith in the strictest sense, that
is, something, the belief whereof God requires under pain of
damnation ; and so the conclusion is true, though the consequence
of it from your former premises either is none at all, or so obscure
that I can hardly discern it. Or it may be, as it often falls out
concerning a thing, which being indeed no matter of faith, is yet
overvalued by the parties at variance, and esteemed to be so ; and
in this sense it is neither consequent, nor true. The untruth of
it I have already declared in my examination of your preface :
the inconsequence of it is of itself evident ; for who ever heard of
a wilder collection than this ?
" God hath provided means sufficient to decide all controversies
in religion necessary to be decided :
" This means is universally infallible :
" Therefore of two that differ in any thing, which they esteem a
matter of faith, one cannot be saved."
He that can find any connexion between these propositions, I
believe will be able to find good coherence between the deaf
plaintiff's accusation in the Greek epigram, and the deaf defend
ant's answer, and the deaf judge's sentence ; and to contrive them all
into a formal categorical syllogism.
11. Indeed, if the matter in agitation were plainly decided by
this infallible means of deciding controversies, and the parties in
variance knew it to be so, and yet would stand out in their dis
sension ; this were, in one of them, direct opposition to the testi
mony of God, and undoubtedly a damnable sin. But if you take
the liberty to suppose what you please, you may very easily con
clude what you list. For, who is so foolish as to grant you these
unreasonable postulates, that every emergent controversy of faith
is plainly decided by the means of decision which God hath ap
pointed ; and that, of the parties litigant, one is always such a
convicted recusant as you pretend? Certainly, if you say so,
having no better warrant than you have, or can have for it, this
is more proper and formal uncharitableness, than ever was charged
upon you. Methinks, with much more reason and much more
charity, you might suppose that many of these controversies,
which are now disputed among christians (all which profess
themselves lovers of Christ, and truly desirous to know his will
and do it) are either not decidable by that means which God has
provided, and so not necessary to be decided : or, if they be, yet
not so plainly and evidently, as to oblige all men to hold one way :
or, lastly, if decidable, and evidently decided, yet you may hope,
that the erring party, by reason of some veil before his eyes,
some excusable ignorance or unavoidable prejudice, doth not see
f2

84 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants.
the question to be decided against him, and so opposeth not that
which he doth not know to be the word of God, but only that which
you know to be so, and which he might know, were he void of
prejudice ; which is a fault I confess, but a fault which is incident
even to good and honest men very often; and not of such a
gigantic disposition as you make it, to fly directly upon God Al
mighty, and to give him the lie to his face.
12. Ad. § 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. In all this long dis
course you only tell us what you will do, but do nothing. Many
positions there are, but proofs of them you offer none, but reserv
them to the chapters following ; and there, in their proper places,
they shall be examined. The sum of all your assumpts collected
by yourself, § 16, is this:
That the infallible means of determining controversies is the
visible church.
That the distinction of points fundamental and not fundamental,
maketh nothing to the present question.
That to say the creed containeth all fundamentals, is neither
pertinent nor true.
That whosoever persist in division from the communion and
faith of the Roman church, are guilty of schism and heresy.
That in regard of the precept of charity towards one's self,
protestants are in a state of sin, while they remain divided
from the Roman church.
To all these assertions I will content myself for the present to
oppose this one, that not one of them all is true. Only I may not
omit to tell you, that if the first of them were as true as the pope
himself desires it should be, yet the corollary, which you deduce
from it, would be utterly inconsequent, — that whosoever denies
any point proposed by the church, is injurious to God's divine
majesty ; as if he could deceive, or be deceived. For though your
church were indeed as infallible a propounder of divine truths as
it pretends to be, yet, if it appeared not to me to be so, I might
very well believe God most true, and your church most false. As,
though the gospel of St. Matthew be the word of God ; yet, if I
neither knew it to be so, nor believed it, I might believe in God,
and yet think that gospel a fable. Hereafter, therefore, I must
entreat you to remember, that our being guilty of this impiety,
depends not only upon your being, but upon our knowing that
you are so. Neither must you argue thus; the church of Rome
is the infallible propounder of divine verities, therefore he that
opposeth her calls God's truth in question: but thus rather, the
church of Rome is so, and protestants know it to be so ; therefore
in opposing her, they impute to God, that either he deceives
them, or is deceived himself. For as I may deny something
which you upon your knowledge have affirmed, and yet never
disparage your honesty, if I never knew that you affirmed it; so
I may be undoubtedly certain of God's omniscience, and veracity,
and yet doubt of some thing which he hath revealed ; provided, I
do not know, nor believe, that he hath revealed it. So, that
though your church be the appointed witness of God's revelations,

Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants. 85
yet until you know that we know she is so, you cannot without
foul calumny impute to us, that we charge God blasphemously
with deceiving, or being deceived. You will say, perhaps, that
this is directly consequent from our doctrine, that the church
may err, which is directed by God in all her proposals. True, if
we knew it to be directed by him, otherwise not ; much less if we
believe, and know the contrary. But then, if it were consequent
from our opinion, have you so little charity, as to say, that men
are justly chargeable with all the consequences of their opinions?
Such consequences, I mean, as they do not own, but disclaim ;
and if there were a necessity of doing either, would much rather
forsake their opinion, than embrace these consequences? What
opinion is there that draws after it such a train of portentous
blasphemies, as that of the dominicans by the judgment of the
best writers of your own order ? And will you say now, that the
dominicans are justly chargeable with all those blasphemies ? If
not, seeing our case (take it at the worst) is but the same, why
should not your judgment of us be the same? I appeal to all
those protestants that have gone over to your side — whether, when
they were most averse from it, they did ever deny or doubt of
God's omniscience or veracity ; whether they did ever believe, or
were taught, that God did deceive them, or was deceived him
self? Nay, I provoke to you yourself, and desire you to deal
truly, and to tell us, whether you do in your heart believe, that
we do indeed not believe the eternal veracity of the eternal
verity? And, if you judge so strangely of us, having no better
ground for it than you have or can have, we shall not need any
farther proof of your uncharitableness towards us, this being the
extremity of true uncharitableness. If not, then I hope, having
no other ground but this (which sure is none at all) to pronounce
us damnable heretics, you will cease to do so ; and hereafter (as
if your ground be true, you may do with more truth and charity)
collect thus — they only err damnably, who oppose what they know
God hath testified : but protestants sure do not oppose what they
know God hath testified, at least we cannot with charity say they
do : therefore they either do not err damnably, or with charity we
cannot say they do so.
13. Ad. § 17. Protestants (you say) according to their own
grounds must hold, that of persons contrary in whatsoever point
of belief one part only can be saved, therefore it is strangely done
of them to charge papists with want of charity for holding the
same. The consequence I acknowledge, but wonder much what
it should be that lays upon protestants any necessity to do so !
You tell us, it is their holding scripture the sole rule of faith :
for this, you say, obligeth them to pronounce them damned, that
oppose any least point delivered in scripture. This I grant, if
they oppose it after sufficient declaration, so that either they
know it to be contained in scripture, or have no just probable
reason, and which may move an honest man to doubt, whether or
no it be there contained. For to oppose in the first case, in a
man that believes the scripture to be the word of God, is to give

86 Papists uncharitable in condemning Protestants.
God the lie. To oppose in the second, is to be obstinate against
reason; and therefore a sin, though not so great as the former.
But then this is nothing to the purpose of the necessity of
damning all those that are of contrary belief; and that for these
reasons. First, because the contrary belief may be touching a
point not at all mentioned in scripture; and such points, though
indeed they be not matters of faith, yet by men in variance are
often overvalued and esteemed to be so. So that, though it were
damnable to oppose any point contained in scripture, yet persons
of contrary belief (as Victor and Polycrates, St. Cyprian and
Stephen) might both be saved, because their contrary belief was
not touching any point contained in scripture. Secondly, because
the contrary belief may be about the sense of some place of scrip
ture which is ambiguous, and with probability capable of divers
senses ; and in such cases it is no marvel, and sure no sin if
several men go several ways. Thirdly, because the contrary
belief may be concerning points wherein scripture may, with so
great probability, be alleged on both sides, (which is a sure note
of a point not necessary,) that men of honest and upright hearts,
true lovers of God and of truth, such as desire above all things to
know God's will and to do it, may, without any fault at all, some
go one way and some another, and some (and those as good men
as either of the former) suspend their judgment, and expect some
Elias to solve doubts, and reconcile repugnances. Now in all such
questions, one side or other (whichsoever it is) holds that which
indeed is opposite to the sense of the scripture which God in
tended ; for it is impossible that God should intend contradictions.
But then this intended sense is not so fully declared, but that they
which oppose it, may verily believe that they indeed maintain it,
and have great show of reason to induce them to believe so ; and
therefore are not to be damned, as men opposing that which they
either know to be a truth delivered in scripture, or have no proba
ble reason to believe the contrary ; but rather, in charity to be
acquitted and absolved, as men who endeavour to find the truth,
but fail of it through human frailty.
This ground being laid, the answer to your ensuing interrogato
ries, which you conceive impossible, is very obvious and easy.
14. To the first, whether it be not in any man a grievous sin to
deny any one truth contained in holy writ ? I answer, yes, if he
knew it to be so, or have no probable reason to doubt of it; other
wise not.
15. To the second : whether there be in such denial any dis
tinction between fundamental and not fundamental, sufficient to
excuse from heresy? I answer, yes, there is such a distinction.
But the reason is, because these points, either in themselves, or
by accident, are fundamental, which are evidently contained in
scripture, to him that knows them to be so : those not funda
mental, which are there-hence deducible, but probably only, not
evidently. 16. To the third : whether it be not impertinent, to allege the
creed, as containing all fundamental points of faith, as if be-

Charity maintained by Catholics. 87
lieving it alone we were at liberty to deny all other points of scrip
ture ? I answer, it was never alleged to any such purpose ; but only
as a sufficient, or rather more than a sufficient summary of those
points of faith which were of necessity to be believed actually and
explicitly ; and that only of such which were merely and purely cre-
denda and not agenda.
17. To the fourth, drawn as a corollary from the former :
whether this be not to say, that, of persons contrary in belief, one
part only can be saved ? I answer, by no means : for they may
differ about points not contained in scripture : they may differ
about the sense of some ambiguous text of scripture : they may
differ about some doctrines, for and against which scriptures may
be alleged with so great probability, as may justly excuse either
part from heresy, and a self-condemning obstinacy. And, there
fore, though D. Potter do not take it ill, that you believe your
selves may be saved in your religion, yet notwithstanding all that
hath yet been pretended to the contrary, he may justly condemn
you, and that out of your own principles, of uncharitable pre
sumption for affirming, as you do, that no man can be saved out
of it.

CHAPTER II.
What is that means, whereby the revealed truths of God are conveyed
to our understanding, and which must determine controversies in
faith and religion ?
" Of our estimation, respect, and reverence to holy scripture, even
protestants themselves do in fact give testimony, while they possess
it from us, and take it upon the integrity of our custody. No cause
imaginable could avert our will from giving the function of supreme
and sole judge to holy writ, if both the thing were not impos
sible in itself, and if both reason and experience did not convince
our understanding, that, by this assertion, contentions are in
creased, and not ended. We acknowledge holy scripture to be a
most perfect rule, forasmuch as a writing can be a rule : we only
deny, that it excludes either divine tradition, though it be un
written, or an external judge- to keep, to propose, to interpret it
in a true, orthodox, and catholic sense. Every single book, every
chapter, yea, every period of holy scripture is infallibly true, and
wants no due perfection. But must we therefore infer, that all
other books of scripture are to be excluded, lest, by addition of
them, we may seem to derogate from the perfection of the former ?
When the first books of the Old and New Testament were written,
they did not exclude unwritten traditions, nor the authority of the
church to decide controversies: and who hath then so altered
their nature, and filled them with such jealousies, as that now
they cannot agree for fear of mutual disparagement ? What greater
wrong is it for the written word to be compartner now with the
unwritten, than for the unwritten, which was once alone, to be after
ward joined with the written 1 Who ever heard, that, to commend

88 Charity maintained by Catholics.
the fidelity of a keeper, were to disaufhorize the thing committed
to his custody ? or that, to extol the integrity and knowledge, and
to avouch the necessity of a judge in suits of law, were to deny
perfection in the law ? Are there not in commonwealths, besides
the laws, written and unwritten customs, judges appointed to
declare both the one, and the other, as several occasions may
require ?
" 2. That the scripture alone cannot be judge in controversies of
faith, we gather it very clearly, from the quality of a writing in
general ; from the nature of holy writ in particular, which must be
believed as true, and infallible ; from the editions and transla
tions of it ; from the difficulty to understand it without hazard of
error ; from the inconveniences that must follow upon the ascrib
ing of sole judicature to it ; and, finally, from the confessions of
our adversaries. And, on the other side, all these difficulties ceas
ing, and all other qualities requisite to a judge concurring in the
visible church of Christ our Lord, we must conclude, that she it is
to whom, in doubts concerning faith and religion, all christians ought
to have recourse.
" 3. The name, notion, nature, and properties of a judge cannot
in common reason agree to any mere writing, which, be it other
wise in its kind, never so highly qualified with sanctity and infal
libility, yet it must ever be, as all writings are, deaf, dumb, and
inanimate. By a judge, all wise men understand a person endued
with life and reason, able to hear, to examine, to declare his mind
to the disagreeing parties, in such sort, as that each one may
know whether the sentence be in favour of his cause, or against his
pretence ; and he must be appliable, and able to do all this, as the
diversity of controversies, persons, occasions, and circumstances
may require. There is a great and plain distinction between a
judge and a rule : for, as in a kingdom, the judge has his rule to
follow, which are the received laws and customs; so are they not
fit or able to declare, or be judges to themselves ; but that office must
belong to a living judge. The holy scripture may be, and is a rule,
but cannot be a judge, because it being always the same, cannot
declare itself any one time, or upon any one occasion, more particu
larly than upon any other ; and let it be read over an hundred
times, it will be still the same, and no more fit alone to terminate
controversies in faith, than the law would be to end suits, if it were
given over to the fancy and gloss of every single man.
"4. This difference betwixt a judge and a rule, D. Potter per
ceived, when, more than once having styled the scripture a judge,
by way of correcting that term, he adds, or rather a rule ; because
he knew that an inanimate writing could not be a judge. From
hence also it was, that though protestants in their beginning
affirmed scripture alone to be the judge of controversies ; yet, upon
a more advised reflection, they changed the phrase, and said, that
not scripture, but the Holy Ghost speaking in scripture, is judge in
controversies. A difference without a disparity. The Holy Ghost
speaking only in scripture, is no more intelligible to us, than the
scripture in which he speaks : as a man speaking only in Latin,

Charity maintained by Catholics. 89
can be no better understood than the tongue wherein he speaketh.
And therefore, to say a judge is necessary for deciding controver
sies about the meaning of scripture, is as much as to say, he is
necessary to decide what the Holy Ghost speaks in scripture. And
it were a conceit equally foolish and pernicious, if one should seek
to take away all judges in the kingdom upon this nicety, that albeit
laws cannot be judges, yet the law-maker speaking in the law,
may perform that office, as if the law-maker speaking in the law,
were with more perspicuity understood than the law whereby
he speaketh.
" 5. But though some writing were granted to have a privilege
to declare itself upon supposition that it were maintained in being,
and preserved entire from corruptions ; yet it is manifest, that no
writing can conserve itself, nor can complain, or denounce the fal
sifier of it ; and therefore it stands in need of some watchful and
not-erring eye to guard it, by means of whose assured vigilancy, we
may undoubtedly receive it sincere and pure.
" 6. And, suppose it could defend itself from corruption, how
could it assure us, that itself were canonical, and of infallible
verity, by saying so ? Of this very affirmation, there will remain
the same question still ; how it can prove itself to be infallibly true ?
Neither can there ever be an end of the like multiplied demands,
till we rest in the external authority of some person or persons
bearing witness to the world, that such or such a book is scripture ;
and yet upon this point, according to protestants, all other contro
versies in faith depend.
" 7. That scripture cannot assure us that itself is canonical scrip
ture, is acknowledged by some protestants in express words, and by
all of them in deeds. Mr. Hooker, whom D. Potter ranketh* among
men of great learning and judgment, saith, ' Of thingsf necessary,
the very chiefest is to know what books we are to esteem holy ;
which point is confessed impossible for the scripture itself to teach.'
And this he proveth by the same argument, which we lately used,
saying thus, 'It is not J the word of God which doth, or possibly can
assure us, that we do well to think it is his word. For, if any one
book of scripture did give testimony of all, yet still that scripture,
which giveth testimony to the rest, would require another scripture
to give credit unto it. Neither could we come to any pause whereon
to rest, unless, besides scripture, there were something which might
assure us,' &c. And this he acknowledges to be the§ church. By
the way, if, of things necessary the very chiefest cannot possibly be
taught by scripture, as this man of so great learning and judgment
affirmeth, and demonstratively proveth, how can the protestant
clergy of England subscribe to their sixth article ? wherein it is said
of the scripture, whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved
thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as
an article of the faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salva
tion ; and concerning their belief and profession of this article, they are
* Page 131. t In his first book of Eccles. Polit. sect. 14, p. 68.
t Ibid. 1. 2, sect. 4, p. 102. § L. 3, sect. 8, p 1, 146, et alibi.

90 Charity maintained by Catholics.
particularly examined when they are ordained priests and bishops.
With Hooker, his defendant Covel doth punctually agree. Whitaker
likewise confesseth, that the question about canonical scriptures,
is defined to us, not by ' testimony of the private spirit, which (saith
he) being private and secret, is* unfit to teach and refel others;
but (as he acknowledgeth) by thef ecclesiastical tradition : an argu
ment (saith he) whereby may be argued, and convinced, what books
be canonical, and what be not.' Luther saith, ' this J indeed the
church hath, that she can discern the word of God from the word
of men :' as Augustine confesseth, that he believed the gospel, being
moved by the authority of the church, which did preach this to be
the gospel. Fulk teacheth, that the ' church § hath judgment to
discern true writings from counterfeit, and the word of God from
the writing of men ; and that this judgment she hath not of herself,
but of the Holy Ghost.' And to the end that you may not be igno
rant from what church you must receive scriptures, hear your first
patriarch Luther speaking against them, who (as he saith) brought
in anabaptism, that so they might despite the pope. ' Verily, (saith
he) these || men build upon a weak foundation: for by this means
they ought to deny the whole scripture, and the office of preach
ing : for all these we have from the pope ; otherwise we must go
make a new scripture.'
" 8. But now in deeds they all make good, that without the
church's . authority no certainty can be had what scripture is ca
nonical, while they cannot agree in assigning the canon of the holy
scripture. Of the epistle of St. James, Luther hath these words :
'TheTI epistle of James is contentious, swelling, dry, strawy, and
unworthy of an apostolical spirit.' Which censure of Luther, Uli-
ricus acknowledgeth and maintaineth. Kemnitius teacheth, that the
second epistle** of Peter, the second and third of John, the epistle
to the Hebrews, the epistle of James, the epistle of Jude, and the
apocalypse of John, are apocryphal, as not having sufficient testi
mony ff of their authority, and therefore that nothing in contro
versy can be proved out of these JJ books. The same is taught by
divers other lutherans : and, if some other amongst them be of a
contrary opinion since Luther's time, I wonder what new infallible
ground they can allege, why they leave their master, and so many
of his prime scholars. I know no better ground, than because they
may with as much freedom abandon him, as he was bold to alter
that canon of scripture, which he found received in God's church.
" 9. What books of scripture the protestants of England hold for
canonical, is not easy to affirm. In their sixth article, they say, ' in
the name of the holy scripture, we do understand those canonical
books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never
any doubt in the church.' What mean they by these words, that by the

* Adv. Stap. 1. 2, u. 6, p. 270, 357. || Ep. con. Anab. ad duos Paroch. tom.
t Ibid. 1. 2, c. 4, p. 300. ii. Ger. Witt.
t L. de Cap. Bab. Tom. ii. Witt. f. IT praf. in Epist. Jac. in ed. Jen.
88. ** In Enchirid. p. 65.
§ In his Answer to a. counterfeit Catho- tt In Exam. Cone. Trid oar 1 d 55
lie. p. 5. tt Ibid. • r • . f •

Charity maintained by Catholics. 91
church's consent they are assured what scriptures be canonical ?
This were to make the church judge, and not scriptures alone. Do
they only understand the agreement of the church to be a probable
inducement ? Probability is no sufficient ground for an infallible
assent of faith. By this rule (of whose authority was never any
doubt in the church) the whole book of Esther must quit the canon,
because some in the church have excluded it from the canon,* as
Melito Asianus,f Athanasius, and J Gregory Nazianzen. And Luther
(if protestants will be content that he be in the church) saith, ' The
Jews§ place the book of Esther in the canon ; which yet, if I might
be judge, doth rather deserve to be put out of the canon.' And of
Ecclesiastes he saith, ' This Jj book is not full ; there are in it many
abrupt things : he wants boots and spurs, that is, he hath no perfect
sentence, he rides upon a long reed, like me when I was in the
monastery.' And much more is to be read in him whoTf saith
further, that the said book was not written by Solomon, but by
Syrach in the time of the Maccabees, and that it is like to the
Talmud (the Jews' Bible) out of many books heaped into one work,
perhaps out of the library of King Ptolemeus. And further he
saith, that ** he does not believe all to have been done, that there
is set down. And he teacheth the fj- book of Job to be as it were an
argument for a fable (or comedy) to set before us an example of
patience. And he JJ delivers this general censure of the prophets'
books, ' the sermons of no prophet were written whole and perfect ;
but their disciples and auditors snatched now one sentence and then
another, and so put them all into one book, and by this means the
bible was conserved.' If this were so, the book of the prophets,
being not written by themselves, but promiscuously and casually
by their disciples, will soon be called in question. Are not these
errors of Luther fundamental ? and yet, If protestants deny the in
fallibility of the church, upon what certain ground can they dis
prove these lutheran and luciferian blasphemies ? 0 godly reformer
of the Roman church ! But to return to our English canon of scrip
ture. In the New Testament, by the abovementioned rule (of
whose authority was never any doubt in the church) divers books
of the New Testament must be discanonized, to wit, all those
of which some ancients have doubted, and those which divers
lutherans have of late denied. It is worth the observation, how the
beforementioned sixth article doth specify by name all the books
of the Old Testament which they hold for canonical ; but those of
the New, without naming any one, they shuffle over with this
generality — 'all the books of the New Testament, as they are com
monly received, we do receive and account them canonical.' The
mystery is easy to be unfolded. If they had descended to particulars,
* Apud. Euseb. 1. iv. Hist. u. 26. IT In Ger. colloq. Lutheri ab Aurifabro
t In Synops. ed. Fran. tit. de lib. Vet. et Nov. Test. f.
t In Carm. de Genuinis Scrip. 379.
§Li. de serv. arb. con. eras. tom. ii. ** lb. tit. de Patriarch, et Proph. fol.
Wit. fol. 471. 282.
|| In lat. serm. conviv. Fran, in 8 impr. tt Tit. de lib. Vet. et Nov. Test.
anno 1571. ft Fol. 380.

92 Charity maintained by Catholics.
they must have contradicted some of their chiefest brethren. ' As
they are commonly received,' &c. I ask, by whom ? By the church
of Rome ? Then by the same reason they must receive divers books
of the Old Testament, which they reject. By lutherans? Then
with lutherans they may deny some books of the New Testament.
If it be the greater, or less number of voices, that must cry up
or down the canon of scripture, our Roman canon will prevail :
and among protestants the certainty of their faith must be re
duced to an uncertain controversy of fact, whether the number
of those who reject, or of those others who receive such and such
scriptures, be greater; their faith must alter according to years
and days. When Luther first appeared, he and his disciples were
the greater number of that new church; and so this claim (of
being ' commonly received') stood for them, till Zuinglius and
Calvin grew to some equal, or greater number than that of the
lutherans, and then this rule of ' commonly received' will canonize
their canon against the lutherans. I would gladly know, why,
in the former part of their article, they say both of the Old and
New Testament : ' In the name of the holy scripture, we do un
derstand those canonical books of the Old and New Testament,
of whose authority was never any doubt in the church :' and in
the latter part, speaking again of the New Testament, they give a
far different rule, saying, ' All the books of the New Testament,
as they are commonly received, we receive and account them ca
nonical.' This, I say, is a rule much different from the former (of
whose authority was never any doubt in the church) ; for some
books might be said to be ' commonly received,' although they were
sometime doubted of by some. If to be ' commonly received,' pass
for a good rule to know the canon of the New Testament, why
not of the Old ? Above all we desire to know, upon what infallible
ground in some books they agree with us against Luther, and
divers principal lutherans, and in others jump with Luther against
us ? But seeing they disagree among themselves, it is evident, that
they have no certain rule to know the canon of scripture, in assign
ing whereof some of them must of necessity err ; because of con
tradictory propositions, both cannot be true.
" 10. Moreover, the letters, syllables, words, phrase, or matter
contained in holy scripture, have no necessary, or natural connec
tion with divine revelation or inspiration : and, therefore, by seeing,
reading, or understanding them, we cannot infer, that they pro
ceed from God, or be confirmed by divine authority ; as, because
creatures involve a necessary relation, connexion, and dependence
upon their Creator, philosophers may, by the light of natural rea
son, demonstrate the existence of one prime Cause of all things.
In holy writ there are innumerable truths not surpassing the
sphere of human wit, which are, or may be delivered by pagan
writers, in the self-same words and phrases as they are in scrip
ture. And as for some truths peculiar to christians (for example,
the mystery of the blessed Trinity, &c.) the only setting them down
in writing is not enough to be assured, that such a writing is the
undoubted word of God ; otherwise some sayings of Plato, Tris-

Charity maintained by Catholics. 93
megistus, Sibyls, Ovid, &c. must be esteemed canonical scripture,
because they fall upon some truths proper to christian religion.
The internal light and inspiration, which directed and moved the
authors of canonical scripture, is a hidden quality infused into
their understanding and will, and hath no such particular sensible
influence into the external writing, that in it we can discover, or
from it demonstrate any such secret light and inspiration; and
therefore to be assured, that such a writing is divine, we cannot
know from itself alone, but by some other extrinsical authority.
" 11. And here we appeal to any man of judgment, whether it
be not a vain brag of some protestants, to tell us that they wot
full well what is scripture, by the light of scripture itself, or (as
D. Potter words it) ' by* that glorious beam of divine light, which
shines therein ;' even as our eye distinguisheth light from dark
ness, without any other help than light itself; and as our ear
knows a voice, by the voice itself alone. But this vanity is re
futed by what we said even now, that the external scripture hath
no apparent or necessary connexion with divine inspiration or
revelation. Will D. Potter hold all his brethren for blind men,
for not seeing that glorious beam of divine light which shines in
scripture, about which they cannot agree ? Corporal light may be
discerned by itself alone, as being evident, proportionate, and
connatural to our faculty of seeing. The scripture is divine, and
inspired by God, is a truth exceeding the natural capacity and
compass of man's understanding, to us obscure, and to be believed
by divine faith, which according to the apostle, is, argumentum\
non apparentium; an argument or conviction of things not evi
dent; and therefore no wonder if scripture do not manifest itself
by itself alone, but must require some other means for applying
it to our understanding. Nevertheless, their own similitudes and
instances make against themselves : for, suppose a man had
never read or heard of sun or moon, fire, candle, &c, and should
be brought to behold a light, yet in such sort as that the agent
or cause efficient from which it proceeded, were kept hidden from
him ; could such a one, by beholding the light, certainly know,
whether it were produced by the sun, or moon, &c? Or, if one
heard a voice, and had never known the speaker, could he know
from whom in particular that voice proceeded ? They, who look
upon scripture, may well see that some one wrote it ; but that it
was written by divine inspiration, how shall they know ? Nay,
they cannot so much as know who wrote it, unless they first know
the writer, and what hand he writes ; as likewise I cannot know
whose voice it is which I hear, unless I first both know the per
son who speaks, and with what voice he useth to speak : and yet
even all this supposed, I may perhaps be deceived. For there
may be voices so alike, and hands counterfeited, that men may be
deceived by them, as birds were by the grapes of that skilful
painter. Now since protestants affirm, knowledge concerning
God as our supernatural end, must be taken from scripture, they
cannot in scripture alone discern, that it is his voice or writing,
* Page 141. tHeb. xi. v. 1.

94 Charity maintained by Catholics.
because they cannot know from whom a writing or voice proceeds,
unless first they know the person who speaketh or writeth : nay,
I say more ; by scripture alone they cannot so much as know, that
any person doth in it, or by it, speak any thing at all ; because
one may write without intent to signify, or affirm any thing, but
only to set down, or, as it were, paint such characters, syllables,
and words, as men are wont to set copies, not caring what the
signification of the words import ; or as one transcribes a writing,
which himself understands not ; or when one writes what another
dictates ; and in other such cases, wherein it is clear, that the
writer speaks or signifies nothing in such his writing ; and there
fore by it we cannot hear, or understand his voice. With what
certainty then can any man affirm, that by scripture itself they
can see, that the writers did intend to signify any thing at all;
that they were apostles, or other canonical authors; that they
wrote their own sense, and not what was dictated by some other
man ; and finally and especially, that they wrote by the infallible
direction of the Holy Ghost ?
" 12. But let us be liberal, and for the present suppose [not
grant] that scripture is like to corporal light, by itself alone able
to determine, and move our understanding to assent; yet the
similitude proves against themselves. For light is not visible,
except to such as have eyes, which are not made by the light,
but must be pre-supposed as produced by some other cause. And
therefore to hold the similitude, scripture can be clear only to
those who are endued with the eye of faith ; or, as D. Potter
above cited saith, to all that 'have* eyes to discern the shining
beams thereof;' that is, to the believer, as immediately after he
speaketh. Faith then must not originally proceed from scrip
ture, but it is to be pre-supposed, before we can see the light
thereof; and consequently there must be some other means pre
cedent to scripture, to beget faith, which can be no other than the
church. " 13. Others affirm, that they know canonical scriptures to be
such, by the title of the books. But how shall we know such
inscriptions or titles to be infallibly true ? From this their answer
our argument is strengthened, because divers apocryphal writings
have appeared under the titles and names of sacred authors, as
the gospel of Thomas, mentioned by St. Augustine,f the gospel of
Peter, which the Nazarenes did use, as TheodoreJ witnesseth,
with which Seraphon, a catholic bishop, was for some time de
ceived, as may be read in Eusebius,^ who also speaketh of the
apocalypse of Peter.|| The like may be said of the gospels of Bar
nabas, Bartholomew, and other such writings specified by Pope
Gelasius.TI Protestants reject likewise some part of Esther and
Daniel, which bear the same titles with the rest of those books,
as also both we and they hold for apocryphal the third and fourth
books which go under the name of Esdras, and yet both of us
receive his first and second book ; wherefore titles are not suffi-
* Page 141. tCon. Adimantum, u. 11. t L. ii. Heretic. Fab.
5 Lib. 6, c. 10. II Lib. 6, c. 1 1. IT Dist. Can. Sancta Romana.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 95
cient assurances what books be canonical; which D. Covel*
acknowledgeth in these words : 'It is not the word of God, which
doth, or possibly can assure us, that we do well to think it is the
word of God ; the first outward motion leading men so to esteem
of the scripture, is the authority of God's church, which teacheth
us to receive Mark's gospel, who was not an apostle ; and to refuse
the gospel of Thomas, who was an apostle ; and to retain Luke's
gospel, who saw not Christ, and to reject the gospel of Nicode-
mus, who saw him.'
" 14. Another answer, or rather objection, they are wont to
bring ; that the scripture being a principle, needs no proof among
christians. So D. Potter.f But this is either a plain begging
of the question, or manifestly untrue, and is directly against their
own doctrine and practice. If they mean, that scripture is one
of those principles, which being the first, and most known in all
sciences, cannot be demonstrated by other principles, they suppose
that which is in question, whether there be not some principle
(for example the church), whereby we may come to the know
ledge of scripture. If they intend, that scripture is a principle,
but not the first, and most known in Christianity, then scripture
may be proved. For principles, that are not the first, nor known
of themselves, may, and ought to be proved, before we can yield
assent either to them, or to other verities depending on them.
It is repugnant to their own doctrine and practice, inasmuch as
they were wont to affirm, that one part of scripture may be known
to be canonical, and may be interpreted by another. And since
every scripture is a principle sufficient upon which to ground
divine faith, they must grant that one principle may, and some
times must, be proved by another. Yea, this their answer upon
due ponderation, falls out to prove what we affirm. For, since all
principles cannot be proved, we must (that our labour may not be
endless) come at length to rest in some principle, which may not
require any other proof: such is tradition, which involves an
evidence of fact ; and from hand to hand, and age to age, bring
ing up to the times and persons of the apostles, and our Saviour
himself, cometh to be confirmed by all those miracles and other
arguments, whereby they convinced their doctrine to be true.
Wherefore the ancient fathers avouch that we must receive the
sacred canon upon the credit of God's church. St. AthanasiusJ
saith, that only four gospels are to be received, because the canons
of the holy and catholic church have so determined. The third
council of Carthage§ having set down the books of holy scripture,
gives the reason, because, ' we have received from our fathers, that
those are to be read in the church.' St. Augustine|| speaking of
the Acts of the Apostles, saith, ' to which book I must give credit,
if I give credit to the gospel, because the catholic church doth
alike recommend to me both these books.' And in the same place
he hath also these words : ' I would not believe the gospel, unless
the authority of the catholic church did move me.' A saying so
* In his Defence, art. 4, p. 31. t Page 234. t In Synops.
§ Can. 47. |1 Cont. ep. Fundam. t. 5.

96 Charity maintained by Catholics.
plain, that Zuinglius is forced to cry out, ' Here* I implore your
equity to speak freely, whether the saying of Augustine seems not
over bold, or else unadvisedly to have fallen from him.'
" 15. But suppose they were assured what books were canoni
cal, this will little avail them, unless they be likewise certain in
what language they remain uncorrupted, or what translations be
true. Calvinf acknowledgeth corruption in the Hebrew text;
which if it be taken without points, is so ambiguous, that scarcely
any one chapter, yea period, can be securely understood without
the help of some translation : if with points, these were, after St.
Hierom's time, invented by the perfidious Jews, who either by
ignorance might mistake, or upon malice force the text to favour
their impieties. And that the Hebrew text still retains much
ambiguity, is apparent by the disagreeing translations of novel
ists; which also proves the Greek, for the New Testament, not
to be void of doubtfulness, as Calvin J confesseth it to be cor
rupted. And although both the Hebrew and Greek were pure,
what doth this help, if only scripture be the rule of faith, and so
very few be able to examine the text in these languages? All
then must be reduced to the certainty of translations into other
tongues, wherein no private man having any promise or assurance
of infallibility, protestants, who rely upon scripture alone, will
find no certain ground for their faith ; as accordingly Whitaker§
affirmeth ; ' those who understand not the Hebrew and Greek, do
err often, and unavoidably.'
" 16. Now concerning the translations of protestants, it will be
sufficient to set down what the laborious, exact, and judicious au
thor of the Protestant's Apology, &.c. dedicated to our late King
James, of famous memory, hath to this|| purpose. ' To omit (saith
he) particulars, whose recital would be infinite, and to touch this
point but generally only, the translation of the New Testament by
Luther is condemned by Andreas Osiander, Kechermannus, and
Zuinglius, who saith hereof to Luther, thou dost corrupt the word
of God, thou art seen to be a manifest and common corrupter of
the holy scriptures : how much are we ashamed of thee, who have
hitherto esteemed thee beyond all measure, and now prove thee
to be such a man ? And in like manner doth Luther reject the
translations of the Zuinglians, terming them in matter of divinity,
fools, asses, antichrists, deceivers, and of ass-like understanding.
Insomuch, that when Froschoverus, the zuinglian printer of
Zurich, sent him a bible translated by the divines there, Luther
would not receive the same ; but sending it back, rejected it, as
the protestant writers Hospinianus and Lavatherus witness. The
translation set forth by Oecolampadius, and the divines of Basil,
is reproved by Beza, who affirmeth that the Basil translation is
in many places wicked, and altogether differing from the mind
of the Holy Ghost. The translation of Castalio is condemned by
Beza, as being sacrilegious, wicked, and ethnical. As concerning
* Tom. i. fol. 135. t Instil, u. 6, sect. 11.
t Ibid. c. 7, sect. 12. § Lib. de sancta Scriptura, p. 523.
|| Tract. 1, sect. 10, subd. 4, joined with tract 2, c. 2, sect. 10, subd. 2.

Charily maintained by Catholics. 97
Calvin's translation, that learned protestant writer Carolus Moli-
naeus saith thereof, Calvin in his Harmony maketh the text of
the gospel to leap up and down ; he useth violence to the letter of
the gospel; and, besides this, addeth to the text. As touching
Beza's translation (to omit the dislike had thereof by Selneccerus,
the German protestant of the university of Jena) the aforesaid
Molinaeus saith of him, de facto mutat textum, he actually changeth
the text, and giveth farther sundry instances of his corruptions :
as also Castalio, that learned calvinist, and most learned in the
tongues, reprehendeth Beza in a whole book of this matter, and
saith, that to note all his errors in translation would require a
great volume. And M. Parker saith, As for the Geneva bibles,
it is to be wished, that either they may be purged from those ma
nifold errors, which are both in the text, and in the margent, or
else utterly prohibited. All which confirmeth your majesty's
grave and learned censure, in your thinking the Geneva transla
tion to be worst of all ; and that in the marginal notes annexed to
the Geneva translation, some are very partial, untrue, seditious,
&c. Lastly, concerning the English translation, the Puritans say,
Our translation of the Psalms, comprised in our Book of Com
mon Prayer, doth in addition, subtraction, and alteration, differ
from the truth of the Hebrew in two hundred places at least :
insomuch as they do therefore profess to rest doubtful whether a
man with a safe conscience may subscribe thereunto. And Mr.
Carlisle saith of the English translators, that they have depraved
the sense, obscured the truth, and deceived the ignorant : that in
many places they do detort the scriptures from the right sense :
and that they show themselves to love darkness more than light,
falsehood more than truth. And the ministers of Lincoln diocese
give their public testimony, terming the English translation, a
translation that taketh away from the text; that addeth to the
text ; and that sometime to the changing or obscuring of the
meaning of the Holy Ghost. Not without cause, therefore, did
your majesty affirm, that you could never see a bible well trans
lated into English.' Thus far the author of the Protestant Apo
logy, &c. And I cannot forbear to mention in particular, that
famous corruption of Luther, who in the text, where it is said,
(Rom. iii. 28,) ' We account a man to be justified by faith,
without the works of the law,' in favour of justification by faith
alone, translateth 'justified by faith alone.' As likewise the fal
sification of Zuinglius is no less notorious, who, in the gospels of
St. Matthew, Mark, and Luke, and in St. Paul, in place of, ' This
is my body, this is my blood,' translates, ' This signifies my body,
this signifies my blood.' And here, let protestants consider duly
of these points: salvation cannot be hoped for without true faith:
faith according to them, relies upon scripture alone : scripture
must be delivered to most of them, by the translations : transla
tions depend on the skill and honesty of men, in whom nothing is
more certain than a most certain possibility to err ; and no greater
evidence of truth, than that it is evident some of them embrace
falsehood, by reason of their contrary translations. What then

98 Charity maintained by Catholics.
remaineth, but that truth, faith, salvation, and all must in them
rely upon a fallible and uncertain ground ? How many poor souls
are lamentably seduced, while from preaching ministers they ad
mire a multitude of texts of divine scripture, but are indeed the
false translations and corruptions of erring men ! Let them,
therefore, if they will be assured of true scriptures, fly to the al
ways visible catholic church, against which the gates of hell can
never so far prevail, as that she shall be permitted to deceive the
christian world with false scriptures. And Luther himself, by
unfortunate experience, was at length forced to confess thus much,
saying, ' If the world* last longer, it will be again necessary to
receive the decrees of councils, and to have recourse to them, by
reason of divers interpretations of scripture which now reign.'
On the contrary side, the translation approved by the Roman
church is commended even by our adversaries; and D. Covel in
particular saith, that it was used in the church one thousandf
three hundred years ago, and doubteth not to prefer thatj trans
lation before others. Insomuch, that whereas the English trans
lations be many, and among themselves disagreeing, he con-
cludeth, that of all those the approved translation, authorized by
the church of England, is that which cometh nearest to the vul
gar, and is commonly called the Bishops' Bible. So that the
truth of that translation which we use, must be the rule to judge
of the goodness of their bibles ; and therefore they are obliged to
maintain our translations, if it were but for their own sake.
" 17. But doth indeed the source of their manifold uncertainties
stop here? No, the chiefest difficulty remains, concerning the
true meaning of scripture ; for attaining whereof, if protestants
had any certainty, they could not disagree so hugely as they do.
Hence Mr. Hooker saith, ' We are§ right sure of this, that nature,
scripture, and experience, have all taught the world to seek for
the ending contentions, by submitting itself unto some judicial
and definitive sentence, whereunto neither part that contendeth
may, under any pretence, refuse to stand.' Doctor Field's words
are remarkable to this purpose ; ' Seeing (saith he) the controver-
siesj| of religion in our times are grown in number so many, and
in nature so intricate, that few have time and leisure, fewer
strength of understanding, to examine them ; what remaineth for
men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence, but dili
gently to search out, which among all the societies in the world, is
that blessed company of holy ones, that household of faith, that
spouse of Christ, and church of the living God, which is the pillar
and ground of truth, that so they may embrace her communion,
follow her directions, and rest in her judgment?'
" 18. And now, that the true interpretation of scripture ought
to be received from the church, it is also proved by what we have
already demonstrated, that she it is who must declare what books
* Lib. con. Zuing. de verit. Corp. Christ, in Eucha.
t In his answer unto M. John Burges, p. 94. % Ibid.
§ In his Preface to his Books of Eccl. Policy, sect. 6, p. 26.
II In his Treatise of the Church, in his Epistle Dedicatory to the L. Archbishop.

Charily maintained by Catholics. 99
be true scripture ; wherein if she be assisted by the Holy Ghost,
why should we not believe her to be infallibly directed concern
ing the true meaning of them ? Let protestants, therefore, either
bring some proof out of scripture, that the church is guided by
the Holy Ghost in discerning true scripture, and not in delivering
the true sense thereof: or else give us leave to apply against
them the argument which St. Augustine opposed to his Mani-
cheans in these words : ' I would not believe* the gospel, unless
the authority of the church did move me. Them, therefore,
whom I obeyed, saying, believe the gospel, why should I not
obey, saying to me, do not believe Manicheus (Luther, Calvin,
&c.) choose what thou pleasest. If thou shalt say, believe the
catholics ; they warn me not to give any credit to you. If, there
fore, I believe them, I cannot believe thee. If you say, do not
believe the catholics, thou shalt not do well in forcing me to the
faith of Manicheus, because, by the preaching of catholics, I be-
ieved the gospel itself. If you say, you did well to believe them
catholics] commending the gospel, but you did not well to be-
ieve them, discommending Manicheus ; dost thou think me so
very foolish, that without any reason at all, I should believe what
thou wilt, and not believe what thou wilt not ?' And do not pro
testants perfectly resemble these men, to whom St. Augustine
spake, when they will have men to believe the Roman church de
livering scripture, but not to believe her condemning Luther and
the rest ?" Against whom, when they first opposed themselves to
the Roman church, St. Augustine may have seemed to have
spoken no less prophetically, than doctrinally, when he said,
' Why should I not mostf diligently inquire what Christ com
manded of them before all others, by whose authority I was
moved to believe that Christ commanded any good thing ? Canst
thou better declare to me what he said, whom I would not have
thought to have been, or to be, if the belief thereof had been re
commended by thee to me ? This, therefore, I believed by fame,
strengthened with celebrity, consent, antiquity. But every one
may see that you, so few, so turbulent, so new, can produce no
thing deserving authority. What madness is this ! Believe them
[catholics] that we ought to believe Christ ; but learn of us what
Christ said. Why, I beseech thee? Surely, if they [catholics]
were not at all, and could not teach me any thing, I would more
easily persuade myself that I were not to believe Christ, than that
I should learn any thing concerning him from any other than them
by whom I believed him.' If, therefore, we receive the knowledge
of Christ and scriptures from the church, from her also we take his
doctrine, and the interpretation thereof.
" 19. But besides all this, the scripture cannot be judge of
controversies ; who ought to be such, as that to him not only the
learned, or veterans, but also the unlearned and novices, may
have recourse : for these being capable of salvation, and endued
with faith of the same nature with that of the learned, there must
be some universal judge, which the ignorant may understand,
* Con. Ep. Fund. cap. 5. t Lib. de Util. Cre. cap. 14.
g2

100 Charity maintained by Catholics.
and to whom the greatest clerks must submit. Such is the church,
and the scripture is not such.
" 20. Now, the inconveniences which follow by referring all con
troversies to scripture alone, are very clear : for by this principle,
all is finally in very deed and truth reduced to the internal private
spirit, because there is really no middle way betwixt a public ex
ternal, and a private internal voice ; and whosoever refuseth the
one, must of necessity adhere to the other.
"21. This tenet also of protestants, by taking the office of ju
dicature from the church, comes to confer it upon every particular
man, who, being driven from submission to the church, cannot be
blamed if he trust himself as far as any other, his conscience dic
tating, that wittingly he means not to cozen himself, as others
maliciously may do. Which inference is so manifest, that it
hath extorted from divers protestants the open confession of so
vast an absurdity. Hear Luther: 'The governors of* churches
and pastors of Christ's sheep, have indeed power to teach, but
the sheep ought to give judgment, whether they propound the
voice of Christ, or of aliens.' Lubbertus saith, 'As we havef
demonstrated that all public judges may be deceived in interpret
ing ; so we affirm, that they may err in judging. 'Allfaithful
men are private judges, and they also have power to judge of
doctrines and interpretations.' Whitaker, even of the unlearned
saith,J ' They ought to have recourse unto the more learned : but
in the mean time we must be careful not to attribute to them over
much, but so that still we retain our own freedom.' Bilson also
affirmeth, that ' the people^ must be discerners and judges of
that which is taught.' This same pernicious doctrine is delivered
by Brentius, Zanchius, Cartwright, and others exactly cited by
|| Breerely, and nothing is more common in every protestant's
mouth, than that he admits of fathers, councils, church, &c. as
far as they agree with scripture ; which upon the matter is
himself. Tf Thus heresy ever falls upon extremes ; it pretends to
have scripture alone for judge of controversies ; and in the mean
time sets up as many judges, as there are men and women in the
christian world. What good statesmen would they be, who should
ideate or fancy such a commonwealth, as these men have framed
to themselves a church ! They verify what St. Augustine ob-
jecteth against certain heretics : ' You see that you go about to
overthrow all authority of scripture, and that every man's mind
may be to himself a rule, what he is to allow, or disallow, in every
scripture.' " 22. Moreover, what confusion to the church, what danger to
the commonwealth, this denial of the authority of the church may
bring, I leave to the consideration of any judicious, indifferent
man. I will only set down some words of D. Potter, who,
speaking of the proposition of revealed truths, sufficient to prove
him that gainsayeth them to be an heretic, saith thus : ' This
* Tom. 2. Wittem. fol. 375. § In his true Difference, part 2.
t In lib. de Principiis Christian. Dogm. 1. 6, c. 3. || Tract. 2, cap. 1, sect. 1.
X De Sacra Scriptura, 529. t Lib. 32, Cont. Faust

Charity maintained by Catholics. 101
proposition* of revealed truths, is not by infallible determination
of pope or church ; (pope and church being excluded, let us hear
what more secure rule he will prescribe;) but by whatsoever
means a man may be convinced in conscience of divine reve
lation. If a preacher do clear any point of faith to his hearers ;
if a private christian do make it appear to his neighbour, that
any conclusion, or point of faith is delivered by divine revela
tion of God's word; if a man himself (without any teacher) by
reading of the scriptures, or hearing them read, be convinced of
the truth of any such conclusion ; this is a sufficient proposition
to prove him that gainsayeth any such proof, to be an heretic,
an obstinate opposer of the faith.' Behold, what goodly safe pro-
pounders of faith arise in place of God's universal visible church,
which must yield to a single preacher, a neighbour, a man himself
if he can read, or at least have ears to hear scripture read ! Verily
I do not see but that every well-governed civil commonwealth ought
to concur towards the exterminating of this doctrine, whereby the
interpretation of scripture is taken from the church, and conferred
upon every man, who, whatsoever is pretended to the contrary,
may be a passionate, seditious creature.
"23. Moreover, there was no scripture, or written word for
about two thousand years from Adam to Moses, whom all acknow
ledge to have been the first author of canonical scripture ; and
again, for about two thousand years more, from Moses to Christ
our Lord, holy scripture was only among the people of Israel ;
and yet there were gentiles endued in those days with divine faith,
as appeareth in Job, and his friends. Wherefore, during so many
ages, the church alone was the decider of controversies, and in
structor of the faithful. Neither did the word written by Moses
deprive that church of her former infallibility, or other qualities
requisite for a judge ; yea, D. Potter acknowledgeth, that besides
the law, there was a living judge in the Jewish church, endued
with an absolutely infallible direction in cases of moment ; as all
points belonging to divine faith are. Now, the church of Christ
our Lord was before the scriptures of the New Testament, which
were not written instantly, nor all at one time, but successively
upon several occasions ; and some after the decease of most
of the apostles : and, after they were written, they were not
presently known to all churches : and of some there was a
doubt in the church for some ages after our Saviour. Shall
we then say, that according as the church by little and little
received holy scripture, she was, by the like degrees, divested
of her possessed infallibility and power to decide controversies
in religion ? That some churches had one judge of controversies,
and others another ? That with months, or years, as new ca
nonical scripture grew to be published, the church altered her
whole rule of faith, or judge of controversies? After the apos
tles' time, and after the writing of scriptures, heresies would be
sure to rise, requiring in God's church, for their discovery and
condemnation, infallibillity, either to write new canonical scrip-
* Page 247.

102 Charity maintained by Catholics.
ture, as was done in the apostles' time by occasion of emergent
heresies; or infallibility to interpret scriptures already writ
ten, or without scripture, by divine unwritten traditions, and
assistance of the Holy Ghost to determine all controversies;
as Tertullian saith, 'The soul* is before the letter; and speech
before books; and sense before style.' Certainly such addition
of scripture, with derogation, or subtraction from the former
power and infallibility of the church, would have brought to
the world division in matters of faith, and the church had
rather lost than gained by hply scripture (which ought to be far
from our tongues and thoughts) ; it being manifest, that for
decision of controversies, infallibility settled in a living judge, is
incomparably more useful and fit, than if it were conceived as
inherent in some inanimate writing. Is there such repugnance
betwixt infallibility in the church, and existence of scripture, that
the production of the one must be the destruction of the other?
Must the church wax dry, by giving to her children the milk
of sacred writ ? No, no : her infallibility was, and is, derived from
an inexhausted fountain. If protestants will have the scripture
alone for their judge, let them first produce some scripture affirm
ing, that by the entering thereof, infallibility went out of the
church. D. Potter may remember what himself teacheth ; that
the church is still endued with infallibility in points fundamental ;
and, consequently, that infallibility in the church doth well agree
with the truth, the sanctity, yea, with the sufficiency of scripture,
for all matters necessary to salvation. I would therefore gladly
know, out of what text he imagineth, that the church, by the
coming of scripture, was deprived of infallibility in some points,
and not in others? He affirmeth, that the Jewish synagogue
retained infallibility in herself, notwithstanding the writing of
the Old Testament : and will he so unworthily and unjustly de
prive the church of Christ of infallibility by reason of the New
Testament ? Especially, if we consider, that in the Old Testa
ment, laws, ceremonies, rites, punishments, judgments, sacra
ments, sacrifices, &c. were more particularly and minutely
delivered to the Jews, than in the New Testament is done ; our
Saviour leaving the determination or declaration of particulars to
his spouse the church, which therefore stands in need of infalli
bility more than the Jewish synagogue. D. Potter f against this
argument, drawn from the power and infallibility of the syna
gogue, objects, that we might as well infer, that christians must
have one sovereign prince over all, because the Jews had one
chief judge. But the disparity is very clear : the synagogue was
a type and figure of the church of Christ ; not so their civil
government of christian commonwealths or kingdoms : the church
succeeded to the synagogue, but not christian princes to
Jewish magistrates: and the church is compared to a house, or
a family ;J to an army§, to a body |j, to a kingdom 1, &c, all
which require one master, one general, one head, one magistrate,
* De Test. Anim. cap. 5. t Heb. xiii. || 1 Cor. x. Eph. iv.
t Page 24. § Cant. ii. H Matt. xii.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 103
one spiritual king ; as our blessed Saviour with fiet unum ovile,
joined* unus pastor ; one sheepfold, one pastor : but all distinct
kingdoms, or commonwealths, are not one army, family, &c.
And, finally, it is necessary to salvation, that all have recourse
to one church ; but for temporal weal, there is no need that all
submit or depend upon one temporal prince, kingdom, or com
monwealth : and therefore our Saviour hath left to his whole
church, as being one, one law, one scripture, the same sacraments,
&c. Whereas kingdoms have their several laws, different govern
ments, diversity of powers, magistracy, &c. And so this objection
returneth upon D. Potter. For as in the one community of the
Jews, there was one power and judge, to end debates, and resolve
difficulties ; so in the church of Christ, which is one, there must be
some one authority to decide all controversies in religion.
"24. This discourse is excellently proved by ancient St. Ire-
naeusf in these words : ' What if the apostles had not left scrip
tures, ought we not to have followed the order of tradition, which
they delivered to those to whom they committed the churches?
To which order many nations yield assent, who believe in Christ,
having salvation written in their hearts by the Spirit of God, with
out letters or ink, and diligently keeping ancient tradition. It is
easy to receive the truth from God's church, seeing the apostles
have most fully deposited in her, as in a rich store-house, all things
belonging to truth. For what ? If there should arise any conten
tion of some small question, ought we not to have recourse to the
most ancient churches, and from them to receive what is certain
and clear concerning the present question?'
"25. Besides all this, the doctrine of protestants is destructive
of itself: for either they have certain and infallible means, not to
err in interpreting scripture, or they have not : if not, then the
scripture (to them) cannot be a sufficient ground for infallible
faith, nor a mere judge in controversies. If they have certain in
fallible means, and so cannot err in their interpretations of scrip
tures, then they are able with infallibility to hear, examine, and
determine all controversies of faith ; and so they may be, and are
judges of controversies, although they use the scriptures as a rule.
And thus, against their own doctrine, they constitute another judge
of controversies, beside scripture alone.
" 26. Lastly, I ask D. Potter, whether this assertion (scripture
alone is judge of all controversies in faith) be a fundamental point
of faith, or no 1 He must be well advised, before he say, that it
is a fundamental point : for he will have against him as many
protestants as teach, that by scripture alone it is impossible to
know what books be scripture, which yet, to protestants, is the
most necessary and chief point of all other. D. Covel expressly
saith, ' Doubtless J it is a tolerable opinion in the church of Rome,
if they go no further, as some of them do not (he should have
said, as none of them do), to affirm, that the scriptures are holy
and divine in themselves, but so esteemed by us, for the authority
* loan. c. x. t Lib. 5, c. 4.
t In his defence of Mr. Hooker's books, Art. 4, p. 31.

104 Charity maintained by Catholics.
of the church.' He will likewise oppose himself to those his
brethren, who grant, that controversies cannot be ended, without
some external living authority, as we noted before. Besides, how
can it be in us a fundamental error to say, the scripture alone is
not judge of controversies, seeing (notwithstanding this our belief)
we use for interpreting of scripture, all the means which they pre
scribe ; as prayer, conferring of places, consulting the originals, &c,
and to these add the instruction, and authority of God's church,
which even by his confession cannot err damnably, and may afford
us more help, than can be expected from the industry, learning, or
wit of any private person : and finally, D. Potter grants, that the
church of Rome doth not maintain any, fundamental error against
faith ; and consequently, he cannot affirm, that our doctrine, in
this present controversy, is damnable. If he answer, that their
tenet, about the scriptures being the only judge of controversies,
is not a fundamental point of faith ; then, as he teacheth, that the
universal church may err in points not fundamental; so, I hope,
he will not deny, but particular churches, and private men, are
much more obnoxious to error in such points ; and in particular in
this, that scripture alone is judge of controversies : and so, the
very principle upon which their whole faith is grounded, remains
to them uncertain. And, on the other side, for the self-same reason,
they are not certain, but that the church is judge of controversies;
which if she be, then their case is lamentable, who in general deny
her this authority, and in particular controversies oppose her defi
nitions. Besides, among public conclusions defended in Oxford in
the year 1633, to the questions, ' Whether the church have autho
rity to determine controversies in faith ;' and, ' to interpret holy
scripture ?' the answer to both is affirmative.
" 27. Since, then, the visible church of Christ our Lord, is that
infallible means whereby the revealed truths of Almighty God are
conveyed to our understanding ; it followeth, that to oppose her
definitions is to resist God himself; which blessed St. Augustine
plainly affirmeth, when, speaking of the controversy about re-
baptization of such as were baptized by heretics, he saith, ' This*
is neither openly nor evidently read, neither by you nor by me;
yet if there were any wise man of whom our Saviour had given
testimony, and that he should be consulted in this question, we
should make no doubt to perform what he should say, lest we might
seem to gainsay not him so much as Christ, by whose testimony he
was recommended. Now Christ beareth witness to his church.'
And a little after, ' Whosoever refuseth to follow the practice of
the church, doth resist our Saviour himself, who by his testimony
recommends the church.' I conclude therefore with this argu
ment ; whosoever resisteth that means which infallibly proposeth
to us God's word or revelation, commits a sin, which, unrepented,
excludes salvation : but whosoever resisteth Christ's visible church,
doth resist that means which infallibly proposeth to us God's word
or revelation : therefore whosoever resisteth Christ's visible church,
* De Unit. Eccles. e. 22.

Scripture the only Rule whereby to judge of Controversies. 105
commits a sin, which, unrepented, excludes salvation. Now,
what visible church was extant, when Luther began his pretended
reformation, whether it were the Roman, or protestant church ;
and whether he, and other protestants, do not oppose that visible
church, which was spread over the world, before, and in Luther's
time, is easy to be determined, and importeth every one most
seriously to ponder, as a thing whereon eternal salvation depend-
eth. And because our adversaries do here most insist upon the
distinction of points fundamental, and not fundamental ; and in
particular teach, that the church may err in points not funda
mental, it will be necessary to examine the truth and weight of
this evasion, which shall be done in the next chapter."

AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND CHAPTER.
Concerning the means whereby the revealed truths of God are con
veyed to our understanding ; and which must determine contro
versies in faith and religion.
Ad. § 1. He that would usurp an absolute lordship and tyranny
over any people, need not put himself to the trouble and difficulty
of abrogating and disannulling the laws, made to maintain the
common liberty; for he may frustrate their intent, and compass
his own design as well, if he can get the power and authority to
interpret them as he pleases, and add to them what he pleases,
and to have his interpretations and additions stand for laws : if he
can rule his people by his laws, and his laws by his lawyers. So
the church of Rome, to establish her tyranny over men's conscien
ces, needed not either to abolish or corrupt the holy scriptures, '
the pillars and supporters of christian liberty : (which in regard
of the numerous multitudes of copies dispersed through all places,
translated into almost all languages, guarded with all solicitous
care and industry, had been an impossible attempt :) but the more
expedite way, and therefore more likely to be successful, was, to
gain the opinion and esteem of the public and authorized inter
preter of them, and the authority of adding to them what doc
trine she pleased, under the title of traditions or definitions. For
by this means, she might both serve herself of all those clauses of
scripture, which might be drawn to cast a favourable countenance
upon her ambitious pretences, which in case the scripture had
been abolished she could not have done ; and yet be secure enough
of having either her power limited, or her corruptions and abuses
reformed by them ; this being once settled in the minds of men,
that unwritten doctrines, if proposed by her, were to be received
with equal reverence to those that were written; and that the
sense of scripture was not that which seemed to men's reason and
understanding to be so, but that which the church of Rome should
declare to be so, seemed it never so unreasonable and incongruous.
The matter being once thus ordered, and the holy scriptures being

106 Scripture the only Rule
made in effect not your directors and judges (no farther than you
please) but your servants and instruments, always pressed and in
readiness to advance your designs, and disabled wholly with minds
so qualified to prejudice or impeach them; it is safe for you to
put a crown on their head, and a reed in their hands, and to bow
before them, and cry, " Hail, King of the Jews !" to pretend a great
deal of esteem, and respect, and reverence to them, as here you
do. But to little purpose is verbal reverence without entire sub
mission and sincere obedience ; and, as our Saviour said of some,
so the scripture, could it speak, I believe would .say to you, " Why
call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not that which I command you 1"
Cast away the vain and arrogant pretence of infallibility, which
makes your errors incurable. Leave picturing God, and worship
ping him by pictures. " Teach not for doctrine the commandments
of men." Debar not the laity of the testament of Christ's blood.
Let your public prayers and psalms, and hymns, be in such lan
guage as is for the edification of the assistants. Take not from
the clergy that liberty of marriage which Christ hath left them.
Do not impose upon men that humility of worshipping angels
which St. Paul condemns. Teach no more proper sacrifices of
Christ but one. Acknowledge them that die in Christ to be
blessed, and " to rest from their labours." Acknowledge the sacra
ment after consecration, to be bread and wine, as well as Christ's
body and blood. Acknowledge the gift of continency without
marriage, not to be given to all. Let not the weapons of your
warfare be carnal, such as are massacres, treasons, persecutions,
and, in a word, all means either violent or fraudulent: these and
other things, which the scripture commands you, do, and then we
shall willingly give you such testimony as you deserve ; but, till
you do so, to talk of estimation, respect and reverence to the scrip
ture, is nothing else but talk.
2. For neither is that true which you pretend, that we possess
the scripture from you, or take it upon the integrity of your cus
tody ; but upon universal tradition, of which you are but a little
part. Neither, if it were true that protestants acknowledge the
integrity of it to have been guarded by your alone custody, were
this any argument of your reverence towards them. For, first,
you might preserve them entire, not for want of will, but of power
to corrupt them, as it is a hard thing to poison the sea. And then,
having prevailed so far with men, as either not to look at all into
them, or but only through such spectacles as you should please to
make for them, and to see nothing in them, though as clear as
the sun, if it any way made against you ; you might keep them
entire, without any thought or care to conform your doctrine to
them, or reform it by them (which were indeed to reverence the
scriptures) ; but, out of a persuasion, that you could qualify them
well enough with your glosses and interpretations, and make
them sufficiently conformable to your present doctrine, at least
in their judgment, who were prepossessed with this persuasion,
that your church was to judge of the sense of scripture, not to be
judged by it.

whereby to judge of Controversies. 107
3. For, whereas you say, no cause imaginable could avert your
will, from giving the function of supreme and sole judge to holy
writ ; but that the thing is impossible, and that by this means
controversies are increased and not ended; you mean perhaps —
that you can or will imagine no other cause but these. But sure
there is little reason you should measure other men's imaginations
by your own, who perhaps may be so clouded and vailed with
prejudice, that you cannot, or will not, see that which is most
manifest. For what indifferent and unprejudicate man may not
easily conceive another cause which (I do not say does, but cer
tainly) may pervert your wills, and avert your understandings
from submitting your religion and church to a trial by scripture ?
I mean the great, and apparent, and unavoidable danger which by
this means you would fall into, of losing the opinion which men
have of your infallibility, and consequently your power and autho
rity over men's consciences, and all that depends upon it. So
that though Diana of the Ephesians be cried up, yet it may be
feared that with a great many among you (though I censure or
judge no man) the other cause which wrought upon Demetrius
and the craftsmen, may have with you also the more effectual,
though -more secret influence ; and that is, that by this craft we
have our living; by this craft, I mean, of keeping your proselytes [__
from an indifferent trial of your religion by scripture, and making
them yield up and captivate their judgment unto yours. Yet had
you only said de. facto, that no other cause did avert your own
will from this, but only these which you pretend out of charity, I
should have believed you. But seeing you speak not of yourself,
but of all of your side, whose hearts you cannot know ; and pro
fess not only, that there is no other cause, but that no other is
imaginable, I could not let this pass without a censure. As for
the impossibility of scriptures being the sole judge of controver
sies, that is the sole rule for men to judge them by (for we mean
nothing else) you only affirm it without proof, as if the thing were
evident of itself; and therefore I, conceiving the contrary to be
more evident, might well content myself to deny it without refu
tation : yet I cannot but desire you to tell me, if scripture cannot
be the judge of any controversy, how shall that touching the
church and the notes of it be determined ? And if it be the sole
judge of this one, why may it not of others? Why not of all?
those only excepted, wherein the scripture itself is the subject of
the question, which cannot be determined but by natural reason,
the only principle, beside scripture, which is common to Christians.
4. Then for the imputation of increasing contentions and not
ending them, scripture is innocent of it ; as also this opinion, that
controversies are to be decided by scripture. For if men did
really and sincerely submit their judgments to scripture, and that
only, and would require no more of any man but to do so, it were
impossible but that all controversies touching things necessary
and very profitable should be ended ; and if others were continued
or increased, it were no matter.
5. In the next words we have direct boy's play, a thing given
with one hand, and taken away with the other ; an acknowledg-

108 Scripture the only Rule
ment made in one line, and retracted in the next. We acknow
ledge (say you) scripture to be a perfect rule, forasmuch as a
writing can be a rule ; only we deny that it excludes unwritten
tradition. As if you should have said, we acknowledge it to be
as perfect a rule as writing can be ; only we deny it to be as per
fect a rule as a writing may be. Either therefore you must re
voke your acknowledgment, or retract your retraction of it ; for
both cannot possibly stand together. For if you will stand to
what you have granted, that, scripture is as perfect a rule of faith
as a writing can be ; you must then grant it both so complete,
that it needs no addition, and so evident, that it needs no inter
pretation : for both these properties are requisite to a perfect
rule, and a writing is capable of both these properties.
6. That both these properties are requisite to a perfect rule,
it is apparent; because that is not perfect in any kind which
wants some parts belonging to its integrity ; as he is not a per
fect man that wants any part appertaining to the integrity of a
man ; and therefore that which wants any accession to make it a
perfect rule, of itself is not a perfect rule. And then, the end of
a rule is to regulate and direct. Now every instrument is more
or less perfect in its kind, as it is more or less fit to attain, the end
for which it is ordained : but nothing obscure or unevident, while
it is so, is fit to. regulate and direct them to whom it is so : there
fore, it is requisite also to a rule (so far as it is a rule) to be evi
dent ; otherwise indeed it is no rule, because it cannot serve for
direction. I conclude, therefore, that both these properties are
required to a perfect rule ; both to be so complete as to need no
addition ; and to be so evident as to need no interpretation.
7. Now that a writing is capable of both these perfections, it
is so plain, that I am even ashamed to prove it. For he that
denies it, must say, that something may be spoken which cannot
be written. For if such a complete and evident rule of faith may
be delivered by word of mouth, as you pretend it may, and is ; and
whatsoever is delivered by word of mouth, may also be written ;
then such a complete and evident rule of faith may also be written.
If you will have more light added to the sun, answer me then to
these questions : whether your church can set down in writing all
these, which she pretends to be divine unwritten traditions, and
add them to the verities already written ? And whether she can set
us down such interpretations of all obscurities in the faith as shall
need no farther interpretations ? If she cannot, then she hath not
that power, which you pretend she hath, of being an infallible
teacher of all divine verities, and an infallible interpreter of obscu
rities in the faith : for she cannot teach us all divine verities, if she
cannot write them down ; neither is that an interpretation which
needs again to be interpreted. If she can, let her do it, and then
we shall have a writing, not only capable of, but actually endowed
with, both these perfections, of being both so complete as to need
no addition, and so evident as to need no interpretation. Lastly,
whatsoever your church can do or not do, no man can, without
blasphemy, deny that Christ Jesus, if he had pleased, could have
writ us a rule of faith so plain and perfect, as that it should have

whereby to judge of Controversies. 109
wanted neither any part to make up its integrity, nor any clear
ness to make it sufficiently intelligible. And if Christ could have
done this, then the thing might have been done ; a writing there
might have been, endowed with both these properties. Thus there
fore I conclude ; a writing may be so perfect a rule, as to need
neither addition nor interpretation : but the scripture you acknow
ledge a perfect rule, forasmuch as a writing can be a rule, there
fore it needs neither addition nor interpretation.
8. You will say, that though a writing be never so perfect a rule
of faith, yet it must be beholden to tradition to give it this testi
mony, that it is a rule of faith, and the word of God. I answer,
first, there is no absolute necessity of this, for God might, if he
thought good, give it the attestation of perpetual miracles.
Secondly, that it is one thing to be a perfect rule of faith, another
to be proved so unto us. And thus though a writing could not be
proved to us to be a perfect rule of faith, by its own saying so,
for nothing is proved true by being said or written in a book, but
only by tradition, which is a thing credible of itself: yet it may
be so in itself, and contain all the material objects, all the par
ticular articles of our faith, without any dependence upon tra
dition ; even this also not excepted, that this writing doth contain
the rule of faith. Now when protestants affirm against papists,
that scripture is a perfect rule of faith, their meaning is not, that
by scripture all things absolutely may be proved, which are to be
believed : for it can never be proved by scripture to a gainsayer,
that there is a God, or that the book called scripture is the word of
God ; for he that will deny these assertions when they are spoken,
will believe them never a whit the more, because you can shew
them written : but their meaning is, that the scripture, to them
which pre-suppose it divine and a rule of faith, as papists and
protestants do, contains all the material objects of faith, is a com
plete and total, and not only an imperfect and a partial rule.
9. But every book and chapter, and text of scripture is infal
lible, and wants no due perfection, and yet excludes not the
addition of other books of scripture : therefore the perfection
of the whole scripture excludes not the addition of unwritten
tradition. I answer : every text of scripture, though it hath the
perfection belonging to a text of scripture, yet it hath not the
perfection requisite to a perfect rule of faith ; and that only is the
perfection which is the subject of our discourse. So that this is
to abuse your reader with the .ambiguity of the word perfect. In
effect, as if you should say, a text of scripture may be a perfect
text, though there be others beside it ; therefore the whole scrip
ture may be a perfect rule of faith, though there be other parts
of this rule, besides the scripture, and though the scripture be but
a part of it.
10. The next argument to the same purpose is, for sophistry,
cousin-german to the former. When the first books of scripture
were written, they did not exclude unwritten traditions : there
fore now also, that all the books of scripture are written, tradi
tions are not excluded. The sense of which argument (if it have
anv) must be this : wheu only a part of the scripture was written,

110 \ Scripture the only Rule
then a part of the divine doctrine was unwritten ; therefore now,
when all the scripture is written, yet some part of the divine doc
trine is yet unwritten. If you say, your conclusion is not that it
is so, but without disparagement to scripture, may be so; with
out disparagement to the truth of scripture, I grant it; but with
out disparagement to the scripture's being a perfect rule, I deny
it. And now the question is not of the truth, but the perfection
of it, which are very different things, though you would fain con
found them. For scripture might very well be all true, though
it contain not all necessary divine truth. But unless it do so, it
cannot be a perfect rule of faith ; for that which wants any thing
is not perfect. For, I hope you do not imagine, that we conceive
any antipathy between God's word written and unwritten, but
that both might very well stand together. All that we say is this,
that we have reason to believe that God, de facto, hath ordered
the matter so, that all the gospel of Christ, the whole covenant
between God and man, is now written. Whereas if he had
pleased, he might have so disposed it, that part might have been
written, and part unwritten ; but then he would have taken order,
to whom we should have had recourse for that part of it which
was not written ; which seeing he hath not done (as the progress
shall demonstrate) it is evident he hath left no part of it un
written. We know no man therefore that says, it were any
injury to the written word to be joined with the unwritten, if there
were any wherewith it might be joined ; but that we deny. The
infidelity of a keeper may very well consist with the authority of
the thing committed to his custody. But we know no one so
ciety of christians that is such a faithful keeper as you pretend.
The scripture itself was not kept so faithfully by you, but that
you suffered infinite variety of readings to creep into it ; all which
could not possibly be divine, and yet, in several parts of your
church, all of them, until the last age, were so esteemed. The
interpretations of obscure places of scripture, which without
question the apostles taught the primitive christians, are wholly
lost ; there remains no certainty scarce of any one. Those worlds
of miracles which our Saviour did, which were not written, for
want of writing are vanished out of the memory of men : and
many profitable things which the apostles taught and writ not,
as that which St. Paul glanceth at in his second epistle to the
Thessalonians, of the cause of the hindrance of the coming of
antichrist, are wholly lost and extinguished ; so unfaithful or
negligent hath been this keeper of divine verities, whose eyes, like
the Keeper's of Israel (you say) have never slumbered nor slept.
Lastly, we deny not but a judge and a law might well stand
together, but we deny that there is any such judge of God's
appointment. Had he intended any such judge, he would have
named him, lest otherwise (as now it is) our judge of controversies
should be our greatest controversy.
11. Ad. § 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. In your second paragraph, you sum up
those arguments wherewith you intend to prove that scripture
alone cannot be judge in controversies : wherein I profess
unto you beforehand, that you will fight without an adversary.

whereby to judge of Controversies. Ill
For though protestants, being warranted by some of the fathers,
have called scripture the judge of controversy ; and you, in say
ing, here, that scripture alone cannot be judge, imply that it may
be called in some sense a judge, though not alone: jet to speak
properly (as men should speak when they write of controversies
in religion) the scripture is not a judge of controversies, but a rule
only, and the only rule for christians to judge them by. Every
man is to judge for himself with the judgment of discretion, and
to choose either his religion first, and then his church, as we say ;
or, as you, his church first, and then his religion. But, by the
consent of both sides, every man is to judge and choose ; and the
rule whereby he is to guide his choice, if he be a natural man, is
reason ; if he be already a christian, scripture ; which we say is
the rule to judge controversies by. Yet not all simply, but all
the controversies of christians, of those that are already agreed
upon this first principle, that the scripture is the word of God.
But that there is any man, or any company of men appointed to
be judge for all men, that we deny ; and that I believe you will
never prove. The very truth is, we say no more in this matter,
than evidence of truth hath made you confess in plain terms in
the beginning of this chapter ; viz. That scripture is a perfect rule
of faith forasmuch as a writing can be a rule. So that all your
reasons, whereby you labour to dethrone the scripture from this
office of judging, we might let pass as impertinent to the conclu
sion which we maintain, and you have already granted; yet out of
courtesy we will consider them.
12. Your first is this : A judge must be a person fit to end con
troversies; but the scripture is not a person, nor fit to end contro
versies, no more than the law would be without the judges ; there
fore though it may be a rule, it cannot be a judge. Which
conclusion I have already granted: only my request is, that you
will permit scripture to have the properties of a rule, that is, to
be fit to direct every one that will make the best use of it, to that
end for which it was ordained : and that is as much as we need
desire. For, as if I were to go a journey, and had a guide which
could not err, I needed not to know my way ; so on the other
side, if I know my way, or have a plain rule to know it by, I shall
need no guide. Grant therefore scripture to be such a rule, and
it will quickly take away all necessity of having an infallible
guide. But without a living judge it will be no fitter (you say)
to end controversies, than the law alone to end suits. I answer,
if the law were plain and perfect, and men honest and desirous to
understand aright, and obey it, he that says it were not fit to end
controversies, must either want understanding himself, or think the
world wants it. Now the scripture, we pretend, in things ne
cessary is plain and perfect ; and men, we say, are obliged under
pain of damnation, to seek the true sense of it, and not to wrest
it to their pre-conceived fancies. Such a law therefore to such
men, cannot but be very fit to end all controversies necessary to
be ended. For others that are not so, they will end when 'the
world ends, and that is time enough.

112 Scripture the only Rule
13. Your next encounter is with them, who acknowledging
the scripture a rule only and not a judge, make the Holy Ghost,
speaking in scripture, the judge of controversies. Which you
disprove, by saying, that the Holy Ghost, speaking only in scrip
ture, is no more intelligible to us, than the scripture in which
he speaks. But by this reason, neither the pope, nor a council
can be a judge neither. For first, denying the scriptures, the
writings of the Holy Ghost, to be judges, you will not, I hope,
offer to pretend, that their decrees, the writings of men, are more
capable of this function ; the same exceptions at least, if not
more, and greater lying against them as do against scripture.
And then what you object against the Holy Ghost, speaking in
scripture, to exclude him from this office, the same I return
upon them and their decrees, to debar them from it; that they
speaking unto us only in their decrees, are no more intelli
gible than the decrees in which they speak. And therefore
if the Holy Ghost speaking in scripture may not be a judge
for this reason, neither may they, speaking in their decrees, be
judges for the same reason. If the pope's decrees, you will say,
be obscure, he can explain himself; and so the scripture cannot.
But the Holy Ghost that speaks in scripture, can do so, if he
please; and when he is pleased, will do so. In the mean time,
it will be fit for you to wait his leisure, and to be content that
those things of scripture which are plain should be so, and those
which are obscure should remain obscure, until he please to
declare them. Besides, he can, which you cannot warrant me
of the pope or a council, speak at first so plainly, that his words
shall need no farther explanation ; and so in things necessary we
believe he hath done. And if you say, the decrees of councils
touching controversies, though they be not the judge, yet they
are the judge's sentence : so I say the scripture, though not the
judge, is the sentence of the judge. When therefore you con
clude, that to say a judge is necessary for deciding controver
sies about the meaning of scripture, is as much as to say, he is
necessary to decide what the Holy Ghost speaks in scripture:
this I grant is true; but I may not grant that a judge, such an
one as we dispute of, is necessary either to do the one, or the
other. For if the scripture (as it is in things necessary) be plain,
why should it be more necessary to have a judge to interpret
it in plain places, than to have a judge to interpret the meaning of
a council's decrees, and others to interpret their interpretations,
and others to interpret theirs, and so on for ever ? And where they
are not plain, there if we, using diligence to find the truth, do yet
miss of it and fall into error, there is no danger in it. They that
err, and they that do not err, may both be saved. So that those
places, which contain things necessary, and wherein errors were
dangerous, need no infallible interpreter, because they are plain ;
and those that are obscure need none, because they contain not
things necessary, neither is error in them dangerous.
13. The law maker speaking in the law, I grant it, is no more

whereby to judge of Controversies. 113
easily understood than the law itself; for his speech is nothing
else but the law; I grant it very necessary, that besides the
law maker speaking in the law, there should be other judges to
determine civil and criminal controversies, and to give every
man that justice which the law allows him. But your argument
drawn from hence to shew a necessity of a visible judge in con
troversies of religion, I say is sophistical; and that for many
reasons. 14. First, because the variety of civil cases is infinite, and
therefore there cannot be possibly laws enough provided for the
determination of them; and therefore there must be a judge to
supply, out of the principles of reason, the interpretation of the
law, where it is defective. But the scripture, we say, is a perfect
rule of faith, and therefore needs no supply of the defects of it.
15. Secondly, to execute the letter of the law, according to
rigour, would be many times unjust, and therefore there is need
of a judge to moderate it; whereof in religion there is no use
at all.
16. Thirdly, in civil and criminal causes the parties have for
the most part so much interest, and very often so little honesty,
that they will not submit to a law, though never so plain, if it be
against them ; or will not see it to be against them, though it be
so never so plainly ; whereas, if men were honest, arid the law
were plain and extended to all cases, there would be little need
of judges. Now in matters of religion, when the question is,
whether every man be a fit judge and chooser for himself, we
suppose men honest, and such as understand the difference be
tween a moment and eternity. And such men, we conceive, will
think it highly concerns them to be of the true religion, but
nothing at all that this or that religion should be the true. And
then we suppose that all the necessary points of religion are
plain and easy, and consequently every man in this cause to be a
competent judge for himself; because it concerns himself to
judge right as much as eternal happiness is worth. And if
through his own default he judge amiss, he alone shall suffer
for it.
17. Fourthly, in civil controversies we are obliged only to
external passive obedience, and not to an internal and active.
We are bound to obey the sentence of the judge, or not to resist
it, but not always to believe it just : but in matters of religion,
such a judge is required whom we should be obliged to believe
to have judged aright. So that in civil controversies every
honest understanding man is fit to be a judge; but in religion
none but he that is infallible.
18. Fifthly, in civil causes there is means and power, when
the judge hath decreed, to compel men to obey his sentence ;
otherwise, I believe laws alone would be to as much purpose for
the ending of differences, as laws and judges both. But all the
power in the world is neither fit to convince, nor able to compel
a man's conscience to consent to any thing. Worldly terror may
H

114 Scripture the only Rule
prevail so far as to make men profess a religion which they
believe not, (such men, I mean, who know not that there is a
heaven provided for martyrs, and a hell for those that dissemble
such truths as are necessary to be professed) : but to force either
any man to believe what he believes not, or any honest man to
dissemble what he does believe, (if God commands him to pro
fess it,) or to profess what he does not believe, all the powers in
the world are too weak, with all the powers of hell to assist
them. 19. Sixthly, in civil controversies the case cannot be so put,
but there may be a judge to end it, who is not a party ; in con
troversies of religion, it is in a manner impossible to he avoided, but
the judge must be a party. For this must be the first, whether he
be a judge or no, and in that he must be a party. Sure I am, the
pope, in the controversies of our time, is a chief party : for it
highly concerns him, even as much as his popedom is worth, not
to yield any one point of his religion to be erroneous. And he is
a man subject to like passions with other men ; and therefore we
may justly decline his sentence, for fear temporal respects should
either blind his judgment, or make him pronounce against it.
20. Seventhly, in civil controversies, it is impossible Titus
should hold the land in question and Sempronius too ; and there
fore either the plaintiff must injure the defendant, by disquieting
his possession, or the defendant wrong the plaintiff by keeping
his right from him. But in controversies of religion, the case is
otherwise. I may hold my opinion, and do you no wrong; and
you yours, and do me none : nay, we may both of us hold our
opinion, and yet do ourselves no harm ; provided the difference
be not touching any thing necessary to salvation, and that we
love truth so well, as to be diligent to inform our conscience,
and constant in following it.
21. Eighthly, for the deciding of civil controversies, men may
appoint themselves a judge : but in matters of religion, this
office may be given to none but whom God hath designed for
it ; who doth not always give us those things which we conceive
most expedient for ourselves.
22. Ninthly and lastly, for the ending of civil controversies, who
does not see, it is absolutely necessary, that not only judges should
be appointed, but that it should be known and unquestioned who
they are ? Thus all the judges of our land are known men, known
to be judges, and no man can doubt or question but these are the
men. Otherwise, if it were a disputable thing, who were these
judges, and they have no certain warrant for their authority, but
only some topical congruities; would not any man say, such
judges, in all likelihood, would rather multiply controversies than
end them ? So likewise if our Saviour, the Icing of heaven, had
intended, that all controversies in religion should be by some visi
ble judge finally determined, who can doubt, but in plain terms
he would have expressed himself about this matter? He would
have said plainly, The bishop of Rome I have appointed to decide

whereby to judge of Controversies. 115
all emergent controversies; for that our Saviour designed the
bishop of Rome to this office, and yet would not say so, nor cause
it to be written, ad rei memoriam, by any of the evangelists or
apostles, so much as once ; but leave it to be drawn out of uncer-
tain principles, by thirteen or fourteen more uncertain consequences,
he that can believe it, let him.
23. All these reasons, I hope, will convince you, that though
we have, and have great necessity of, judges in civil and criminal
causes ; yet you may not conclude from hence, that there is any
public authorised judge to determine controversies in religion, nor
any necessity there should be any.
24. But the scripture stands in need of some watchful and unerr
ing eye to guard it, by means of whose assured vigilancy, we may
undoubtedly receive it sincere and pure. Very true; but this
is no other than the watchful eye of divine providence ; the good
ness whereof will never suffer, that the scripture should be de
praved, and corrupted, but that in them should be always extant
a conspicuous and plain way to eternal happiness. Neither can
any thing be more palpably inconsistent with his goodness, than
to suffer scripture to be undiscernably corrupted in any matter of
moment, and yet to exact of men the belief of those verities, which
without their fault, or knowledge, or possibility of prevention,
were defaced out of them. So that God requiring of men to be
lieve scripture in its purity, engages himself to see it preserved
in sufficient purity ; and you need not fear but he will satisfy his
engagement. You say, we can have no assurance of this, but your
church's vigilance. But if we had no other, we were in a hard
case ; for, who could then assure us, that your church hath been
so vigilant, as to guard scripture from any the least alteration ?
there being various lections in the ancient copies of your bibles.
What security can your new-raised office of assurance give us, that
the reading is true, which you now receive, and that false, which
you reject ? Certainly,- they that anciently received and made use
of these divers copies, were not all guarded by the church's vigi
lancy from having their scripture altered from the purity of the
original in many places. For of different readings, it is not in
nature impossible, that all should be false; but more than one
cannot possibly be true. Yet the want of such a protection, was
no hindrance to their salvation ; and why then shall having of it
be necessary for ours ? But then, this vigilancy of your church,
what means have we to be ascertained of it ? First, the thing is
not evident of itself; which is evident, because many do not be
lieve it : neither can any thing be pretended to give evidence to it,
but only some places of scripture ; of whose incorruption more
than any other, what is it that can secure me ? If you say the
church's vigilancy, you are in a circle, proving the scriptures un-
corrupted by the church's vigilancy, and the church's vigilancy
by the incorruption of some places of scripture, and again the
incorruption of those places by the church's vigilancy. If you
name any other means, then that means which secures me of the
h2

116 Scripture the only Rule
scriptures incorruption in those places, will also serve to assure
me of the same in other places. For my part, abstracting from
divine providence, which will never suffer the way to heaven to
be blocked up, or made invisible ; I know no other means (I mean,
no other natural and rational means) to be assured hereof, than
I have, that any other book is uncorrupted. For though I have
a greater degree of rational and human assurance of that than
this, in regard of divers considerations, which makes it more cre
dible, that the scripture hath been preserved from any material
alteration; yet my assurance of both is of the same kind and
condition ; both moral assurances, and neither physical nor ma
thematical. 25. To the next argument the reply is obvious : that though we
do not believe the books of scripture to be canonical, because they
say so, (for other books that are not canonical may say they are,
and those that are so, may say nothing of it :) yet we believe not
this upon the authority of your church, but upon the credibility
of universal tradition, which is a thing credible of itself, and
therefore fit to be rested on ; whereas the authority of your church
is not so. And therefore your rest thereon is not rational, but
merely voluntary. I might as well rest upon the judgment of the
next man I meet, or upon the chance of a lottery for it. For by
this means I only know I might err, but by relying on you, I know
I should err. But yet (to return you one suppose for another)
suppose I should for this and all other things submit to her direc
tion, how could she assure me that I should not be misled by
doing so. She pretends indeed infallibility herein ; but how can
she assure us that she hath it ? What, by scripture ? That you
say cannot assure us of its own infallibility, and therefore not of
yours. What, then, by reason ? That you say, may deceive in
other things, and why not in this ? How then will she assure us
hereof? By saying so? Of this very affirmation there will re
main the same question still, how can it prove itself to be infallibly
true ? Neither can there be an end of the like multiplied demands,
till we rest in something evident of itself, which demonstrates
to the world that this church is infallible. And seeing there is
no such rock for the infallibility of this church to be settled on, it
must of necessity, like the island of Delos, float up and down for
ever. And yet upon this point, according to papists, all other con
troversies in faith depend.
26. To the 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14 §. The sum and substance
of the ten next paragraphs is this, that it appears by the confes
sions of some protestants, and the contentions of others, that the
questions about the canon of scripture, what it is ; and about the
various readings and translations of it, which is true, and which
not ; are not to be determined by scripture, and therefore that all
controversies of religion are not decidable by scripture.
27. To which I have already answered, saying, that when
scripture is affirmed to be the rule by which all controversies
of religion are to be decided ; those are to be excepted out of this

Whereby to judge of Controversies. 117
generality, which are concerning the scripture itself; for as that
general saying of scripture, "He hath put all things under his feet,"
is most true; though yet St Paul tells us, that when it is said,
" He hath put all things under him, it is manifest he is excepted
who did put all things under him :" so when we say, that all con
troversies of religion are decidable by the scripture, it is manifest
to all but cavillers, that we do, and must, except from this gene
rality, those which are touching the scripture itself. Just as a
merchant, showing a ship of his own, may say, all my substance is
in this ship ; and yet never intend to deny, that his ship is part
of his substance, nor yet to say, that his ship' is in itself. Or, as a
man may say, that a whole house is supported by the foundation,
and yet never mean to exclude the foundation from being a part
of the house, or to say, that it is supported by itself. Or, as you
yourselves used to say, that the bishop of Rome is the head of the
whole church, and yet would think us but captious sophisters,
should we infer from hence, that either you made him no part of
the whole, or else made him head of himself. Your negative con
clusion therefore, that these questions touching scripture, are not
decidable by scripture, you needed not have cited any authorities,
nor urged any reason to prove it; it is evident of itself, and I
grant it without more ado. But your corollary from it, which
you would insinuate to your unwary reader, that therefore they
are to be decided by your, or any visible church, is a mere incon
sequence, and very like his collection, who because Pamphilus
was not to have Glycerium for his wife, presently concluded that
he must have her ; as if there had been no more men in the world
but Pamphilus and himself. For so you, as if there were nothing
in the world capable of this office, but the scripture, or the present
church; having concluded against scripture, you conceive, but
too hastily, that you have concluded for the church. But the
truth is, neither the one nor the other have any thing to do with
this matter. For, first, the question, whether such or such a book
be canonical scripture, though it may be decided negatively out
of scripture, by showing apparent and irreconcileable contradic
tions between it and some other book confessedly canonical ; but
affirmatively it cannot, but only by the testimonies of the ancient
churches; any book being to be received as undoubtedly canoni
cal, or to be doubted of as uncertain, or rejected as apocryphal,
according as it was received, or doubted of, or rejected by them.
Then for the question, of various readings which is the true ? It
is in reason evident, and confessed by your own pope, that there is
no possible determination of it, but only by comparison with an
cient copies. And, lastly, for controversies about different trans
lations of scripture, the learned have the same means to satisfy
themselves in it, as in the questions which happen about the
translation of any other author ; that is, skill in the language of
the original, and comparing translations with it. In which way,
if there be no certainty, I would know what certainty you have,
that your Doway Old, and Rhemish New Testament, are true trans
lations 1 And then for the unlearned, those on your side are sub-

118 Scripture the only Rule
ject to as much, nay, the very same uncertainty with those on ours.
Neither is there any reason imaginable why an ignorant English
protestant may not be as secure of the translation of our church,
that it is free from error, if not absolutely, yet in matters of mo
ment, as an ignorant English papist can be of his Rhemish testa
ment, or Doway bible. The best direction I can give them, is
to compare both together, and where there is no real difference
(as in the translation of controverted places I believe there is
very little) there to be confident, that they are right ; where they
differ, there to be prudent in the choice of the guides they follow.
Which way of proceeding, if it be subject to some possible error,
yet it is the best that either we or you have ; and it is not required
that we use any better than the best we have.
28. You will say, dependence on your church's infallibility is a
better. I answer, it would be so, if we could be infallibly cer
tain that your church is infallible, that is, if it were either evident
of itself, and seen by its own light, or could be reduced unto, and
settled upon some principle that is so. But seeing you yourselves
do not so much as pretend to enforce us to the belief hereof, by
any proofs infallible and convincing ; but only to induce us to it
by such as are, by your confession, only probable and prudential
motives ; certainly it will be to very little purpose to put off your
uncertainty for the first turn, and to fall upon it at the second;
to please yourselves in building your house upon an imaginary
rock, when you yourselves see and confess, that this very rock
stands itself at the best but upon a frame of timber. I answer,
secondly, that this cannot be a better way, because we are infal
libly certain, that your church is not infallible, and indeed hath
not the real prescription of this privilege, but only pleaseth herself
with a false imagination and vain presumption of it ; as I shall
hereafter demonstrate by many unanswerable arguments.
29. Now seeing I make no scruple or difficulty to grant the
conclusion of this discourse, that these controversies about scrip
ture are not decidable by scripture ; and have showed, that your
deduction from it, that therefore they are to be determined by the
authority of some present church, is irrational and inconsequent ;
I might well forbear to tire myself with an exact and punctual
examination of your premises xard irooa, which whether they be
true or false, is to the question disputed wholly impertinent. Yet
because you shall not complain of tergiversation, I will run over
them, and let nothing that is material and considerable pass with
out some stricture or animadversion.
30. You pretend that M. Hooker acknowledgeth, that that
whereon we must rest our assurance that the scripture is God's
word, is the church, and for this acknowledgement you refer us to
1. 3, § 8. Let the reader consult the place, and he shall find
that he and M. Hooker hath been much abused, both by you
here, and by M. Breerly and others before you ; and that Mv
Hooker hath not one syllable to your pretended purpose, but very
much directly to the contrary. There he tells us, indeed, that
ordinarily the first introduction and probable motive to the belief

whereby to judge of Controversies. 119
of the verity, is the authority of the church ; but that it is the last
foundation whereon our belief hereof is rationally grounded, that
in the same place he plainly denies. His words are, " Scripture
teacheth us that saving truth which God hath discovered unto
the world by revelation, and it presumeth us taught otherwise,
that itself is divine and sacred. The question then being by what
means we are taught this : *some answer, that to learn it we have
no other way than tradition : as namely, that so we believe, be
cause we from our predecessors, and they from theirs, have so re
ceived. But is this enough ? That which all men's experience
teacheth them, may not in any wise be denied ; and by experience
we all know, fthat the first outward motive leading men to esteem
of the scripture is, the authority of God's church. For when we
knowj the whole church of God hath that opinion of the scrip
ture, we judge it at the first an impudent thing for any man, bred
and brought up in the church, to be of a contrary mind without
cause. Afterwards, the more we bestow our labour upon reading
or hearing the mysteries thereof,^ the more we find that the thing
itself doth answer our received opinion concerning it ; so that the
former inducement prevailing somewhat|| with us before, doth now
much more prevail, when the very thing hath ministered farther
reason. If infidels or atheists chance at any time to call it in
question, this giveth us occasion to sift what reason there is
whereby the testimony of the church concerning scripture, and
our own persuasion, which scripture itself hath settled, may be
proved a truth infallible.TT In which case the ancient fathers,
being often constrained to show what warrant they had so much
to rely upon the scriptures, endeavoured still to maintain the au
thority of the books of God, by arguments such as the unbelievers
themselves must needs think reasonable, if they judge thereof as
they should. Neither is it a thing impossible, or greatly hard,
even by such kind of proofs, so to manifest and clear that point, that
no man living shall be able to deny it, without denying some appa
rent principle, such as all men acknowledge to be true." **By this
time I hope the reader sees sufficient proof of what I said in my
reply to your Preface, that Mr. Breerly's great ostentation of exact
ness is no very certain argument of his fidelity.
31. But, seeing the belief of the scripture is a necessary thing,
* Some answer so, but he doth not
t The first outward motive, not the last assurance whereon we rest.
t The whole church that he speaks of, seems to be that particular church wherein a
man is bred and brought up; and the authority of this he makes an argument, which
presseth a man's modesty more than his reason. And in saying it seems impudent to
be of a contrary mind without cause, he implies, there may be a just cause to be of a
contrary mind, and that then it were no impudence lo be so.
§ Therefore the authority of the church is not the pause whereon we rest ; we had
need of more assurance, and the intrinsical arguments afford it.
II Somewhat, but not much, until it be backed and enforced by farther reason ; itself,
therefore, is not the farthest reason, and the last resolution.
1[ Observe, I pray, our persuasion, and the testimony of the church concerning
scripture, may be proved true ; therefore neither of them was in his account the farthest
proof; ** Natural reason, then, built on principles common to all men, is the last resolution,
unto which the church's authority is but the first inducement.

120 Scripture the only Rule
and cannot be proved by scripture, how can the church of England
teach, as she doth, Art. VI. that all things necessary are contained
in scripture ?
32. I have answered this already. And here again I say, that
all but cavillers will easily understand the meaning of the article
to be, that all the divine verities, which Christ revealed to his
apostles, and the apostles taught the churches, are contained in
scripture ; that is, all the material objects of our faith, whereof
the scripture is none, but only the means of conveying them unto
us ; which we believe not finally, and for itself, but for the matter
contained in it. So that, if men did believe the doctrine contained
in scripture, it should no way hinder their salvation, not to know
whether there were any scripture or no. Those barbarous nations
Irenaeus speaks of, were in this case, and yet no doubt but they
might be saved. The end that God aims at is the belief of the
gospel, the covenant between God and man ; the scripture he
hath provided as a means for this end, and this also we are to be
lieve, but not as the last object of our faith, but as the instrument
of it. When, therefore, we subscribe to the sixth article, you
must understand, that by articles of faith, they mean the final
and ultimate objects of it, and not the means and instrumental
objects ; and then there will be no repugnance between what they
say, and that which Hooker, and D. Covel, and D. Whitaker, and
Luther here say.
33. But, protestants agree not in assigning the canon of holy
scripture; Luther and Illyricus reject the epistle of St. James:
Kemnitius, and other lutherans, the second of Peter, the second
and third of John, the epistle to the Hebrews, the epistle of
James, of Jude, and the Apocalypse. Therefore, without the au
thority of the church, no certainty can be had what scripture is
canonical. 34. So also the ancient fathers, and not only fathers, but whole
churches, differed about the certainty of the authority of the very
same books ; and by their difference shewed, they knew no ne
cessity of conforming themselves herein to the judgment of your
or any church : for, had they done so, they must have agreed all
with that church, and consequently among themselves. Now, I
pray, tell me plainly, had they sufficient certainty what scripture
was canonical, or had they not ? If they had not, it seems there
is no great harm or danger in not having such a certainty whether
some books be canonical, or not, as you require ; if they had, why
may not protestants, notwithstanding their differences, have suffi
cient certainty hereof, as well as the ancient fathers and churches,
notwithstanding theirs ?
35. You proceed : and whereas the protestants of England in
the sixth article have these words — " In the name of the holy scrip
ture we do understand those books, of whose authority was never
any doubt in the church ;" you demand what they mean by them?
Whether that, by the church's consent they are assured what
scriptures be canonical? I answer for them, yes, they are so.
And whereas you infer from hence, this is to make the church

whereby to judge of Controversies. 121
judge. 1 have told you already, that of this controversy we make
the church the judge ; but not the present church, much less the
present Roman church, but the consent and testimony of the
ancient and primitive church ; which though it be but an highly
probable inducement, and no demonstrative enforcement, yet
methinks you should not deny, but it may be a sufficient ground
of faith; whose faith, even of the foundation of all your faith,
your church's authority is built lastly and wholly upon prudential
motives. 36. But, by this rule, the whole book of Esther must quit the
canon, because it was excluded by some in the church ; by Melito,
Athanasius, and Gregory Nazianzen. Then, for aught I know, he
that should think he had reason to exclude it now, might be still
in the church as well as Melito, Athanasius, Nazianzen were. And
while you thus inveigh against Luther, and charge him with lucife-
rian heresy, for doing that which you in this very place confess,
that saints in heaven before him have done, " are you not partial,
and a judge of evil thoughts?"
37. Luther's censures of Ecclesiastes, Job, and the prophets,
though you make such tragedies with them, I see none of them
but is capable of a tolerable construction, and far from having in
them any fundamental heresy. He that condemns him for saying,
the book of Ecclesiastes is not full, that it hath many abrupt
things, condemns him, for aught I can see, for speaking truth.
And the rest of the censure is but a bold and blunt expression of
the same thing. The book of Job may be a true history ; and yet,
as many true stories are, and have been, an argument of a fable
to set before us an example of patience. And though the books
of the prophets were not written by themselves, but by their
disciples, yet it does not follow, that they were written casually
(though I hope you will not damn all for heretics, that say some
books of scripture were written casually).. Neither is there any
reason they should the sooner be called in question for being written
by their disciples, seeing being so written they had attestation from
themselves. Was the prophecy of Jeremy the less canonical, for
being written by Baruch? Or, because St. Peter the master dic
tated the gospel, and St. Mark the scholar writ it, is it the more
likely to be called in question ?
38. But leaving Luther, you return to our English canon of
scripture ; and tell us, that in the New Testament, by the above-
mentioned rule (of whose authority was never any doubt in the
church) divers books must be discanonized. Not so, for I may
believe even those questioned books to have been written by the
apostles, and to be canonical ; but I cannot in reason believe this
of them so undoubtedly, as of those books which were never
questioned; at least I have no warrant to damn any man that
shall doubt of them or deny them now, having the example of
saints in heaven, either to justify or excuse such their doubting
or denial.
39. You observe in the next place, that our sixth article, spe
cifying by name all the books of the Old Testament, shuffles over

122 Scripture the only Rule
those of the new with this generality :— " All the books of the
New Testament, as they are commonly received, we do receive,
and account them canonical:" and in this you fancy to yourself a
mystery of iniquity. But if this be all the shuffling that the
church of England is guilty of, I believe the church, as well as
the king, may give for her motto, honi soit qui mal ypense: for all
the bibles, which since the composing of the articles have been
used and allowed by the church of England, do testify and even
proclaim to the world, that by " commonly received," they meant
received by the church of Rome, and other churches before the
reformation. I pray take the pains to look in them, and there
you shall find the books which the church of England accounts
apocryphal, marked out, and severed from the rest, with this title
in the beginning, The books called Apocrypha ; and with this close
or seal in the end, The end of the Apocrypha. And having told
you by name, and in particular, what books only she esteems apo
cryphal, I hope you will not put her to the trouble of telling you,
that the rest are in her judgment canonical.
40. But if by " commonly received," she meant by the church of
Rome ; then, by the same reason, must she receive divers books of
the Old Testament, which she rejects.
41. Certainly a very good consequence. The church of Eng
land receives the books of the New Testament which the church
of Rome receives : therefore she must receive the books of the
Old Testament which she receives. As if you should say, if you
will do as we in one thing, you must in all things. If you will pray
to God with us, ye must pray to saints with us. If you hold with
us, when we have reason on our side, you must do so when we have
no reason.
42. The discourse following, is but a vain declamation. No
man thinks that this controversy is to be tried by most voices, but
by the judgment and testimony of the ancient fathers and
churches. 43. But with what coherence can we say in the former part of
the article, that by scripture we mean those books that were never
doubted of; and in the latter say, we receive "all the books of the
New Testament, as they are commonly received," whereas of them
many were doubted ? I answer, when they say, of whose autho
rity there was never any doubt in the church, they mean not those
only of whose authority there was simply no doubt at all, by any
man in the church ; but such as were not at any time doubted of
by the whole church, or by all churches ; but had attestation, though
not universal, yet at least sufficient to make considering men receive
them for canonical. In which number they maywell reckon those
epistles which were sometimes doubted of by some, yet whose num
ber and authority was not so great, as to prevail against the con
trary suffrages.
44. But if to be " commonly received," passed for a good rule to
know the canon of the New Testament by, why not of the Old ?
You conclude many times very well ; but still when you do so, it
is out of principles which no man grants : for who ever told you

whereby to judge of Controversies. 123
that to be " commonly received" is a good rule to know the canon
of the New Testament by ? Have you been trained up in schools
of subtilty, and cannot you see a great difference between these
two— we receive the books of the New Testament as they are
" commonly received," and we receive those that are " commonly
received," because they are so? To say this, were indeed to make
being " commonly received," a rule or reason to know the canon
by. But to say the former, doth no more make it a rule, than
you should make the church of England the rule of your receiving
them, if you should say, as you may, the books of the New Tes
tament we receive for canonical, as they are received by the church
of England.
45. You demand upon what infallible ground we agree with
Luther against you in some, and with you against Luther in
others? And I also demand, upon what infallible ground you
hold your canon, and agree neither with us, nor Luther? For
sure your differing from us both, is of itself no more apparently
reasonable, than our agreeing with you in part, and in part with
Luther. If you say, your church's infallibility is your ground ; I
demand again some infallible ground, both for the church's infal
libility, and for this, that yours is the church; and shall never
cease multiplying demands upon demands, until you settle me
upon a rock; I mean, give such an answer, whose truth is so
evident, that it needs no further evidence. If you say, this is
universal tradition ; I reply, your church's infallibility is not
built upon it, and that the canon of scripture, as we receive it, is :
for we do not profess ourselves so absolutely and undoubtedly
certain, neither do we urge others to be so, of those books, which
have been doubted, as of those that never have.
46. The conclusion of your 10th §. is, that the divinity of a
writing cannot be known from itself alone, but by some extrin
sical authority : which you need not prove ; for no wise man
denies it. But then, this authority is that of universal tradition,
not of your church. For to me it is altogether as avriiruSTov that
the gospel of St. Matthew is the word of God, as that all which
your church says is true.
47. That believers of the scripture, by considering the divine
matter, the excellent precepts, the glorious promises contained in
it, may be confirmed in their faith of the scripture's divine autho
rity ; and that among other inducements and enforcements here
unto, internal arguments have their place and force, certainly no
man of understanding can deny. For my part, I profess, if the
doctrine of the scripture were not as good, and as fit to come from
the Fountain of goodness, as the miracles by which it was con
firmed were great, I should want one main pillar of my faith;
and for want of it, I fear, should be much staggered in it. Now
this, and nothing else, did the doctor mean in saying, " the believer
sees, by that glorious beam of divine light, which shines in scrip
ture, and by many internal arguments, that the scripture is of
divine authority. By this (saith he) he sees" it, that is, he is moved
to, and strengthened in his belief of it ; and by this partly, not

124 Scripture the only Rule
wholly ; by this, not alone, but with the concurrence of other
arguments. He that will quarrel with him for saying so, must
find fault with the master of the sentences, and all his scholars,
for they all say the same. The rest of this paragraph, I am as
willing it should be true, as you are to have it ; and so let it pass
as a discourse wherein we are wholly unconcerned. You might
have met with an answerer, that would not have suffered you to
have said so much truth together ; but to me it is sufficient, that
it is nothing to the purpose.
48. In the next division, out of your liberality, you will suppose,
that scripture, like to a corporal light, is by itself alone able to
determine and move our understanding to assent; yet notwith
standing this supposal, faith still (you say) must go before scrip
ture ; because as the light is visible only to those that have eyes,
so the scripture only to those that have the eye of faith. But to
my understanding, if scripture do move and determine our under
standing to assent; then the scripture, and its moving, must be
before this assent, as the cause must be before its own effect:
now this very assent is nothing else but faith, and faith nothing
else than the understanding's assent. And therefore (upon this
supposal) faith doth, and must originally proceed from scripture,
as the effect from its proper cause, and the influence and efficacy
of scripture is to be presupposed before the assent of faith, unto
which it moves and determines ; and, consequently, if this suppo
sition of yours were true, there should need no other means pre
cedent to scripture to beget faith; scripture itself being able (as
here you suppose) to determine and move the understanding to
assent, that is, to believe them, and the verities contained in them.
Neither is this to say, that the eyes with which you see, are made
by the light by which we see. For you are mistaken much, if you
conceive, that in this comparison, faith answers to the eye. But
if you will not prevent it, the analogy must stand thus ; scripture
must answer to light ; the eye of the soul, that is, the understand
ing or the faculty of assenting, to the bodily eye : and, lastly,
assenting or believing, to the act of seeing. As therefore the
light, determining the eye to see, though it presupposeth the eye,
which it determines, as every action doth the object on which it
is employed, yet itself is presupposed and antecedent to the act of
seeing, as the cause is always to its effect : so, if you will suppose
that scripture, like light, moves the understanding to assent, the
understanding (that is, the eye and object on which it works)
must be before this influence upon it ; but the assent, that is, the
belief whereto the scripture moves, and the understanding is
moved, which answers to the act of seeing, must come after : for,
if it did assent already, to what purpose should the scripture do
that which was done before ? Nay, indeed, how were it possible it
should be so, any more than a father can beget a son that he hath
already? Or an architect build a house, that is built already?
Or, that this very world can be made again, before it be unmade ?
Transubstantiation indeed is fruitful of such monsters : but they
that have not sworn themselves to the defence of error, will

whereby to judge of Controversies. 125
easily perceive, that jam factum facere, and factum infectumfacere,
are equally impossible. But I digress.
49. The close of this paragraph is a fit cover for such a dish.
There you tell us, that if there be some other means precedent to
scripture to beget faith, this can be no other than the church. By
the church, we know you do and must understand the Roman
church : so that in effect you say, no man can have faith, but he
must be moved to it by your church's authority : and that is to
say, that the king and all other protestants, to whom you write,
though they verily think they are christians, and believe the gos
pel, because they assent to the truth of it, and would willingly
die for it, yet indeed are infidels, and believe nothing. The
scripture tells us, " The heart of man knoweth no man, but the
spirit of man which is in him." And who are you, to take upon
you to make us believe, that we do not believe what we know we
do ? But if I may think verily that I believe the scripture, and
yet not believe it ; how know you that you believe the Roman
church ? I am as verily and as strongly persuaded that I believe
the scripture, as you are that you believe the church : and if I may
be deceived, why may not you ? Again, what more ridiculous,
and against sense and experience, than to affirm, that there are
not millions amongst you and us, that believe upon no other rea
son than their education, and the authority of their parents and
teachers, and the opinion they have of them ? The tenderness of
the subject, and aptness to receive impressions, supplying the
defect and imperfection of the agent. And will you proscribe from
heaven all those believers of your own creed, who do indeed lay
the foundation of their faith (for I cannot call it by any other
name) no deeper than upon the authority of their father, or master,
or parish priest ? Certainly, if they have no true faith, your church
is very full of infidels. Suppose Xaverius, by the holiness of his
life, had converted some Indians to Christianity, who could (for so
I will suppose) have no knowledge of your church but from him,
and therefore must last of all build their faith of the church upon
their opinion of Xaverius : do these remain as very pagans after
conversion, as they were before ? Are they brought to assent in
their souls, and obey in their lives the gospel of Christ, only to be
tantalized and not saved and not benefited, but deluded by it, be
cause, forsooth, it is a man, and not the church that begets faith in
them ? What if their motive to believe be not in reason sufficient?
Do they therefore not believe what they do believe, because they
do it upon insufficient motives ? They choose the faith imprudently,
perhaps, but yet they choose it. Unless you will have us believe,
that that which is done is not done, because it is not done upon
good reason ; which is to say, that never any man living ever did a
foolish action. But yet I know not why the authority of one holy
man, which apparently hath no ends upon me, joined with the
goodness of the christian faith, might not be a far greater and more
rational motive to me to embrace Christianity, than any I can have
to continue in paganism. And therefore for shame, if not for love
of truth, you must recant the fancy when you write again, and

126 Scripture the only Rule
suffer true faith to be many times, where your church's infallibility
hath no hand in the beginning of it : and be content to tell us
hereafter, that we believe not enough ; and not go about to per
suade us we believe nothing, for fear with telling us what we know
to be manifestly false, you should gain only this, not to be believed
when you speak truth. Some pretty sophisms you may haply bring
us, to make us believe we believe nothing ; but wise men know,
that reason against experience is always sophistical. And there
fore as he that could not answer Zeno's subtilties against the ex
istence of motion, could yet confute them, by doing that which
he pretended could not be done : so, if you should give me a hun
dred arguments to persuade me, because I do not believe in God,
and the knots of them I could not untie, yet I should cut them in
pieces with doing that, and knowing that I do so, which you pre
tend I cannot do.
50. In the thirteenth division, we have again much ado about
nothing. A great deal of stir you keep in confuting some, that
pretend to know canonical scripture to be such, by the titles of
the books. But these men you do not name; which makes me
suspect you cannot. Yet it is possible there may be some such
men in the world ; for Gusman de Alferache hath taught us, that
the fool's hospital is a large place.
51. In the fourteenth §. we have very artificial juggling. D.
Potter had said, that the scripture (he desires to be understood of
those books wherein all christians agree) is a principle, and needs
not to be proved among christians. His reason was, because that
needs no farther proof, which is believed already. Now by this
(you say) he means either that the scripture is one of these first
principles, and most known in all sciences, which cannot be
proved : which is to suppose it cannot be proved by the church ;
and that is to suppose the question : or, he means that it is not
the most known in Christianity, and then it may be proved
Where we see plainly, that two most different things, most
known in all sciences, and most known in Christianity, are cap
tiously confounded. As if the scripture might not be the first and
most known principle in Christianity, and yet not the most known
in all sciences : or as if to be a first principle in Christianity, and
in all sciences, were all one. That scripture is a principle among
christians, that is, so received by all, that it need not be proved
in any emergent controversy to any christian, but may be taken
for granted, I think few will deny. You yourselves are of this a
sufficient testimony ; for urging against us many texts of scrip
ture, you offer no proof of the truth of them, presuming we will
not question it. Yet this is not to deny, that tradition is a prin
ciple more known than scripture ; but to say, it is a principle not
in Christianity, but in reason, not proper to christians, but com
mon to all men.
52. But it is repugnant to our practice to hold scripture a
principle, because we are wont to affirm, that one part of scrip
ture may be known to be canonical, and may be interpreted by
another. — Where the former device is again put in practice. For

whereby to judge of Controversies. 127
to be known to be canonical, and to be interpreted, is not all one.
That scripture may be interpreted by scripture, that protestants
grant, and papists do not deny; neither does that any way hin
der, but that this assertion— scripture is the word of God, may
be among christians a common principle. But the first— that one
part of scripture may prove another part canonical, and need no
proof of its own being so ; for that you have produced divers pro
testants that deny it ; but who they are that affirm it, nondum
constat. . ,
53. It is superfluous for you to prove out of St. Athanasius, and
St. Austin, that we must receive the sacred canon upon the credit
of God's church : understanding by church, as here you explain
yourself, the credit of tradition. And that not the tradition of
the present church, which we pretend may deviate from the an
cient, but such a tradition, which involves an evidence of fact,
and from hand to hand, from age to age, bringing us up to the
times and persons of the apostles, and our Saviour himself,
cometh to be confirmed by all these miracles and other arguments,
whereby they convinced their doctrine to be true. Thus you.
Now prove the canon of scripture, which you receive by such tra
dition, and we will allow it: prove your whole doctrine, or the
infallibility of your church by such tradition, and we will yield to
you in all things. Take the alleged places of St. Athanasius and
St. Austin in this sense (which is your own), and they will not press
us any thing at all. We will say, with Athanasius, that only four
gospels are to be received, because the canons of the holy and ca
tholic church (understand all ages since the perfection of the canon)
have so determined.
54. We will subscribe to St. Austin and say, that we also would
not believe the gospel unless the authority of the catholic church
did move us (meaning by the church, the church of all ages, and
that succession of christians which takes in Christ himself and his
apostles). Neither would Zuinglius have needed to cry out upon
this saying, had he conceived as you now do, that by the catholic
church, the church of all ages, since Christ, was to be understood.
As for the council of Carthage, it may speak not of such books
only as were certainly canonical, and for the regulating of faith,
but also of those which were only profitable, and lawful to be
read in the church : which in England is a very slender argument
that the book is canonical, where every body knows that apocry
phal books are read as well as canonical. But howsoever, if you
understand by fathers, not only their immediate fathers and pre
decessors in the gospel, but the succession of them from the apos
tles ; they are right in the thesis, that whatsoever is received from
these fathers, as canonical, is to be so esteemed ; though in the
application of it to this or that particular book, they may haply
err, and think that book received as canonical, which was only
received as profitable to be read; and think that book received
alway, and by all, which was rejected by some, and doubted of by
many. ¦ 55. But we cannot be certain in what language the scriptures

128 Scripture the only Rule
remain uncorrupted. Not so certain, I grant, as of that which
we can demonstrate ; but certain enough, morally certain, as cer
tain as the nature of the thing will bear ; so certain we may be,
and God requires no more. We may be as certain as St. Austin
was, who, in his second book of baptism, against the donatists,
c. 3, plainly implies, the scripture might possibly be corrupted.
He means sure in matters of little moment, such as concern not
the covenant between God and man. But thus he saith, the
same St. Austin, in his 48th epist. clearly intimates,* that in his
judgment, the only preservative of the scripture's integrity was
the translating it into so many languages, and the general and
perpetual use and reading of it in the church ; for want whereof
the works of particular doctors were more exposed to danger in
this kind ; but the canonical scripture being by this means guarded
with universal care and diligence, was not obnoxious to such
attempts. And this assurance of the scripture's incorruption is
common to us with him ; we therefore are as certain hereof, as
St. Austin was, and that I hope was certain enough. Yet if this
does not satisfy you, I say farther, we are as certain hereof as
your own pope Sixtus Quintus was. He in his preface to his bible
tells us,f that " in the pervestigation of the true and genuine text,
it was perspicuously manifest to all men, that there was no argu
ment more firm and certain to be relied on than the faith of an
cient books." Now this ground we have to build upon as well as
he had ; and therefore our certainty is as great, and stands upon as
certain ground as his did.
56. This is not all I have to say in this matter ; for I will add,
moreover, that we are as certain in what language the scripture is
uncorrupted, as any man in your church was, until Clement the
Eighth set forth your own approved edition of your vulgar trans
lation : for you do not, nor cannot, without extreme impudence,
deny, that until then, there were great variety of copies current in
divers parts of your church, and those very frequent in various
lections, all which copies might possibly be false in some things,
but more than one sort of them could not possibly be true in all
things ; neither were it less impudence to pretend, that any man
in your church could until Clement's time have any certainty
what that one true copy and reading was (if there were any one
perfectly true). Some, indeed, that had got Sixtus's bible, might
after the edition of that, very likely think themselves cock-sure
of a perfect, true, uncorrupted translation, without being beholden
* Neque enim sic pot nit integritas atque notitia literarum quamlibet illustris episcopi
custodiri, quemadmodum scriptura canonica tot linguarum Uteris et ordine et succes-
sione celebrationis ecclcsiastica) custoditur ; contra quam non defuerunt tamen, qui sub
nominibus apostolorum multa confingerent. Frustra quidcm ; quia ilia sic commendaia,
sic celebrata, sic nota est. Veruin quid possit adversus literas non canonica autlwritate
fundatas etiam hinc demonstrabit impia conatus audacite, quod et adversus eos qua
tanta notitite mole firmata sunt, sese erigere non praitermisit. Aug. ep. 48. ad Vincent.
cont. Donat. et Rogat.
t In hac germani textus pervestigatione, satis perspicue inter omnes constat, nullum
argumentum esse aut certius aut Jirmius, quam antiquorum probatorum codicum La-
tinorumjidem, Sfc. sic Sixtus in Prsef.

whereby to judge of Controversies. 129
to Clement ; but how foully they were abused and deceived that
thought so, the edition of Clement, differing from that of Sixtus in
a multitude of places, doth sufficiently demonstrate.
57. This certainty, therefore, in what language the scripture
remains uncorrupted, is it necessary to have it, or is it not ? If it
be not, I hope we may do well enough without it. If it be neces
sary, what became of. your church for 1500 years together ? All
which time you must confess she had no such certainty ; no one man
being able truly and upon good ground to say, this or this copy
of the bible is pure and perfect, and uncorrupted in all things.
And now at present, though some of you are grown to a higher
degree of presumption in this point, yet are you as far as ever
from any true, and real, and rational assurance of the absolute
purity of your authentic translation, which I suppose myself to
have proved unanswerably in divers places.
58. In the sixteenth division, it is objected to protestants in a
long discourse transcribed out of the Protestant's Apology, that
their translations of the scripture are very different, and by each
other mutually condemned. Luther's translation by Zuinglius and
others ; that of the zuinglians by Luther ; the translation of O3co-
lampadius, by the divines of Basil ; that of Castalio, by Beza ; that
of Beza by Castalio ; that of Calvin, by Carolus Molinaeus ; that
of Geneva, by M. Parker and King James ; and, lastly, one of our
translations by the puritans.
59. All which might have been as justly objected against that
great variety of translations extant in the primitive church, and
made use of by the fathers and doctors of it. For which, I desire
not that my word, but St. Austin's may be taken : " They which
have translated the scriptures out of the Hebrew into Greek,
may be numbered ; but the Latin interpreters are innumerable :
for, whensoever any one, in the first times of Christianity, met with
a Greek bible, and seemed to himself to have some ability in both
languages, he presently ventured upon an interpretation." So he,
in his second book of christian doctrine, chap. 11. Of all these,
that which was called the Italian translation was esteemed best ;
so we may learn from the same St. Austin, in chap. 15 of the
same book : " Amongst all these interpretations," saith he, " let
the Italian be preferred, for it keeps closer to the letter, and is
perspicuous in the sense." Yet so far was the church of that time
from presuming upon the absolute purity and perfection even of
this best translation, that St. Jerome thought it necessary to
make a new translation of the Old Testament out of the Hebrew
fountain (which himself testifies in his book de viris illustribus);
and to correct the vulgar version of the New Testament accord
ing to the truth of the original Greek, amending many errors
which had crept into it, whether by the mistake of the author, or
the negligence of the transcribers, which work he undertook and
performed at the request of Damascus, bishop of Rome. " You
constrain me," saith he, " to make a new work of an old : that
after the copies of the scripture have been dispersed through.
the whole world, I should sit, as it were, an arbitrator amongst

130 Scripture the only Rule
them; and because they vary among themselves, should deter
mine what are those things in them which consent with the
Greek verity." And after : " Therefore this present preface pro
mises the four gospels only, corrected by collation with Greek
copies ; but that they might not be very dissonant from the cus
tom of the Latin reading, I have so tempered with my style the
translation of the ancients, that those things amended which did
seem to change the sense, other things I have suffered to .remain
as they were." So that in this matter protestants must either
stand or fall with the primitive church.
60. The corruption that you charge Luther with, and the falsi
fication that you impute to Zuinglius, what have we to do with
them? Or why may not we as justly lay to your charge the
errors which Lyranus, or Paulus Brugensis, or Laurentius Valla, or
Cajetan, or Erasmus, or Arias Montanus, or Augustus Nebiensis, or
Pagnine, have committed in their translation ?
61. Which yet I say not, as if these translations of Luther and
Zuinglius were absolutely indefensible; for what such great
difference is there between faith without the works of the law,
and faith alone without the works of the law ? Or, why does not
without, alone, signify all one with alone, without? Consider
the matter a little better, and observe the use of these phrases of
speech in our ordinary talk, and perhaps you will begin to doubt
whether you had sufficient ground for this invective. And then
for Zuinglius, if it be true, as they say it is, that the language
our Saviour spake in had no such word as to signify, but used
always to be instead of it, as it is certain the scripture does in a
hundred places ; then this translation, which you do so declaim
against, will prove no falsification in Zuinglius, but a calumny in
you. 62. " But the faith of protestants relies upon scripture alone ;
scripture is delivered to most of them by translations; transla
tions depend upon the skill and honesty of men, who certainly
may err because they are men, and certainly do err, at least some
of them, because their translations are contrary. It seems then the
faith, and consequently the salvation of protestants, relies upon fal
lible and uncertain grounds."
63. This objection, though it may seem to do you a great
service for the present ; yet I fear you will repent the time that
ever you urged it against us as a fault, that we make men's salva
tion depend upon uncertainties: for the objection returns upon
you many ways; as first thus — the salvation of many millions of
papists (as they suppose and teach) depends upon their having
the sacrament of penance duly administered unto them. This
again upon the minister's being a true priest. That such or such
a man is priest, not himself, much less any other can have any
possible certainty; for it depends upon a great many contingent
and uncertain supposals. He that will pretend to be certain
of it, must undertake to know for a certain all these things that
follow. 64. First, that he was baptized with due matter. Secondly,

whereby to judge of Controversies. 131
with the due form of words, which he cannot know, unless he
were both present and attentive. Thirdly, he must know that he
was baptized with due intention, and that is, that the minister of
his baptism was not a secret Jew, nor a Moor, nor an atheist (of
all which kinds, I fear, experience gives you a just cause to fear,
that Italy and Spain have priests not a few), but a christian, in
heart as well as profession (otherwise, believing the sacrament to
be nothing, in giving it he could intend to give nothing), nor a
Samosatenian, nor an Arian, but one that was capable of having
due intention, from which they that believe not the doctrine of the
trinity are excluded by you. And, lastly, that he was neither
drunk nor distracted at the administration of the sacrament, nor
out of negligence or malice omitted his intention.
65. Fourthly, he must undertake to know, that the bishop
which ordained him priest, ordained him completely with due
matter, form, and intention ; and, consequently, that he again was
neither Jew, nor Moor, nor atheist, nor liable to any such excep
tion, as is inconsistent with due intention in giving the sacrament
of orders.
66. Fifthly, he must undertake to know, that the bishop,
which made him priest, was a priest himself; for your rule is, nihil
dat quod non habet : and, consequently, that there was again none
of the former nullities in his baptism, which might make him inca
pable of ordination, nor no invalidity in his ordination, but a true
priest to ordain him again, the requisite matter and form, and due
intention all concurring.
67. Lastly, he must pretend to know the same of him that
made him priest, and him that made him priest, even until he
comes to the very fountain of priesthood. For take any one in
the whole train and succession of ordainers, and suppose him, by
reason of any defect, only a supposed, and not a true priest; then,
according to your doctrine, he could not give a true, but only a
supposed priesthood ; and they that receive it of him, and again,
they that derive it from them, can give no better than they re
ceived ; receiving nothing but a name and shadow, can give
nothing but a name and shadow; and so from age to age, from
generation to generation, being equivocal fathers, beget only
equivocal sons; no principle in geometry being more certain than
this, that the unsuppliable defect of any necessary antecedent,
must needs cause a nullity of all those consequences which depend
upon it. In fine, to know this one thing you must first know
ten thousand others, whereof not any one is" a thing that can be
known, there being no necessity that it should be true, which
only can qualify any thing for an object of science, but only, at
the best, a high degree of probability that it is so. But then, that
of ten thousand probables, no one should be false ; that of ten
thousand requisites, whereof any one may fail, not one should be
wanting, this to me is extremely improbable, and even cousin-
german to impossible. So that the assurance hereof is like a
machine composed of an innumerable multitude of pieces, of
which it is strangely unlikely but some will be out of order ; and
i2

132 Scripture the only Rule
yet if any one be so, the whole fabric of necessity falls to the
ground : and he that shall put them together, and maturely con
sider all the possible ways of lapsing, and nullifying a priesthood
in the church of Rome, I believe will be very inclinable to think,
that it is a hundred to one, that amongst a hundred seeming
priests, there is not one true one : nay, that it is not a thing very
improbable, that amongst those many millions, which make up
the Romish hierarchy, there are not twenty true. But be the
truth in this what it will be, once this is certain, that they, which
make men's salvation (as you do) depend upon priestly absolution ;
and this again (as you do) upon the truth and reality of the priest
hood that gives it ; and this, lastly, upon a great multitude of ap
parent uncertainties, are not the fittest men in the world to object
to others, as a horrible crime, that they make men's salvation de
pend upon fallible and uncertain foundations. And let this be the
first retorting of your argument.
68. But suppose this difficulty assoyled, and that an angel
from heaven should ascertain you (for other assurances you can
have none) that the person you make use of, is a true priest, and
a competent minister of the sacrament of penance ; yet still the
doubt will remain, whether he will do you that good which
he can do, whether he will pronounce the absolving words
with intent to absolve you ; for perhaps he might bear you
some secret malice, and project to himself your damnation for a
complete Italian revenge. Perhaps (as the tale is of a priest that
was lately burnt in France) he may upon some conditions have.
compacted with the devil to give no sacraments with intention.
Lastly, he may be (for aught you can possibly know) a secret Jew,
or Moor, or anti-trinitarian, or perhaps such an one as is so far
from intending your forgiveness of sins and salvation by this
sacrament, that in his heart he laughs at all these things, and
thinks sin nothing, and salvation a word. All these doubts you
must have clearly resolved (which can hardly be done but by
another revelation) before you can upon good grounds assure
yourself, that your true priest gives you true and effectual abso- ,
lution. So that when you have done as much as God requires for
your salvation, yet can you by no means be secure, but that you
may have the ill luck to be damned ; which is to make salvation a
matter of chance, and not of choice ; and which a man may fail
of, not only by an ill life, but by ill fortune. Verily, a most com
fortable doctrine for a considering man lying upon his death-bed,
who either feels or fears that his repentance is but attrition only,
and not contrition, and consequently believes, that if he be not
absolved really by a true priest, he cannot possibly escape damna
tion. Such a man, for his comfort, you tell first (you that will
have men's salvation depend upon no uncertainties) that though
he verily believe that his sorrow for his sins is a true sorrow, and
his purpose for amendment a true purpose, yet he may deceive
himself, perhaps it is not ; and, if it be not, he must be damned.
You bid him hope well ; but spes est rei incertce nomen. You tell
him, secondly, that though the party he confesses to, seem to be

whereby to judge of Controversies. 133
a true priest, yet, for aught he knows, or for aught himself knows,
by reason of some secret undiscernable invalidity in his baptism
or ordination, he may be none ; and if he be none, he can do
nothing. This is a hard saying; but this is not the worst: you
tell him, thirdly, that he may be in such a state, that he cannot,
or if he can, that he will not give the sacrament with due inten
tion ; and if he does not, all is in vain. But in case a man by these
considerations should be cast into some agonies; what advice,
what comfort would you give him ? Verily, I know not what you
could say to him, but this; that, first, for the qualification re
quired on his part, he might know that he desired to have true
sorrow, and that is sufficient : but then if he should ask you, why
he might not know his sorrow to be a true sorrow, as well as his
desire to be sorrowful to be a true desire, I believe you would
be put to silence. Then, secondly, to quiet his fears, concerning
the priest and his intention, you should tell him, by my advice,
that God's goodness (which will not suffer him to damn men for
not doing better than their best) will supply all such defects, as to
human endeavours were unavoidable. And therefore though his
priest were indeed no priest, yet to him he should be as if he
were one ; and if he gave absolution without intention, yet in
doing so he should hurt himself only, and not his penitent. This
were some comfort indeed, and this were to settle men's salvation
upon reasonable certain grounds. But this, 1 fear, you will never
say ; for this were to reverse many doctrines established by your
church ; and besides, to degrade your priesthood from a great part
of their honour, by lessening the strict necessity of the laity's
dependence upon them : for it were to say, that the priest's inten
tion is not necessary to the obtaining of absolution ; which is to
say, that it is not in the parson's power to damn whom he will in
his parish, because, by this rule, God should supply the defect
which his malice had caused: and besides, -it were to say, that
infants dying without baptism might be saved ; God supplying the
want of baptism, which to them is unavoidable : but, beyond all
this, it were to put into my mouth a full and satisfying answer to
your argument, which I am now returning ; so that in answering
my objection you should answer your own : for then I should tell
you, that it were altogether as abhorrent from the goodness of
God, and as repugnant to it, to suffer an ignorant layman's soul
to perish, merely for being misled by an undiscernable false
translation, which yet was commended to him by the church,
which (being of necessity to credit some in this matter) he had
reason to rely upon, either above all other, or as much as any
other, as it is to damn a penitent sinner for a secret defect in
that desired absolution, which his ghostly father perhaps was an
atheist, and could not give him, or was a villain, and would not.
This answer, therefore, which alone would serve to comfort your
penitent in his perplexities, and to assure him, that he cannot fail
of salvation, if he will not ; for fear of inconvenience you must
forbear: and seeing you must, I hope you will, come down from
the pulpit, and preach no more against others for making men's
salvation depend upon fallible and uncertain grounds, lest by

134 Scripture the only Rule
judging others, you make yourselves, and your own church inex
cusable, who are strongly guilty of this fault, above all the men
and churches of the world ; whereof I have already given you two
very pregnant demonstrations, drawn from your presumptuous
tying God and salvation to your sacraments ; and the efficacy of
them to your priest's qualifications and intentions.
69. Your making the salvation of infants depend on baptism, a
casual thing, and in the power of man to confer, or not confer,
would yield me a third of the same nature. And your suspend
ing the same on the baptizer's intention, a fourth. And, lastly,
your making the real presence of Christ in the eucharist depend
upon the casualties of the consecrator's true priesthood and in
tention, and yet commanding men to believe it for certain that he
is present, and to adore the sacrament, which, according to your
doctrine, for aught they can possibly know, may be nothing else
but a piece of bread, so exposing them to the danger of idolatry,
and consequently of damnation, doth offer me a fifth demonstration
of the same conclusion, if I thought fit to insist upon them. But I
have no mind to draw any more out of this fountain ; neither do I
think it charity to cloy the reader with uniformity, when the sub
ject affords variety.
70. Sixthly, therefore, I return it thus : the faith of papists relies
alone upon their church's infallibility. That there is any church
infallible, and, that theirs is it, they pretend not to believe, but only
upon prudential motives. Dependence upon prudential motives
they confess to be obnoxious to a possibility of erring. What then
remaineth, but truth, faith, salvation, and all, must in them rely
upon a fallible and uncertain ground ?
71. Seventhly, the faith of papists relies upon the church alone.
The doctrine of the church is delivered to most of them by their
parish-priest, or ghostly father, or, at least by a company of priests,
who, for the most part, sure, are men and not angels, in whom
nothing is more certain than a most certain possibility to err. What
then remaineth, but that truth, faith, salvation, and all, must in
them rely upon a fallible and uncertain ground ?
72. Eighthly, thus : It is apparent and undeniable, that many
thousands there are, who believe your religion upon no better
grounds than a man may have for the belief almost of any religion.
As some believe it, because their forefathers did so, and they were
good people. Some, because they were christened and brought
up in it. Some, because many learned and religious men are
of it. Some, because it is the religion of their country, where all
other religions are persecuted and proscribed. Some, because
protestants cannot shew a perpetual succession of professors of all
their doctrines. Some, because the service of your church is more
stately, and pompous, and magnificent. Some, because they find
comfort in it. Some, because your religion is farther spread,
and hath more professors of it than the religion of protestants.
Some, because your priests compass sea and land to gain prose
lytes to it. Lastly, an infinite number by chance, and they know
not why, but only because they are sure they are in the right.
This which I say, is a most certain experimented truth, and if

whereby to judge of Controversies. 135
you will deal ingenuously, you will not deny it. And, without ques
tion, he that builds his faith upon our English translation, goes upon
a more prudent ground than any of these can, with reason, be pre
tended to be. What then can you allege, but that with you, rather
than with us, truth, and faith, and salvation, and all, rely upon
fallible and uncertain grounds ?
73. Ninthly, your Rhemish and Doway translations are de
livered to your proselytes (such, I mean, that are dispensed with,
for the reading of them) for the direction of their faith and lives.
And the same may be said of your translation of the bible into
other national languages, in respect of those that are licensed to
read them. This, I presume, you will confess. And, moreover,
that these translations came not by inspiration, but were the pro
ductions of human industry; and that not angels, but men, were
the authors of them. Men, I say, mere men, subject to the same
passions, and to the same possibility of erring with our translators.
And then, how does it not unavoidably follow, that in them which
depend upon these translations for their direction, faith, and truth,
and salvation, and all rely upon fallible and uncertain grounds ?
74. Tenthly, and lastly (to lay the axe to the root of the tree)
the Helena which you so fight for, your vulgar translation, though
some of you believe, or pretend to believe, it to be, in every par
ticular of it, the pure and uncorrupted word of God ; yet others
among you, and those as good and zealous catholics as you, are not
so confident hereof.
75. First, for all those who have made translations of the whole
bible or any part of it different many times in sense from the vul
gar, as Lyranus, Cajetan, Pagnine, Arias, Erasmus, Valla, Steuchus,
and others, it is apparent, and even palpable, that they never
dreamt of any absolute perfection and authentical infallibility of
the vulgar translation. For, if they had, why did they in many
places reject it, and differ from it ?
76. Vega was present at the council of Trent, when the decree
was made, which made the vulgar edition (then not extant any
where in the world) authentical, and not to be rejected upon any
pretence whatsoever. At the forming this decree, Vega, I say, was
present, understood the mind of the council as well as any man,
and professes, that he was instructed in it by the president of it,
the Cardinal S. Cruce. And yet he hath written, that the coun
cil in this decree means to pronounce this translation free (not
simply from all error) but only from such errors, out of which
any opinion pernicious to faith and manners might be collected.
This, Andradius, in his defence of that council, reports of Vega,
and assents to himself. Driedo, in his book' of the translation of
holy scripture, hath these words, very pregnant and pertinent
to the same purpose : " The see apostolic hath approved or ac
cepted Jerome's edition, not as so wholly consonant to the ori
ginal, and so entire, and pure, and restored in all things, that it
may not be lawful for any man, either by comparing it with the
fountain, to examine it, or, in some places, to doubt, whether or
no Jerome did understand the true sense of the scripture ; but

136 Scripture the only Rule
only, as an edition to be preferred before all others then extant,
and no where deviating from the truth in the rules of faith and
good life." Mariana, even where he is a most earnest advocate
for the vulgar edition, yet acknowledges the imperfection of it in
these words : " The faults of the vulgar edition are not approved*
by the decree of the council of Trent, a multitude whereof we did
collect from the variety of copies." And again, " We maintain,
that the Hebrew and Greek were by no means rejected by the Trent
fathers ; and that the Latin edition is indeed approved ; yet not so,
as if they did deny, that some places might be translated more
plainly, some more properly, whereof it were easy to produce in
numerable examples." And this he there professes to have learnt
of Laines, the then general of the society ; who was a great part
of that council, present at all the actions of it, and of very great
authority in it.
77. To this so great authority he adds a reason of his opinion ;
which with all indifferent men will be of a far greater authority.
" If the council (saith he) hath purposed to approve an edition in
all respects, and to make it of equal authority and credit with the
fountains, certainly they ought with exact care first to have cor
rected the errors of the interpreter ;" which certainly they did not.
78. Lastly, Bellarmine himself, though he will not acknow
ledge any imperfection in the vulgar edition, yet he acknowledges,
that the case may, and does oft-times, so fall out, thatf it is im
possible to discern, which is the true reading of the vulgar edition,
but only by recourse unto the originals and dependence upon them.
79. From all which it may evidently be collected, that though
some of you flatter yourselves with a vain imagination of the cer
tain absolute purity and perfection of your vulgar edition, yet the
matter is not so certain, and so resolved, but that the best learned
men amongst you are often at a stand, and very doubtful some
times whether your vulgar translation be true, and sometimes
whether this or that be your vulgar translation, and sometimes
undoubtedly resolved, that your vulgar translation is no true
translation, nor consonant to the original, as it was at first de
livered. And what then can be alleged, but that out of your own
grounds it may be inferred and enforced upon you, that not only in
your laymen, but your clergymen and scholars, faith and truth, and
salvation, and all, depend upon fallible and uncertain grounds?
And thus, by ten several retortions of this one argument, I have
endeavoured to shew you, how ill you have complied with your own
advice, which was — to take heed of urging arguments that might
be returned upon you. I should now, by a direct answer, shew
that it presseth not us at all : but I have in passing, done it already
in the end of the second retortion of this argument, and thither I
refer the reader.
80. Whereas, therefore you exhort them, that will have assu
rance of true scriptures, to fly to your church for it; — I desire to
know (if they should follow your advice) how they should be as-
* Pro edit. vulg. c. xxi. p. 99.
t Bell, de verbo Dei, 1. 2, c. xi. p. 120.

whereby to judge of Controversies. 137
sured, that your church can give them any such assurance, which
hath been confessedly so negligent, as to suffer many whole books
of scripture to be utterly lost : again, in those that remain, con
fessedly so negligent, as to suffer the originals of these that remain
to be corrupted: and, lastly, so careless of preserving the inte
grity of the copies of her translation, as to suffer infinite variety
of readings to come into them, without keeping any one perfect
copy, which might have been as the standard and Polycletus's
canon to correct the rest by. So that which was the true reading,
and which the false, it was utterly undiscernible, but only by
comparing them with the originals, which also she pretends to be
corrupted. 81. But — Luther himself, by unfortunate experience, was at
length enforced to confess thus much, saying, If the world last
longer, it will be again necessary to receive the decrees of coun
cils, by reason of divers interpretations of scripture which now
reign. —
82. And what if Luther, having a pope in his belly, (as he was
wont to say that most men had,) and desiring perhaps to have his
own interpretations pass without examining, spake such words in
heat of argument : do you think it reasonable, that we should
subscribe to Luther's divinations and angry speeches ? Will
you oblige yourself to answer for all the assertions of your private
doctors ? If not, why do you trouble us with what Luther says, and
what Calvin says ? Yet this I say not, as if these words of Luther
made any thing at all for your present purpose. For what if he
feared, or pretended to fear, that the infallibility of councils being
rejected, some men would fall into greater errors than were imposed
upon them by the councils ? Is this to confess, that there is any
present visible church, upon whose bare authority we may infallibly
receive the true scriptures, and the true sense of them ? Let the
reader judge. But, in my opinion, to fear a greater inconvenience
may follow from the avoiding of the less, is not to confess that the
less is none at all.
83. For Dr. Covel's commending your translation, what is it
to the business in hand? Or how proves it the perfection, of
which it is here contested, any more than St. Augustine's com
mending the Italian translation argues the perfection of that, or
that there was no necessity, that St. Jerome should correct it ? Dr.
Covel commends your translation, and so does the bishop of Chi
chester, and so does Dr. James, and so do I; but I commend it
for a good translation, not for a perfect. Good may be good, and
deserve commendations ; and yet better may be better. And
though he says, that — the then approved translation of the church
of England, is that which cometh nearest the vulgar — yet he does
not say, that it agrees exactly with it. So that whereas you infer,
that the truth of your translation must be the rule to judge of
the goodness of ours; this is but a vain flourish. For, to say of
our translations, that is the best which comes nearest the vulgar
(and yet it is but one man that says so) is not to say, it is therefore
the best, because it does so : for this may be true by accident, and

138 Scripture the only Rule
yet the truth of our translation no way depend upon the truth of
yours : for, had that been their direction, they would not only have
made a translation that should come near to yours, but such a one,
which should exactly agree with it, and be a translation of your
translation. 84. Ad. 17. §. In this division you charge us with great uncer
tainty concerning the meaning of scripture — which hath been
answered already, by saying, that, if you speak of plain places
(and in such all things necessary are contained) we are sufficiently
certain of the meaning of them, neither need they any inter
preter : if of obscure and difficult places, we confess we are
uncertain of the sense of many of them : but then we say there
is no necessity we should be certain : for, if God's will had been,
we should have understood him more certainly, he would have
spoken more plainly. And we say, besides, that as we are un
certain, so are you too; which he that doubts of, let him read
your commentators upon the bible, and observe their various and
dissonant interpretations, and he shall in this point need no further
Satisfaction. 85. But seeing there are contentions among us, we are taught
by nature and scripture and experience (so you tell us out of Mr.
Hooker) to seek for the ending of them, by submitting unto some
judicial sentence, whereunto neither part may refuse to stand. —
This is very true. Neither should you need to persuade us to
seek such a means of ending all our controversies, if we could
tell where to find it. But this we know, that none is fit to pro
nounce for all the world a judicial definite obliging sentence,
in controversies of religion, but only such a man, or such a so
ciety of men, as is authorised thereto by God. And besides, we
are able to demonstrate, that it hath not been the pleasure of God
to give to any man, or society of men, any such authority. And
therefore, though we wish heartily, that all controversies were
ended, as we do, that all sin were abolished, yet we have little
hope of the one or the other, until the world be ended: and in
the meanwhile, think it best to content ourselves with, and to
persuade others unto, an unity of charity, and mutual toleration ;
seeing God hath authorised no man to force all men to unity of
opinion. Neither do we think it fit to argue thus ; to us it seems
convenient there should be one judge of all controversies for the
whole world ; therefore God hath appointed one ; but more modest
and more reasonable to collect thus : God hath appointed no such
judge of controversies ; therefore, though it seems to us convenient
there should be one, yet it is not so ; or though it were convenient
for us to have one, yet it hath pleased God (for reasons best known
to himself) not to allow us this convenience.
86. Dr. Field's words, which follow, I confess are somewhat
more pressing : and if he had been infallible, and the words had
not slipt unadvisedly from him, they were the best argument in
your book. But yet it is evident out of his book, and so acknow
ledged by some of your own, that he never thought of any one
company of christians invested with such authority from God,

whereby to judge of Controversies. 139
that all men were bound to receive their decrees without examin
ation, though they seem contrary to scripture and reason, which
the church of Rome requires. And therefore, if he have in his
preface strained too high in commendation of the subject he
writes of (as writers very often do in their prefaces and dedicatory
epistles), what is that to us ? Besides, by all the societies of the
world, it is not impossible, not very improbable, he might mean,
all that are, or have been, in the world, and so include even the
primitive church ; and her communion we shall embrace, her di
rection we shall follow, her judgment we shall rest in, if we be
lieve the scripture, endeavour to find the true sense of it, and live
according to it.
87. Ad. §. 18. That the true interpretation of the scripture
ought to be received from the church, you need not prove ; for it
is very easily granted by them, who profess themselves very ready
to receive all truths, much more the true sense of scripture, not
only from the church, but from any society of men, nay from any
man whatsoever.
88. That the church's interpretation of scripture is always true
— that is it which you would have said : and that in some sense
may be also admitted ; viz. if you speak of that church (which
before you spake of in the 14th §.) that is, of the church of all ages
since the apostles. Upon the tradition of which church you there
told us — we were to receive the scripture, and to believe it to be
the word of God. For there you teach us, that — our faith of
scripture depends on a principle, which requires no other proof;
and that, such -is tradition, which from hand to hand, and age to
age, bringing us up to the times and persons of the apostles, and
our Saviour himself, cometh to be confirmed by all those miracles,
and other arguments, whereby they convinced their doctrine to
be true. — Wherefore the ancient fathers avouch, that we must re
ceive the sacred scripture upon the tradition of this church. The
tradition then of this church, you say, must teach us what is scrip
ture ; and we are willing to believe it. And now, if you make it
. good unto us, that the same tradition, down from the apostles, hath
delivered from age to age, and from hand to hand, any interpre
tation of any scripture, we are ready to embrace that also. But
now, if you will argue thus : the church in one sense tells us what
is scripture, and we believe ; therefore, if the church taken in
another sense, tells us, this or that is the meaning of the scripture,
we are to believe that also; this is too transparent sophistry, to
take any but those that are willing to be taken.
89. If there be any traditive interpretation of scripture, produce
it, and prove it to be so ; and we embrace it. But the tradition of
all ages is one thing ; and the authority of the present church, much
more of the Roman church, Which is but a part, and a corrupted
part of the catholic church, is another. And therefore, though we
are ready to receive both scripture and the sense of scripture, upon
the authority"of original tradition, yet we receive neither the one
nor the other upon the authority of your church.
90. First, for the scriptures how can we receive them upon the

140 Scripture the only Rule
authority of your church, who hold now those books to be canonica],
which formerly you rejected from the canon ? I instance in the
book of Maccabees, and the epistle to the Hebrews : the first of
these you held not to be canonical in St. Gregory's time, or else he
was no member of your church ; for it is apparent* he held other
wise. The second you rejected from the canon in St. Jerome's
time, as it is evident out off many places of his works.
91. If you say (which is all you can say) that Jerome spake this
of the particular Roman church, not of the Roman catholic church
— I answer there were none such in his time, none that was called so.
Secondly what he spake of the Roman church, must be true of all
other churches, if your doctrine of the necessity of the conformity of
all other churches to that church, were then catholic doctrine. Now
then choose whether you will, either that the particular Roman
church was not then believed to be the mistress of all other churches,
notwithstanding ad hanc ecclesiam, necesse est omnem convenire ec-
clesiam, hoc est, omnes qui sunt undique fideles ; which Cardinal
Perron and his translatress so often translate false : or, if you say
she was, you will run into a greater inconvenience, and be forced to
say, that all the churches of that time rejected from the canon the
epistle to the Hebrews, together with the Roman church. And,
consequently, that the catholic church may err in rejecting from
the canon scriptures truly canonical.
92. Secondly, how can we receive the scripture upon the autho
rity of the Roman church, which hath delivered at several times
scriptures in many places different and repugnant, for authentical
and canonical ? which is most evident out of the place of Malachi,
which is so often quoted for the sacrifice of the mass, that either
all the ancient fathers had false bibles, or yours is false : most
evident likewise from the comparing the story of Jacob in Genesis,
with that which is cited out of it, in the epistle to the Hebrews,
according to the vulgar edition : but above all, to any one who
shall compare the bibles of Sixtus and Clement, so evident that the
wit of man cannot disguise it.
93. And thus you see what reason we have to believe your
antecedent, that your church it is, which must declare what books
be true scripture. Now, for the consequence, that certainly is as
liable to exception as the antecedent : for if it were true, that God
had promised to assist you, for the delivering of true scripture,
would this oblige him, or would it follow from hence, that he had
obliged himself to teach you, not only sufficiently, but effectually
and irresistibly, the true sense of scripture ? God is not defective
in things necessary ; neither will he leave himself without witness,
nor the world without means of knowing his will, and doing it.
And therefore it was necessary, that by his providence he should
preserve the scripture from any undiscernible corruption in those
* See Greg. Mor. 1. xir. c. xiii.
tThus he testifies, Com. in Isa. c. vi. in these words: " Unde et Paulus Apost in
Epist. ad Heb. (quam Latina oonsuetudo non recipit)." And again, in c viii. in these,
" In Epist. qua? ad Hebrreos scribitur (licet earn Latini consuetudo inter canonicas scrip-
turas non reeipiat)," &c.

whereby to judge of Controversies. 141
things which he would have known ; otherwise it is apparent, it
had not been his will, that these things should be known, the only
means of continuing the knowledge of them being perished. But
now neither is God lavish in superfluities ; and therefore, having
given us means sufficient for our direction, and power sufficient to
make use of these means, he will not constrain or necessitate us to
make use of these means : for that were to cross the end of our
creation, which was to be glorified by our free obedience ; whereas
necessity and freedom cannot stand together : that were to reverse
the law" which he hath prescribed to himself in his dealing with
man ; and that is, to set life and death before him, and leave him
in the hands of his own counsel. God gave the wise men a star
to lead them to Christ, but he did not necessitate them to follow
the guidance of this star ; that was left to their liberty. God gave
the children of Israel a fire to lead them by night, and a pillar of
cloud by day; but he constrained no man to follow them ; that was
left to their liberty. So he gives the church the scripture ; which
in those things which are to be believed or done are plain and easy
to be followed like the wise men's star. Now that which he de
sires of us, on our part, is the obedience of faith, and love of the
truth, and desire to find the true sense of it, and industry in
searching it, and humility in following, and constancy in professing
it ; all which, if he should work in us by an absolute irresistible
necessity, he could no more require of us, as our duty, than he
can of the sun to shine, of the sea to ebb and flow, and of all
other creatures to do those things which by mere necessity they
must do, and cannot choose. Besides, what an impudence is it to
pretend, that your church is infallibly directed concerning the true
meaning of the scripture, whereas there are thousands of places
of scripture, which you do not pretend certainly to understand, and
about the interpretation whereof, your own doctors differ among
themselves! If your church be infallibly directed concerning the
true meaning of scripture, why do not your doctors follow her in
fallible direction? And, if they do, how comes such difference
among them in their interpretations ?
94. Again, why does your church thus put her candle under a
bushel, and keep her talent of interpreting scripture infallibly thus
long wrapped up in napkins? Why sets she not forth infallible
commentaries or expositions upon all the bible ? Is it, because
this would not be profitable for christians, that scripture should be
interpreted ? It is blasphemous to say so. The scripture itself tells
us, " all scripture is profitable." And the scripture is not so much
the words as the sense. And if it be not profitable, why does she
employ particular doctors to interpret scriptures fallibly ? unless
we must think that fallible interpretations of scripture are profita
ble, and infallible interpretations would not be so.
95. If you say — the Holy Ghost, which assists the church in
interpreting, will move the church to interpret when he shall think
fit, and that the church will do it when the Holy Ghost shall move
her to do it — I demand, whether the Holy Ghost's moving of the
church to such works as these, be resistible by the church or

142 Scripture the only Rule
irresistible : if resistible, then the Holy Ghost may move, and the
church may be moved. As certainly the Holy Ghost doth always
move to an action, when he shows us plainly, that it would be for
the good of men, and honour of God ; as he that hath any sense
will acknowledge, that an infallible exposition of scripture could
not but be ; and there is no conceivable reason why such a work
should be put off a day, but only because you are conscious to
yourselves you cannot do it, and therefore make excuses. But if
the moving of the Holy Ghost be irresistible, and you are not yet
so moved to go about this work, then I confess you are excused.
But then I would know, whether those popes, which so long de
ferred calling of a council for the reformation of your church, at
length pretended to be- effected by the council of Trent, whether
they may excuse themselves, for that they were not moved by the
Holy Ghost to do it? I would know, likewise, as this motion is
irresistible when it comes, so whether it be so simply necessary to
the moving of your church to any such public action, that it can
not possibly move without it ? that is, whether the pope now could
not, if he would, seat himself in cathedra, and fall to writing ex
positions upon the bible for the direction of christians to the true
sense of it ? If you say he cannot, you will make yourself ridicu
lous; if he can, then I would know, whether he should be infallibly
directed in these expositions or no ; if he should, then what need
he stay for irresistible motion ? Why does he not go about this no
ble work presently ? If he should not, how shall we know that the
calling of the council of Trent was not upon his voluntary motion,
or upon human importunity and suggestion, and not upon the mo
tion of the Holy Ghost; and consequently, how shall we know whe
ther he were assistant to it or no, seeing he assists none but what
he himself moves to ? And whether he did move the pope to call
this council, is a secret thing, which we cannot possibly know, nor
perhaps the pope himself.
96. If you say, your meaning is only — that the church shall be
infallibly guarded from giving any false sense of any scripture, and
not infallibly assisted positively to give the true sense of all scrip
ture — I put to you your own question, why should we believe the
Holy Ghost will stay there ? Or, why may we not as well think
he will stay at the first thing, that is, in teaching the church what
books be true scripture? for, if the Holy Ghost's assistance be
promised to all things profitable, then will he be with them infalli
bly, not only to guard them from all errors, but to guide them to
all profitable truths, such as the true sense of all scripture' would
be. Neither could he stay there, but defend them irresistibly from
all vices : nor there neither, but infuse into them irresistibly all
virtues ; for all these things would be much for the benefit of chris
tians. If you say, he cannot do this without taking away their
free-will in living ; I say, neither can he necessitate men to believe
aright, without taking away their free-will in believing, and in pro
fessing their belief.
97. To the place of St. Augustine, I answer that not the autho
rity of the present church, much less a part of it (as the Roman

whereby to judge of Controversies. 143
church is) was that which alone moved St. Augustine to believe
the gospel, but the perpetual tradition of the churches of all ages.
Which you yourself have taught us to be the only principle by
which the scripture is proved, and which itself needs no proof;
and to which you have referred this very saying of St. Augus
tine, ego vero evangelio non crederem, nisi, &c. chap. ii. § 14. And,
in the next place, which you cite out of his book, De Util. Cred. c.
xiv. he shows that his motives to believe, were fame, celebrity,
consent, antiquity. And seeing this tradition, this consent, this
antiquity, did as fully and powerfully move him not to believe
Manichaetis, as to believe the gospel (the christian tradition being
as full against Manichaeus, as it was for the gospel) therefore he
did well to conclude upon these grounds, that he had as much
reason to disbelieve Manichaeus, as to believe the gospel. Now if
you can truly say, that the same fame, celebrity, consent, antiquity,
that the same universal and original tradition lies against Luther
and Calvin, as did against Manichaeus, you may do well to apply
the argument against them, otherwise it will be to little purpose to
substitute their names instead of Manichaeus, unless you can shew
the thing agrees to them as well as him.
98. If you say, that St. Augustine speaks here of the authority
of the present church, abstracted from consent with the ancient ;
and therefore you, seeing you have the present church on your
side against Luther and Calvin, as St. Augustine against Mani
chaeus, may urge the same words against them which St. Augustine
did against him, —
99. I answer, first, that it is a vain presumption of yours, that
the catholic church is of your side. Secondly, that if St. Augus
tine speak here of that present church, which moved him to believe
the gospel, without consideration of the antiquity of it, and its
both personal and doctrinal succession from the apostles; his
argument will be like a buskin, that will serve any leg : it will
serve to keep an arian or a Grecian from being a Roman catholic,
as well as a catholic from being an arian or a Grecian : inasmuch
as the arians and Grecians did pretend to the title of catholics
and the church, as much as the papists now do. If then you
should have come to an ancient Goth or Vandal, whom the arians
converted to Christianity, and should have moved him to your
religion ; might he not say the very same words to you as St.
Augustine to the Manichaeans ? "I would not believe the gospel,
unless the authority of the church did move me. Them, therefore,
whom I obeyed, saying, believe the gospel, why should I not obey,
saying to me, do not believe the Homoousians ? Choose what thou
pleasest : if thou shalt say, believe the arians, they warn me not
to give any credit to you : if therefore I believe them, I cannot
believe thee. If thou say, do not believe the arians, thou shalt not
do well to force me to the faith of the Homoousians, because by
the preaching of the arians, I believed the gospel itself. If you
say, you do well to believe them, commending the gospel, but you
did not well to believe them, discommending the Homoousians:
dost thou think me so very foolish, that without any reason at all,

144 Scripture the only Rule
I should believe what thou wilt, and not believe what thou wilt
not?" It were easy to put these words into the mouth of a Gre
cian, Abyssine, Georgian, or any other of any religion. And I pray,
bethink yourselves what you would say in such a case, and imagine
that we say the very same to you.
100. Whereas you ask — whether protestants do not perfectly
resemble those men to whom St. Augustine spake, when they will
have men to believe the Roman church delivering scripture, but
not to believe her condemning Luther ? — I demand again, whether
you be well in your wits to say, that protestants would have men
believe the Roman church delivering scripture, whereas they ac
cuse her to deliver many books for scripture which are not so ? And
do not bid men to receive any book which she delivers, for that
reason, because she delivers it ; and, if you meant only, protestants
will have men to believe some books to be scripture which the
Roman church delivers for such, may not we then ask as you do,
do not papists perfectly resemble these men, which will have men
believe the church of England delivering scripture, but not to be
lieve her condemning the church of Rome ?
101. And whereas you say — St. Augustine may seem to have
spoken prophetically against protestants, when he said, " Why
should I not most diligently inquire what Christ commanded, of
them before all others, by whose authority I was moved to believe,
that Christ commanded any good thing?" — I answer, until you
can shew, that protestants believe that Christ commanded any
good thing, that is, that they believe the truth of christian religion,
upon the authority of the church of Rome, this place must be
wholly impertinent to your purpose, which is to make protestants
believe your church to be the infallible expounder of scriptures
and judge of controversies. Nay, rather, is it not directly against
your purpose ? For why may not a member of the church of
England; who received his baptism, education, and faith, from the
ministry of this church, say just so to you as St. Augustine here
to the Manichees? Why should not I most diligently inquire
what Christ commanded, of them (the church of England) before
all others, by whose authority I was moved to believe, that Christ
commanded any good thing ? Can you, F. or K., or whosoever
you are, better declare to me what he said, whom I would not have
thought to have been, or to be, if the belief thereof had been re
commended by you to me ? This, therefore (that Christ Jesus did
those miracles, and taught that doctrine, which is contained evi
dently in the undoubted books of the New Testament), I believed
by fame, strengthened with celebrity and consent (even of those
which in other things are at infinite variance one with another) ;
and lastly, by antiquity (which gives an universal and a constant
attestation to them); but every one may see that you, so few (in
comparison of all those upon whose consent we ground our belief
of scripture), so turbulent, that you damn all to the fire, and to
hell, that any ways differ from you ; that you profess it is lawful
for you, to use violence and power whensoever you can have it, for
the planting of your own doctrine, and extirpation of the contrary :

whereby to judge of Controversies. 145
lastly, so new in many of your doctrines, as in the lawfulness and
expedience of debarring the laity of the sacramental cup, the law
fulness and expedience of your Latin service, transubstantiation,
indulgences, purgatory, the pope's infallibility, his authority over
kings, &c. So new, I say, in comparison of the undoubted books
of scripture, which evidently containeth, or rather is our religion,
and the sole and adequate object of our faith : I say, every one
may see that you, so few, so turbulent, so new, can produce no
thing deserving authority (with wise and considerate men). What
madness is this ? Believe then the consent of christians, which
are now. and have been ever since Christ in the world, that we
ought to believe Christ ; but learn of us what Christ said, which
contradict and damn all other parts of Christendom. Why, I be
seech you ? Surely if they were not at all, and could not teach me
any thing, I would more easily persuade myself, that I were not to
believe in Christ, than that I should learn any thing concerning
him, from any other, than them by whom I believed him ; at least,
than that I should learn what his religion was from you, who have
wronged so exceedingly his miracles and his doctrine, by forging
so evidently so many false miracles for the confirmation of your
new doctrine, which might give us just occasion, had we no other
assurance of them but your authority, to suspect the true ones.
Who, with forging so many false stories, and false authors, have
taken a fair way to make the faith of all stories questionable, if
we had no other ground for our belief of them but your authority ;
who have brought in doctrines plainly and directly contrary to
that which you confess to be the word of Christ, and which, for
the most part, make either for the honour or profit of the teachers
of them ; which (if there were no difference between the christian
and the Roman church) would be very apt to make suspicious men
believe, that christian religion was a human invention, taught by
some cunning impostors, only to make themselves rich and power
ful ; who make a profession of corrupting all sorts of authors — a
ready course to make it justly questionable, whether any remain
uncorrupted. For if you take this authority upon you, upon the
six ages last past, how shall we know, that the church of that time
did not usurp the same authority upon the authors of the six last
ages before them, and so upwards, until we come to Christ him
self? Whose questioned doctrines, none of them came from the
fountain of apostolic tradition, but have insinuated themselves into
the streams, by little and little ; some in one age, and some in
another; some more anciently, some more safely; and some yet
are embryos, yet hatching, and in the shell : as the pope's infalli
bility, the blessed virgin's immaculate conception, the pope's power
over the temporalities of kings, the doctrine of predetermination,
&c, all which yet are, or in time may be, imposed upon christians
under the title of original and apostolical tradition ; and that with
that necessity, that they are told, they were as good believe no
thing at all, as not believe these things to have come from the
apostles, which they know to have been brought in but yesterday,
which whether it be not a ready and likely way to make men con
ic

146 Scripture the only Rule
elude thus with themselves: — I am told, that I were as good
believe nothing at all, as believe some points which the church
teacheth me, and not others ; and some things which she teacheth
to be ancient and certain, I plainly see to be new and false ; there
fore I will believe nothing at all. — Whether, I say, the aforesaid
grounds be not a ready and likely way to make men conclude thus,
and whether this conclusion be not too often made in Italy and
Spain, and France, and in England too, I leave it to the judgment
of those that have wisdom and experience. Seeing therefore the
Roman church is so far from being a sufficient foundation for our
belief in Christ, that it is in sundry regards a dangerous temptation
against it ; why should not I much rather conclude, seeing we re
ceive not the knowledge of Christ and scriptures from the church
of Rome, neither from her must we take his doctrine, or the inter
pretation of scripture.
102. Ad. §. 19. In this number, this argument is contained. —
The judge of controversies ought to be intelligible to learned and
unlearned : the scripture is not so, and the church is so ; therefore
the church is the judge, and not the scripture.
103. To this I answer — As to be understandable is a condi
tion requisite to a judge, so is not that alone sufficient to make a
judge ; otherwise you might make yourself judge of controversies,
by arguing, the scripture is not intelligible by all, but I am ; there
fore I am judge of controversies. If you say, your intent was to
conclude against the scripture, and not for the church : I demand
why then, but to delude the simple with sophistry did you say in
the close of this section — Such is the church, and the scripture is
not such ? — but that you would leave it to them, to infer in the
end (which indeed was more than you undertook in the beginning) ;
therefore the church is judge, and the scripture not. I say, sec
ondly, That you still run upon a false supposition, that God hath
appointed some judge of all controversies, that may happen among
christians about the sense of obscure texts of scripture ; whereas
he hath left every one to his liberty herein, in those words of St.
Paul — Quisque abundet in sensu suo, &c. I say, thirdly, whereas
some protestants make the scripture judge of controversies, that
they have the authority of fathers to warrant their manner of
speaking; as of Optatus.*
104. But, speaking truly and properly, the scripture is not a
judge, nor can be, but only a sufficient rule for those to judge, by,
that believe it to be the word of God (as the church of England and
the church of Rome both do) what they are to believe, and what
they are not to believe. I say sufficiently perfect, and sufficiently
intelligible, in things necessary, to all that have understanding,
whether they be learned or unlearned. And my reason hereof is
convincing and demonstrative, because nothing is necessary to be
believed, but what is plainly revealed. For to say, that when a
place of scripture, by reason of ambiguous terms, lies indifferent
between divers senses, whereof one is true, and the other is false.
* Contra. Parmen. 1. 5, in Prin.

whereby to judge of Controversies. 147
that God obliges men, under pain of damnation, not to mistake
through error and human frailty, is to make God a tyrant; and to
say, that he requires us certainly to attain that end, for the attain
ing whereof we have no certain means ; which is to say, that, like
Pharaoh, he gives no straw, and requires brick; that he reaps
where he sows not ; that he gathers where he strews not ; that he
will not be pleased with our utmost endeavours to please him,
without full, and exact, and never-failing performance; that his
will is, we should do what he knows we cannot do; that he will
not accept of us, according to that which we have, but requireth
of us what we have not. Which, whether it can consist with his
goodness, with his wisdom, and with his word, I leave it to honest
men to judge. If I should send a servant to Paris, or Rome, or
Jerusalem, and he using his utmost diligence not to mistake his
way, yet notwithstanding, meeting often with such places where
the road is divided into several ways, whereof every one is as likely
to be true, and as likely to be false, as any other, should at length
mistake, and go out of the way, would not any man say, that I
were an impotent, foolish, and unjust master, if I should be of
fended with him for so doing ? and shall we not tremble to impute
that to God, which we would take in foul scorn if it were imputed
to ourselves ? Certainly, I, for my part, fear I should not love God,
if I should think so strangely of him.
105. Again, when you say — that unlearned and ignorant men
cannot understand scripture — I would desire you to come out of
the clouds, and tell us what you mean : whether that they cannot
understand all scripture, or that they cannot understand any scrip
ture, or that they cannot understand so much as is sufficient for
their direction to heaven. If the first, I believe the learned are in
the same case. If the second, every man's experience will confute
you ; for, who is there that is not capable of a sufficient under
standing of the story, the precepts, the promises, and the threats
of the gospel ? If the third, that they may understand something,
but not enough for their salvations: I ask you, first, Why then
doth St. Paul say to Timothy, the scriptures are able to make him
wise unto salvation? Why doth St. Augustine say — Ea qua mani-
festeposita sunt in sacris scripturis, omnia continent qua pertinent
ad fi dem, moresque vivendi ? Why does every one of the four evan
gelists entitle their book, The Gospel, if any necessary and essential
part of the gospel were left out of it ? Can we imagine that either
they omitted something necessary out of ignorance, not knowing it
to be necessary ? or, knowing it to be so, maliciously concealed it ?
or, out of negligence, did the work they have undertaken by halves?
If none of these things can without blasphemy be imputed to them,
considering they were assisted by the Holy Ghost in this work,
then certainly it most evidently follows, that every one of them
writ the whole gospel of Christ; I mean, all the essential and
necessary parts of it. So that if we had no other book of scripture,
but one of them alone, we should not want any thing necessary
to salvation. And what one of them hath more than another, it
is only profitable and not necessary: necessary indeed to be
k2

148 Scripture the only Rule
believed, because revealed ; but not therefore revealed, because
necessary to be believed.
106. Neither did they write only for the learned, but for all men.
This being one special means of the preaching of the gospel, which
was commanded to be preached, not only to learned men, but to
all men. And therefore, unless we will imagine the Holy Ghost
and them to have been wilfully wanting to their own desire and
purpose, we must conceive, that they intended to speak plain, even
to the capacity of the simplest ; touching all things necessary to be
published by them, and believed by us.
107. And whereas you pretend — it is so easy, and obvious both
for the learned and the ignorant both to know, which is the church,
and what are decrees of the church, and what is the sense of the
decrees ; I say, this is a vain pretence.
108. For, first, How shall an unlearned man, whom you have
supposed now ignorant of scripture, how shall he know which of
all the societies of christians is indeed the church ? You will say,
perhaps — He must examine them by the notes of the church, which
are perpetual visibility, succession, conformity with the ancient
church, &c. But how shall he know, first, that these are the notes
of the church, unless by scripture, which, you say, he understands
not ? You may say, perhaps, he may be told so. But seeing men
may deceive, and be deceived, and their words are no demonstra
tions, how shall he be assured, that what they say is true? so that
at the first he meets with an impregnable difficulty, and cannot
know the church but by such notes, which whether they be the notes
of the church he cannot possibly know. But let us suppose this
isthmus digged through, and that he is assured these are the notes
of the true church ; how can he possibly be a competent judge,
which society of christians hath title to these notes, and which hath
not? seeing this trial of necessity requires a great sufficiency of
knowledge of the monuments of christian antiquity, which no un
learned man can have, because he that hath it cannot be unlearned.
As for example, how shall he possibly be able to know whether
the church of Rome hath had a perpetual succession of visible pro
fessors, which held always the same doctrine which they now
hold, without holding any thing to the contrary ; unless he hath
first examined, what was the doctrine of the church in the first
age, what in the second, and so forth ? And whether this be not
a more difficult work, than to stay at the first age, and to examine
the church by the conformity of her doctrine with the doctrine of
the first age, every man of ordinary understanding may judge.
Let us imagine him advanced a step further, and to know which
is the church ; how shall he know what the church hath decreed,
seeing the church hath not been so careful in keeping her decrees,
but that many are lost, and many corrupted ? Besides, when even
the learned among you are not agreed concerning divers things,
whether they be de fide, or not, how shall the unlearned do?
Then for the sense of the decrees, how can he be more capable of
the understanding of them, than of plain texts of scripture, which
you will not suffer him to understand ? especially seeing the de-

whereby to judge of Controversies. 149
crees of divers popes and councils are conceived so obscurely, that
the learned cannot agree about the sense of them : and then they
are written all in such languages, which the ignorant understand
not, and therefore must of necessity rely herein upon the uncertain
and fallible authority of some particular men, who inform them,
that there is such a decree. And if the decrees were translated
into vulgar languages, why the translators should not be as fal
lible as you say the translators of scripture are, who can possibly
imagine ?
109. Lastly, how shall an unlearned man, or indeed any man,
be assured of the certainty of that decree, the certainty whereof
depends upon suppositions, which are impossible to be known
whether they be true or no ? for it is not the decree of a council,
unless it be confirmed by a true pope. Now the pope cannot be a
true pope, if he came in by simony ; which whether he did or no,
who can answer me ? he cannot be a true pope, unless he were
baptized ; and baptized he was not, unless the minister had due
intention. So likewise he cannot be a true pope, unless he were
rightly ordained priest, and that again depends upon the ordainer's
secret intention, and also upon his having the episcopal character.
All which things, as I have formerly proved, depend upon so many
uncertain suppositions, that no human judgment can possibly be
resolved in them. I conclude, therefore, that not the learnedest
man amongst you all, no, not the pope himself, can, according to
the grounds you go upon, have any certainty, that any decree of
any council is good and valid, and consequently, not any assurance,
that it is indeed the decree of a council.
110. Ad. §. 20. If by a private spirit, you mean a particular per
suasion, that a doctrine is true, which some men pretend, but
cannot prove to come from the Spirit of God ; I say, to refer con
troversies to scripture, is not to refer them to this kind of private
spirit. For is there not a manifest difference between saying, the
Spirit of God tells me, that this is the meaning of such a text
(which no man can possibly know to be true, it being a secret
thing) and between saying — these and these reasons I have to show,
that this or that doctrine, or that this or that is the meaning of such
a scripture? reason being a public and certain thing, and exposed
to all men's trial and examination. But now, if by private spirit
you understand every man's particular reason, then your first and
second inconvenience will presently be reduced to one, and shortly
to none at all.
111. Ad. §. 20. And does not also giving the office of judicature
to the church, come to confer it upon every particular man? for,
before any man believes the church infallible, must he not have
reason to induce him to believe it to be so? and must he not judge
of those reasons, whether they be indeed good and firm, or cap
tious and sophistical? or, would you have all men believe all your
doctrine upon the church's infallibility, and the church's infalli
bility they know not why ?
112. Secondly, supposing they are to be guided by the church,
they must use their own particular reason to find out which is the
church. And, to that purpose, you yourselves give a great many,

150 Scripture the only Rule
notes, which you pretend first to be certain notes of the church,
and then to be peculiar to your church, and agreeable to none
else ; but you do not so much as pretend, that either of those pre
tences is evident of itself, and therefore you go about to prove them
both by reasons ; and those reasons, I hope, every particular man
is to judge of, whether they do indeed conclude and convince that
which they are alleged for ; that is, that these marks are indeed
certain notes of the church ; and then, that your church hath them,
and no other.
113. One of these notes, indeed the only note of a true and un
corrupted church, is conformity with antiquity ; I mean, the most
ancient church of all, that is, the primitive and apostolic. Now,
how is it possible any man should examine your church by this note,
but he must by his own particular judgment find out what was the
doctrine of the primitive church, and what is the doctrine of the
present church, and be able to answer all these arguments which
are brought to prove repugnance between them ? Otherwise, he
shall but pretend to make use of this note for the finding the true
church, but indeed make no use of it, but receive the church at a
venture, as the most of you do, not one in a hundred being able to
give any tolerable reason for it. So that instead of reducing men
to particular reasons, you reduce them to none at all, but to chance,
and passion, and prejudice, and such other ways, which if they
lead one to the truth, they lead hundreds, nay thousands, to false
hood. But it is a pretty thing to consider, how these men can
blow hot and cold out of the same mouth to serve several purposes.
Is there hope of gaining a proselyte ? Then they will tell you —
God hath given every man reason to follow ; and " if the blind lead
the blind, both shall fall into the ditch :" that it is no good reason
for a man's religion, that he was born and brought up in it ; for
then a Turk should have as much reason to be a Turk, as a
christian to be a christian : that every man hath a judgment of
discretion ; which, if they will make use of, they shall easily find,
that the true church hath always such and such marks, and that
their church hath them, and no others but theirs. But then, if any
of theirs be persuaded to a sincere and sufficient trial of their
church, even by their own notes of it, and to try whether they be
indeed so conformable to antiquity as they pretend, then their note
is changed. You must not use your own reason, nor your judg
ment, but refer all to the church, and believe her to be conformable
to antiquity, though they have no reason for it ; nay, though they
have evident reason to the contrary. For my part, I am certain,
that God hath given us our reason, to discern between truth and
falsehood ; and he that makes not this use of it, but believes
things he knows not why ; I say, it is by chance that he believes
the truth, and not by choice; and that I cannot but fear, that
God will not accept of this " sacrifice of fools."
114. But you that would not have men follow their reason, what
would you have them follow? their passions? or pluck out their
eyes, and go blindfold ? No, you say, you would have them follow
authority. On God's name let them ; we also would have them
follow authority ; for it is upon the authority of universal tradition,

whereby to judge of Controversies. 151
that we would have them believe scripture. But then, as for the
authority which you would have them follow, you will let them
see reason why they should follow it. And is not this to go a little
about? To leave reason for a short turn, and then to come to it
again, and to do that which you condemn in others ? It being in
deed a plain impossibility for any man to submit his reason but to
reason ; for he that doth it to authority, must of necessity think
himself to have greater reason to believe that authority. There
fore the confession cited by Breerly, you need not think to have
been extorted from Luther and the rest. It came very freely from
them, and what they say you practise as much as they.
115. And whereas you say, that — a protestant admits of fathers,
councils, church, as far as they agree with scripture, which upon
the matter is himself: — I say, you admit neither of them, nor the
scripture itself, but only so far as it agrees with your church ; and
your church you admit, because you think you have reason to do
so : so that by you as well as protestants all is finally resolved into
your own reason.
116. Nor do heretics only, but Romish catholics also, set up as
many judges as there are men and women in the christian world.
For do not your men and women judge your religion to be true,
before they believe it, as well as the men and women of other reli
gions? Oh, but you say — they receive it, not because they think
it agreeable to scripture^ but because the church tells them so.
But then I hope they believe the church, because their own reason '
tells them they are to do so. So that the difference between a
papist and a protestant is this : not that the one judges, and the
other does not judge, but that the one judges his guide to be infal
lible, the other his way to be manifest. This same pernicious doc
trine is taught by Brentius, Zanchius, Cartwright, and others. It
is so in very deed : but it is taught also by some others, whom you
little think of. It is taught by St. Paul, where he says, " Try all
things; hold fast that which is good." It is taught by St. John,
in these words : " Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits,
whether they be of God or no." It is taught by St. Peter, in these:
" Be ye ready to render a reason of the hope that is in you." Lastly,
this very pernicious doctrine is taught by our Saviour, in these words :
" If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch :" and,
" Why of yourselves judge you not what is right ?" All which
speeches, if they do not advise men to make use of their reason for
the choice of their religion, I must confess myself to understand
nothing. Lastly, not to be infinite, it is taught by Mr. Knot him
self, not in one page only, or chapter of his book, but all his book
over ; the very writing and publishing whereof supposes this for cer
tain, that the readers are to be judges, whether his reasons, which
he brings, be strong and convincing, of which sort we have hitherto
met with none ; or else captious, or impertinences, as indifferent
men shall (as I suppose) have cause to judge them.
117. But you demand, — what good statesmen would they be,
who should ideate, or fancy, such a commonwealth as these men
have framed to themselves a church ? Truly if this be all the fault

152 Scripture the only Rule
they have, that they say, every man is to use his own judgment
in the choice of his religion, and not to believe this or that sense of
scripture, upon the bare authority of any learned man or men, when
he conceives he hath rea.sons to the contrary which are of more
weight than their authority ; I know no reason but, notwithstanding
all this, they might be as good statesmen as any of the society.
But what hath this to do with commonwealths, where men are
bound only to external obedience unto the laws and judgment of
courts, but not to an internal approbation of them, no, nor to con
ceal their judgment of them, if they disapprove them? As, if I
conceived I had reason to mislike the law of punishing simple theft
with death, as Sir Thomas More did, I might profess lawfully my
judgment ; and represent my reasons to the king or commonwealth
in a parliament, as Sir Thomas More did, without committing any
fault or fearing any punishment.
¦118. To the place of St. Augustine wherewith this paragraph is
concluded, I shall need give no other reply, but only to desire you
to speak like an honest man, and to say, whether it be all one
for a man to allow and disallow in every scripture what he pleases?
which is either to dash out of scripture such texts or such chapters,
because they cross his opinion : or to say (which is worse) though
they be scripture, they are not true? whether, I say, for a man thus
to allow and disallow in scripture what he pleases, be all one, and
no greater fault, than to allow that sense of scripture which he con-
*ceives to be true and genuine, and deduced out of the words, and
to disallow the contrary ? for God's sake, sir, tell me plainly : in
those texts of scripture, which you allege for the infallibility of your
church, do not you allow what sense you think true, and disallow
the contrary ? and do you not this, by the direction of your private
reason ? if you do, why do you condemn it in others ? if you do not,
I pray you tell me, what direction you follow, or whether you follow
none at all ? if none at all, this is like drawing lots, or throwing the
dice, for the choice of a religion : if any other, I beseech you tell
me what it is. Perhaps you will say, the church's authority ; and
that will be to dance finely in a round, thus — to believe the church's
infallible authority, because the scriptures avouch it ; and to believe,
that scriptures say and mean so, because they are so expounded by
the church. Is not this for a father to beget his son, and the son
to beget his father ? for a foundation to support the house, and the
house to support the foundation ? would not Campian have cried
out at it, Ecce quos gyros, quos Maandros ! And to what end was
this going about, when you might as well at first have concluded the
church infallible, because she says so, as thus to put in scripture for
a mere stale, and to say the church is infallible, because the scrip
ture says so, and the scripture means so, because the church says
so, which is infallible ? Is it not most evident therefore to every
intelligent man, that you are enforced of necessity to do that your
self, which so tragically you declaim against in others ? The church,
you say, is infallible ; I am very doubtful of it : how shall I know it?
The scripture, you say, affirms it, as in the 59th of Isaiah, " My spirit
that is in thee," &c. Well, I confess I find there these words, but

whereby to judge of Controversies. 153
I am still doubtful whether they be spoken of the church of Christ ;
and if they be, whether they mean as you pretend. You say, the
church says so, which is infallible. Yea, but that is the question, and
therefore not to be begged, but proved : neither is it so evident, as
to need no proof; otherwise, why brought you this text to prove it?
Nor is it of such a strange quality, above all other propositions, as to
be able to prove itself. , What then remains, but that you say, reasons
drawn out of the circumstances of the text will evince, that this is the
sense of it. Perhaps they will : but reasons cannot convince me
unless I judge of them by my reason ; and for every man or woman
to rely on that, in the choice of their religion, and in the interpreting
of scripture, you say is a horrible absurdity ; and therefore must
neither make use of your own in this matter, nor desire me to make
use of it.
119. But universal tradition (you say, and so do I too) is of itself
credible ; and that hath, in all ages, taught the church's infallibility
with full consent. — If it have, I am ready to believe it ; but that it
hath, I hope you would not have me take upon your word ; for that
were to build myself upon the church, and the church upon you.
Let then the tradition appear; for a secret tradition is somewhat
like a silent thunder. You will perhaps produce, for the con
firmation of it, some sayings of some fathers, who in every age
taught this doctrine (as Gualterius in his Chronology undertakes to
do ; but with so ill success, that I heard an able man of your religion
profess, that in the first three centuries, there was not one authority
pertinent) : but how will you warrant that none of them teach the
contrary ? Again, how shall I be assured, that the places have indeed
this sense in them, seeing there is not one father for five hundred
years after Christ, that does say in plain terms, the church of Rome
is infallible ? What, shall we believe your church, that this is their
meaning? But this will be again to go into the circle, which made
us giddy before ; to prove this church infallible, because tradition
says so; tradition to say so, because the fathers say so; the fathers
to say so, because the church says so, which is infallible : yea, but
reason will show this to be the meaning of them. Yes, if we may
use our reason, and rely upon it : otherwise, as light shows nothing
to the blind, or to him that uses not his eyes, so reason cannot prove
any thing to him, that either hath not or useth not his reason to
judge of them.
120. Thus you have excluded yourself from all proof of your
church's infallibility from scripture or tradition : and if you fly, lastly,
to reason itself for succour, may it not justly say to you as Jephtha
said to his brethren, " Ye have cast me out, and banished me, and
do you now come to me for succour !" But if there be no certainty
in reason, how shall I be assured of the certainty of those which
you allege for this purpose ? Either I may judge of them, or not ;
if not, why do you propose them ? If I may, why do you say I may
not, and make it such a monstrous absurdity, that men in the choice
of their religion should make use of their reason ? which yet, without
all question, none but unreasonable men can deny to have been the
chiefest end why reason was given them.

154 Scripture the only Rule
121. Ad. §. 22. " A heretic he is (saith D. Potter) who opposeth
any truth, which to be a divine revelation he is convinced in con
science by any means whatsoever ; be it by a preacher or layman ;
be it by reading scriptures, or hearing them read." And from hence
you infer, that he makes all these safe propounders of faith. — A
most strange and illogical deduction ! For, may not a private
man by evident reason convince another man, that such or such a
doctrine is divine revelation ; and yet though he be a true propounder
in this point, yet propound another thing falsely, and without proof,
and consequently, not to be a safe propounder in every point? Your
preachers in their sermons, do they not propose to men divine re
velations ? and do they not sometimes convince men in conscience,
by evident proof from scripture, that the things they speak are
divine revelations? And whosoever, being thus convinced, should
oppose this divine revelation, should he not be a heretic, according
to your own grounds, for calling God's own truth into question ?
And would you think yourself well dealt with, if I should collect
from hence, that you make every preacher a safe, that is, infallible,
propounder of faith ? Be the means of proposal what it will, suffi
cient or insufficient, worthy of credit, or not worthy; though it were
if it were possible, the barking of a dog, or the chirping of a bird ;
or were it the discourse of the devil himself, yet if I be, I will not
say convinced, but persuaded, though falsely, that it is a divine reve
lation, and shall deny to believe it, I shall be a formal, though not
a material, heretic. For he that believes, though falsely, any thing
to be divine revelation, and yet will not believe it to be true, must
of necessity believe God to be false ; which, according to your own
doctrine, is the formality of a heretic.
122. And how it can be any way advantageous to civil govern
ment, that men without warrant from God should usurp a tyranny
over other men's consciences, and prescribe unto them, without reason,
and sometimes against reason, what they shall believe, you must
show us plainer, if you desire we should believe. For to say —
Verily I do not see but it must be so — is no good demonstration ;
for whereas you say — that a man may be a passionate and seditious
creature ; from whence you would have us infer, that he may
make use of his interpretation to satisfy his passion, and raise sedi
tion : there were some colour in this consequence, if we (as you do)
made private men infallible interpreters for others ; for then indeed
they might lead disciples after them, and use them as instruments
for their vile purposes. But when we say, they can only interpret
for themselves, what harm they can do by their passionate or sedi
tious interpretations, but only endanger both their temporal and
eternal happiness, I cannot imagine ; for though we deny the pope
or church of Rome to be an infallible judge, yet we do not deny,
but that there are judges which may proceed with certainty enough
against all seditious persons, such as draw men to disobedience,
either against church or state, as well as against rebels, and trai
tors, and thieves, and murderers.
123. Ad. §. 23. The next §. in the beginning argues thus : — For
many ages there was no scripture in the world; and for many

whereby to judge of Controversies. 155
more there was none in many places of the world; yet man
wanted not then and there some certain direction what to believe ;
therefore there was then an infallible judge. — Just as if I should
say, York is not my way from Oxford to London, therefore Bristol
is ; or a dog is not a horse, therefore he is a man : as if God had
no other ways of revealing himself to men, but only by scripture
and an infallible church. *St. Chrysostom and Isidorus Pelusiota
conceived, he might use other means. And St. Paul telreth us
that the yvuttrlv tou 0sou, "might be known by his works;" and
that they had " the law written in their hearts." Either of these
ways might make some faithful men, without either necessity of
scripture or church.
124. But Dr. Potter says, you say — In the Jewish church there
was a living judge, endowed with an absolute infallible direction
in cases of moment ; as all points belonging to divine faith are."
And where was that infallible direction in the Jewish church
when they should have received Christ for their Messias and re
fused him ? Or, perhaps this was not a case of moment. Dr.
Potter indeed might say very well, not that the high priest was
infallible (for certainly he was not), but that his determination
was to be of necessity obeyed, though for the justice of it there
was no necessity that it should be believed. Besides, it is one
thing to say, that the living judge in the Jewish church had an in
fallible direction ; another, that he was necessitated to follow this
direction. This is the privilege which you challenge. But it is
that, not this, which the doctor attributes to the Jews. As a man
may truly say, the wise men had an infallible direction to Christ,
without saying or thinking they were constrained to follow it and
could not do otherwise.
125. But either the church retains still her infallibility, or it was
divested of it upon the receiving of holy scripture, which is ab
surd : — an argument methinks like this : either you have horns, or
you have lost them ; but you never lost them, therefore you have
them still. If you say you never had horns ; so say I, for aught
appears by your reasons, the church never had infallibility.
126. But some scriptures were received in some places, and
not in others : therefore if scriptures were the judge of contro
versies, some churches had one judge, and some another. — And
what great inconvenience is there in that, that one part of Eng
land should have one judge, and another another: especially seeing
the books of scripture, which were received by those that received
fewest, had as much of the doctrine of Christianity in them, as
they all had which were received by any : all the necessary parts
of the gospel being contained in every one of the four gospels, as I
have proved ? So that they which had all the books of the New
Testament, had nothing superfluous; for it was not superfluous,
*See Chrysost. Hom.l, in Mat. Isidor. Pelus. 1. 3, ep. 106; and also Basil in Psal.
xxviii. and then you shall confess, that by other means besides these, God did commu
nicate himself unto men, and made them receive and understand his law. See also, to
the same purpose, Heb. i. 1.

156 Scripture the only Rule
but profitable, that the same thing should be said divers times
and be testified by divers witnesses ; and they, that had but one
of the four gospels, wanted nothing necessary: and therefore it
is vainly inferred by you, that — with months and years, as new
canonical scriptures grew to be published, the church altered her
rule of faith, and judge of controversies.
127. Heresies, you say, would arise after the apostles' time and
after the writing of scriptures ; these cannot be discovered, con
demned, and avoided, unless the church be infallible; therefore
there must be a church infallible. — But I pray tell me, why cannot
heresies be sufficiently discovered, condemned, and avoided, by
them which believe scripture to be the rule of faith ? If scripture
be sufficient to inform us what is the faith, it must of necessity be
also sufficient to teach us what is heresy ; seeing heresy is nothing
but a manifest deviation from, and an opposition to, the faith.
That which is straight will plainly teach us what is crooked :
and one contrary cannot but manifest the other. If any one should
deny, that there is a God ; that this God is omnipotent, omni
scient, good, just, true, merciful, a rewarder of them that seek
him, a punisher of them that obstinately offend him ; that Jesus
Christ is the Son of God, and the Saviour of the world ; that
it is he, by obedience to whom men must look to be saved : if
any man should deny either his birth, or passion, or resurrec
tion, or ascension, or sitting at the right hand of God ; his having
all power given him in heaven and earth ; that it is he whom
God hath appointed to be judge of the quick and dead; that
all men shall rise again at the last day ; that they which believe
and repent shall be saved ; that they which do not believe and
repent shall be damned ; if a man should hold that either the
keeping of the mosaical law is necessary to salvation ; or that
good works are not necessary to salvation : in a word, if any man
should obstinately contradict the truth of any thing plainly de
livered in scripture, who does not see that every one, which be
lieves the scripture, hath a sufficient means to discover, and
condemn, and avoid that heresy without any need of an infallible
guide? If you say, that the obscure places of scripture contain
matters of faith — I answer, that it is a matter of faith to believe,
that the sense of them, whatsoever it is, which was intended by
God, is true; for he that doth not so, calls God's truth into
question. But to believe this or that to be the true sense of
them, or, to believe the true sense of them, and to avoid the
false, is not necessary either to faith or salvation. For if God
would have had his meaning in these places certainly known,
how could it stand with his wisdom, to be so wanting to his own
will and end, as to speak obscurely ? Or, how can it consist with
his justice to require of men to know certainly the meaning of
those words, which he himself hath not revealed ? Suppose there
were an absolute monarch, that, in his own absence from one of
his kingdoms, had written laws for the government of it, some
very plainly, and some very ambiguously and obscurely, and his

whereby to judge of Controversies. 157
subjects should keep those that were plainly written with all ex
actness, and for those that were obscure use their best diligence
to find his meaning in them, and obey them according to the
sense of them which they conceived ; should this king either with
justice or wisdom be offended with these subjects, if by reason
of the obscurity of them they mistook the sense of them, and failed
of performance by reason of their error ?
128. But it is more useful and fit (you say) for deciding of con
troversies, to have, besides an infallible rule to go by, a living in
fallible judge to determine them : and from hence you conclude,
that certainly there is such a judge. But why then may not
another say, that it is yet more useful for many excellent purposes
that all the patriarchs should be infallible, than that the pope only
should ? Another, that it would be yet more useful, that all the
archbishops of every province should be so, than that the patri
archs only should be so. Another, that it would be yet more use
ful if all the bishops of every diocess were so. Another, that it
would be yet more available, that all parsons of every parish
should be so. Another, that it would be yet more excellent, if
all the fathers of families were so. And, lastly, another, that it
were much more to be desired, that every man and every woman
were so ; just as much as the prevention of controversies is better than
the decision of them ; and the prevention of heresies better than
the condemnation of them; and upon this ground conclude, by
your own very consequence, that not only a general council, nor
only the pope, but all the patriarchs, archbishops, bishops, pastors,
fathers, nay, all the men in the world are infallible : if you say
now, as I am sure you will, that this conclusion is most gross and
absurd, against sense and experience, then must also the ground
be false from which it evidently and undeniably follows, viz. That
that course of dealing with men seems always more fit to divine
providence, which seems most fit to human reason.
129. And so, likewise, that there should men succeed the
apostles, which could show themselves to be their successors,
by doing of miracles, by speaking all kinds of languages, by de
livering men to Satan as St. Paul did Hymenaeus, and the inces
tuous Corinthian : it is manifest in human reason, it were im-
comparably more fit and useful for the decision of controversies,
than that the successor of the apostles should have none of these
gifts, and for want of the signs of apostleship, be justly ques
tionable, whether he be his successor or no ; and will you now con
clude, that the popes have the gift of doing miracles as well as the
apostles had ?
130. It were in all reason very useful and requisite that the pope
should, by the assistance of God's Spirit, be freed from the vices
and passions of men, lest otherwise, the authority given him for the
good of the church, he might employ (as divers popes you well
know have done) to the disturbance and oppression, and mischief
of it. And will you conclude from hence, that the popes are not
subject to the sins and passions of other men ? that there never
have been ambitious, covetous, lustful, tyrannous popes ?

158 Scripture the only Rule
131. Who sees not that for men's direction it were much more
beneficial for the church, that infallibility should be settled in the
pope's person, than in a general council; that so the means of
deciding controversies might be speedy, easy, and perpetual ;
whereas that of general councils is not so. And will you hence
infer, that not the church representative, but the pope, is indeed
the infallible judge of controversies? Certainly, if you should,
the Sorbonne doctors would not think this a good conclusion.
132. It had been very commodious (one would think) that
seeing either God's pleasure was, the scripture should be translated,
or else in his providence he knew it would be so, that he had ap
pointed some men for this business, and by his Spirit assisted them
in it, that so we might have translations as authentical as the ori
ginal : yet you see God did not think fit to do so.
133. It had been very commodious (one would think) that the
scripture should have been, at least for all things necessary, a rule,
plain and perfect ; and yet you say, it is both imperfect and obscure,
even in things necessary.
134. It had been most requisite (one would think) that the copies
of the bibles should have been preserved free from variety of read
ings, which make men very uncertain in many places, which is the
word of God, and which is the error or presumption of man ; and
yet we see God hath not thought fit so to provide for us.
135. Who can conceive, but that an apostolic interpretation of
all the difficult places of scripture, would have been strangely be
neficial to the church, especially there being such danger in mis
taking the sense of them, as is by you pretended, and God in his
providence foreseeing that the greatest part of christians would not
accept of the pope for the judge of controversies ? And yet we see
God hath not so ordered the matter.
136. Who doth not see, that supposing the bishop of Rome had
been appointed head of the church, and judge of controversies, that
it would have been infinitely beneficial to the church, perhaps as
much as all the rest of the bible, that in some book of scripture,
which was to be undoubtedly received, this one proposition had
been set down in terms — The bishops of Rome shall be always
monarchs of the church, and they either alone, or with their adhe
rents, the guides of faith, and the judges of controversies that shall
arise amongst christians ? This, if you deal ingenuously, you can
not but acknowledge ; for then all true christians would have sub
mitted to him, as willingly as to Christ himself; neither needed
you and your fellows have troubled yourself to invent so many
sophisms for the proof of it. There would have been no more
doubt of it among christians, than there is of the nativity, passion,
resurrection, or ascension of Christ. You were best now rub your
forehead hard, and conclude upon us, that because this would have
been so useful to have been done, therefore it is done. Or if you
be (as I know you are) too ingenuous to say so, then must you ac
knowledge that the ground of your argument, which is the very
ground of all these absurdities, is most absurd ; and that it is our
duty to be humbly thankful for those sufficient, nay, abundant,

whereby to judge of Controversies. 159
means of salvation, which God hath of his own goodness granted
us ; and not conclude he hath done that which he hath not done,
because, forsooth, in our vain judgments, it seems convenient he
should have done so.
137. But you demand, what repugnance there is between infal
libility in the church, and existence of scripture, that the produc
tion of the one must be the destruction of the other? Out of
which words I can frame no other argument for you than this:
there is no repugnance between the scripture's existence and the
church's infallibility; therefore the church is infallible. Which
consequence will then be good, when you can shew that nothing
can be untrue, but that only which is impossible ; that whatsoever
may be done, that also is done : which, if it were true, would con
clude both you and me to be infallible, as well as either your church
or pope ; inasmuch as there is no more repugnance between the
scripture's existence and our infallibility, than there isbetween theirs.
138. But if protestants will have the scripture alone for their
judge, let them first produce some scripture, affirming that, by the
entering thereof, infallibility went out of the church. This argu
ment, put in form, runs thus: no scripture affirms that, by the
entering thereof, infallibility went out of the church ; therefore
there is an infallible church ; and therefore the scripture alone
is not to judge, that is, the rule to judge by. But as no scripture
affirms that, by the entering of it, infallibility went out of the church ;
so neither do we, neither have we any need to do so. But we say
that it continued in the church, even together with the scriptures,
so long as Christ and his apostles were living, and then departed ;
God in his providence having provided a plain and infallible rule,
to supply the defect of living and infallible guides. Certainly, if
your cause were good, so great a wit as yours is, would devise bet
ter arguments to maintain it. We can shew no scripture affirming
infallibility to have gone out of the church ; therefore it is infallible.
Somewhat like his discourse that said, it could not be proved out
of scripture that the king of Sweden was dead ; therefore he is still
living. Methinks, in all reason, you that challenge privileges, and
exemption from the condition of men, which is to be subject to er
ror ; you that, by virtue of this privilege, usurp authority over men's
consciences, should produce your letters patent from the King of
heaven, and show some express warrant for this authority you take
upon you ; otherwise you know the rule is — Ubi contrarium non
manifeste probatur, presumitur pro libertate.
139. But Dr. Potter may remember what himself teacheth, that
the church is still endued with infallibility in points fundamental,
and consequently, that infallibility in the church doth well agree
with the truth, the sanctity, yea, with the sufficiency of scripture,
for all matters necessary to salvation. Still your discourse is so
far from hitting the white, that it roves quite beside the butt. You
conclude that the infallibility of the church may well agree with
the truth, the sanctity, the sufficiency of scripture. But what is
this, but to abuse your reader with the proof of that which no man
denies? The question is not, whether an infallible church might

160 Scripture the only Rule
agree with scripture ; but whether there be an infallible church ?
Jam die, posthume, de tribus capellis. Besides, you must know
there is a wide difference between being infallible in fundamentals,
and being an infallible guide even in fundamentals. Dr. Potter
says, that the church is the former, that is, there shall be some men
in the world, while the world lasts, which err not in fundamentajs ;
for otherwise there should be no church. For to say, the church,
while it is the church, may err in fundamentals, implies a contra
diction, and is all one as to say, the church, while it is the church,
may not be the church. So that to say that the church is infallible
in fundamentals, signifies no more but this: there shall be a
church in the world for ever. But we utterly deny the church to
be the latter ; for, to say so, were to oblige ourselves to find some
certain society of men, of whom we might be certain, that they
neither do nor can err in fundamentals, nor in declaring what is
fundamental, what is not fundamental : and, consequently, to
make any church an infallible guide in fundamentals, would be to
make it infallible in all things which she proposes and requires to
be believed. This, therefore, we deny both to your and all other
churches of any one denomination, as the Greek, the Roman, the
Abyssine ; that is, indeed, we deny it simply to any church ; for
no church can possibly be fit to be a guide, but only a church of
some certain denomination : for otherwise no man can possibly
know which is the true church, but by a pre-examination of the
doctrine controverted, and that were not to be guided by the church
to the true doctrine, but by the true doctrine to the church.
Hereafter, therefore, when you hear protestants say, the church is
infallible in fundamentals, you must not conceive them as if they
meant as you do, that some society of christians, which may be
known by adhering to some one head, for example, the pope, or
the bishop of Constantinople, is infallible in these things ; but only
thus, that true religion shall never be so driven out of the world,
but that it shall always, somewhere or other, have some that be
lieve and profess it, in all things necessary to salvation.
140. But you would therefore gladly know out of what text he
imagines that the church, by the coming of scripture, was deprived
of infallibility in some points, and not in others ? And I also would
gladly know, why you do thus frame to yourself vain imaginations,
and then father them upon others? We yield unto you, that there
shall be a church which never erreth in some points, because (as
we conceive) God hath promised so much ; but not that there shall
be such a church, which doth or can err in no points, because we
find not that God hath promised such a church ; and therefore may
not promise such a one to ourselves. But for the church's being
deprived by the scripture of infallibility in some points, and not in
others, that is a wild notion of your own, which we have nothing
to do with.
141. But he affirmeth, that the Jewish church retained infalli
bility in herself: and therefore it is unjustly and unworthily done
of him to deprive the church of Christ of it. That the Jews had
sometimes an infallible miraculous direction from God in some

whereby to judge of Controversies. 161
cases of moment, he doth affirm, and had good warrant ; but that
the synagogue was absolutely infallible, he nowhere affirms ; and
therefore it is unjustly and unworthily done of you to obtrude it
upon him. And, indeed, how can the infallibility of the synagogue
be conceived, but only by settling it in the high priest, and the
company adhering and subordinate unto him ? And whether the
high priest was infallible* when he believed not Christ to be the
Messias, but condemned and excommunicated them that so pro
fessed, and caused him to be crucified for saying so, I leave it to
christians to judge. But then suppose God had been so pleased to
do as he did not, to appoint the synagogue an infallible guide ;
could you by your rules of logic constrain him to appoint such an
one to christians also ; or say unto him, that in wisdom he could
not do otherwise ? Vain man, that will be thus always tying God
to your imaginations ! It is well for us that he leaves us not with
out directions to him ; but if he will do this sometimes by living
guides, sometimes by written rules, what is that to you ? May not
he do what he will with his own ?
142. And whereas you say, for the further enforcing of this ar
gument, that there is greater reason to think the church should be
infallible than the synagogue ; because to the synagogue all laws
and ceremonies, &c. were more particularly and minutely delivered
than in the New Testament is done, our Saviour leaving particulars
to the determination of the church. But I pray walk not thus in
generality, but tell us what particulars? If you mean particular
rites and ceremonies, and orders for government, we grant it, and
you know we do so. Our Saviour only hath left a general injunc
tion by St. Paul, " Let all things be done decently and in order."
But what order is fittest, i. e. what time, what place, what manner,
&c. is fittest ? That he hath left to the discretion of the governors
of the church. But if you mean that he hath only concerning mat
ters of faith, the subject in question, prescribed in general, that we
are to hear the church, and left it to the church to determine what
particulars we are to believe, the church being nothing else but an
aggregation of believers: this in effect is to say, he hath left it
to all believers to determine what particulars they are to believe.
Besides, it is so apparently false, that I wonder how you could con
tent yourself, or think we should be contented, with a bare saying,
without any show or pretence of proof.
143. As for Dr. Potter's objection against this argument — That
as well you might infer, that christians must have all one king,
because the Jews had so. For aught I can perceive, notwithstand
ing any thing answered by you, it may stand still in force ; though
the truth is, it is urged by him not against the infallibility, but the
monarchy, of the church. For whereas you say, the disparity is
very clear; he that should urge this argument for one monarch
over the whole world, would say that this is to deny the conclu
sion, and reply unto you, that there is disparity as matters are now
ordered, but that there should not be so : for that there was no
more reason to believe that the ecclesiastical government of the
Jews was a pattern for the ecclesiastical government of christians,

162 Scripture the only Rule
than the civil of the Jews for the civil of the christians. He would
tell you, that the church of Christ, and all christian commonwealths
and kingdoms, are one and the same thing : and therefore he sees
no reason why the synagogue should be a type and figure of the
church, and not of the commonwealth. He would tell you, that
as the church succeeded the Jewish synagogue, so christian princes
should succeed the Jewish magistrates ; that is, the temporal
governors of the church should be christians. He would tell you,
that as the church is compared to a house, a kingdom, an army, a
body, so all distinct kingdoms might and should be one army, one
family, &.c. and that it is not so, is the thing he complains of. And
therefore you ought not to think it enough to say, it is not so ; but
you should shew why it should not be so ; and why this argument
will not follow — the Jews had one king, therefore ali christians
ought to have ; as well as this, the Jews had one high priest over
them all, therefore all christians ought also to have. He might tell
you, moreover, that the church may have one master, one general,
one head, one king, and yet he not be the pope, but Christ. He
might tell you, that you beg the question, in saying without proof
that it is necessary to salvation, that all (whether christians or
churches) have recourse to one church, if you mean by one church,
one particular church, which is to govern and direct all others :
and that, unless you mean so, you say nothing to the purpose. And
besides, he might tell you, and that very truly, that it may seem
altogether as available for the temporal good of christians to be
under one temporal prince, or commonwealth, as for their salvation
to be subordinate to one visible head: I say, as necessary, both
for the prevention of the effusion of the blood of christians by
christians, and for the defence of Christendom from the hostile in
vasions of Turks and pagans. And from all this he might infer,
that though now, by the fault of men, there were in several king
doms several laws, governments, and powers; yet that it were
much more expedient, that there were but one : nay, not only ex
pedient, but necessary, if once your ground be settled for a general
rule — that what kind of government the Jews had, that the chris
tians must have. And, if you limit the generality of this proposi
tion, and frame the argument thus — what kind of ecclesiastical
government the Jews had, that the christians must have : but they
were governed by one high priest, therefore these must be so : he
will say, that the first proposition of this syllogism is altogether as
doubtful as the conclusion ; and therefore neither fit nor sufficient
to prove it, until itself be proved. And then, besides that, there is
as great reason to believe this, that what kind of civil government
the Jews had, that the christians must have. And so Dr. Potter's
objection remains still unanswered, that there is as much reason to
conclude a necessity of one king over all christian kingdoms, from
the Jews having one king ; as one bishop over all churches, from
their being under one high priest.
144. Ad. §.24. Neither is this discourse confirmed by *Irenaeus
at all, whether by this discourse you mean that immediately fore-
* Ircnoeus, 1. iii. c. 3.

whereby to judge of Controversies. 1 63
going all the analogy between the church and the synagogue, to
which this speech of Irenaeus alleged by you is utterly and plainly
impertinent ; or whether by this discourse you mean (as 1 think
you do) not your discourse, but your conclusion which you dis- 1
course on ; that is, that your church is the infallible judge in con
troversies. For neither hath Irenaeus one syllable to this purpose ;
neither can it be deduced out of what he says, with any colour of
consequence. For, first in saying — what if the apostles had not
left scripture, ought we not to have followed the order of tradition ?
And in saying, that to this order many nations yield assent, who
believe in Christ, having salvation written in their hearts by the
Spirit of God, without letters or ink, and diligently keeping ancient
tradition : — doth he not plainly shew, that the tradition he speaks
of is nothing else but the very same that is written ; nothing but
to believe in Christ ? To which, whether scripture alone, to them
that believe it, be not a sufficient guide, I leave it to you to judge.
And are not his words just as if a man should say, " If God had
not given us the light of the sun, we must have made use of can
dles and torches: if we had no eyes, we must have felt out our
way : if we had no legs, we must have used crutches." And doth
not this in effect import, that, while we have the sun we need no
candles ? While we have our eyes, we need not feel out our way ?
While we enjoy our legs, we need not crutches? And, by like
reason, Irenasus in saying — If we had no scripture, we must have
followed tradition; and they that have none, do well to do so —
doth he not plainly import, that to them that have scripture and
believe it, tradition is unnecessary ? which could not be, if the
scripture did not contain evidently the whole tradition, which,
whether Irenaeus believed or no, these words of his may inform
you — Non enimper alios, &c, we have received the disposition of
our salvation from no others, but from them by whom the gospel
came unto us. Which gospel truly the apostles first preached,
and afterwards by the will of God delivered in writing to us, to be
the pillar and foundation of our faith. — Upon which place Bellar-
mine's two observations, and his acknowledgment ensuing upon
them, are very considerable ; and, as I conceive, as home to my
purpose as I could wish them. His first notandum is, that — in the
christian doctrine, some things are simply necessary for the salva
tion of all men ; as the knowledge of the articles of the apostles'
creed ; and besides, the knowledge of the ten commandments, and
some of the sacraments. Other things are not so necessary, but
that a man may be saved without the explicit knowledge, and
belief, and profession of them. His second note is, that — those
things, which were simply necessary, the apostles were wont to
preach to all men ; but of other things not all to all, but some
things to all; to wit, those things which were profitable for all,
other things only to prelates and priests. These things premised,
fie acknowledgeth, that — all these things were written by the
apostles which are necessary for all, and which they were wont to
preach to all ; but that other things were not all written ; that
therefore, when Irenaeus says, that the apostles wrote what they
l2

164 Scripture the only Rule
preached in the world, it is true (saith he), and not against tradi
tion, because they preached not to the people all things, but only
those things which are necessary and profitable for them.
t 145. So that, at the most, you can infer from hence but only a
suppositive necessity of having an infallible guide, and that grounded
upon a false supposition, in case we had no scripture ; but an abso
lute necessity hereof, and to them who have and believe the scrip
ture, which is your assumption, cannot with any colour from hence
be concluded, but rather the contrary.
146. Neither because (as he says) it was then easy to receive
the truth from God's church ; then in the age next after the apos
tles, then when all the ancient and apostolic churches were at an
agreement about the fundamentals of faith: will it therefore follow,
that now one thousand six hundred years after, when the ancient
churches are divided almost into as many religions as there are
churches, every one being the church to itself, and heretical to all
other, that it is as easy, but extremely difficult, or rather impossi
ble, to find the church first independently of the true doctrine, and
then to find the truth by the church?
147. As for the last clause of the sentence, it will not any whit
advantage, but rather prejudice your assertion. Neither will I
seek to avoid the pressure of it, by saying that he speaks of small
questions, and therefore not of questions touching things necessary
to salvation, which can hardly be called small questions ; but I
will favour you so far as to suppose, that saying this of small
questions, it is probable he would have said it much more of the
great; but I will answer that which is most certain and evident,
and which I am confident you yourself, were you as impudent as I
believe you modest, would not deny, that the ancient apostolic
churches are not now as they were in Irenaeus's time ; then they
were all at unity about matters of faith, which unity was a good
assurance that what they so agreed in, came from some one com
mon fountain, and that no other than of apostolic preaching. And
this is the very ground of Tertullian's so often mistaken prescrip
tion against heretics : Variasse debuerat error ecclesiarum ; quod
autem apud multos unum est, non est erratum sed traditum. " If
the churches had erred, they could not but have varied ; but that
which is among so many, came not by error, but tradition." But
now the case is altered, and the mischief is, that these ancient
churches are divided among themselves; and, if we have recourse
to them, one of them will say, this is the way to heaven, another
that. So that now in place of receiving from them certain and
clear truths, we must expect nothing but certain and clear contra
dictions. 148. Neither will the apostles' depositing with the church all
things belonging to the truth, be any proof that the church shall
certainly keep this depositum entire and sincere, without adding to
it, or taking from it; for this whole depositum was committed to
every particular church, nay, to every particular man which the
apostles converted. And yet no man, I think, will say that there
was any certainty, that it should be kept whole and inviolate by

whereby to judge of Controversies. 165
every man, and every church. It is apparent out of scripture it
was committed to Timothy, and by him consigned to other faithful
men ; and yet St. Paul thought it not superfluous, earnestly to
exhort him to the careful keeping of it : which exhortation you
must grant had been vain and superfluous, if the not keeping had
been impossible. And therefore though Irenaeus says, the apostles
fully deposited in the church all truth, yet he says not, neither
can we infer from what he says, that the church should always in
fallibly keep this depositum entire, without the loss of any truth,
and sincere, without the mixture of any falsehood.
149. Ad. §. 25. But you proceed and tell us — that besides ail
this, the doctrine of protestants is destructive of itself. For either
they have certain and infallible means not to err in interpreting, or
not. If not, scripture to them cannot be a sufficient ground for
infallible faith : if they have, and so cannot err in interpreting
scripture, then they are able with infallibility to hear and deter
mine all controversies of faith; and so they may be, and are, judges
of controversies, although they use the scripture as a rule. And
thus, against their own doctrine, they constitute another judge of
controversies besides scripture alone. — And may not we with as
much reason substitute church and papists instead of scripture
and protestants, and say unto you, besides all this, the doctrine of
papists is destructive of itself? For either they have certain and
infallible means not to err in the choice of the church, and inter
preting her decrees, or they have not ; if not, then the church to
them cannot be a sufficient (but merely a fantastical) ground for
infallible faith, nor a meet judge of controversies: (for unless I be
infallibly sure, that the church is infallible, how can I be, upon her
authority, infallibly sure that any thing she says is infallible ?) if
they have certain infallible means, and so cannot err in the choice
of their church, and interpreting her decrees, then they are able
with infallibility to hear, examine, and determine, all controversies
of faith, although they pretend to make the church their guide.
And thus, against their own doctrine, they constitute another judge
of controversies besides the church alone. Nay, every one makes
himself a chooser of his own religion, and of his own sense of the
church's decrees, which very thing in protestants, they so highly
condemn ; and so, in judging others, condemn themselves.
150. Neither in saying thus have I only cried quittance with
you ; but that you may see how much you are in my debt, I will
show unto you, that for your sophism against our way, I have
given you a demonstration against yours. First, I say, your argu
ment against us is a transparent fallacy. The first part of it lies
thus : protestants have no means to interpret, without error, ob
scure and ambiguous places of scripture ; therefore plain places of
scripture cannot be. to them a sufficient ground of faith. But
though we pretend not to certain means of not erring in interpreting
all scripture, particularly such places as are obscure and ambigu
ous, yet this, methinks, should be no impediment, but that we may
have certain means of not erring in and about the sense of those
places which are so plain and clear, that they need no interpreters;

166 Scripture the only Rule
and in such we say our faith is contained. If you ask me how I
can be sure that I know the true meaning of these places ? I ask
you again, can you be sure, that you understand what I, or any
man else says? They that heard our Saviour and the apostles
preach, could they have sufficient assurance, that they understood
at any time what they would have them do ? If not, to what end
did they hear them ? If they could, why may we not be as well
assured that we understand sufficiently what we conceive plain in
their writings?
151. Again, I pray tell us, whether you do certainly know the
sense of these scriptures, with which you pretend you are led to
the knowledge of your church? If you do not, how know you that
there is any church infallible, and that these are the notes of it,
and that this is the church that hath these notes? If you do, then
give us leave to have the same means, and the same abilities, to
know other plain places, which you have to know these. For,
if all scripture be obscure, how come you to know the sense of
these places ? If some place of it be plain, why should we stay
here ?
152. And now to come to the other part of your dilemma. In
saying, " If they have certain means, and so cannot err," methinks
you forget yourself very much, and seem to make no difference
between having certain means to do a thing, and the actual doing
of it. As if you should conclude, because all men have certain
means of salvation, therefore all men certainly must be saved, and
cannot do otherwise; as if, whosoever had a horse must presently
get up and ride ; whosoever had means to find out a way, could
not neglect those means, and so mistake it. God be thanked, that
we have sufficient means to be certain enough of the truth of our
faith ! But the privilege of not being in possibility of erring, that
we challenge not, because we have as little reason as you to do so;
and you have none at all. If you ask, seeing we may possibly err,
how can we be assured we do not ? I ask you again, seeing your
eye-sight may deceive you, how can you be sure you see the sun
when you do see it ? Perhaps you may be in a dream, and perhaps
you, and all the men in the world, have been so, when they thought
they were awake, and then only awake, when they thought they
dreamt. But this I am sure of, as sure as that God is good, that
he will require no impossibilities of us; not an infallible, nor a
certainly unerring belief, unless he hath given us certain means to
avoid error ; and, if we use those which we have, he will never
require of us, that we use that which we have not.
153. Now from this mistaken ground, that it is all one to have
means of avoiding error, and.to be in no danger, nor possibility of
error, you infer upon us an absurd conclusion — That we make our
selves able to determine controversies of faith without infallibility,
and judges of controversies. — For the latter part of this inference,
we acknowledge and embrace it : we do make ourselves judges of
controversies; that is, we do make use of our own understanding
in the choice of our religion. But this, if it be a crime, is common
to us with you (as I have proved above) ; and the difference is,

whereby to judge of Controversies. 167
not that we are choosers, and you not choosers ; but that we, as
we conceive, choose wisely ; but you, being wilfully blind, choose
to follow those that are so too, not remembering what our Saviour
hath told you, when " the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into
the ditch." But then again I must tell you, you have done ill
to confound together judges and infallible judges, unless you will
say, either that we have no judges in our courts of civil judicature,
or that they are all infallible.
154. Thus have we cast off your dilemma, and broken both the
horns of it. But now my retortion lies heavy upon you, and will
not be turned off For, first you content not yourselves with a moral
certainty of the things you believe, nor with such a degree of as
surance of them, as is sufficient to produce obedience to the con
dition of the new covenant, which is all that we require. God's
Spirit, if he please, may work more, a certainty of adherence beyond
a certainty of evidence : but neither God doth, nor man may,
require of us, as our duty, to give a greater assent to thexonclusion
than the premises deserve; to build an infallible faith upon motives
that are only highly credible, and not infallible, as it were a great
and heavy building upon a foundation that hath not strength pro
portionable. But though God require not of us such unreasonable
things, you do; and tell men they cannot be saved, unless they
believe your proposals with an infallible faith. To which end they
must believe also your propounder, your church, to be simply in
fallible. Now how is it possible for them to give a rational assent
to the church's infallibility, unless they have some infallible means
to know that she is infallible ? Neither can they infallibly know
the infallibility of this means, but by some other, and so on for
ever ; unless they can dig so deep as to come at length to the rock ;
that is, to settle all upon something evident of itself, which is not
so much as pretended. But the last resolution of all is into
motives, which indeed, upon examination, will scarce appear pro
bable, but are not so much as vouched to be any more than very
credible. For example ; if I ask you, why you do believe transub
stantiation? What can you answer, but because it is a reve
lation of the prime verity. I demand, again, how can you assure
yourself or me of that, being ready to embrace it if it may appear
to be so ? And what can you say, but that you know it to be so,
because the church says so, which is infallible? If I ask, what
mean you by your church? You can tell me nothing but the
company of christians which adhere to the pope. I demand then,
further, why should I believe this company to be the infallible pro
pounder of divine revelation ? And then you tell me, that there
are many motives to induce a man to this belief. But are these mo
tives, lastly, infallible ? No, say you, but very credible. Well, let
them pass for such, because now we have not leisure to examine
them. Yet methinks, seeing the motives to believe the church's
infallibility are only very credible, it should also be but as credible
that your church is infallible; and as credible, and no more,
perhaps somewhat less, that her proposals, particularly transub
stantiation, are divine revelations. And methinks you should

168 Scripture the only Rule
require only a moral and modest assent to them, and not a divine;
as you call it, and infallible faith. But then of these motives to
the church's infallibility, I hope you will give us leave to consider,
and judge, whether they be indeed motives, and sufficient ; or whe
ther they be not motives at all, or not sufficient ; or whether these
motives or inducements to your church be not impeached, and op
posed with compulsives and enforcements from it ; or, lastly, whether
these motives, which you use, be not indeed only motives to Chris
tianity, and not to popery ; give me leave for distinction-sake to call
your religion so. If we may not judge of these things, how can my
judgment be moved with that which comes not within its cognizance ?
If I may, then at least I am to be a judge of all these controversies.
1. Whether every one of these motives be indeed a motive to any
church ? 2. If to some, whether to yours ? 3. If to yours, whether
sufficient, or insufficient ? 4. Whether other societies have not as
many, and as great motives, to draw me to them? 5. Whether I have
not greater reason to believe you do err, than that you cannot? And
now, Sir, I pray let me trouble you with a few more questions. Am I
a sufficient judge of these controversies, or no ? If of these, why
shall I stay here, why not of others, why not of all ? Nay, doth
not the true examining of these few contain and lay upon me the ex
amination of all ? What other motives to your church have you, but
your notes of it ? Bellarmine gives some fourteen or fifteen. And one
of these fifteen contains in it the examination of all controversies :
and, not only so, but of all uncontroverted doctrines. For how shall
I, or can I, know the church of Rome's conformity with the ancient
church, unless I know first what the ancient church did hold, and
then what the church of Rome doth hold ? And, lastly, whether
they be conformable, or if in my judgment they seem not conform
able, I am then to think the church of Rome not to be the church,
for want of the note, which she pretends is proper and perpetual
to it ? So that, for aught I can see, judges we are, and must be
of all sides, every one for himself, and God for us all.
155. Ad. §. 26. I answer — This assertion, that "scripture alone
is judge of all controversies in faith," if it be taken properly, is
neither a fundamental nor unfundamental point of faith, nor no
point of faith at all, but a plain falsehood. It is not a judge of con
troversies, but a rule to judge them by ; and that not an absolutely
perfect rule, but as perfect as a written rule can be ; which must
always need something else, which is either evidently true, or
evidently credible, to give attestation to it, and that in this case
is universal tradition. So that universal tradition is the rule to
judge all controversies by. But then, because nothing besides
scripture comes to us with as full a stream of tradition as scripture,
scripture alone, and no unwritten doctrine, nor no infallibility of
any church, having attestation from tradition truly universal ; for
this reason we conceive, as the apostles' persons, while they'were
living, were the only judges of controversies, so their writings, now
they are dead, are the only rule for us to judge them by ; there
being nothing unwritten, which can go in upon half so fair cards
for the title of apostolic tradition as these things, which by the

whereby to judge of Controversies. 169
confession of both sides are not so; I mean — the doctrine of the mil
lenaries, and of the necessity of the eucharist for infants.
156. Yet when we say, the scripture is the only rule to judge
all controversies by ; methinks you should easily conceive, that we
would be understood of all those that are possible to be judged
by scripture, and of those that arise among such as believe the
scripture. For, if I had a controversy with an atheist, whether
there was a God or no, I would not say, that the scripture were a
rule to judge this by; seeing that, doubting whether there be a
God or no, he must needs doubt whether the scripture be the
word of God ; or if he does not, he grants the question, and is not
the man we speak of. So, likewise, if I had a controversy about
the truth of Christ with a Jew, it would be vainly done of me
should I press him with the authority of the New Testament,
which he believes not, till out of some principles, common to us
both, I had persuaded him that it is the word of God. The New
Testament, therefore, while he remains a Jew, would not be a fit
rule to decide this controversy, inasmuch as that which is doubted
of itself, is not fit to determine other doubts. So, likewise, if there
were any that belieye the christian religion, and yet believe not
the Bible to be the word of God, though they believed the matter
of it to be true (which is no impossible supposition ; for I may
believe a book of St. Augustine's to contain nothing but the
truth of God, and yet not to have been inspired by God himself) ;
against such men therefore there were no disputing out of the Bible,
because nothing in question can be a proof to itself. When there
fore we say, scripture is a sufficient means to determine all contro
versies, we say not this either to atheists, Jews, Turks, or such
christians (if there be any such) as believe not scripture to be the
word of God ; but among such men only, as are already agreed
upon this, that " the scripture is the word of God," we say, all
controversies that arise about faith, are either not at all decidable,
and consequently not necessary to be believed one way or other,
or they may be determined by scripture. In a word, that all
things necessary to be believed are evidently contained in scrip
ture, and what is not there- evidently contained, cannot be neces
sary to be believed. And our reason hereof is convincing, because
nothing can challenge our belief, but what hath thus descended to
us from Christ by original and universal tradition. Now nothing
but scripture hath thus descended to us, therefore nothing but
scripture can challenge our belief. Now then to come up closer
to you, and to answer to your question, not as you put it, but as
you should have put it : I say, that this position, " scripture alone
is the rule whereby they which believe it to be God's word, are to
judge all controversies in faith," is no fundamental point, though
not for your reasons : for, your first and strongest reason, you see,
is plainly voided and cut off by my stating of the question as I
have done, and supposing in it, that the parties at variance are
agreed about this, that the scripture is the word of God ; and con
sequently that this is none of their controversies. To your second,
that " controversies cannot be ended without some living authority ;"

170 Scripture the only Rule
we have said already, that necessary controversies may be and are
decided : and, if they be not ended, this is not through defect of
the rule, but through the default of men. And, for those that
cannot thus be ended, it is not necessary they should be ended :
for, if God did require the ending of them, he would have provided
some certain means for the ending of them. And to your third,
I say, that your pretence of using these means is but hypocritical ;
for you use them with prejudice, and with a settled resolution not
to believe any thing which these means happily may suggest unto
you, if it any way cross your preconceived persuasion of your
church's infallibility. You give not yourselves liberty of judgment
in the use of them, nor suffer yourselves to be led by them to the
truth, to which they would lead you, would you but be as willing
to believe this consequence — our church doth oppose scripture,
therefore it doth err, therefore it is not infallible ; as you are reso
lute to believe this — the church is infallible, therefore it doth not
err, and therefore it doth not oppose scripture, though it seem to
do so never so plainly.
157. You pray, but it is not that God would bring you to the
true religion, but that he would confirm you in your own. You
confer places, but it is that you may confirm, or colour over with
plausible disguises your erroneous doctrines ; not that you may
judge of them, and forsake them, if there be reason for it. You
consult the originals, but you regard them not when they make
against your doctrine or translation.
158. You add, not only the authority, but the infallibility, not of
God's church, but of the Roman, a very corrupt and degenerous part
of it : whereof Dr. Potter never confessed, that it cannot err damna
bly. And which being a company made up of particular men, can
afford you no help, but the industry, learning, and wit of private men :
and, that these helps may not help you out of your error, tell you
that you must make use of none of all these to discover any error
in the church, but only to maintain her impossibility of erring.
And, lastly, Dr. Potter assures himself, that your doctrines and
practices are damnable enough in themselves ; only he hopes (and
spes est rei incerta nomen) he hopes, I say, that the truths which
you retain, especially the necessity of repentance and faith in Christ,
will be as an antidote to you against the errors which you maintain ;
and that your superstruction may burn, yet they amongst you qui
sequuntur Absolonem in simplicitate cordis, may be saved, " yet so
as by fire." Yet his thinking so is no reason for you or me to think
so, unless you suppose him infallible ; and, if you do, why do you
write against him ?
159. Notwithstanding, though not for these reasons, yet for others,
I conceive this doctrine not fundamental ; because, if a man should
believe christian religion wholly, and entirely, and live according
to it, such a man, though he should not know or not believe the
scripture to be a rule of faith, no, nor to be the word of God, my
opinion is, he may be saved ; and my reason is, because he performs
the entire condition of the new covenant, which is, that we believe
the matter of the gospel, and not that it is contained in these or

lohereby to judge of Controversies. 171
these books. So that the books of scripture are not so much the
objects of our faith, as the instruments of conveying it to our under
standing ; and not so much of the being of the christian doctrine
as requisite to the well-being of it. Irenaeus tells us (as M. K. ac
knowledgeth) of some barbarous nations — that believed the doctrines
of Christ, and yet believed not the scripture to be the word of God ;
for they never heard of it, and faith comes by hearing. — But these
barbarous people might be saved : therefore men might be saved
without believing the scripture to be the word of God ; much more
without believing it to be a rule, and a perfect rule of faith. Neither
doubt I, but if the books of scripture had been proposed to them
by the other parts of the church, where they had been before re
ceived, and had been doubted of, or even rejected by those barbarous
nations, but still by the bare belief and practice of Christianity they
might be saved ; God requiring of us, under pain of damnation,
only to believe the verities therein contained, and not the divine
authority of the books wherein they are contained. Not but that
it were now very strange and unreasonable, if a man should believe
the matter of these books, and not the authority of the books : and
therefore if a man should profess the not-believing of these, I should
have reason to fear he did not believe that. But there is not always
an equal necessity for the belief of those things, for the belief whereof
there is an equal reason. We have, I believe, as great reason to
believe there was such a man as Henry the Eighth, King of England,
as that Jesus Christ suffered under Pontius Pilate : yet this is ne
cessary to be believed, and that is not so. So that if any man should
doubt of or disbelieve that, it were most unreasonably done of him,
yet it were no mortal sin, nor no sin at all ; God having no where
commanded men under pain of damnation to believe all which
reason induceth them to believe. Therefore as an executor, that
should perform the whole will of the dead, should fully satisfy the
law, though he did not believe that parchment to be his written
will which indeed is so ; so I believe, that he, who believes all the
particular doctrines which integrate Christianity, and lives according
to them, should be saved, though he neither believed nor knew that
the gospels were written by the evangelists, or the epistles by the
apostles. 160. This discourse, whether it be rational and concluding or no,
I submit to better judgment; but sure I am, that the corollary,
which you draw from this position, that this point is not funda
mental, is very inconsequent; that is, that we are uncertain of the
truth of it, because we say, the whole church, much more particular
churches and private men, may err in points not fundamental. A
pretty sophism, depending upon this principle, that whosoever pos
sibly may err, he cannot be certain that he doth not err ! And upon
this ground, what shall hinder me from concluding, that seeing you
also hold, that neither particular churches, nor private men, are in
fallible even in fundamentals, that even the fundamentals of Christi
anity remain to you uncertain ? A judge may possibly err in judg
ment : can he therefore never have assurance that he hath judged
right ? A traveller may possibly mistake his way ; must I therefore

172 Scripture the only Rule
be doubtful whether I am in the right way from my hall to my
chamber ? Or can our London carrier have no certainty, in the
middle of the day, when he is sober and in his wits, that he is in the
way to London ? These you see are right worthy consequences, and
yet they are as like your own, as an egg to an egg, or milk to milk.
161. And, for the self-same reason (you say) we are not certain,
that the church is not judge of controversies. — But now this self
same appears to be no reason ; and therefore, for all this, we may
be certain enough that the church is no judge of controversies.
The ground of this sophism is very like the former, viz. that we can
be certain of the falsehood of no propositions, but those only which
are damnable errors. But I pray, good sir, give me your opinion
of these : the snow is black, the fire is cold, that M. Knot is arch
bishop of Toledo, that the whole is not greater than a part of the
whole, that twice two make not four : in your opinion, good Sir,
are these damnable heresies, or, because they are not so, have we
no certainty of the falsehood of them ? I beseech you, Sir, to con
sider seriously, with what strange captions you have gone about to
delude your king and your country ; and if you be convinced they
are so, give glory to God, and let the world know it by your desert
ing that religion, which stands upon such deceitful foundations.
162. Besides (you say) among public conclusions defended in
Oxford in the year 1633, to the questions, Whether the church
have authority to determine controversies of faith ? and to inter
pret holy scripture ? The answer to both is affirmative. — But what
now if I should tell you, that in the year 1632, among public con
clusions defended in Doway, one was — that God predeterminates
men to all their actions, good, bad, and indifferent ? will you think
yourself obliged to be of this opinion ? If you will, say so : if not,
do as you would be done by. Again, methinks so subtile a man
as you are, should easily apprehend a wide difference between
authority to do a thing, and infallibility in doing it : and again,
between a conditional infallibility, and an absolute. The former,
the doctor, together with the articles of the church of England, at-
tributeth to the church, nay, to particular churches, and I subscribe
to his opinion ; that is, an authority of determining controversies
of faith according to plain and evident scripture and universal tra
dition, and infallibility, while they proceed according to this rule.
As if there should arise an heretic, that should call in question
Christ's passion and resurrection, the church had authority to de
cide this controversy, and infallible direction how to do it, and to
excommunicate this man, if he should persist in error. I hope you
will not deny, but that the judges have authority to determine
criminal and civil controversies : and yet I hope, you will not say,
that they are absolutely infallible in their determinations : infallible
while they proceed according to law, and if they do so ; but not
infallibly certain that they shall ever do so. But that the church
should be infallibly assisted by God's Spirit to decide rightly all
emergent controversies, even such as might be held diversely of
divers men, salva compage fidei, and that we might be absolutely
certain that the church should never fail to decree the truth,

whereby to judge of Controversies. 173
whether she used means or no, whether she proceed according to
her rule or not ; or, lastly, that we might be absolutely certain, that
she should never fail to proceed according to her rule, this the de
fender of these conclusions said not : and therefore said no more to
your purpose, than you have all this while— that is, just nothing.
163. Ad. §. 27. To the place of St. Augustine, alleged in this
paragraph, I answer, first, that in many things you will not be tried
by St. Augustine's judgment, nor submit to his authority; not con
cerning appeals to Rome ; not concerning transubstantiation ; not
touching the use and worshipping of images ; not concerning the
state of saints' souls before the day of judgment ; not touching the
Virgin Mary's freedom from actual and original sin ; not touching
the necessity of the eucharist for infants; not touching the damning
infants to hell that die without baptism ; not touching the know
ledge of saints departed ; not touching purgatory ; not touching
the fallibility of councils, even general councils ; not touching per
fection and perspicuity in scriptures in matters necessary to salva
tion ; not touching auricular confession ; not touching the half-
communion ; not touching prayers in an unknown tongue : in these
things, I say, you will not stand to St. Augustine's judgment, and
therefore can with no reason or equity require us to do so in this
matter. To St. Augustine, in heat of disputation against the dona-
tists, and ransacking all places for arguments against them, we
oppose St. Augustine out of this heat, delivering the doctrine of
Christianity calmly and moderately, where he says, In iis qua
aperte posita sunt in sacris scripturis, omnia ea reperiuntur qua
continent fidem, moresque vivendi. 3. We say, he speaks not of the
Roman, but the catholic church, of far greater extent, and there
fore of far greater credit and authority than the Roman church.
4. He speaks of a point not expressed, but yet not contradicted
by scripture. 5. He says not, that Christ hath recommended the
church to us for an infallible definer of all emergent controver
sies, but for a credible witness of ancient tradition. Whosoever
therefore refuseth to follow the practice of the church (understand
of all places and ages) though he be thought to resist our Saviour,
what is that to us, who cast off no practices of the church, but such
as are evidently post-nate to the time of the apostles, and plainly
contrary to the practice of former and purer times. Lastly, it is
evident, and even to impudence itself undeniable, that upon this
ground, of believing- all things taught by the present church as
taught by Christ, error was held ; for example, the necessity of the
eucharist for infants, and that in St. Augustine's time, and that by
St. Augustine himself: and therefore without controversy this is
no certain ground for truth, which may support falsehood as well
as truth.
164. To the argument wherewith you conclude, I answer, that
though the visible church shall always without fail propose so
much of God's revelation, as is sufficient to bring men to heaven,
for otherwise it will not be the visible church ; yet it may some
times add to this revelation things superfluous, nay, hurtful, nay,
in themselves damnable, though not unpardonable ; and sometimes

174 Charity maintained by Catholics.
take from it things very expedient and profitable : and therefore it
is possible, without sin, to resist in some things the visible church
of Christ. But you press us farther, and demand — what visible
church was extant when Luther began, whether it were the Roman
or protestant church ? — As if, it must of necessity either be pro
testant or Roman, or Roman of necessity, if it were not protestant.
Yet this is the most usual fallacy of all your disputers, by some
specious arguments to persuade weak men, that the church of pro
testants cannot be the true church ; and thence to infer, that with
out doubt it must be the Roman. But why may not the Roman
be content to be a part of it, and the Grecian another ? And if
one must be the whole, why not the Greek church as well as the
Roman ? there being not one note of your church which agrees not
to her as well as to your own ; unless it be, that she is poor and
oppressed by the Turk, and you are in glory and splendour.
165. Neither is it so easy to be determined as you pretend —
that Luther and other protestants opposed the whole visible church
in matters of faith; — neither is it so evident, that the visible
church may not fall into such a state, wherein she may be justly
opposed. And, lastly, for calling the distinction of points into
fundamental and not fundamental, an evasion, I believe you will
find it easier to call it so than to prove it so. But that shall
be the issue of the controversy in the next chapter.

CHAPTER III.
That the distinction of points fundamental, and not fundamental,
is neither pertinent nor true in our present controversy : and
that the catholic visible church cannot err in either kind of the
said points.
" This distinction is abused by protestants to many purposes of
theirs ; and therefore if it be either untrue or impertinent (as they
understand, and apply it) the whole edifice built thereon must be
ruinous and false. For if you object their bitter and continued
discords in matters of faith, without any means of agreement —
they instantly tell you (as Charity Mistaken plainly shews) that
they differ only in points not fundamental. If you convince them,
even by their own confessions, that the ancient fathers taught
divers points held by the Roman church against protestants —
they reply, that those fathers may nevertheless be saved, because
those errors were not fundamental. If you will them to re
member, that Christ must always have a visible church on earth,
with administration of sacraments, and succession of pastors,_and
that when Luther appeared, there was no church distinct from the
Roman, whose communion and doctrine Luther then forsook, and
for that cause must be guilty of schism and heresy — they have an
answer (such as it is) that the catholic church cannot perish, yet
may err in points not fundamental, and therefore Luther and
other protestants were obliged to forsake her for such errors,

Charity maintained by Catholics. 175
under pain of damnation : as if, forsooth, it were damnable to
hold an error not fundamental, nor damnable. If you wonder
how they can teach, that both catholics and protestants may be
saved in their several professions — they salve this contradiction, by
saying, that we both agree in all fundamental points of faith,
which is enough for salvation. And yet, which is prodigiously
strange, they could never be induced to give a catalogue what
points in particular be fundamental, but only by some general
description, or by referring us to the apostles' creed, without de
termining what points therein be fundamental or not fundamental
for the matter ; and in what sense they be, or be not, such : and
yet concerning the meaning of divers points contained in, or
reduced to, the creed, they differ both from us, and among them
selves. And indeed it being impossible for them to exhibit any
such catalogue, the said distinction of points, although it were
pertinent and true, cannot serve them to any purpose, but still
they must remain uncertain, whether or no they disagree from
one another, from the ancient fathers, and from the catholic
church, in points fundamental ; which is to say, they have no
certainty whether they enjoy the substance of christian faith,
without which they cannot hope to be saved. But of this more
hereafter. "2. And to the end, that what shall be said concerning this
distinction may be better understood, we are to observe, that
there be two precepts, which concern the virtue of faith, or our
obligation to believe divine truths. The one is by divines called
affirmative, whereby we are obliged to have a positive explicit
belief of some chief articles of christian faith ; the other is termed
negative, which strictly binds us not to disbelieve, that is, not to
believe the contrary of one point sufficiently represented to our
understandings, as revealed or spoken by Almighty God. The
said affirmative precept (according to the nature of such com
mands) enjoins some act to be performed, but not at all times,
nor doth it equally bind all sorts of persons, in respect of all ob
jects to be believed. For objects ; we grant that some are more
necessary to be explicitly and severally believed than other ;
either because they are in themselves more great and weighty ;
or else in regard they instruct us in some necessary christian duty
towards God, ourselves, or our neighbour. For persons ; no'
doubt but some are obliged to know distinctly more than others,
by reason of their office, vocation, capacity, or the like. For
times; we are not obliged to be still in act of exercising acts of
faith, but according as several occasions permit or require. The
second kind of precept, called negative, doth (according to the
nature of all such commands) oblige universally all persons, in
respect of all objects ; and at all times semper et pro semper, as
divines speak. This general doctrine will be more clear by ex
amples. I am not obliged to be always helping my neighbour,
because the affirmative precept of charity bindeth only in some
particular cases ; but I am always bound, by a negative precept,
never to do him any hurt, or wrong. I am not always bound to

176 Charity maintained by Catholics.
utter what I know to be true ; yet I am obliged never to speak
any one least untruth against my knowledge. And (to come to
our present purpose) there is no affirmative precept, commanding
us to be at all times actually believing any one or all articles of
faith : but we are obliged never to exercise any act against any
one truth, known to be revealed. All sorts of persons are not
bound explicitly and distinctly to know all things testified by God
either in scripture, or otherwise ; but every one is obliged not to
believe the contrary of any one point known to be testified by
God. For that were in fact to affirm, that God could be de
ceived, or would deceive ; which were to overthrow the whole
certainty of our faith wherein the thing most principal is not the
point which we believe, which divines call the material object,
but the chiefest is the motive for which we believe, to wit, Al
mighty God's infallible revelation, or authority, which they term
the formal object of our faith. In two senses, therefore, and with
a double relation, points of faith may be called fundamental, and
necessary to salvation : the one is taken with reference to the
affirmative precept, when the points are of such quality, that
there is obligation to know and believe them explicitly and
severally. In this sense we grant that there is difference betwixt
points of faith, which Dr. Potter* to no purpose laboureth to
prove against his adversary, who in express words doth grant and
explicate f it. But the doctor thought good to dissemble the
matter, and not to say one pertinent word in defence of his
distinction, as it was impugned by Chanty Mistaken, and as it is
wont to be applied by protestants. The other sense, according to
which points of faith may be called fundamental, and necessary to
salvation, with reference to the negative precept of faith, is such,
that we cannot, without grievous sin, and forfeiture of salvation,
disbelieve any one point, sufficiently propounded, as revealed by
Almighty God. And in this sense we avouch, that there is no
distinction in points of faith, as if to reject some must be damn
able, and to reject others, equally proposed as God's word, might
stand with salvation. Yea, the obligation of the negative precept
is far more strict, than is that of the affirmative, which God freely
imposed, and may freely release. But it is impossible, that he
can dispense, or give leave to disbelieve, or deny what he
affirmeth ; and in this sense sin and damnation are more inse
parable from error in points not fundamental, than from igno
rance in articles fundamental. All this I shew by an example,
which I wish to be particularly noted for the present, and for
divers other occasions hereafter. The creed of the apostles con
tains divers fundamental points of faith, as the deity, trinity of
persons, the incarnation, passion, and resurrection of our Saviour
Christ, &c. It contains also some points, for their matter and
nature in themselves not fundamental; as under what judge our
Saviour suffered ; that he was buried ; the circumstance of the
time of his resurrection the third day, &c. But yet nevertheless
whosoever once knows that these points are contained in the
*Page 209. t Charity Mistaken, c. viii. p. 75.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 177
apostles' creed, the denial of them is damnable, and is in that
sense a fundamental error : and this is the precise point of the
present question.
" 3. And all that hitherto hath been said, is so manifestly true,
that no protestant or christian, if he do but understand the terms,
and state of the question, can possibly deny it: insomuch, as I am
amazed that men, who otherwise were endued with excellent
wits, should so enslave themselves to their predecessors in pro
testantism, as still to harp on this distinction, and never regard
how impertinently and untruly it was employed by them at first,
to make all protestants seem to be of one faith, because, forsooth,
they agree in fundamental points. For the difference against pro
testants consists not in that some believe some points, of which
others are ignorant, or not bound expressly to know (as the dis
tinction ought to be applied) ; but that some of them disbelieve,
and directly, wittingly, and willingly oppose what others do be
lieve to be testified by the word of God, wherein there is no
difference between points fundamental and not fundamental ;
because, till points fundamental be sufficiently proposed as re
vealed by God, it is not against faith to reject them ; or rather,
without sufficient proposition, it is not possible prudently to
believe them; and the like is of points not fundamental, which
as soon as they come to be sufficiently propounded as divine
truths, they can no more be denied than points fundamental pro
pounded after the same manner : neither will it avail them to
their other end, that for the preservation of the church in being, it
is sufficient that she doth not err in points fundamental. For if, in
the mean time, she maintain any one error against God's revela
tion, be the thing in itself never so small, her error is damnable,
and destructive of salvation.
"4. But Dr. Potter, forgetting to what purpose protestants
make use of their distinction, doth finally overthrow it, and
yields to as much as we can desire. For, speaking of that mea
sure* and quantity of faith, without which none can be saved, he
saith, ' It is enough to believe some things by a virtual faith, or by
a general, and as it were a negative faith, whereby they are not
denied or contradicted.' Now our question is, in case that divine
truths, although not fundamental, be denied and contradicted;
and therefore even according to him, all such denial excludes
salvation. After he speaks more plainly. ' It is true (saith he)
whatsoeverf is revealed in scripture, or propounded by the
church out of scripture, is in some sense fundamental, in regard
of the divine authority of God, and his word, by which it is re
commended; that is, such as may not be denied or contradicted
without infidelity; such as every christian is bound, with humility
and reverence, to believe, whensoever the knowledge thereof is
offered to him. And, further, where J the revealed will or word
of God is sufficiently propounded ; there he that opposeth is con
vinced of error, and he, who is thus convinced, is a heretic, and
heresy is a work of the flesh which excludeth from heaven:
* Page 211. t Page 212. i Page 250.
HI

178 Charity maintained by Catholics.
(Gal. v. 20, 21 :) and hence it followeth, that it is fundamental to
a christian's faith, and necessary for his salvation, that he believe
all revealed truths of God, whereof he may be convinced, that
they are from God.' Can any thing be spoken more clearly or
directly from us, that it is a fundamental error to deny any one
point, though never so small, if once it be sufficiently propounded
as a divine truth, and that there is, in this sense, no distinction
betwixt points fundamental and not fundamental ? And if any
should chance to imagine, that it is against the foundation of
faith not to believe points fundamental, although they be not
sufficiently propounded, Dr. Potter doth not admit of this differ
ence* betwixt points fundamental and not fundamental: for he
teacheth, that sufficient proposition of revealed truth is required
before a man can be convinced ; and, for want of sufficient convic
tion, he excuseth the disciples from heresy, although they believed
not our Saviour's resurrection,! which is a very fundamental point
of faith. Thus, then, I argue out of Dr. Potter's own confession :
no error is damnable, unless the contrary truth be sufficiently pro
pounded as revealed by God : every error is damnable, if the con
trary truth be sufficiently propounded as revealed by God : there
fore all errors are alike for the general effect of damnation, if the
difference arise not from the manner of being propounded. And
what now is become of their distinction ?
" 5. I will therefore conclude with this argument : according
to all philosophy and divinity, the unity and distinction of every
thing followeth the nature and essence thereof; and therefore, if
the nature and being of faith be not taken from the matter which
a man believes, but from the motive for which be believes (which
is God's word or revelation) we must likewise affirm, that the
unity and diversity of faith must be measured by God's revelation
(which is alike for all objects) and not by the smallness or great
ness of the matter which we believe. Now, that the nature of
faith is not taken from the greatness or smallness of the things
believed, is manifest ; because, otherwise, one who believes only
fundamental points, and another, who, together with them, doth
also believe points not fundamental, should have faith of different
natures ; yea, there should be as many differences of faith, as
there are different points which men believe, according to diffe
rent capacities or instructions, &c, all which consequences are
absurd, and therefore we must say, that unity in faith doth not
depend upon points fundamental, or not fundamental, but upon
God's revelation equally or unequally proposed; and protestants,
pretending an unity only by reason of their agreement in funda
mental points, do indeed induce as great a multiplicity of faith
as there is multitude of different objects which are believed by
them ; and since they disagree in things equally revealed by
Almighty God, it is evident that they forsake the very formal
motive of faith, which is God's revelation, and consequently lose all
faith and unity therein.
"6. The first part of the title of this chapter — that the dis-
* Page 246. t Ibid.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 179
tinction of points fundamental, and not fundamental, in the sense
of protestants, is both impertinent and untrue, being demon
strated ; let us now come to the second:— that the church is
infallible in all her definitions, whether they concern points
fundamental, or not fundamental. And this I prove by these
reasons. "7. It hath been showed in the precedent chapter, that the
Church is judge of controversies in religion ; which she could not
be, if she could err in any one point ; as Dr. Potter would not deny,
if he were once persuaded that she is judge : because, if she could
err in some points, we could not rely upon her authority and judg
ment in any one thing.
" 8. This same is proved by the reason we alleged before ; that
seeing the church was infallible in all her definitions before
scripture was written (unless we will take away all certainty of
faith for that time) we cannot with any show of reason affirm that
she hath been deprived thereof by the adjoined comfort and help
of sacred writ.
"9. Moreover, to say that the catholic church may propose
any false doctrine, maketh her liable to damnable sin and error ;
and yet Dr. Potter teacheth, that the church cannot err damn
ably. For, if in that kind of oath which divines call assertorium,
wherein God is called to witness, every falsehood is a deadly sin
in any private person whatsoever, although the thing be of itself
neither material nor prejudicial to any ; because the quantity or
greatness of that sin is not measured so much by the thing which
is affirmed, as by the manner and authority whereby it is avouched,
and by the injury that is offered to Almighty God, in applying
his testimony to a falsehood : in which respect it is the unanimous
consent of all divines, that in such kind of oaths, no levitas
materia, that is, smallness of matter, can excuse from a mortal
sacrilege against the moral virtue of religion, which respects
worship due to God : if, I say, every least falsehood be a deadly sin
in the aforesaid kind of oath, much more pernicious a sin must it
be in the public person of the catholic church to propound untrue
articles of faith, thereby fastening God's prime verity to false
hood, and inducing and obliging the world to do the same.
Besides, according to the doctrine of all divines, it is not only
injurious to God's eternal verity, to disbelieve things by him
revealed, but also to propose as revealed truths things not re
vealed; as, in commonwealths, it is a heinous offence to coin
either by counterfeiting the metal or the stamp, or to apply the
king's seal to a writing counterfeited, although the contents were
supposed to be true. And whereas to show the detestable sin of
such pernicious fictions, the church doth most exemplarily punish
all broachers of feigned revelations, visions, miracles, prophecies,
&c, as in particular appeareth in the council of Lateran,* excom
municating such persons; if the church herself could propose
false revelations, she herself should have been the first and
chiefest deserver to have been censured and as it were excom-
* Sub Leon. 10. Sees. 11.
M2

180 Charity maintained by Catholics.
municated by herself. For as the Holy Ghost saith in Job,*
' Doth God need your lie, that for him you may speak deceits V
And that of the Apocalypse is most truly verified in fictitious reve
lations : ' If anyf shall add to these things, God will add unto him
the plagues.which are written in this book.' And Dr. Potter saith,
' to addj to it (speaking of the creed) is high presumption, almost as
great as to detract from it.' And therefore, to say the church may
add false revelations, is to accuse her of high presumption, and of
pernicious error, excluding salvation.
" 10. Perhaps some will here reply, that although the church
may err, yet it is not imputed to her for sin, by reason she doth not
err upon malice or wittingly, but by ignorance or mistake.
"11. But it is easily demonstrated, that this excuse cannot
serve : for if the church be assisted only for points fundamental,
she cannot but know, that she may err in points not fundamental,
at least she cannot be certain that she cannot err, and therefore
cannot be excused from headlong and pernicious temerity, in
proposing points not fundamental to be believed by christians as
matters of faith, wherein she can have no certainty, yea, which
always imply a falsehood : for although the thing might chance
to be true, and perhaps all revealed, yet for the matter, she, for
her part, doth always expose herself to danger of falsehood and
error, and in fact doth always err in the manner in which she doth
propound any matter not fundamental ; because she proposeth it
as a point of faith certainly true, which yet is always uncertain,
if she in such things may be deceived.
" 12. Besides, if the church may err in points not funda
mental, she may err in proposing some scripture for canonical,
which is not such ; or else err in keeping and conserving from
corruptions such scriptures as are already believed to be cano
nical. For I will suppose, that, in such apocryphal scripture as
she delivers, there is no fundamental error against faith, or that
there is no falsehood at all, but only want of divine testification :
in which case, Dr. Potter must either grant, that it is a funda
mental error to apply divine revelation to any point not revealed,
or else must yield, that the church may err in her proposition or
custody of the canon of scripture : and so we cannot be sure,
whether she hath not been deceived already in books recom
mended by her, and accepted by christians. And thus we shall
have no certainty of scripture, if the church want certainty in all
her definitions : and it is worthy to be observed, that some
books of scripture, which were not always known to be canonical,
have been afterwards received for such ; but never any one book
or syllable, defined by the church to be canonical, was afterward
questioned, or rejected for apocryphal : a sign that God's church
is infallibly assisted by the Holy Ghost, never to propose as di
vine truth any thing not revealed by God: and, that omission
to define points not sufficiently discussed is laudable; but com
mission in propounding things not revealed, inexcusable : into
* Cap. xiii. v. 7. t Cap. ult. v. 18. \ Page 222.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 181
which precipitation our Saviour Christ never hath, nor never will,
permit his church to fall.
" 13. Nay, to limit the general promises of our Saviour Christ
made to his church to points only fundamental ; namely, that the
' gates* of hell shall not prevail against her :' and that ' the Holy
Ghostf shall lead her into all truth, &c, is to destroy all faith.
For we may, by that doctrine and manner of interpreting the
scripture, limit the infallibility of the apostles' words, and
preaching, only to points fundamental : and whatsoever general
texts of scripture shall be alleged for their infallibility, they may,
by Dr. Potter's example, be explicated, and restrained to points
fundamental. By the same reason it may be further affirmed,
that the apostles, and other writers of canonical scripture, were
endued with infallibility, only in setting down points funda
mental. For if it be urged, that, all scripture is divinely in
spired ; that it is the word of God, &c, Dr. Potter hath afforded
you a ready answer, to say that scripture is inspired, &c. only in
those parts, or parcels, wherein it delivereth fundamental points.
In this -manner, Dr. Fotherby saith, ' The apostlej twice in one
chapter professed, that this he speaketh, and not the Lord : he is
very well content, that where he wants the warrant of the express
word of God, that part of his writings should be esteemed as the
word of man.' Dr. Potter also speaks very dangerously towards
this purpose, §. 5, where he endeavoureth to prove, that the
infallibility of the church is limited to points fundamental, be
cause ' as nature, so God is neither defective in§ necessaries, nor
lavish in superfluities.' Which reason doth likewise prove, that
the infallibility of scripture, and of the apostles, must be re
strained to points necessary to salvation, that so God be not
accused ' as defective in necessaries, or lavish in superfluities.'
In the same place he hath a discourse much tending to this pur
pose ; where, speaking of these words, ' the Spirit shall lead you
into all truth, and shall abide with || you for ever,' he saith,
' though that promise was H directly and primarily made to the
apostles (who had the Spirit's guidance in a more high and abso
lute manner than any since them) yet it was made to them for the
behoof of the church, and is verified in the church universal.
But all truth is not simply all, but all of some kind. To be led
into all truths, is to know and believe them. And who is so
simple, as to be ignorant that there are many millions of truths
(in nature, history, divinity) whereof the church is simply igno
rant? How many truths lie unrevealed in the infinite treasure of
God's wisdom, wherewith the church is not acquainted, &c. So
then the truth itself enforceth us to understand by (all truths) not
simply all, not all which God can possibly reveal, but all per
taining to the substance of faith, all truth absolutely necessary to
salvation.' Mark what he saith : ' that promise— (the Spirit shall
lead you into all truths) was made directly to the apostles, and is
verified in the universal church ; but by all truth is not understood
* Malt. xvi. 18. X In his Sermons, Serm. II. p. 50. || John xvi. 13 ; xiv. 16.
+ John xvi. 13. § Page 150. IT Page 151, 152.

182 Charity maintained by Catholics.
simply all, but all appertaining to the substance of faith, and ab
solutely necessary to salvation.' Doth it not hence follow, that
the promise made to the apostles, of being led into all truth, is to
be understood only of all truth absolutely necessary to salvation ;
and consequently their preaching and writing were not infallible
in' points not fundamental? Or, if the apostles were infallible in
all things which they proposed as divine truth, the like must be
affirmed of the church, because Dr. Potter teacheth the said pro
mise to be verified in the church. And as he limits the aforesaid
works to points fundamental, so may he restrain what other text
soever that can be brought for the universal infallibility of the
apostles or scriptures ; so he may, and so he must, lest otherwise
he receive this answer of his own from himself: ' How many
truths lie unrevealed in the infinite treasures of God's wisdom,
wherewith the church is not acquainted !' And therefore, to verify
such general sayings, they must be understood of truths absolutely
necessary to salvation. Are not these fearful consequences ! And
yet Dr. Potter will never be able to avoid them, till he come to
acknowledge the infallibility of the church in all points hy.her pro
posed as divine truths : and thus it is universally true, that she is
led into all truth, in regard, that our Saviour never permits her to
define or teach any falsehood.
" 14. All that with any colour may be replied to this argu
ment, is — that if once we call any one book, or parcel of scrip
ture in question, although for the matter it contains no funda
mental error, yet it is of great importance, and fundamental, by
reason of the consequence ; because, if once we doubt of one book
received for canonical, the whole canon is made doubtful and un
certain, and therefore the infallibility of scripture must be univer
sal, and not confined within compass of points fundamental.
" 15. I answer : for the thing itself it is very true, that if I
doubt of any one parcel of scripture received for such, I may
doubt of all : and thence, by the same parity, I infer, that if we
doubt of the church's infallibility in some points, we could not
believe her in any one, and, consequently, not in propounding
canonical books, or any other points fundamental, or not funda
mental ; which thing being most absurd, and withal most impious,
we must take away the ground thereof, and believe that she
cannot err in any point great or small : and so this reply doth
much more strengthen what we intend to prove. Yet I add, that
protestants cannot make use of this reply with any good cohe
rence to this their distinction, and some other doctrines which
they defend. For, if Dr. Potter can tell what points in parti
cular be fundamental (as in his 7th section he pretendeth) then
he might be sure, that whensoever he meets with such points in
scripture, in them it is infallibly true, although it may err in
others : and not only true, but clear, because protestants teach
that in matters necessary to salvation the scripture is so clear,
that all such necessary truths are either manifestly contained
therein, or may be clearly deduced from it. Which doctrines
being put together, to wit, that scripture cannot err in points

Charity maintained by Catholics. 1S3
fundamental; that they clearly contain all such points, and that
they can tell what points in particular be such, I mean funda
mental — it is manifest, that it is sufficient for salvation, that scrip
ture be infallible only in points fundamental : for supposing these
doctrines of theirs be true, they may be sure to find in scripture all
points necessary to salvation, although it were fallible in other points
of less moment : neither will they be able to avoid this impiety
against holy scripture, till they renounce their other doctrines, and,
in particular, till they believe that Christ's promises to his church
are not limited to points fundamental.
" 16. Besides, from the fallibility of Christ's catholic church
in some points, it followeth, that no true protestants, learned or
unlearned, doth or can with assurance believe the universal
church in any one point of doctrine : not in points of lesser mo
ment, which they call not fundamental, because they believe that
in such points she may err : not in fundamental, because they
must know what points be fundamental, before they go to learn
of her, lest otherwise they be rather deluded than instructed, in
regard, that her certain and infallible direction extends only to
points fundamental. Now, if before they address themselves to
the church, they must know what points are fundamental, they
learn not of her, but will be as fit to teach, as to be taught by
her : how then are all christians so often, so seriously, upon so
dreadful menaces, by fathers, scriptures, and our blessed Saviour
himself, counselled and commanded to seek, to hear, to obey the
church ? St. Augustine was of a very different mind from pro
testants : ' If (saith he) the* church through the whole world
practise any of these things ; to dispute whether that ought to be
so done, is a most insolent madness.' And in another place he
saith, ' that which thef whole church holds, and is not ordained
by councils, but hath always been kept, is most rightly believed
to be delivered by apostolical authority.' The same holy father
teacheth, that the custom of baptizing children cannot be proved
by scripture alone, and yet that it is to be believed, as derived
from the apostles. 'The custom of our mother, thej church
(saith he), in baptizing infants, is in nowise to be condemned, nor
to be accounted superfluous, nor is it all to be believed, unless
it were an apostolical tradition.' And elsewhere : ' Christy is
of profit to children baptized : is he therefore of profit to persons
not believing ? But, God forbid that I should say, infants do not
believe. I have already said, he believes in another, who sinned
in another. It is said he believes, and it is of force, and he is
reckoned among the faithful that are baptized. This is the autho
rity our mother the church hath ; against this strength, against
this invincible wall, whosoever rusheth shall be crushed in pieces.'
To this argument the protestants, in the conference at Ratisbon,
gave this round answer : — JVos ab Augustino\\ hac in parte libere
dissentimus : ' in this we plainly disagree from Augustine.' Now,
* Epist. 118. t Lib. iv. de Bapt. c. xxiv. § Serm. XIV. verbis Apost. c. xviii.
t Lib. x. de Genesi ad liter, cap. xxiii. j] See Protocol Monach. edit. 2. p. 367.

184 Charity maintained by Catholics.
if this doctrine of baptizing infants be not fundamental in Dr.
Potter's sense, then, according to St. Augustine, the infallibility
of the church extends to points not fundamental. But if, on the
other side, it be a fundamental point ; then, according to the same
holy doctor, we must rely upon the authority of the church for
some fundamental point not contained in scripture, but delivered
by tradition. The like argument I frame out of the same father,
about the not rebaptizing of those who were baptized by here
tics, whereof he excellently, to our present purpose, speaketh in
this manner : ' We follow,* indeed, in this matter even the most
certain authority of canonical scripture.' But, how ? consider his
words: 'although verily there be brought no example for this
point out of the canonical scriptures, yet even in this point the truth
of the same scripture is held by us, while we do that which the
authority of scriptures doth recommend ; that so, because the holy
scripture cannot deceive us, whosoever is afraid to be deceived
by the obscurity of this question, must have recourse to the same
church concerning it, which, without any ambiguity, the holy
scripture doth demonstrate to us.' Among many other points in
the aforesaid words, we are to observe, that, according to this
holy father, when we prove some points, not particularly con
tained in scripture, by the authority of the church ; even in that
case we ought not to be said to believe such points without scrip
ture, because scripture itself recommends the church ; and there
fore, relying on her, we rely on scripture, without danger of being
deceived by the obscurity of any question defined by the church.
And elsewhere he saith : ' Seeing this isf written in no scripture,
we must believe the testimony of the church, which Christ de-
clareth to speak the truth.' But, it seems, Dr. Potter is of opi
nion, that this doctrine about not rebaptizing such as were
baptized by heretics, is no necessary point of faith, nor the con
trary an heresy : wherein he contradicteth St. Augustine, from
whom we have now heard, that what the church teacheth, is
truly said to be taught by scripture ; and consequently to deny
this particular point, delivered by the church, is to oppose scrip
ture itself. Yet, if he will needs hold, that this point is not fun
damental, we must conclude out of St. Augustine (as we did con
cerning the baptizing of children), that the infallibility of the
church reacheth to points not fundamental. The same father, in
another place, concerning this very question of the validity of
baptism conferred by heretics, saith : ' TheJ apostles indeed have
prescribed nothing of this ; but this custom ought to be believed
to be originally taken from their tradition, as there are many
things that the universal church observeth, which are therefore
with good reason believed to have been commanded by the apostles,
although they be not written.' No less clear is St. Chrysostome
for the infallibility of the traditions of the church. For, treating
on these words, (2 Thess. ii.) ' Stand and hold the traditions which
* Lib. i. cont. Crcscon. cap. xxxii., xxxiiii. f De Unit. Eccl. cap. xix.
} De Bapt. cont. Donat. lib. v. c. xxiii.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 185
you have learned, whether by speech or by our epistle,' he saith :
« Hence it is* manifest, that they delivered not all things by letter,
but many things also without writing, and these also are worthy
of belief. Let us therefore account the tradition of the church to
be worthy of belief : it is a tradition : seek no more.' Which words
are so plainly against protestants, that Whitaker is as plain with
St. Chrysostome, saying, ' I answerf that this is an inconsiderable
speech, and unworthy so great a father.' But let us conclude with
St. Augustine, that the church cannot approve any error against
faith, or good manners : ' The church (saith he), being J placed be
tween much chaff and cockle, doth tolerate many things ; but yet
she doth not approve, nor dissemble, nor do those things which are
against faith or good life.'
" 17. And as I have proved that protestants, according to their
grounds, cannot yield infallible assent to the church in any one
point ; so, by the same reason, I prove, that they cannot rely upon
scripture itself in any one point of faith ; not in points of lesser
moment (or not fundamental) because in such points the catholic
church (according to Dr. Potter), and much more any protestant,
may err, and think it is contained in scripture, when it is not : not
in points fundamental, because they must first know what points be
fundamental, before they can be assured that they cannot err in
understanding the scripture: and consequently, independently of
scripture, they must foreknow all fundamental points of faith : and
therefore they do not indeed rely upon scripture, either for funda
mental or not fundamental points.
" 18. Besides, I mainly urge Dr. Potter, and other protestants,
that they tell us of certain points which they call fundamental, and
we cannot wrest from them a list in particular of such points, with
out which no man can tell whether or no he errs in points funda
mental, and be capable of salvation. And, which is most lament
able, instead of giving us such a catalogue, they fall to wrangle
among themselves about the making of it.
"19. Calvin holds § the pope's primacy, invocation of saints,
free-will, and such like, to be fundamental errors, overthrowing
the gospel. Others are not of his mind, as Melancthon, who
saith, in || the opinion of himself, and other his brethren, that
' the monarchy of the bishop of Rome is of use or profit, to this
end, that consent of doctrine may be retained. An agreement,
therefore, may be easily established in this article of the pope's
primacy, if other articles could be agreed upon.' If the pope's
primacy be a means, that consent of doctrine may be retained,
first to submit to it, and other articles will be easily agreed upon.
Luther also saith of the pope's primacy, it may be borne IT withal.
And why then, O Luther ! did you not bear with it ? And how
can you and your followers be excused from damnable schism,
who chose rather to divide God's church, than to bear with that
which you confess may be borne withal ? But" let us go forward.
That the doctrine of free-will, prayer for the dead, worshipping
* Horn. 4. t De sacra Scrip, p. 678. tEp. 119. § Instit. lib. iv. c. ii.
II Cent. Ep. Theol. Ep. 74. 1 In Assertionib. art. 36.

186 Charity maintained by Catholics.
of images, worship and invocation of saints, real-presence, tran
substantiation, receiving under one kind, satisfaction and merit of
Works, and the mass, be not fundamental errors, is taught (respec
tive) by divers protestants, carefully alleged in the Protestants'*
Apology, &c. as namely, by Perkins, Cartwright, Frith, Fulk,
Henry, Sparke, Goad, Luther, Reynolds, Whitaker, Tindal,
Francis Johnston, with others. Contrary to these, is the Confes
sion of the Christian Faith, so called by protestants, which I men
tioned f heretofore, wherein we are damned unto unquenchable
fire, for the doctrine of mass, prayer to saints, and for the dead,
free-will, presence at idol-service, man's merit, with such like.
Justification by faith alone is by some protestants affirmed to be
— the soul of the J church : the only principal origin of §salvation,
of all other points of || doctrine the chiefest and weightiest. —
Which yet, as we have seen, is contrary to other protestants, who
teach, that merit of good works is not a fundamental error; yea,
divers protestants defend merit of good works, as may be seen in
Breerly.Tf One would think that the king's supremacy, for which
some blessed men lost their lives, was once among protestants
held for a capital point : but now, Dr. Andrews, late of Win
chester, in his book against Bellarmine, tells us, that it is suffi
cient to reckon it among true doctrines. And Wotton denies —
that protestants hold** the king's supremacy to be an essential
point of faith. — O freedom of the new gospel ! Hold with ca
tholics, the pope ; or with protestants, the king ; or with puritans,
neither pope nor king to be the head of the church, all is one,
you may be saved. Some, as Casta lio,ff and the whole sect of
the academical protestants hold, that doctrines about the supper,
baptism, the state and office of Christ, how he is one with his
Father, the trinity, predestination, and divers other such questions,
are not necessary to salvation. And (that you may observe how
ungrounded and partial their assertions be) Perkins teacheth, that
the real presence of our Saviour's body in the sacrament, as it is
believed by catholics, is a fundamental error ; and yet affirmeth the
consubstantiation of lutherans not to be such, notwithstanding
that divers chief lutherans to their consubstantiation join the pro
digious heresy of ubiquitation. Dr. Usher, in his sermon of the
Unity of the Catholic Faith, grants salvation to the Ethiopians,
who yet with christian baptism join circumcision. Dr. Potter JJ
cites the doctrine of some, whom he termeth men of great learn
ing and judgment, that — all who profess to love and honour Jesus
Christ are in the visible christian church, and by catholics to be
reputed brethren. — One of these men of great learning and judg
ment, is Thomas Morton, by Dr. Potter cited in his margin,
* Tract. 2, c. ii. § 14, after F. tCap. i. v. 4.
X Chark in the Tower Disputation, the Four Days' Conference.
§ Fox's Acts and Mon. p. 402.
[| The Confession of Bohemia in the Harmony of Confessions, p. 253.
V Tract. 3, § 7, under M. n. 15.
** In his Answer lo a Popish Pamphlet, p. 68.
tt Vid. Gal. Reginald. Calv. Turcis. 1. 2, c. vi.
it Page 113, 114. Morton in his Treatise of the Kingdom of Israel, p. 94.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 187
whose love and honour to Jesus Christ you may perceive by his say
ing, that — the churches of Arians (who denied our Saviour Christ
to be God) are to be accounted the church of God, because they
do hold the foundation of the gospel, which is faith in Jesus Christ,
the Son of God, and Saviour of the world.— And, which is more,
it seems by these charitable men, that for being a member of
the church, it is not necessary to believe one only God. For Dr.
Potter,* among the arguments to prove Hooker's and Morton's
opinion, brings this : — the people of the ten tribes, after their
defection, notwithstanding their gross corruption and idolatry — •
remaineth still a true church. We may also, as it seemeth by
these men's reasoning, deny the resurrection, and yet be members
of the true church. For a learned man (saith Dr. Potter f in
behalf of Hooker's and Morton's opinion) was anciently made a
bishop of the catholic church, though he did professedly doubt of
the last resurrection of our bodies. Dear Saviour ! what times do
we behold ? If one may be a member of the true church, and yet
deny the trinity of the persons, the Godhead of our Saviour, the
necessity of baptism ; if we may use circumcision, and with the
worship of God join idolatry, wherein do we differ from Turks and
Jews? Or rather, are we not worse than either of them ? If they
who deny our Saviour's divinity, might be accounted the church of
God, how will they deny that favour to those ancient heretics, who
denied our Saviour's true humanity ; and so the total denial of Christ
will not exclude one from being a member of the true church. St.
HilaryJ makes it of equal necessity for salvation, that we believe
our Saviour to be true God, and true man, saying: — This manner
of confession we are to hold, that we remember him to be the Son
of God, and the Son of man, because the one without the other
can give no hope of salvation. — And yet Dr. Potter saith of the
aforesaid doctrine of Hooker and Morton — the § reader may be
pleased to approve or reject it, as he shall find cause. — And in
another place, || he showeth so much good liking of this doctrine,
that he explicateth and proveth the church's perpetual visibility by
it. And in the second edition of his book he is careful to declare
and illustrate it more at large than he had done before : howsoever,
this sufficiently sheweth, that they have no certainty what points
be fundamental. As for the Arians in particular, the author whom
Dr. Potter cites for a moderate catholic, but is indeed a plain
heretic, or rather atheist, Lucian like, jesting at all religion, H
placeth Arianism among fundamental errors: but, contrarily, an
English protestant divine, masked under the name of Irenaeus
Philalethes, in a little book in Latin, entitled Dissertatio de pace,
et concordia ecclesia, endeavoureth to prove, that even the denial
of the blessed trinity may stand with salvation. Divers protestants
have taught, that the Roman church erreth in fundamental points :
but Dr. Potter, and others teach the contrary; which could not
happen, if they could agree what be fundamental points. You
brand the donatists with a note of an error — in the matter** and

•Page 121. t Page 122. X Comment, in Matt. cap. xvi. § Page 123.
II Page 253. H A Moderate Examination, &c. cap. i. paulo post initium. ** Page 126.

188 Charity maintained by Catholics.
the nature of it properly heretical — because they taught, that the
church remained only with them, in the part of Donatus. And
yet many protestants are so far from holding that doctrine to be
a fundamental error, that themselves go further, and say, that for
divers ages before Luther there was no true visible church at all.
It is then too apparent, that you have no agreement in specifying
what be fundamental points : neither have you any means to deter
mine what they be ; for, if you have any such means, why do you
not agree ? You tell us the creed contains all points fundamental :
which, although it were true, yet you see it serves not to bring you
to a particular knowledge and agreement in such points. And no
wonder ; for (besides what I have said already in the beginning of
this chapter, and am to deliver more at large in the next) after so
much labour and paper spent to prove that the creed contains all
fundamental points, you conclude — It remains* very probable, that
the creed is the perfect summary of those fundamental truths,
whereof consists the unity of faith, and of the catholic church. —
Very probable ! Then, according to all good logic, the contrary may
remain very probable, and so all remain as full of uncertainty as
before. The whole rule, you say, and the sole judge of your faith
must be scripture. Scripture doth indeed deliver divine truths, but
seldom doth qualify them, or declare whether they be, or be not,
absolutely necessary to salvation. You fallf heavy upon Charity
Mistaken, because he demands a particular catalogue of funda
mental points, which yet you are obliged in conscience to do, if
you be able. For without such a catalogue, no man can be
assured whether or no he have faith sufficient to salvation : and
therefore take it not in ill part, if we again and again demand such
a catalogue. And that you may see we proceed fairly, I will per
form, on our behalf, what we request of you, and do here deliver
a catalogue, wherein are comprised all points taught by us to be
necessary to salvation in these words : — We are obliged, under
pain of damnation, to believe whatsoever the catholic visible church
of Christ proposeth, as revealed by Almighty God. — If any be of
another mind, all catholics denounce him to be no catholic. But,
enough of this. And I go forward with the infallibility of the church
in all points.
" 20. For even out of your own doctrine, that the church can
not err in points necessary to salvation, any wise man will infer,
that it behoves all who have care of their souls, not to forsake her
in any one point. First, because they are assured, that although
her doctrine proved not to be true, in some point, yet even,
according to Dr. Potter, the error cannot be fundamental, nor
destructive of faith and salvation : neither can they be accused of
any the least imprudence, in erring (if it were possible) with the
universal church. Secondly, since she is, under pain of eternal
damnation, to be believed, and obeyed in some things, wherein
confessedly she is endued with infallibility, I cannot in wisdom
suspect her credit in matters of less moment : for who would trust
* Page 241. t Page 215.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 189
another in matters of highest consequence, and be afraid to rely
on him in things of less moment ? Thirdly, since (as I said) we
are undoubtedly obliged not to forsake her in the chiefest, or
fundamental points, and that there is no rule to know precisely
what, and how many, those fundamental points be, I cannot,
without hazard of my soul, leave her in any one point, lest,
perhaps, that point, or points, wherein I forsake her, prove indeed
to be fundamental, and necessary to salvation. Fourthly, that
visible church, which cannot err in points fundamental, doth
without distinction propound all her definitions concerning matters
of faith to be believed under anathemas or curses, esteeming all
those that resist to be deservedly cast out of her communion, and
holding it a point necessary to salvation, that we believe she can
not err ; wherein, if she speak truth, then to deny any one point
in particular, which she defineth, or to affirm in general that she
may err, puts a man into a state of damnation : whereas to believe
her in such points as are not necessary to salvation, cannot endanger
salvation ; as likewise to remain in her communion, can bring no
great harm, because she cannot maintain any damnable error, or
practice ; but to be divided from her (she being Christ's catholic
church) is most certainly damnable. Fifthly, the true church,
being in lawful and certain possession of superiority and power,
to command and require obedience from all christians in some
things; I cannot without grievous sin withdraw my obedience
in any one, unless I evidently know, that the thing commanded
comes not within the compass of those things to which her power
extendeth. And who can better inform me, how far God's church
can proceed, than God's church herself? or to what doctor can
the children and scholars, with greater reason and more security
fly for direction, than to the mother and appointed teacher of all
christians ? In following her, I sooner shall be excused, than in
cleaving to any particular sect or person, teaching or applying
scriptures against her doctrine or interpretation. Sixthly, the
fearful examples of innumerable persons, who, forsaking the
church under pretence of her errors, have failed even in funda
mental points, and suffered shipwreck of their salvation, ought to
deter all christians from opposing her in any one doctrine, or
practice ; as (to omit other, both ancient and modern heresies) we
see, that divers chief protestants, pretending to reform the cor
ruptions of the church, are come to affirm, that for many ages she
erred to death, and wholly perished : which Dr. Potter cannot
deny to be a fundamental error against that article of our creed —
I believe the catholic church — as he affirmeth of the donatists,
because they confined the universal church within Africa, or some
other small tract of soil. Lest therefore I may fall into some
fundamental error, it is most safe for me to believe all the decrees
of that church which cannot err fundamentally ; especially if we
add, that, according to the doctrine of catholic divines, one error
in faith, whether it be for the matter itself, great or small, destroys
faith, as is shewed in Charity Mistaken; and consequently, to

190 Charity maintained by Catholics.
accuse the church of any one error, is to affirm, that she lost all
faith, and erred damnably ; which very saying is damnable, because
it leaves Christ no visible church on earth.
"21. To all these arguments I add this demonstration: Dr.
Potter teacheth, that — there neither was,* nor can be, any just
cause to depart from the church of Christ, no more than from
Christ himself. — But if the church of Christ can err in some points
of faith, men not only may, but must, forsake her in these (unless
Dr. Potter will have them believe one thing, and profess another) :
and if such errors and corruptions should fall out to be about the
church's liturgy, public service, administration of sacraments, and
the like, they, who perceive such errors, must of necessity leave
her externa] communion. And, therefore, if once we grant the
church may err, it followeth, that men may, and ought, to forsake
her (which is against Dr. Potter's own words), or else they are
inexcusable who left the communion of the Roman church, under
pretence of errors, which they grant not to be fundamental. And,
if Dr. Potter think good to answer this argument, he must re
member his own doctrine to be, that even the catholic church may
err in points not fundamental.
" 22. Another argument for the universal infallibility of the
church, I take out of Dr. Potter's own words. ' If (saith he) wef
did not dissent in some opinions from the present Roman church,
we could not agree with the church truly catholic. These words
cannot be true, unless he presuppose that the church truly catholic
cannot err in points not fundamental : for if she may err in such
points, the Roman church, which he affirmeth to err only in
points not fundamental, may agree with the church truly catholic,
if she likewise may err in points not fundamental.' Therefore,
either he must acknowledge a plain contradiction in his own words,
or else must grant that the church truly catholic . cannot err in
points not fundamental, which is what we intended to prove.
" 23. If words cannot persuade you, that in all controversies
you must rely upon the infallibility of the church, at least yield
your assent to deeds : hitherto I have produced arguments drawn,
as it were, ex natura rei, from the wisdom and goodness of God, who
cannot fail to have left some infallible means to determine contro
versies, which, as we have proved, can be no other, except a visible
church, infallible in all her definitions. But because both catholics
and protestants receive holy scripture, we may thence also prove
the infallibility of the church in all matters which concern faith
and religion. Our Saviour speaketh clearly: 'the gates of hell J
shall not prevail against her.' And, '§1 will ask my Father,
and he will give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with
you for ever, the Spirit of truth.' And, ' But when he, the Spirit
of || truth cometh, he shall teach you all truth.' The apostle saith,
that the church is ' the pillar and ground of If truth.' And, ' he
gave some apostles, and some prophets, and other some evange-
* Page 75. X Matt. xvi. || Ibid. xvi.
t Page 97. § John xiv. T 1 Tim. iii.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 191
lists, and other some pastors and doctors, to the consummation of
the saints unto the work of the ministry, unto the edifying of
the body of Christ; until we meet all into the unity of faith and
knowledge of the Son of God, into a perfect man, into, the measure
of the age of the fulness of Christ : that now we be not children,
wavering, and carried about with every wind of doctrine in the
wickedness of men, in craftiness, to the circumvention* of error.'
All which words seem clearly enough to prove, that the church is
universally infallible ; without which, unity of faith could not be
conserved against ' every wind of doctrine.' And yet Dr. Potterf
limits these promises and privileges to fundamental points, in
which he grants the church cannot err. I urge the words of
scripture, which are universal, and do not mention any such re
straint. I allege that most reasonable and received rule, that
scripture is to be understood literally, as it soundeth, unless some
manifest absurdity force us to the contrary. But all will not serve
to accord our different interpretation. In the mean time, divers of
Dr. Potter's brethren step in, and reject his limitation, as over-
large, and somewhat tasting of papistry : and therefore they
restrain the mentioned texts, either to the infallibility which the
apostles and other sacred writers had in penning of scripture, or
else to the invisible church of the elect ; and to them not abso
lutely, but with a double restriction, that they shall not fall damn
ably, and finally ; and other men have as much right as these to
interpose their opinion and interpretation. Behold we are three
at debate about the self-same words of scripture ; we confer divers
places and texts ; we consult the originals ; we examine trans
lations; we endeavour to pray heartily; we profess to speak
sincerely, to seek nothing but truth, and the salvation of our
own souls, and that of our neighbours ; and, finally, we use all
those means, which, by protestants themselves, are prescribed for
finding out the true meaning of scripture : nevertheless, we neither
do, or have any possible means to agree, as long as we are left to
ourselves; and when we should chance to be agreed, the doubt
will still remain, whether the thing itself be a fundamental point
or no : and yet it were great impiety to imagine, that God, the
lover of all souls, hath left no certain infallible means, to decide
both this and all other differences arising about the interpretation
of scripture, or upon any other occasion. Our remedy therefore
in these contentions must be, to consult and hear God's visible
church, with submissive acknowledgment of her power and in
fallibility, in whatsoever she proposeth as a revealed truth; ac
cording to that divine advice of St. Augustine, in these words :
' If at length} thou seem to be sufficiently tossed, and hast a desire
to put an end to thy pains, follow the way of the catholic discipline,
which from Christ himself, by the apostles, hath come down even
to us, and from us shall descend to all posterity.' And though I
conceive, that the distinction of points, fundamental and not
fundamental, hath now been sufficiently confuted, yet that no
* Ephes. iv. t Page 151. 1. 153. X De Util. Cred. cap. viii.

192 Points rightly distinguished
shadow of difficulty may remain, I will particularly refel a common
saying of protestants, that it is sufficient for salvation to believe
the apostles' creed, which they hold to be a summary of all funda
mental points of faith. '

THE ANSWER TO THE THIRD CHAPTER.
Wherein it is maintained, that the distinction of points, funda
mental and not fundamental, is in this present controversy good
and pertinent : and that the catholic church may err in the lat
ter kind of the said points.
1. This distinction is employed by protestants to many purposes ;
and, therefore, if it be pertinent and good, (as they understand
and apply it,) the whole edifice built thereon must be either firm
and stable, or, if it be not, it cannot be for any default in this
distinction. 2. If you object to them discords in matters of faith without any
means of agreement — they will answer you, that they want not
good and solid means of agreement in matters necessary to salva
tion ; viz. their belief of those things which are plainly and un
doubtedly delivered in scripture, which whoso believes, must of
necessity believe all things necessary to salvation : and their
mutual suffering one another to abound in their several sense, in
matters not plainly and undoubtedly there delivered. And for
their agreement in all controversies of religion, either they may
have means to agree about them or not ; if you say they have,
why did you before deny it ? if they have not means, why do you
find fault with them for not agreeing ?
3. You will say, that their fault is, that — by remaining protes
tants, they exclude themselves from the means of agreement which
you have — and which by submission to your church they might
have also. But if you have means of agreement, the more shame
for you that you still disagree. For who, I pray, is more inex
cusably guilty, for the omission of any duty ? they that either
have no means to do it, or else know of none they have, which
puts them in the same case, as if they had none : or they which
profess to have an easy and expedite means to do it, and yet still
leave it undone ? " If you had been blind (saith our Saviour to the
pharisees) you had had no sin ; but now you say you see, there
fore your sin remaineth."
4. If you say, you do agree in matters of faith, I say this is
ridiculous, for you define matters of faith to be those wherein
you agree : so that to say you agree in matters of faith, is to say
you agree in those things wherein you do agree. And do not pro
testants do so likewise ? Do not they agree in those things wherein
they do agree ?
5. But you are all agreed, that only those things wherein you
do agree are matters of faith. — And protestants, if they were wise,
would do so too. Sure I am they have reason enough to do so :

into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 193
seeing all of them agree with explicit faith in all those things,
which are plainly and undoubtedly delivered in scripture ; that
is, in all which God hath plainly revealed : and with an implicit
faith, in that sense of the whole scripture which God intended,
whatsoever it was. Secondly, That which you pretend is false ;
for else, why do some of you hold it against faith, to take or
allow the oath of allegiance ; others, as learned and honest as
they, that it is against faith, and unlawful to refuse it, and allow
the refusing of it ? Why do some of you hold that it is de fide,
that the pope is head of the church by divine law, others the
contrary? Some hold it de fide, that the blessed Virgin was free
from actual sin ; others that it is not so. Some that the pope's
indirect power over princes in temporalities is de fide; others the
contrary. Some that it is universal tradition, and consequently
de fide, that the Virgin Mary was conceived in original sin ; others
the contrary.
6. But what shall we say now, if you be not agreed touching
your pretended means of agreement, how then can you pretend to
unity, either actual or potential, more than protestants may ?
Some of you say, the pope alone, without a council, may determine
all controversies : but others deny this. Some, that a general coun
cil without a pope may do so : others deny this. Some, both in
conjunction are infallible determiners : others again deny this.
Lastly, some among you hold the acceptation of the decrees of
councils by the universal church to be the only way to decide con
troversies: which others deny, by denying the church to be infal
lible. And, indeed, what way of ending controversies can this be,
when either party may pretend that they are part of the church,
and they receive not the degree, therefore the whole church hath
not received it ?
7. Again, means of agreeing differences are either rational and
well-grounded, and of God's appointment ; or voluntary, and
taken up at the pleasure of men. Means of the former nature,
we say, you have as little as we. For where hath God appointed,
that the pope, or a council, or a council confirmed by the pope,
or that society of christians which adhere to him, shall be the in
fallible judge of controversies ? I desire you to show any one of
these assertions plainly set down in scripture, (as in all reason a
thing of this nature should be,) or at least delivered with a full
consent of fathers, or at least taught in plain terms by any one
father for four hundred years after Christ. And if you cannot
do this (as I am sure you cannot), and yet will still be obtruding
yourselves upon us for our judges, who will not cry out, — perisse
frontem de rebus ?
8. But then for means of the other kind, such as yours are, we
have great abundance of them. For, besides all the ways which
you have devised, which we make use of when we please, we have
a great many more, which you yet have never thought of, for
which we have as good colour out of scripture, as you have for
yours. For, first, we could, if we would, try it by lots, whose
doctrine is true, and whose false: and you know it is written,

194 Points rightly distinguished
* " The lot is cast into the lap, but the whole disposition of it is
from the Lord." 2. We could refer them to the king, and you
know it is written, f" A divine sentence is in the lips of the king ;
his mouth transgresseth not in judgment." J" The heart of the
king is in the hand of the Lord." We could refer the matter to
any assembly of christians assembled in the name of Christ, see
ing it is writtten, § " Where two or three are gathered together
in my name, there am I in the midst of them." We may refer
it to any priest, because it is written, \\ " The priest's lips shall
preserve knowledge." T[ " The scribes and pharisees sit in Moses'
chair," &c. To any preacher of the gospel, to any pastor, or
doctor ; for to every one of them Christ hath promised,** he
will be with them "always, even to the end of the world;" and
to every one of them, it is said, ff " He that heareth you, heareth
me, &c. To any bishop, or prelate ; for it is written, JJ " Obey
your prelates;" and again, §§"He hath given pastors and doctors,
&c. lest we should be carried about with every wind of doctrine."
To any particular church of christians, seeing it is a particular
church which is called ||||" The house of God, the pillar and ground
of truth ;" and seeing of any particular church it is written,
1H["He that heareth not the church, let him be unto thee as an
heathen or a publican." We might refer it to any man that prays-
for God's Spirit ; for it is written, *** " Every one that asketh,
receiveth:" and again, fff"If any man want wisdom, let him
ask of God, who giveth all men liberally, and upbraideth not."
Lastly, we might refer it to the Jews ; for, without all doubt, of
them it is written, JJJ" My spirit that is in thee/' &c. All these
means of agreement, whereof not any one but bath as much pro
bability from scripture, as that which you obtrude upon us, offer
themselves upon a sudden to me ; haply many more might be
thought on, if we had time ; but these are enough to shew, that,
would we make use of voluntary and devised means to determine
differences, we had them in great abundance. And if you say,
these would fail us and contradict themselves : so, as we pretend,
have yours. There have been popes against popes ; councils
against councils ; councils confirmed by popes against councils con
firmed by popes : lastly, the church of some ages against the church
of other ages.
Lastly, whereas you find fault — that protestants, upbraided with
their discord, answer, that they differ only in points not fundamen
tal : — I desire you to tell me, whether they do so, or not so : if they
do so, I hope you will not find fault with the answer ; if you say,
they do not so, but in points fundamental also, then they are not
members of the same church one with another, no more than with
you : and therefore, why should you object to any of them, their
differences from each other, any more than to yourselves, their
more and greater differences from you ?
* Prov. xvi. 33. t Prov. xvi. 10. X Prov. xxi. 1. § Matt, xviii. 20.
|| Mal. ii. 7. T Matt. xxv. 2. ** Matt, xxviii. 20. ttLuke x. 16.
8 Heb. xiii. 17. ^Eph. iv. 11. |||| 1 Tim. iii. 15. IT Matt, xviii. 17.
*** Matt. vii. 8, fit Jam. i. 5. XXX Isa. lix. 21.

into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 195
10. But they are convinced, sometimes even by their own con
fessions, that the ancient fathers taught divers points of popery ;
and then they reply, those fathers may nevertheless be saved, be
cause those errors were not fundamental. — And may not you also
be convinced, by the confessions of your own men, that the fathers
taught divers points held by protestants against the church of
Rome, and divers against protestants, and the church of Rome ?
Do not your purging indexes clip the tongues, and seal up the
lips of a great many for such confessions ; and is not the above-
cited confession of your Doway divines, plain and full to the same
purpose? And do you not also, as freely as we, charge the
fathers with errors, and yet say they were saved. Now what
else do we understand by an unfundamental error, but such a
one with which a man may possibly be saved? So that still you
proceed in condemning others for your own faults, and urging
arguments against us, which return more strongly upon your
selves. 11. But your will is — we should remember that Christ must
always have a visible church. — Ans. Your pleasure shall be
obeyed, on condition you will not forget that there is a difference
between perpetual visibility and perpetual purity. As for the
answer which you make for us, true it is, we believe the catholic
church cannot perish, yet that she may, and did, err in points
not fundamental; and that protestants were obliged to forsake
those errors of the church, as they did, though not the church
for her errors : for that they did not, but continued still members
of the church. For it is not all one (though you perpetually
confound them) to forsake the errors of the church, and to
forsake the church : or to forsake the church in her error, and
simply to forsake the church ; no more than it is for me to
renounce my brother's or my friend's vices or errors, and to
renounce my brother or my friend. The former then was done
by protestants, the latter was not done: nay, not only not from
the catholic, but not so much as from the Roman, did they
separate per omnia ; but only in those practices which they con
ceived superstitious or impious. If you would at this time
propose a form of liturgy, which both sides hold lawful, and
then they would not join with you in this liturgy, you might
have some colour then to Say, they renounce your communion
absolutely. But as things are now ordered, they cannot join
with you in prayers, but they must partake with you in unlawful
practices; and for this reason, they (not absolutely, but thus far)
separate from your communion. And this, I say, they were
obliged to do under pain of damnation. Not as if it were damna
ble to hold an error not damnable, but because it is damnable out
wardly to profess and maintain it, and to join with others in the
practice of it, when inwardly they do not hold it. Now had
they continued in your communion, that they must have done ;
viz. have professed to believe, and externally practised, your er
rors, whereof they were convinced that they were errors ; which,
though the matters of the errors had been not necessary, but
n2

196 Points rightly distinguished
only profitable, whether it had not been damnable dissimulation
and hypocrisy, I leave it to you to judge. You yourself tell us,
within two pages after this, that — you are obliged never to speak
any one least lie against your knowledge, §. 2. — Now what is this
but to live in a perpetual lie ?
12. As for that which, in the next place) you seem so to
wonder at, that both catholics and protestants, according to the
opinion of protestants may be saved in their several professions,
because, forsooth, we both agree in all fundamental points— I
answer, this proposition, so crudely set down, as you have here ,
set it down, I know no protestant will justify : for you seem to
make them teach that it is an indifferent thing, for the attainment
of salvation, whether a man believe the truth or the falsehood;
and that they care not in whether of these religions a man live or
die, so he die in either of them : whereas all that they say is this
— that those amongst you which want means to find the truth, and
so die in error ; or use the best means they can with industry, and
without partiality to find the truth, and yet die in error, these
men, thus qualified, notwithstanding these errors, may be saved.
Secondly, For those that have means to find the truth, and will
not use them, they conceive, though their case be dangerous, yet
if they die with a general repentance for all their sins, known
and unknown, their salvation is not desperate. The truths which
they hold of faith in Christ and repentance, being, as it were, an
antidote against their errors, and their negligence in seeking the
truth. Especially, seeing, by confession of both sides, we agree
in much more than is simply and indispensably necessary to
salvation. 13. But seeing we make such various use of this distinction, is
it not prodigiously strange that we will never be induced to give
in a particular catalogue what points be fundamental ? — And
why, I pray, is it so prodigiously strange, that we give no answer
to an unreasonable demand ? God himself hath told us, *that
" where much is given, much shall be required ; where little is
given, little shall be required." To infants, deaf men, madmen,
nothing, for aught we know, is given ; and, if it be so, of them
nothing shall be required. Others, perhaps, may have means
only given them to believe, f" that God is, and that he is a
rewarder of them that seek him ;" and to whom thus much only
is given, to them it shall not be damnable, that they believe but
only this much. Which methinks is very manifest from the
apostle, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, where, having first said,
that " without faith it is impossible to please God," he subjoins,
as his reason, " For whosoever cometh unto God must believe
that God is, and that he is a rewarder of them that seek him."
Where, in my opinion, this is plainly intimated, that this is the
minimum quod sic, the lowest degree of faith, wherewith, in men,
capable of faith, God will be pleased ; and that with this lowest
degree he will be pleased, where means of rising higher are
deficient. Besides, if without this belief, " that God is, and that
•Lukexii. 48. tHeb.xi. 6.

into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 197
he is a rewarder of them that seek him," God will not be pleased,
then his will is, that we should believe it. Now his will it cannot
be, that we should believe a falsehood ; it must be therefore true,
" that he is a rewarder of them that seek him." Now it is pos
sible that they, which never heard of Christ, may seek God;
therefore it is true, that even they shall please him, and be
rewarded by him; I say rewarded, not with bringing them im
mediately to salvation without Christ, but with bringing them,
according to his good pleasure, first, to faith in Christ, and so
to salvation. To which belief the story of Cornelius, in the tenth
chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, and St. Peter's words to him,
are to me a great inducement. For, first, it is evident he be
lieved not in Christ, but was a mere gentile, and one who knew
not but men might be worshipped ; and yet we are assured, that
" his prayers and alms (even while he was in that state) came up
for a memorial before God, that his prayer was heard, and his
alms had in remembrance in the sight of God," ver. 4. That
upon his then fearing God, and working righteousness (such as it
was) he was accepted with God. But how accepted ? Not to be
brought immediately to salvation, but to be promoted to a higher
degree of the knowledge of God's will: for so it is in the fourth
and fifth verses : " Call for one Simon, whose surname is Peter,
he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do :" and, at ver. 33,
" We are all here present before God,, to hear all things that
are commanded thee of God." So that though even in his
gentilism, he was accepted for his present state; yet, if he had
continued in it, and refused to believe in Christ after the sufficient
revelation of the gospel to him, and God's will to have him be
lieve it, he that was accepted before would not have continued
accepted still: for then that condemnation had come upon him,
— that fight was come unto him, and he "loved darkness more
than light." So that (to proceed a step farther) to whom faith in
Christ is sufficiently propounded, as necessary to salvation, to
them it is simply necessary and fundamental to believe in Christ;
that is, to expect remission of sins and salvation from him, upon
the performance of the conditions he requires ; among which
conditions one is, that we believe what he hath revealed, when it
is sufficiently declared to have been revealed by him : for, by
doing so, " we set our seal that God is true," and that Christ was
sent by him. Now that may be sufficiently declared to one (all
things considered), which (all things considered), to another is
not sufficiently declared ; and, consequently, that may be funda-
mentaland necessary to one, which to another is not so. Which
variety of circumstances makes it impossible to set down an exact
catalogue of fundamentals ; and proves your request as reason
able as if you should desire us (according to the fable) to make a
coat to fit the moon in all her changes ; or to give you a garment
that will fit all statures ; or to make you a dial to serve all
meridians; or to design particularly, what provision will serve
an army for a year ; whereas there may be an army of ten thou
sand, there may be of one hundred thousand: and therefore

198 Points rightly distinguished
without setting down a catalogue of fundamentals in particular,
(because none that can be given can universally serve for all
men, God requiring more of them to whom he gives more, and
less of them to whom he gives less) we must content ourselves by
a general description to tell you what is fundamental ; and to
warrant us in doing so, we have your example, §. 19, where,
being engaged to give us a catalogue of fundamentals, instead
thereof you tell us only in general — that all is fundamental,
and not to be disbelieved, under pain of damnation, which the
church hath defined. — As you therefore think it enough to say
in general, that all is fundamental which the church hath de
fined, without setting down in particular a complete catalogue
of all things, which in any age the church hath defined (which, I
believe, you will not undertake to do ; and, if you do, it will be
contradicted by your fellows) : so in reason you might think it
enough for us also to say in general, that it is sufficient for any
man's salvation to believe that the scripture is true, and contains
all things necessary for salvation; and do his best endeavour to
find and believe the true sense, of it; without delivering any
particular catalogue of the fundamentals of faith.
14. Neither doth the want of such a catalogue leave us in such
a perplexed uncertainty as you pretend. For though, perhaps,
we cannot exactly distinguish in the scripture what is revealed,
because it is necessary, from what is necessary, consequently and
accidentally, merely because it is revealed ; yet we are sure
enough, that all that is necessary any way, is there ; and there
fore, in believing all that is there, we are sure to believe all
that is necessary. And if we err from the true and intended
sense of some, nay, many obscure and ambiguous texts of scrip
ture, yet we may be sure enough that we err not damnably ;
because, if we do indeed desire and endeavour to find the truth,
we may be sure we do so, and as sure that it cannot consist with
the revealed goodness of God, to damn him for error, that desires
and endeavours to find the truth.
15. Ad. §. 2. The effect of this paragraph (forasmuch as con
cerns us) is this: that for any man to deny belief to any one
thing, be it great or small, known by him to be revealed by
Almighty God for a truth, is, in effect, to charge God with
falsehood ; for it is to say, that God affirms that to be a truth
which he either knows to be not a truth, or which he doth not
know to be a truth : and therefore, without all controversy, this
is a damnable sin. To this I subscribe with hand and heart,
adding withal, that not only he which knows but he which
believes (nay, though it be erroneously) any thing to be revealed
by God, and yet will not believe it nor assent unto it, is in the
same case, and commits the same sin of derogation from God's
most perfect and pure veracity.
16. Ad. §. 3. I said purposely knows by himself, and believes
himself; for as, without any disparagement of a man's honesty, I
may believe something to be false, which he affirms of his cer
tain knowledge to be true ; provided I neither know nor believe

into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 199
that he hath so affirmed : so, without any the least dishonour to
God's eternal never-failing veracity, I may doubt of, or deny,
some truth revealed by him, if I neither know nor believe it to be
revealed by him.
17. Seeing therefore the crime of calling God's veracity in
question, and consequently (according to your grounds) of erring
fundamentally, is chargeable upon those only that believe the
contrary of any one point known (not by others) but themselves
to be testified by God : I cannot but fear, (though I hope other
wise,) that your heart condemned you of a great calumny and
egregious sophistry, in imputing fundamental and damnable
errors to disagreeing protestants ; because, forsooth, some of
them disbelieve; and directly, wittingly, and willingly oppose,
what others do believe to be testified by the word of God. The
sophistry of your discourse will be apparent, if it be contrived
into a syllogism : thus, therefore, in effect you argue :
Whosoever disbelieves any thing known by himself to be re
vealed by God, imputes falsehood to God, and therefore errs
fundamentally :
But some protestants disbelieve those things which others
believe to be testified by God :
Therefore, they impute falsehood to God, and err fundamen
tally :
Neither can you with any colour pretend, that in these words
— known to be testified by God — you meant — not by himself,
but by any other ; seeing he only in fact affirms, that God doth
deceive, or is deceived, who denies some things which himself
knows or believes to be revealed by God, as before I have demon
strated. -For otherwise, if I should deny belief to some thing
which God had revealed secretly to such a man as I had never
heard of, I should be guilty of calling God's veracity into question,
which is evidently false. Besides, how can it be avoided, but
the Jesuits and dominicans, the dominicans and franciscans,
must upon this ground differ fundamentally, and one of them err
damnably, seeing the one of them disbelieves, and willingly
opposes, what the others believe to be the word of God ?
18. Whereas you say, that — the difference among protestants
consists in this, that some believe some points, of which others are
ignorant, or not bound expressly to know — I would gladly know
whether you speak of protestants differing in profession only, or
in opinion also. If the first, why do you say, presently after,
that some disbelieve what others of them believe ? If they differ
in opinion, then sure they are ignorant of the truth of each
other's opinions ; it being impossible and contradictious, that a
man should know one thing to be true, and believe the contrary ;
or know it, and not believe it. And if they do not know the truth
of each other's opinions, then I hope you will grant they are
ignorant of it. If your meaning were, they were not ignorant,
that each other held these opinions, or of the sense of the opinions
which they held; I answer, this is nothing to the convincing of
their understandings of the truth of them; and these remaining

200 Points rightly distinguished
unconvinced of the truth of them, they are excusable if they do
not believe.
19. But — ignorance of what we are expressly bound to know
is itself a fault, and therefore cannot be an excuse : — and there
fore if you could shew, that protestants differ in those points,
the truth whereof (which can be but one) they were bound ex
pressly to know, I should easily yield that one side must of ne
cessity be in a mortal crime. But for want of proof of this, you
content yourself only to say it; and therefore I also might be
contented only to deny it, yet I will not, but give a reason for
my denial. And my reason is, because our obligation expressly to
know any divine truth must arise from God's manifest revealing
of it, and his revealing unto us that he hath revealed it, and that
his will is we would believe it: now, in the points controverted
among protestants, he hath not so dealt with us, therefore he hath
not laid any such obligation upon us. The major of this syllo
gism is evident, and therefore I will not stand to prove it: the
minor also will be evident to him that considers that, in all the
controversies of protestants there is a seeming conflict of scripture
with scripture, reason with reason, authority with authority :
which how it can consist with the manifest revealing of the truth
of either side I cannot well understand. Besides, though we grant
that scripture, reason, and authority, were all on one side, and
the appearances of the other side all easily answerable ; yet if we
consider the strange power that education and prejudices in
stilled by it have over even excellent understandings, we may
well imagine that many truths, which in themselves are reveal
ed plainly enough, and yet to such or such a man, prepossessed
with contrary opinions, not revealed plainly : neither doubt I, but
God, who knows whereof we are made, and what passions we
are subject unto, will compassionate such infirmities, and not enter
into judgment with us for those things, which, all things considered,
were unavoidable.
20. But till fundamentals (say you) be sufficiently proposed (as
revealed by God) it is not against faith to reject them ; or rather,
it is not possible prudently to believe them : and points unfunda-
mental, being thus sufficiently proposed as divine truths, may not
be denied ; therefore you conclude, there is no difference between
them. — Ans. A circumstantial point may by accident become funda
mental, because it may be so proposed, that the denial of it will draw
after it the denial of this fundamental truth — that all which God
says is true. Notwithstanding in themselves there is a main differ
ence between them ; points fundamental being those only which
are revealed by God, and commanded to be preached to all and be
lieved by all. Points circumstantial being such, as though God
hath revealed them, yet the pastQrs of the church are not bound,
under pain of damnation, particularly to teach them unto all men
every where, and the people may be securely ignorant of them.
21. You say — not erring in points fundamental, is not suffi
cient for the preservation of the church ; because any error
maintained by it against God's revelation is destructive. — I answer,

into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 201
if you mean against God's revelation, known by the church to be
so, it is true ; but it is impossible that the church should do so ;
for ipso facto in doing it, it were a church no longer. But, if you
mean against some revelation, which the church by error thinks
to be no revelation, it is false. The church may ignorantly dis
believe such a revelation, and yet continue a church : which thus
I prove : That the gospel was to be preached to all nations, was
a truth revealed before our Saviour's ascension, in these words ;
"Go and teach all nations," (Matt, xxviii. 19.) Yet through
prejudice or inadvertence, or some other cause, the church dis
believed it, as it is apparent out of the eleventh and twelfth
chapters of the Acts, until the conversion of Cornelius ; and yet
was still a church. Therefore, to disbelieve some divine reve
lation, not knowing it to be so, is not destructive of salvation, or
of the being of a church. Again, it is a plain revelation of God,
that *the sacrament of the eucharist should be administered in
both kinds; and fthat the public hymns and prayers of the
church should be in such a language as is most for edification :
yet these revelations the church of Rome not seeing, by reason
of the veil before their eyes, their church's supposed infallibility,
I hope the denial of them shall not be laid to their charge, no
otherwise than as building hay and stubble on the foundation,
not overthrowing the foundation itself.
22. Ad. §. 4. In the beginning of this paragraph, we have this
argument against this distinction. — It is enough (by Dr. Potter's
confession) to believe some things negatively; i. e. not to deny
them ; therefore all denial of any divine truth excludes salvation.
— As if you should say, one horse is enough for a man to go a
journey ; therefore without a horse no man can go a journey. As
if some divine truths, viz. those which are plainly revealed, might
not be such, as of necessity were not to be denied : and others, for
want of sufficient declaration, deniable without danger. Indeed,
if Dr. Potter had said there had been no divine truth, declared
sufficiently or not declared, but must upon pain of damnation be
believed, or at least not denied ; then you might justly have con
cluded as you do: but now, that some may not be denied, and
that some may be denied without damnation, why they may not
both stand together, I do not yet understand.
23. In the remainder you infer out of Dr. Potter's words — that
all errors are alike damnable, if the manner of propounding the
contrary truths be not different — which, for aught I know, all
protestants, and all that have sense, must grant. Yet I deny your
illation from hence, that the distinction of points into funda
mental and unfundamental, is vain and uneffectual for the purpose
of protestants. For though, being alike proposed as divine truths,
they are by accident alike necessary ; yet the real difference still
remains between them, that they are not alike necessary to be
proposed. 24. Ad. §. 5. The next paragraph, if it be brought out of the
clouds, will, I believe, have in it these propositions: 1. Things
* 1- Cor. xi. 28. T 1 Cor. xiv. 15, 16, 26.

202 Points rightly distinguished
are distinguished by their different natures. 2. The nature of faith
is taken, not from the matter believed; for then they that be
lieved different matters should have different faiths, but from the
motive to it. 3. This motive is God's revelation. 4. This revela
tion is alike for all objects. 5. Protestants disagree in things
equally revealed by God; therefore they forsake the formal
motives of faith; and therefore have no faith nor unity therein.
Which is truly a very proper and convenient argument to close
up a weak discourse, wherein both the propositions are false for
matter, confused and disordered for the form, and the conclusion
utterly inconsequent. First, for the second proposition ; who
knows not that the essence of all habits (and therefore of faith
among the rest) is taken from their act, and their object? If the
habit be general, from the act and object in general ; if the habit
be special, from the act and object in special. Then for the
motive to a thing ; that it cannot be of the essence of the thing to
which it moves, who can doubt that knows that a motive is an
efficient cause, and that the efficient is always extrinsical to the
effect ? For the fourth, that God's revelation is alike for all ob
jects, it is ambigious : and if the sense of it be, that his revelation
is an equal motive to induce us to believe all objects revealed
by him, it is true, but impertinent : if the sense of it be, that all
objects revealed by God are alike (that is, alike plainly and
undoubtedly) revealed by him, it is pertinent, but most untrue.
Witness the great diversity of texts of scripture, whereof some
are so plain and evident, that no man of ordinary sense can
mistake the sense of them. Some are so obscure and ambiguous,
that to say this or this is the certain sense of them, were high
presumption. For the fifth, protestants disagree in things equally
revealed by God: in themselves, perhaps, but not equally to
them, whose understandings, by reason of their different educa
tions, are fashioned and shaped for the entertainment of various
opinions, and consequently some of them more inclined to believe
such a sense of scripture, others to believe another ; which, to
say that God will not take it into his consideration in judging
men's opinions, is to disparage his goodness. But to what purpose
is it that these things are equally revealed to both, (as the light is
equally revealed to all blind men) if they be not fully revealed to
either ? The sense of this scripture, " Why are they then bap
tized for the dead ?" And this, " He shall be saved, yet so as by
fire ;" and a thousand others, is equally revealed to you, and to
another interpreter, that is, certainly to neither. He now con
ceives one sense of them, and you another ; and would it not
be an excellent inference, if I should conclude now as you do ?
That you forsake the formal motive of faith, which is God's reve
lation, and consequently lose all faith and unity therein ? So
likewise the Jesuits and dominicans, and the franciscans and
dominicans, disagree about things equally revealed by Almighty
God; and, seeing they do so, I beseech you let me understand,
why this reason will not exclude them as well as protestants from
all faith and unity therein ? Thus you have failed of your under-

into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 203
taking in your first part of your title, and that is a very ill omen,
especially in points of so straight mutual dependence, that we shall
have but slender performance in your second assumpt : which is —
that the church is infallible in all her definitions, whether concern
ing points fundamental or not fundamental.
25. Ad. §. 7, 8. The reasons in these two paragraphs, as they
were alleged before, so they were before answered, chapter 2. And
thither I remit the reader.
26. Ad. §. 9, 10, 11. I grant that the church cannot, without
damnable sin, either deny any thing to be truth, which she knows
to be God's truth ; or propose any thing as his truth, which she
knows not to be so. — But that she may not do this by ignorance
or mistake, and so, without damnable sin, that you should have
proved, but have not. But, say you — this excuse cannot serve :
for if the church be assisted only for points fundamental, she
cannot but know that she may err in points not fundamental. —
Answer, it does not follow, unless you suppose that the church
knows that she is assisted no farther : but if, being assisted only
so far, she yet did conceive by error, her assistance absolute and
unlimited, or, if knowing her assistance restrained to funda
mentals, she yet conceived by error, that she should be guarded
from proposing any thing but what was fundamental, then the
consequence is apparently false. — But at least she cannot be cer
tain that she cannot err, and therefore cannot be excused from
headlong and pernicious temerity in proposing points not funda
mental, to be believed by christians as matters of faith. — Answer,
neither is this deduction worth any thing, unless it be understood
of such unfundamental points, as she is not warranted to propose
by evident text of scripture. Indeed, if she propose such, as
matters of faith certainly true, she may well be questioned, quo
warranto? she builds without a foundation, and says — thus saith
the Lord, when the Lord doth not say so : which cannot be ex
cused from rashness and high presumption ; such a presumption,
as an ambassador should commit, who should say in his master's
name that for which he hath no commission : of the same nature,
I say, but of a higher strain ; as much as the King of heaven is
greater than any earthly king. But though she may err in some
points not fundamental, yet may she have certainty enough in
proposing others; as for example, these: that Abraham begat
Isaac, that St. Paul had a cloak, that Timothy was sick ; because
these, though not fundamental ; i. e. not essential parts of Chris
tianity, yet are evidently, and undeniably, set down in scripture,
and consequently may be, without all rashness, proposed by the
church as certain divine revelations. Neither is your argument
concluding, when you say — if in such things she may be deceived
she must be always uncertain of all such things — for my sense
may sometimes possibly deceive me, yet I am certain enough that
I see what I see, and feel what I feel. Our judges are not in
fallible in their judgments, yet are they certain enough that they
judge aright, and that they proceed according to the evidence
that is given, when they condemn a thief or a murderer to the

204 Points rightly distinguished
gallows. A traveller is not always certain of his way, but often
mistaken ; and doth it therefore follow that he can have no assu
rance that Charing-cross is his right way from the Temple to
Whitehall? the ground of your error here, is your not distin
guishing between actual certainty and absolute infallibility.
Geometricians are not infallible in their own science ; yet they
are very certain of those things which they see demonstrated :
and carpenters are not infallible, yet certain of the straightness
of those things which agree with the rule and square. So, though
the church be not infallibly certain, that in all her definitions,
whereof some are about disputable and ambiguous matters, she
shall proceed according to her rule ; yet being certain of the in
fallibility of her rule, and that, in this or that thing, she doth
manifestly proceed according to it, she may be certain of the truth
of some particular decrees, and yet not certain that she shall never
decree but what is true.
27. Ad. §. 12. But if the church may err in points not funda
mental, she may err in proposing scripture, and so we cannot be
assured, whether she have not been deceived already. — The
church may err in her proposition or custody of the canon of
scripture, if you understand by the church, any present church
of one denomination ; for example, the Roman, the Greek, or so.
Yet have we sufficient certainty of scripture, not from the bare
testimony of any present church, but from universal tradition, of
which the testimony of any present church is but a little part. So
that here you fall into the fallacy, & dicto secundum quid, ad dictum
simpliciter. For, in effect, this is the sense of your argument :
unless the church be infallible, we can have no certainty of scrip
ture from the authority of the church : therefore, unless the
church be infallible, we can have no certainty hereof at all. As
if a man should say, if the vintage of France miscarry, we can
have no wine from France ; therefore, if that vintage miscarry, we
can have no wine at all. And for the incorruption of scripture, I
know no other rational assurance we can have of it than such as
we have of the incorruption of other ancient books, that is, the
consent of ancient copies : such I mean for the kind, though it
may be far greater for the degree, of it. And if the Spirit of
God give any man any other assurance hereof, this is not rational
and discursive, but supernatural and infused : an assurance it may
be to himself, but no argument to another. As for the infallibility
of the church, it is so far from being a proof of the scripture's
incorruption, that no proof can be pretended for it, but contro
verted places of scripture ; which yet are as subject to corruption
as any other, and more likely to have been corrupted (if it had
been possible) than any other, and made to speak as they do, for
the advantage of those men, whose ambition it hath been a long
time to bring all under their authority. Now then, if any man
should prove the scriptures uncorrupted, because the church says
so, which is infallible ; I would demand again, touching this very
thing, that there is an infallible church, seeing it is not of itself
evident, how shall I be assured of it ? and what can he answer,

into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 205
but that the "scripture says so, in these and these places: here
upon I would ask him, how shall I be assured that the scriptures
are incorrupted in these places ; seeing it is possible, and not alto
gether improbable, that these men, which desire to be thought
infallible, when they had the government of all things in their own
hands, may have altered them for their purpose ? If to this he
answer again, that the church is infallible, and therefore can
not do so ; I hope it would be apparent, that he runs round in a
circle, and proves the scripture's incorruption by the church's infal
libility, and the church's infallibility by the scripture's incorrup
tion; and that is, in effect, the church's infallibility by the
church's infallibility, and the scripture's incorruption by the scrip
ture's incorruption.
28. Now for your observation, that — some books which were
not always known to be canonical have been afterwards received
for such ; but never any book or syllable defined for canonical,
was after questioned or rejected for apocryphal — I demand,
touching the first sort, whether they were commended to the
church by the apostles as canonical or not? if not, seeing the
whole faith was preached by the apostles to the church, and see
ing, after the apostles, the church pretends to no new revelations,
how can it be an article of faith to believe them canonical ? and
how can you pretend that your church, which makes this an
article of faith, is so assisted, as not to propose any thing as a
divine truth which is not revealed by God? If they were, how
then is the church an infallible keeper of the canon of the scrip
ture, which hath suffered some books of canonical scripture to be
lost ? and others, to lose for a long time their being canonical, at
least the necessity of being so esteemed, and afterwards, as it
were by the law of Postliminium, hath restored their authority
and canonicalness unto them ? If this were delivered by the
apostles to the church, the point was sufficiently discussed ; and
therefore your church's omission to teach it for some ages, as an
article of faith, nay, degrading it from the number of articles of
faith, and putting it among disputable problems, was surely not
very laudable. If it were not revealed by God to the apostles,
and by the apostles to the church, then can it be no revelation,
and therefore her presumption in proposing it as such is inex
cusable. 29. And then for the other part of it — that never any book or
syllable defined for canonical, was afterwards questioned or reject
ed for apocryphal — certainly it is a bold asseveration, but ex
tremely false. For I demand, the book of Ecclesiasticus and
Wisdom, the Epistles of St. James and to the Hebrews, were they
by the apostles approved for canonical, or no ? If not, with what
face dare you approve them, and yet pretend that all your doctrine
is apostolical ; especially, seeing it is evident that this point is not
deducible, by rational discourse, from any other defined by them ?
If they were approved by them, this, I hope, was a sufficient defi
nition ; and therefore you were best rub your forehead hard, and
say that these books were never questioned. But, if you do so,

206 Points rightly distinguished
then I shall be bold to ask you, what books you meant in saying
before — some books, which were not always known to be ca
nonical, have been afterwards received. — Then for the book of
Maccabees, I hope you will say it was defined for canonical before
St. Gregory's time ; and yet he, (lib. xix. Moral, c. xiii.) citing a
testimony out of it, prefaceth to it after this manner ; " Concerning
which matter we do not amiss, if we produce a testimony out of
books, although not canonical, yet set forth for the edification
of the church. For Eleazer in the book of Maccabees," &c.
which, if it be not to reject it from being canonical, is, without
question, at least to question it. Moreover, because you are so
punctual as to talk of words and syllables, I would know whether,
before Sixtus Quintus's time, your church had a defined canon of
scripture, or not? If not, then was your church surely a most
vigilant keeper of scripture, that for one thousand five hundred
years, had not defined what was scripture, and what was not. If
it had, then I demand, was it that set forth by Sixtus ? or that set
forth by Clement? or a third different from both? If it were that
set forth by Sixtus, then is it now condemned by Clement ; if that
of Clement, it was condemned I say ; but sure you will say con
tradicted and questioned by Sixtus: if different from both, then
was it questioned and condemned by both, and still lies under the
condemnation. But then, lastly, suppose it had been true, that
both some book not known to be canonical had been received,
and that never any after receiving had been questioned : how had
this been a sign that the church is infallibly assisted by the Holy
Ghost? In what mood or figure would this conclusion follow out
of these premises? Certainly, your flying to such poor signs as
these are, is to me a great sign that you labour with penury of
better arguments ; and that thus to catch at shadows and bulrushes,
is a shrewd sign of a sinking cause.
30. Ad. §. 13. We are told here — that the general promises of
infallibility to the church, must not be restrained only to points
fundamental ; because then the apostles' words and writings may
also be restrained. — The argument put in form, and made complete,
by supply of the concealed proposition, runs thus :
The infallibility promised to the present church of any age, is as
absolute and unlimited, as that promised to the apostles in their
preachings and writings :
But the apostles' infallibility is not to be limited to fundamen
tals:
Therefore neither is the church's infallibility thus to be limited.
Or, thus:
The apostles' infallibility in their preaching and writing may be
limited to fundamentals, as well as the infallibility of the pre
sent church : but that is not to be done : therefore this also is
not to be done.
Now to this argument, I answer, that, if by may be as well, in
the major proposition, be understood, may be as possibly, it is
true, but impertinent. If by it we understand, may be as justly
and rightly, it is very pertinent, but very false. So that as Dr.

into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 207
Potter limits the infallibility of the present church unto funda
mentals, so another may limit the apostles' unto them also. He
may do it, de facto, but dejure he cannot ; that may be done, and
done lawfully ; this also may be done, but not lawfully. That may
be done, and, if it be done, cannot be confuted : this also may be
done, but, if it be done, may easily be confuted. It is done to our
hand in this very paragraph, by five words taken out of scripture :
"All scripture is divinely inspired." Shew but as much for the
church : shew where it is written, that all the decrees of the church
are divinely inspired ; and the controversy will be at an end. Be
sides, there is not the same reason for the church's absolute infalli
bility, as for the apostles' and scripture's. For, if the church fall
into error, it may be reformed by comparing it with the rule of
the apostles' doctrine and scripture : but, if the apostles have erred
in delivering the doctrine of Christianity, to whom shall we have re
course, for the discovering and correcting their error ? Again, there
is not so much strength required in the edifice as in the foundation;
and if but wise men have the ordering of the building, they will
make it a much surer thing, that the foundation shall not fail the
building, than that the building shall not fall from the foundation.
And though the building be to be of brick or stone, and perhaps
of wood, yet it may be possibly they will have a rock for their
foundation, whose stability is a much more indubitable thing, than
the adherence of the structure to it. Now the apostles, and pro
phets, and canonical writers, are the foundation of the church, ac
cording to that of St. Paul, " built upon the foundation of apostles
and prophets ;" therefore their stability, in reason, ought to be greater
than the church's, which is built upon them. Again, a dependent
infallibility (especially if the dependence be voluntary) cannot be
so certain, as that on which it depends : but the infallibility of the
church depends upon the infallibility of the apostles, as the straight-
ness of the thing regulated upon the straightness of the rule : and,
besides, this dependence is voluntary, for it is in the power of the
church to deviate from this rule ; being nothing else but an aggre
gation of men, of which every one hath free-will, and is subject to
passions and error : therefore the church's infallibility is not so cer
tain as that of the apostles.
31. Lastly, Quid verba audiam, cum facta jideam ? If you be
so infallible as the apostles were, shew it as the apostles did :
" They went forth (saith St. Mark) and preached every where,
the Lord working with them, and confirming their words with
signs following." It is impossible that God should lie, and that
the eternal Truth should set his hand and seal to the confirmation
of a falsehood, or of such doctrine as is partly true, and partly
false. The apostles' doctrine was thus confirmed, therefore it was
entirely true, and in no part either false or uncertain. I say, in
no part of that which they delivered constantly, as a certain divine
truth, and which had the attestation of divine miracles. For that
the apostles themselves, even after the sending of the Holy Ghost,
were, and through inadvertence or prejudice, continued for a time
in an error, repugnant to a revealed truth ; it is, as I have already

208 Points rightly distinguished
noted, unanswerably evident, from the story of the Acts of the
Apostles. For notwithstanding our Saviour's express warrant and
injunction, to "go and preach to all nations," yet until St. Peter
was better informed by a vision from heaven, and by the conver
sion of Cornelius, both he and the rest of the church held it un
lawful for them to go or preach the gospel to any but the Jews.
32. And for those things which they profess to deliver as the
dictates of human reason and prudence, and not as divine revela
tions, why we should take them to be divine revelations, I see no
reason; nor how we can do so, and not contradict the apostles,
and God himself. Therefore, when St. Paul says, in the first
Epistle to the Corinthians, vii. 12. " To the rest speak I, not the
Lord ;" and again, " concerning virgins I have no commandment
of the Lord, but I deliver my judgment :" if we will pretend that
the Lord did certainly speak what St. Paul spake, and that his
judgment was God's commandment, shall we not plainly contradict
St. Paul, and that Spirit, by which he wrote ? which moved him
to write, as in other places, divine revelations, which he certainly
knew to be such : so, in this place, his own judgment touching
some things which God had not particularly revealed unto him.
And if Dr. Potter did speak to this purpose — that the apostles
were infallible only in these things which they spake of certain
knowledge — I cannot see what danger there were in saying so:
yet the truth is, you wrong Dr. Potter. It is not he, but Dr.
Stapleton in him, that speaks the words you cavil at. Dr. Sta-
pleton, saith he, p. 140, is full and punctual to this purpose :
then sets down the effect of his discourse, I. 8. Princ. Doct. 4. c.
15, and in that, the words you cavil at; and then, p. 150, he shuts
up this paragraph with these words: thus Dr. Stapleton. So that,
if either the doctrine or the reason be not good, Dr. Stapleton, not
Dr. Potter, is to answer for it.
33. Neither do Dr. Potter's ensuing words — limit the apostles'
infallibility to truths absolutely necessary to salvation — if you
read them with any candour ; for, it is evident, he grants the
church infallible in truth absolutely necessary ; and as evident,
that he ascribes to the apostles the Spirit's guidance, and conse
quently infallibility, in a more high and absolute manner than any
since them. — From whence, thus I argue : he that grants the
church infallible in fundamentals, and ascribes to the apostles the
infallible guidance of the Spirit, in a more high and absolute man
ner than to any since them, limits not the apostles' infallibility
to fundamentals ; but Dr. Potter grants to the church such a
limited infallibility, and ascribes to the apostles the Spirit's in-.
fallible guidance in a more high and absolute manner ; therefore
he limits not the apostles' infallibility to fundamentals. I once
knew a man out of courtesy help a lame dog over a stile, and he
for requital bit him by the fingers : just so you serve Dr. Potter.
He out of courtesy grants you that those words, " The Spirit shall
lead you into all truth, and shall abide with you ever ;" though
in their high and most absolute sense, they agree only to the
apostles, yet in a conditional, limited, moderate, secondary sense,

into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 209
they may be understood of the church : but says, that if they be
understood of the church, " all must not be simply all," no, nor
so large an all as the apostles' all, " but all necessary to salva
tion." And you, to requite his courtesy in granting you thus
much, cavil at him, as if he had prescribed these bounds to the
apostles also, as well as the present church. Whereas, he hath
explained himself to the contrary, both in the clause aforemen
tioned, " the apostles who had the Spirit's guidance in a more
high and absolute manner than any since them;" and in these
words ensuing, " whereof the church is simply ignorant;" and
again, " wherewith the church is not acquainted." But most
clearly in those which, being most incompatible to the apostles,
you, with an &c, I cannot but fear, craftily have concealed : " How
many obscure texts of scripture which she understands not ? How
many school-questions, which she hath not, haply cannot de
termine ? And for matters of fact, it is apparent that the church
may err ;" and then concludes, that " we must understand by all
truths, not simply all, but (if you conceive the words as spoken
of the church) all truth absolutely necessary to salvation ;" and
yet, beyond all this, the negative part of his answer agrees very
well to the apostles themselves ; for that all, which they were led
unto, was not simply all, otherwise St. Paul erred in saying, " we
know in part ;" but such an all as was requisite to make them
the church's foundations. Now such they could not be, without
freedom from error, in all those things which they delivered con
stantly, as certain revealed truths. For, if we once suppose they
may have erred in some things of this nature, it will be utterly
undiscernible what they have erred in, and what they have not.
Whereas, though we suppose the church hath erred in some things,
yet we have means to know what she hath erred in, and what she
hath not ; I mean, by comparing the doctrine of the present
church with the doctrine of the primitive church delivered in
scripture. But then, last of all, suppose the doctor had said,
(which I know he never intended) that this promise, in this place
made to the apostles, was to be understood only of truths abso
lutely necessary to salvation ; is it consequent that he makes their
preaching and writing not infallible' in points not fundamental ?
Do you not blush for shame at this sophistry ? The doctor
says, no more was promised in this place ; therefore he says no
more was promised! Are there not other places besides this?
And may not that be promised in other places, which is not pro
mised in this ?
34. But if the apostles were infallible in all things proposed
by them as divine truths, the like must be affirmed of the church,
because Dr. Potter teacheth the said promise to be verified in the
Wiurch. True, he doth so, but not in so absolute a manner. Now
what is opposed to absolute, but limited, or restrained ? To the
apostles then it was made, and to them only, yet the words are
true of the church. And this very promise might have been made
to it, though here it is not. They agree to the apostles in a higher,
to the church in a lower sense ; to the apostles in a more absolute,
o

210 Points rightly distinguished
to the church in a more limited sense. To the apostles absolutely
for the church's direction ; to the church conditionally by adhe
rence to that direction, and so far as she doth adhere to it. In a
word, the apostles were led into all truths by the Spirit, efficaciter :
the church is led also into all truths by the apostles' writings,
sufficienter : so that the apostles and the church may be fitly com
pared to the star, and the wise men. The star was directed by
the finger of God, and could not but go right to the place where
Christ was: but the wise men were led by the star to Christ;
led by it, I say, not efficaciter or irresistibiliter, but sufficienter;
so that, if they would, they might follow it ,- if they would not,
they might choose. So was it between the apostles writing scrip
tures and the church. They, in their writings, were infallibly
assisted to propose nothing as a divine truth, but what was so :
the church is also led into all truth, but it is by the intervening
of the apostles' writings : but it is as the wise men were led by
the star, or as a traveller is directed by a Mercurial statue, or as
a pilot by his card and compass, led sufficiently, but not irre
sistibly ; led as that she may follow, not so that she must. For,
seeing the church is a society of men, whereof every one (accord
ing to the doctrine of the Romish church) hath free-will in
believing, it follows, that the whole aggregate hath free-will in
believing. And if any man say that at least it is morally im
possible, that of so many, whereof all may believe aright, not any
should do so : I answer, it is true, if they did all give themselves
any liberty of judgment. But if all (as the case is here) captivate
their understandings to one of them, all are as likely to err as
that one ; and he more likely to err than any other, because he
may err, and thinks he cannot, and because he conceives the
Spirit absolutely promised to that succession of bishops, of which
many have been notoriously and confessedly wicked men — men
of the world : whereas this Spirit is the " Spirit of truth, whom
the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither
knoweth him." Besides, let us suppose, that neither in this, nor
in any other place, God hath promised any more unto them, but to
lead them into all truth, necessary for their own, and other men's
salvation : doth it therefore follow that they were, de facto, led no
farther ? God, indeed, is obliged by his veracity to do all that he
hath promised, but is there any thing that binds him not to do any
more ? May not he be better than his word, but you will quarrel
at him ? May not his bounty exceed his promise ? And may not
we have certainty enough that oft-times it doth so? God at first
did not promise to Solomon, in his vision at Gibeon, any more
than what he asked, which was — wisdom to govern his people,
and that he gave him. But yet, I hope, you will not deny that we
have certainty enough that he gave him something which neither
God had promised, nor he had asked. If you do, you contra
dict God himself: for, "Behold (saith God), because thou hast
asked this thing, I have done according to thy word. Lo, I have
given thee a wise and an understanding heart ; so that there was
none like thee before thee, neither after thee shall any arise like

into Fundamental and not Fundamental. 211
unto thee : and I have also given thee that which thou hast not
asked, both riches and honour, so that there shall not be any
among the kings like unto thee in all thy days." God, for
aught appears, never obliged himself by promise, to shew St.
Paul those unspeakable mysteries, which in the third heaven he
shewed unto him ; and yet, I hope, we have certainty enough that
he did so. God promises to those that seek his kingdom, and
the righteousness thereof, that all things necessary shall be added
unto them; and in rigour by his promise he is obliged to do no
more ; and if he give them necessaries, he hath discharged his
obligation : shall we therefore be so injurious to his bounty to
wards us, as to say it is determined by the narrow bounds of mere
necessity? So, though God hath obliged himself by promise to
give his apostles infallibility only in things necessary to salvation ;
nevertheless, it is utterly inconsequent that he gave them no more,
than by the rigour of his promise he was engaged to do ; or that
we can have no assurance of any farther assistance than he gave
them; especially when he himself, both by his word and by his
works, hath assured us, that he did assist them farther. You see
by this time that your chain of fearful consequences (as you call
them) is turned to a rope of sand, and may easily be avoided, with
out any flying to your imaginary infallibility of the church in all
her proposals.
35. Ad. §. 14, 15. Doubting of a book received for canonical,
may signify, either doubting whether it be canonical ; or, sup
posing it to be canonical, whether it be true. If the former sense
were yours, I must then again distinguish of the term, received ;
for it may signify, either received by some particular church, or
by the present church universal, or the church of all ages. If you
meant the word in either of the former senses, that which you
say is not true. A man may justly and reasonably doubt of some
texts, or some book received by some particular church, or by the
universal church of this present time, whether it be canonical or
no ; and yet have just reason to believe, and no reason to doubt,
but that other books are canonical. As Eusebius, perhaps, had
reason to doubt, of the Epistle of St. James ; the church of Rome,
in Jerome's time, of the Epistle to the Hebrews: and yet they
did not doubt of all the books of the canon, nor had reason to do
so. If by received, you mean received by the church of all ages,
I grant, he that doubts of any one such book, hath as much reason
to doubt of all. But yet here again I tell you, that it is possible
a man may doubt of one such book, and yet not of all ; because
it is possible men may do not according to reason. If you meant
your words in the latter sense, then, I confess, he that believes
such a book to be canonical, i. e. the word of God, and yet (to
make an impossible supposition) believes it not to be true, if he will
do according to reason, must doubt of all the rest, and believe
none. For there being no greater reason to believe any thing
true than because God hath said it, nor no other reason to believe
the scripture to be true, but only because it is God's word; he
that doubts of the truth of any thing said by God, hath as much
o2

212 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
reason to believe nothing that he says; and therefore, if he will
do according to reason, neither must nor can believe any thing he
says. And upon this ground you conclude rightly, that the infalli
bility of true scripture must be universal, and not confined to points
fundamental. 36. And this reason why we should not refuse to believe any
part of scripture, upon pretence that the matter of it is not
fundamental, you confess to be convincing. — But the same reason,
you say, is as convincing for the universal infallibility of the
church: for (say you) unless she be infallible in all things, we
cannot believe her in any one. — But by this reason your prc-
selytes, knowing you are not infallible in all things, must not,
nor cannot believe you in any thing : nay, you yourself must not
believe yourself in any thing, because you know that you are not
infallible in all things. Indeed, if you had said, we could not
rationally believe her for her own sake, and upon her own word
and authority in any thing, I should willingly grant the conse
quence. For an authority subject to error can be no firm or
stable foundation of my belief in any thing ; and if it were in
any thing, then this authority, being one and the same in all
proposals, I should have the same reason to believe all, that I
have to believe one ; and therefore must either do unreasonably,
in believing any one thing, upon the sole warrant of this au
thority ; or unreasonably, in not believing all things equally
warranted by it. Let this therefore be granted ; and what will
come of it ? Why then, you say, we cannot believe her in pro
pounding canonical books. If you mean still (as you must do
unless you play the sophister) not upon her own authority, I grant
it : for we believe canonical books not upon the authority of the
present church, but upon universal tradition. If you mean not at
all, and that with reason we cannot believe these books to be cano
nical, which the church proposes, I deny it. There is no more
consequence in the argument than in this : the devil is not infalli
ble ; therefore, if he says there is one God, I cannot believe him.
No geometrician is infallible in all things, therefore not in these
things which he demonstrates. Mr. Knot is not infallible in all
things, therefore he may not believe that he wrote a book, entitled
" Charity Maintained."
37. But though the reply be good, protestants cannot make use
of it, with any good coherence to this distinction, and some other
doctrines of theirs : because they pretend to be able to tell what
points are fundamental, and what not; and therefore, though
they should believe scripture erroneous in others, yet they might
be sure it erred not in these. — To this I answer, that if, without
dependence on scripture, they did know what were fundamental,
and what not, they might possibly believe the scripture true in
fundamentals, and erroneous in other things. But seeing they
ground their belief, that such and such things only are fun
damental, only upon scripture, and go about to prove their
assertion true, only by scripture ; then must they suppose the
scripture true absolutely and in all things, or else the scripture

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 213
could not be a sufficient warrant to them to believe this thing,
that these only points are fundamental. For who would not
laugh at them if they should argue thus: the scripture is true in
something, the scripture says that these points only are funda
mental, therefore this is true, that these only are so ? For every
freshman in logic knows, that from mere particulars nothing
can be certainly concluded. But, on the other side, this reason
is firm and demonstrative — the scripture is true in all things;
but the scripture says, that these only points are the fundamentals
of christian religion ; therefore it is true that these only are so.
So that the knowledge of fundamentals, being itself drawn from
scripture, is so far from warranting us to believe the scripture is,
or may be, in part true, and in part false ; that itself can have no
foundation, but the universal truth of scripture. For, to be a fun
damental truth, presupposes to be a truth ; now I cannot know any
doctrine to be a divine and supernatural truth, or a true part of
Christianity, but only because the scripture says so, which is all
true: therefore, much more can I not know it to be a fundamental
truth. 38. Ad. §. 16. To this paragraph I answer — Though the church
being not infallible, I cannot believe her in every thing she says ;
yet I can and must believe her in every thing she proves, either
by scripture, reason, or universal tradition, be it fundamental, or
be it not fundamental. This you say — we cannot in points not
fundamental, because in such we believe she may err : — but this
I know, we can ; because, though we may err in some things,
yet she does not err in what she proves, though it be not funda
mental. Again, you say — we cannot do it in fundamentals, because
we must know what points be fundamental, before we go to
learn of her. Not so. But seeing faith comes by hearing, and
by hearing those who give testimony to it, which none doth but
the church, and the parts of it ; I must learn of the church, or of
some part of it, or I cannot know any thing fundamental or not
fundamental. For how can I come to know, that there was such
a man as Christ, that he taught such doctrine, that he and his
apostles did such miracles in confirmation of it, that the scripture
is God's word, unless I be taught it? So then, the church is,
though not a certain foundation and proof of my faith, yet a
necessary introduction to it.
39. But the church's infallible direction extending only to
fundamentals, unless I know them before I go to learn of her,
I may be rather deluded than instructed by her. — The reason
and connexion of this consequence, I fear neither I nor you do
well understand. And besides I must tell you, you are too bold
in taking that which no man grants you — that the church is an
infallible director in fundamentals. For if she were so, then
must we not only learn fundamentals of her, but also learn of her
what is fundamental, and take all for fundamental which she
delivers to us as such. In the performance whereof, if I knew
any one church to be infallible, I would quickly be of that church.
But, good Sir, you must needs do us this favour, to be so acute

214 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
as to distinguish between being infallible in fundamentals, and
being an infallible guide in fundamentals. That there shall be
always a church infallible in fundamentals, we easily grant ; for
it comes to no more but this — that there shall be always a church:
but that there shall be always such a church, which is an
infallible guide in fundamentals, this we deny. For this cannot
be without settling a known infallibility in some one known
society of christians (as the Greek or the Roman, or some other
church) ; by adhering to which guide, men might be guided to
believe aright in all fundamentals. A man that were destitute of
all means of communicating his thoughts to others, might yet, in
himself and to himself, be infallible, but he could not be a guide
to others. A man or a church that were invisible, so that none
could know how to repair to it for direction, could not be an
infallible guide, and yet he might be in himself infallible. You
see, then, there is a wide difference between these two ; and there
fore I must beseech you not to confound them, nor to take the
one for the other.
40. But they that know what points are fundamental, otherwise
than by the church's authority, learn not of the church. — Yes,
they may learn of the church, that the scripture is the word of
God, and from the scripture, that such points are fundamental,
others are not so ; and consequently learn, even of the church,
even of your church, that all is not fundamental, nay, all is not
true, which the church teacheth to be so. Neither do I see what
hinders, but a man may learn of a church how to confute the
errors of that church which taught him : as well as of my master
in physic, or the mathematics, I may learn those rules and prin
ciples, by which I may confute my master's erroneous conclusion.
41. But you ask — If the church be not an infallible teacher,
why are we commanded to hear, to seek, to obey the church ? — I
answer, for commands to seek the church, I have not yet met
with any ; and, I believe, you, if you were to show them, would
be yourself to seek. But yet, if you could produce some such,
we might seek the church to many good purposes, without
supposing her a guide infallible. And then for hearing and obey
ing the church, I would fain know, whether none be heard and
obeyed, but those that are infallible ; whether particular churches,
governors, pastors, parents, be not to be heard and obeyed ? Or
whether all these be infallible? I wonder you will thrust upon
us so often these worn-out objections, without taking notice of
their answers.
42. Your argument from St. Austin's first place is a fallacy, A
dicto secundum quid, ad dictum simpliciter : If the whole church
practise any of these things (matters of order and decency, for
such only there he speaks of), to dispute whether that ought to
be done, is insolent madness. — And from hence you infer — If the
whole church practise any thing, to dispute whether it ought to
be done, is insolent madness. — As if there were no difference
between any thing, and any of these things ? Or, as if I might
not esteem it pride and folly to contradict and disturb the church

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 215
for matter of order, pertaining to the time, and place, and other
circumstances of God's worship ; and yet account it neither pride
nor folly, to go about to reform errors, which the church hath
suffered to come in, and to vitiate the very substance of God's
worship. It was a practice of the whole church in St. Augustine's
time, and esteemed an apostolic tradition even by St. Augustine
himself, that the eucharist should be administered to infants: tell
me, Sir, I beseech you, had it been insolent madness to dispute
against this practice, or had it not ? If it had, how insolent and
mad are you, that have not only disputed against it, but utterly
abolished it ? If it had not, then, as I say, you must understand
St. Augustine's words, not simply of all things, but (as indeed he
himself restrained them) of these things, of matter of order, de
cency, and uniformity.
43. In the next place, you tell us out of him — that that which
hath been always kept, is most rightly esteemed to come from the
apostles : — very right, and what then ? Therefore the church
cannot err in defining of controversies. Sir, I beseech you, when
you write again, do us the favour to write nothing but syllogisms :
for I find it still an extreme trouble to find out the concealed
propositions, which are to connect the parts of your enthymemes.
As now, for example, I profess unto you I am at my wit's end,
and have done my best endeavour, to find some glue, or solder,
or cement, or chain, or thread, or any thing to tie this antecedent
and this consequent together, and at length am enforced to give
it over, and cannot do it.
44. But the doctrines — that infants are to be baptized, and those
that are baptized by heretics, are not to be rebaptized, are neither
of them to be proved by scripture: and yet, according to St. Augus
tine, they are true doctrines, and we may be certain of them upon
the authority of the church, which we could not be, unless the church
were infallible ; therefore the church is infallible. — I answer, that
there is no repugnance, but we may be certain enough of the uni
versal traditions of the ancient church ; such as, in St. Augustine's
account, these were, which here are spoken of, and yet not be
certain enough of the definitions of the present church, unless you
can show (which I am sure you never can do) that the infallibility
of the present church was always a tradition of the ancient church.
Now your main business is to prove the present church infallible,
not so much in consigning ancient tradition, as in defining emer
gent controversies. Again, it follows not, because the church's
authority is warrant enough Tor us to believe some doctrine, touch
ing which the scripture is silent ; therefore it is warrant enough
to believe these, to which the scripture seems repugnant. Now
the doctrines which St. Augustine received upon the church's
authority, are of the first sort ; the doctrines for which we deny
your church's infallibility, are of the second : and, therefore,
though the church's authority might be strong enough to bear
the weight which St. Augustine laid upon it, yet haply it may
not be strong enough to bear that which you lay upon it ; though
it may support some doctrines without scripture, yet surely not

216 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
against it. And, last of all, to deal ingenuously with you and
the world, lam not such an idolater of St. Augustine as to think
a thing proved sufficiently, because he says it, nor that all his
sentences are oracles ; and particularly in this thing, that, what
soever was practised or held by the universal church of his time,
must needs have come from the apostles ; though considering the
nearness of his time to the apostles, I think it a good probable
way, and therefore am apt enough to follow it, when I see no
reason to the contrary : yet, I profess, I must have better satisfac
tion before I can induce myself to hold it certain and infallible.
And this, not because popery would come in at this door, as some
have vainly feared, but because by the church universal of some
time, and the church universal of other times, I see plain con
tradictions held and practised: both which could not come from
the apostles ; for then the apostles had been teachers of falsehood.
And therefore, the belief or practice of the present universal
church, can be no infallible proof, that the doctrine so believed,
or the custom so practised, came from the apostles. I instance in
the doctrine of the Millenaries, and the eucharist's necessity for
infants; both which doctrines have been taught by the consent
of the eminent fathers of some ages, without any opposition from
any of their contemporaries; and were delivered by them, not
as doctors, but as witnesses; not as their opinions, but apostolic
traditions. And therefore, measuring the doctrine of the church
by all the rules which Cardinal Perron gives us for that purpose,
both these doctrines must be acknowledged to have been the
doctrine of the ancient church of some age or ages ; and that the
contrary doctrines were catholic at some other time, I believe
you will not think it needful for me to prove. So that either I
must say the apostles were fountains of contradictious doctrines,
or that being the universal doctrine of this present church, is no
sufficient proof that it came originally from the apostles. Besides,
who can warrant us that the universal traditions of the church
were all apostolical ? Seeing in that famous place for traditions,
in Tertullian* — Quicunque traditor, any author whatsoever is
* De corona Militis, c. iii. &c. Where having recounted sundry unwritten traditions
then observed by christians, many whereof, by the way, (notwithstanding the council
of Trent's profession, to " receive them and the written word with like affection of
piety") are now rejected and neglected by the church of Rome : for example, immer
sion in baptism, tasting a mixture of milk and honey presently after, abstaining from
baths for a week after ; accounting it an impiety to pray kneeling on the Lord's day,
or between Easter and Pentecost : I say, having reckoned up these and other tradi
tions in chap. iii. he adds another in the fourth, of the veiling of women j and then
adds, " since I find no law for this, it follows, that tradition must have given this ob
servation to custom, which shall gain in time apostolical authority by the interpre
tation of the reason of it. By these examples, therefore, it is declared, that the
observing of unwritten tradition, being confirmed by custom, may be defended. The
perseverance of the observation being a good testimony of the goodness of the tradition.
Now custom, even in civil affairs, where a law is wanting, passeth for a law. Neither
is it material, whether it be grounded on scripture, or reason, seeing reason is com
mendation enough for a law. Moreover, if law be grounded on reason, all that must be
law, which is so grounded — A quocunque productum — Whosoever is the producer of
it. Do ye think it is not lawful, omni fideli, for every faithful man to conceive and
constitute ? provided he constitute only what is not repugnant to God's will, what is
conducible for discipline, and available to salvation ? seeing the Lord says, ' why even of

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 217
founder good enough for them. And who can secure us that
human inventions, and such as came a quocunque traditore, might
not, in short time, gain the reputation of apostolic ? Seeing the
direction then was, *Pracepta majorum apostolicas traditiones
quisque existimat.
45. No less, you say, is St. Chrysostome for the infallible tradi
tions of the church. But you were to prove the church infalli
ble, not in her traditions (which we willingly grant, if they be as
universal as the tradition of the undoubted books of scripture is,
to be as infallible as the scripture is: for neither doth being
written make the word of God the more infallible, nor being
unwritten make it the less infallible:) not therefore in her uni
versal traditions were you to prove the church infallible, but in
all her decrees and definitions of controversies. To this point,
when you speak, you shall have an answer ; but hitherto you do
but wander.
46. But let us see what St. Chrysostome says : " They (the
apostles) delivered not all things in writing ; (who denies it ?) but
many things also without writing ; (who doubts of it ?) and these
also are worthy of belief." Yes, if we knew what they were. But
many things are worthy of belief, which are not necessary to be
believed: as that Julius Caesar was emperor of Rome is a thing
worthy of belief, being so well testified as it is, but yet it is not
necessary to be believed ; a man may be saved without it. Those
many works which our Saviour did, which St. John supposes
would not have been contained in a world of books, if they had
been written ; or if God, by some other means, had preserved
the knowledge of them, had been as worthy to be believed,
and as necessary, as those that are written. But to shew you
how much a more faithful keeper records are than report, those
few that were written are preserved and believed ; those infinitely
more, that were not written, are all lost and vanished out of the
memory of men. And seeing God in his providence hath not
thought fit to preserve the memory of them, he hath freed us
from the obligation of believing them : for every obligation ceaseth,
when it becomes impossible. Who can doubt but the primitive
christians, to whom the epistles of the apostles were written,
either of themselves understood or were instructed by the apostles,
touching the sense of the obscure places of them? These traditive
interpretations, had they been written and dispersed, as the scrip
tures were, had without question been preserved as the scriptures
are. But, to shew how excellent a keeper of the tradition the
church of Rome hath been, or even the catholic church ; for want
of writing they are all lost, nay, were all lost within a few ages
after Christ : so that if we consult the ancient interpreters, we
shall hardly find any two of them agree about the sense of any
yourselves judge ye not what is right ?' " And a little after, " this reason now demands
saving the respect of the tradition — A quocunque traditore censetur, nee authorem
tespiciens sed authoritatem ; from whatsoever tradition it comes, neither regarding
the author, but the authority."
* Jer.

218 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
one of them. Cardinal Perron, in his Discourse of Traditions,
having alleged this place for them, " Hold the traditions," &c. tells
us, " we must not answer that St. Paul speaks here only of such
traditions which (though not in this Epist. to Thess. yet) were
afterwards written, and in other books of scripture : because it is
upon occasion of tradition (touching the cause of the hinderance
of the coming of Antichrist) which was never written, that he
lays this injunction upon them, to hold the traditions." Well, let
us grant this argument good, and concluding : and that the
church of the Thessalonians, or the catholic church (for what St.
Paul writ to one church, he writ to all) were to hold some un
written traditions, and among the rest, what was the cause of the
hinderance of the coming of Antichrist. But what if they did
not perform their duty in this point, but suffered this tradition to
be lost out of the memory of the church ? Shall we not conclude,
that seeing God would not suffer any thing necessary to salvation
to be lost, and he hath suffered this tradition to be lost, therefore
the knowledge or belief of it, though it were a profitable thing,
yet it was not necessary ? I hope you will not challenge such
authority over us, as to oblige us to impossibilities, to do that
which you cannot do yourselves : it is therefore requisite that
you make this command possible to be obeyed, before you require
obedience unto it. Are you able then to instruct us so well, as
to be fit to say unto us, Now ye know what withholdeth ? Or do
you yourselves know that ye may instruct us ? Can ye, or dare
you say, this or this was this hinderance which St. Paul here
meant, and all men under pain of damnation are to believe it?
Or if you cannot, (as I am certain you cannot) go then, and vaunt
your church, for the only watchful, faithful, infallible keeper of
the apostles' traditions ; when here this very tradition, which here
in particular was deposited with the Thessalonians and the primi
tive church, you have utterly lost it ; so that there is no footstep
or print of it remaining, which, with divine faith, we may rely
upon. Blessed therefore be the goodness of God, who, seeing
that what was not written was in such danger to be lost, took
order, that what was necessary should be written ! St. Chrysos-
tome's "counsel, therefore, of accounting the church's traditions
worthy of belief, we are willing to obey : and, if you can of any
thing make it appear that it is tradition, we will seek no farther.
But this we say withal, that we are persuaded you cannot make
this appear in any thing, but only in the canon of scripture ;
and that there is nothing now extant, and to be known by us,
which can put in so good plea to be the unwritten word of God,
as the unquestioned books of canonical scripture, to be the written
word of God.
47. You conclude this paragraph with a sentence of St. Au
gustine, who says, " The church doth not approve, nor dissemble,
nor do those things which are against faith or good life :" and
from hence vou conclude, that it never has done so, nor ever
can do so. But though the argument hold in logic a non posse,
ad non esse, yet I never heard that it would hold back again, a

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 219
non esse, ad non posse. The church cannot do this, therefore
it does not, follows with good consequence : but the church doth
not this, therefore it shall never do it, nor can never do it, this I
believe will hardly follow. In the epistle next before to the same
Januarius, writing of the same matter, he hath these words : " It
remains, that the thing you inquire of must be of that third kind
of things, which are different in divers places. Let every one,
therefore, do that which he finds done in the church to which he
comes ; for none of them is against faith or good - manners."
And why do you not infer from hence, that — no particular church
can bring up any custom that is against faith or good manners?
Certainly this consequence hath as good reason for it as the
former. If a man say of the church of England, (what St. Au
gustine of the church) that she neither approves nor dissembles,
nor doth any thing against faith or good manners, would you
collect presently, that this man did either make or think the
church of England infallible ? Furthermore, it is observable
out of this, and the former epistle, that this church, which did
not (as St. Augustine, according to you, thought) approve or dis
semble, or do any thing against faith or a good life, did not
tolerate and dissemble vain superstitions and human presump
tions, and suffer all places to be full of them, and to be exacted
as, nay, more severely than, the commandments of God him
self. This St. Augustine himself professeth in this very epistle.
" This (saith he) I do infinitely grieve at, that many most whole
some precepts of the divine scripture are little regarded ; and in
the mean time all is so full of so many presumptions, that he is
more grievously found fault with, who during his octaves touch-
eth the earth with his naked foot, than he that shall bury his
soul in drunkenness." Of these, he says, that " they were
neither contained in scripture, decreed by councils, nor corro
borated by the custom of the universal church: and though not
against faith, yet unprofitable burdens of christian liberty, which
made the condition of the Jews more tolerable than that of
christians." And therefore he professeth of them, Approbare
non possum, I cannot approve them. And, ubi facultas tribuitur,
resecanda existimo ; I think they are to be cut off, wheresoever
we have power. — Yet so deeply were they rooted, and spread so
far, through the indiscreet devotion of the people, always more
prone to superstition than true piety, and through the conni
vance of the governors, who should have strangled them at their
birth, that himself, though he grieved at them, and could not
allow them, yet for fear of offence he durst not speak against
them. Multa hujusmodi, propter nollullarum vel sanctarum vel tur-
bulentarum personarum scandala, devitanda, liberius improbare non
audeo : many of these things for fear of scandalizing many holy
persons, or provoking those that are turbulent, I dare not freely
disallow. Nay, the catholic church itself did see, and dissemble,
and tolerate them ; for these are the things of which he pre
sently says after, " the church of God (and you will have him
speak of the true catholic church), placed between chaff and

220 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
tares, tolerates many things." Which was directly against the
command of the Holy Spirit, given the church by St. Paul, to
" stand fast in that liberty wherewith Christ hath made her free,"
and not to suffer herself to be brought in bondage to these
servile burdens. Our Saviour tells the scribes and pharisees,
that " in vain they worshipped God, teaching for doctrines men's
commandments : for that, laying aside the commandments of
God, they held the traditions of men, as the washing of pots
and cups, and many other such like things." Certainly, that
which St. Augustine complains of as the general fault of chris
tians of his time, was parallel to this: Malta (saith he) qua in
divinis libris saluberrime pracepta sunt, minus curantur; this, I
suppose, I may very well render in our Saviour's words, " the
commandments of God are laid aside;" and then, Tarn multis pre-
sumptionibus sic plena sunt omnia, all things, or all places, are
so full of so many presumptions, and those exacted with such
severity, nay, with tyranny, that he was more severely censured,
who in the time of his octaves touched the earth with his naked
feet, than he which drowned and buried his soul in drink. —
Certainly, if this be not to teach for doctrines men's command
ments, I know not what is: and therefore these superstitious
christians might be said to worship God in vain, as well as the
scribes and pharisees. And yet great variety of superstitions
of this kind were then already spread over the church, being
different in divers places. This is plain from these words of St.
Augustine concerning them, diversorum locorum diversis moribus
innumerabiliter variantur ; and apparent, because the stream of
them was grown so violent, that he durst not oppose it ; liberius
improbare non audeo, I dare not freely speak against them. So
that to say the catholic church tolerated all this, and, for fear of
offence, durst not abrogate or condemn it ; is to say (if we judge
rightly of it) that the church, with silence and connivance,
generally tolerated christians to worship God in vain. Now,
how this tolerating of universal superstition in the church, can
consist with the assistance and direction of God's omnipotent
Spirit to guard it from superstition, and with the accomplish
ment of that pretended prophecy of the church, " I have set
watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, which shall never hold
their peace day nor night ;" besides, how these superstitions,
being thus nourished, cherished, and strengthened by the prac
tice of the most, and urged with great violence upon others, as
the commandments of God, and but fearfully opposed or contra
dicted by any, might in time take such deep root, and spread
their branches so far, as to pass for universal customs of the
church, he that does not see, sees nothing. Especially, consi
dering the catching and contagious nature of this sin, and how
fast ill weeds spread, and how true and experimented that rule
is of the historian, Exempla non consistunt ubi incipiunt, sed quam-
libet in tenuem recepta tramitem latissime evagandi sibi faciunt
potestatem. Nay, that some such superstition had not already,
even in St. Augustine's time, prevailed so far, as to be consuetu-

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 221
dine universa ecclesia roboratum, who can doubt that considers, that
the practice of communicating infants, had even then got the credit
and authority, not only of an universal church, but also of an apos
tolic tradition?
48. But (you will say) notwithstanding all this, St. Augustine
here warrants us, that the church can never either approve, or dis
semble, or practise any thing against faith or good life, and so
long you may rest securely upon it. — Yea, but the same St.
Augustine tells us, in the same place, that " the church may
tolerate human presumptions, and vain superstitions, and those
urged more severely than the commandments of God :" and
whether superstition be a sin or no, I appeal to our Saviour's
words before cited, and to the consent of your schoolmen.
Besides, if we consider it rightly, we shall find, that the church
is not truly said only to tolerate these things, but rather that a
part, and far the lesser, tolerated and dissembled them in silence,
and a part, and a far greater, publicly avowed and practised
them, and urged them upon others with great violence, and yet
continued still a part of the church. Now, why the whole church
might not continue the church, and yet do so, as well as a part of
the church might continue a part of it, and yet do so, I desire you
to inform me.
49. But now, after all this ado, what if St. Augustine says not
this which is pretended of the church ; viz. that she neither ap
proves, nor dissembles, nor practises any thing against faith or
good life, but only of good men in the church ; certainly, though
some copies read as you would have it, yet you should not have
dissembled, that others read the place otherwise ; viz. ecclesia multa
tolerat : et tamen qua sunt contra fidem et bonam vitam, nee bonus
approbat, &c. ; the church tolerates many things, and yet what is
against faith or good life, a good man will neither approve, nor dis
semble, nor practise.
50. Ad. §. 17. That Abraham begat Isaac, is a point very far
from being fundamental ; and yet, I hope, you will grant that pro
testants, believing scripture to be the word of God, may be certain
enough of the truth and certainty of it : for what if they say that
the catholic church, and much more themselves, may possibly
err in some fundamental points, is it therefore consequent they
can be certain of none such ? What if a wiser man than I may
mistake the sense of some obscure place of Aristotle, may I not
therefore, without any arrogance or inconsequence, conceive my
self certain that I understand him in some plain places, which
carry their sense before them ? And then for points fundamental,
to what purpose do you say, that — we must first know what
they be, before we can be assured that we cannot err in under
standing the scripture — when we pretend not at all to any as
surance that we cannot err, but only to a sufficient certainty
that we do not err, but rightly understand those things that are
plain, whether fundamental or not fundamental ; that " God is,
and is a rewarder of them that seek him ;" that there is no salva
tion but by faith in Christ ; that by repentance from dead works,

222 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
and faith in Christ, remission of sins may be obtained ; that there
shall be a resurrection of the body : these we conceive both true,
because the scripture says so, and truths fundamental, because they
are necessary parts of the gospel, whereof our Saviour says, Qui
non crediderit, damnabitur. All which we either learn from scrip
ture immediately, or learn of those that learn it of scripture; so that
neither learned nor unlearned pretend to know these things inde
pendently of scripture. And therefore, in imputing this to us, you
cannot excuse yourself from having done us a palpable injury.
51. Ad. §. 18. And I urge you as mainly as you urge Dr.
Potter, and other protestants, that you tell us all the traditions,
and all the definitions of the church are fundamental points, and
we cannot wrest from you — a list in particular of all such tra
ditions and definitions — without which no man can tell whether
or no he err in points fundamental, and be capable of salvation
(for, I hope, erring in our fundamentals is no more conclusive of
salvation than erring in yours). And, which is most lamentable,
instead of giving us such a catalogue, you also fall to wrangle
among yourselves about the making of it; some of you, as I have
said above, holding some things to be matters of faith, which others
deny to be so.
52. Ad. §. 19. I answer, that these differences between protes
tants concerning errors damnable and not damnable, truths funda
mental and not fundamental, may be easily reconciled. For
either the error they speak of may be purely and simply involun
tary, or it may be in respect of the cause of it voluntary. If the
cause of it be in some voluntary and avoidable fault, the error is
itself sinful, and consequently in its own nature damnable ; as if,
by negligence in seeking the truth, by unwillingness to find it, by
pride, by obstinacy, by desiring that religion should be true which
suits best with my ends, by fear of men's ill opinion, or any other
worldly fear, or any other worldly hope, I betray myself to any
error contrary to any divine revealed truth, that error may be
justly styled a sin, and consequently of itself to such an one dam
nable. But if I be guilty of none of these faults, but be desirous
to know the truth, and diligent in seeking it, and advise not at all
with flesh and blood about the choice of my opinions, but only
with God, and that reason that he hath given me: if I be thus
qualified, and yet through human infirmity fall into error, that
error cannot be damnable. Again, the party erring may be con
vinced either to die with contrition, for all his sins known and un
known, or without it ; if he die without it, this error in itself
damnable will be likewise so unto him ; if he die with contrition,
(as his error can be no impediment but he may) his error, though
in itself damnable, to him, according to your doctrine, will not
prove so. And therefore, some of those authors, whom you quote,
speaking of errors whereunto men were betrayed, or wherein they
were kept by their fault, or vice, or passion (as for the most part
men are) ; others speaking of them, as errors simply and purely
involuntary, and the effects of human infirmity; some, as they
were retracted by contrition (to use your own phrase) ; others, as

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 223
they were not; no marvel that they have passed upon them,
some a heavier, and some a milder, some an absolving, and some
a condemning sentence. The least of all these errors, which here
you mention, having malice enough too frequently mixed with it,
to sink a man deep enough into hell ; and the greatest of them all
being, according to your principles, either no fault at all, or venial,
where there is no malice of the will conjoined with it. And if it
be, yet, as the most malignant poison will not poison him that re
ceives with it a more powerful antidote : so, I am confident, your
own doctrine will force you to confess, that whosoever dies with
faith in Christ, and contrition for all sins, known and unknown
(in which heap all his sinful errors must be comprised), can no
more be hurt by any the most malignant and pestilent error, than
St. Paul by the viper which he shook off into the fire. Now
touching the " necessity of repentance from dead works, and faith
in Christ Jesus, the Son of God, and Saviour of the world," they
all agree ; and therefore you cannot deny, but they agree about all
that is simply necessary. Moreover, though, if they should go about
to choose out of scripture all those propositions and doctrines
which integrate and make up the body of christian religion, per-
adventure there would not be so exact agreement amongst them,
as some say there was between the seventy interpreters, in translat
ing the Old Testament ; yet thus far, without controversy, they do
all agree, that in the bible all these things are contained, and
therefore, that whosoever doth truly and sincerely believe the
scripture, must of necessity, either in hypothesi, or at least in
thesi ; either formally, or at least virtually ; either explicitly, or at
least implicitly ; either in act, or at least in preparation of mind,
believe all things fundamental. It being not fundamental, nor
required of Almighty God, to believe the true sense of scripture
in all places, but only that we should endeavour to do so, and be
prepared in mind to do so, whensoever it shall be sufficiently pro
pounded to us. Suppose a man in some disease were prescribed
a medicine consisting of twenty ingredients, and he, advising with
physicians, should find them differing in opinion about it, some of
them telling him that all the ingredients were absolutely necessary ;
some, that only some of them were necessary, the rest only profitable,
and requisite ad melius esse ; lastly, some, that some only were neces
sary, some profitable, and the rest superfluous, yet not hurtful ; yet
all with one accord agreeing in this, that the whole receipt had in it
all things necessary for the recovery of his health, and that, if he made
use of it, he should infallibly find it successful ; what wise man
would not think they agreed sufficiently for his direction to the
recovery of health ? Just so these protestant doctors, with whose
discords you make such tragedies ; agreeing in thesi thus far — that
the " scripture evidently contains all things necessary to salvation,"
both for matter of faith, and of practice ; and that whosoever be
lieves it, and endeavours to find the true sense of it, and to conform
his life unto it, shall certainly perform all things necessary to salva
tion, and undoubtedly be saved ; agreeing, I say, thus far, what
matters it for the direction of men to salvation, though they differ

224 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
in opinion, touching what points are absolutely necessary, and
what not? What errors absolutely repugnant to salvation, and
what not ? Especially considering, that although they differ about
the question of the necessity of these truths, yet for the most part
they agree in this, that truths they are, and profitable at least,
though not simply necessary. And though they differ in the ques
tion, whether the contrary errors be destructive of salvation, or
no ; yet in this they consent, that errors they are, and hurtful to
religion, though not destructive of salvation. Now that which God
requires of us, is this, that we should believe the doctrine of the
gospel to be truths, not all necessary truths, for all are not so ; and
consequently, the repugnant errors to be falsehoods ; yet not all such
falsehoods, as unavoidably draw with them damnation upon all that
hold them ; for all do not so.
53. Yea, but you say — it is very requisite we should agree upon
a particular catalogue of fundamental points ; for without such a
catalogue no man can be assured whether or no he hath faith suffi
cient to salvation. — This I utterly deny, as a thing evidently false,
and I wonder you should content yourself magisterially to say so,
without offering any proof of it. I might much more justly think
it enough barely to deny it, without refutation, but I will not; thus,
therefore, I argue against it.
Without being able to make a catalogue of fundamentals, I
may be assured of the truth of this assertion, if it be true,
that " the scripture contains all necessary points of faith," and
know that I believe explicitly all that is expressed in scrip
ture, and implicitly all that is contained in them : now he that
believes all this, must of necessity believe all things necessary :
therefore, without being able to make a catalogue of fundamen
tals, I may be assured that I believe all things necessary, and
consequently that my faith is sufficient.
I said, of the truth of this assertion, " if it be true :" because I
will not here enter into the question of the truth of it, it being
sufficient for my present purpose, that it may be true, and may
be believed without any dependence upon a catalogue of funda
mentals : and therefore, if this be all your reason to demand a
particular catalogue of fundamentals, we cannot but think your
demand unreasonable. Especially, having yourself expressed the
cause of the difficulty of it, and that is — because scripture* doth
deliver divine truths, but seldom qualifies them, or declares
whether they be or be not absolutely necessary to salvation. — Yet
not so seldom, but that out of it 1 could give you an abstract of
the essential parts of Christianity, if it were necessary : but I
have shewed it not so by confuting your reason, pretended for
the necessity of it, and at this time 1 have no leisure to do you
courtesies that are so troublesome to myself. Yet thus much I
will promise, that when you deliver a' particular catalogue of
your church's proposals with one hand, you shall receive a parti
cular catalogue of what I conceive fundamental with the other:
for, as yet, I see no such fair proceeding as you talk of, nor any
performance on your own part of that which so clamorously you

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 225
require on ours. For, as for the catalogue which here you have
given us, in saying — you are obliged under pain of damnation to
believe whatsoever the catholic visible church of Christ proposeth
as revealed by Almighty God — it is like a covey of one partridge,
or a flock of one sheep, or a fleet composed of one ship, or an
army of one man. The author of Charity Mistaken demands a
particular catalogue of fundamental points; and we (say you)
again and again demand such a catalogue. And surely, if this
one proposition, which here you think to stop our mouths with,
be a catalogue, yet at least such a catalogue it is not, and there
fore as yet you have not performed what you require. For, if
to set down such a proposition, wherein are comprised all points
taught by us to be necessary to salvation, will serve you instead
of a catalogue, you shall have catalogues enough. As we are
obliged to believe all, under pain of damnation, which God com
mands us to believe : there is one catalogue. We are obliged,
under pain of damnation, to believe all, whereof we may be suffi
ciently assured that Christ taught it his apostles, his apostles the
church : there is another. We are obliged, under pain of damna
tion, to believe God's word, and all contained in it to be true :
there is a third. If these generalities will not satisfy you, but you
will be importuning us to tell you in particular what those doc
trines are which Christ taught his apostles, and his apostles the
church, what points are contained in God's word ; then I beseech
you do us reason, and give us a particular and exact inventory
of all your church-proposals, without leaving out, or adding any;
such an one which all the doctors of your church will subscribe
to ; and if you receive not then a catalogue of fundamentals, I for
my part will give you leave to proclaim us bankrupts.
54. Besides this deceitful generality of your catalogue (as you
call it) another main fault we find with it, that it is extremely
ambiguous ; and therefore, to draw you out of the clouds, give me
leave to propose some questions to you concerning it. I would
know, therefore, whether, by believing, you mean explicitly or
implicitly? If you mean implicitly, I would know, whether
your church's infallibility be, under pain of damnation, to be
believed explicitly, or no? Whether any other point or points
besides this, be, under the same penalty, to be believed ex
plicitly, or no? and if any, what they be? I would know
what you esteem the proposal of the catholic visible church ? In
particular, whether the decree of a pope ex cathedra, that is, with
an intent to oblige all christians by it, be a sufficient and an
obliging proposal ? Whether men, without danger of damnation,
may examine such a decree, and, if they think they have just
cause, refuse to obey it ? Whether the decree of a council, with
out the pope's confirmation, be such an obliging proposal, or no ?
Whether it be so in case there be no pope, or in case it be
doubtful who is pope ? Whether the decree of a general council
confirmed by the pope be such a proposal, and whether he be a
heretic that thinks otherwise ? Whether the decree of a particular
council confirmed by the pope, be such a proposal ? Whether the

226 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
general uncondemned practice of the church for some ages be
such a sufficient proposition? Whether the consent of the most
eminent fathers of any age, agreeing in the affirmation of any
doctrine, not contradicted by any of their contemporaries, be a
sufficient proposition? Whether the fathers' testifying such or
such a doctrine or practice to be a tradition, or to be the doctrine
or practice of the church, be a sufficient assurance that it is so ?
Whether we be bound, under pain of damnation, to believe every
text of the vulgar bible, now authorised by the Roman church, to
be the true translation of the originals of the prophets, and evan
gelists, and apostles, without any the least alteration ? Whether
they that lived when the bible of Sixtus was set forth, were
bound, under pain of damnation, to believe the same of that?
And if not of that, of what bible were they bound to believe it?
Whether the catholic visible church be always that society of
christians which adheres to the bishop of Rome ? Whether every
christian that hath ability and opportunity, be not bound to en
deavour to know explicitly the proposals of the church ? Whether
implicit faith in the church's veracity, will not save him that
actually and explicitly disbelieves some doctrine of the church,
not knowing it to be so; and actually believes some damnable
heresy, as, that God hath the shape of a man ? Whether an ig
norant man be bound to believe any point to be decreed by the
church, when his priest or ghostly father assures him it is so ?
Whether his ghostly father may not err in telling him so, and
whether any man can be obliged, under pain of damnation, to
believe an error ? Whether he be bound to believe such a thing
defined, when a number of priests, perhaps ten or twenty, tell
him it is so ? And what assurance he can have, that they neither
err, nor deceive him, in this matter ? Why implicit faith in Christ
or the scripture should not suffice for a man's salvation, as well
as implicit faith in the church ? Whether, when you say — what
soever the church proposeth — you mean, all that she ever pro
posed, or that only which she now proposeth ; and whether she
now proposeth all that ever she did propose ? Whether all the
books of canonical scripture were sufficiently declared to the
church to be so, and proposed as such by the apostles? And if
not, from whom the church had this declaration afterwards ? If
so, whether all men, ever since the apostles' time, were bound,
under pain of damnation, to believe the epistle of St. James, and
the epistle to the Hebrews, to be canonical ? at least, not to dis
believe it, and believe the contrary ? Lastly, why it is not suffi
cient for any man's salvation to use the best means he can to inform
his conscience, and to follow the direction of it ? To all these de
mands when you have given fair and ingenuous answers, you shall
hear farther from me.
55. Ad. §. 20. At the first entrance into this paragraph, from
our own doctrine — that the church cannot err in points necessary,
it is concluded; if we are wise, we must forsake it in nothing, lest
we should forsake it in something necessary. — To which I answer,
first, that the supposition, as you understand it, is falsely imposed

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 227
upon us, and, as we understand it, will do you no service. For
when we say that there shall be a church always, somewhere or
other, unerring in fundamentals, our meaning is but this, that
there shall be always a church to the very being whereof it is re
pugnant that it should err in fundamentals; for if it should do so,
it would want the very essence of a church, and therefore cease
to be a church. But we never annexed this privilege to any one
church of any one denomination, as the Greek or the Roman
church*, which if we had done, and set up some settled certain
society of christians, distinguishable from all others by adhering
to such a bishop for our guide in fundamentals, then indeed, and
then only, might you with some colour, though not with certainty,
have concluded that we could not, in wisdom — forsake this church
in any point, for fear of forsaking it in a necessary point. — But
now that we say not this of any one determinate church, which
alone can perform the office of guide or director, but indefinitely
of the church, meaning no more but this — that there shall be
always, in some place or other, some church that errs not in funda
mentals; will you conclude from hence, that we cannot in wisdom
forsake this or that, the Roman or the Greek church, for fear of
erring in fundamentals ?
56. Yea, you may say, (for I will make the best I can of all
your arguments) that this church, thus unerring in fundamentals,
when Luther arose, was by our confession the Roman ; and there
fore we ought not in wisdom to have departed from it in any
thing. I answer, first, that we confess no such thing, that the
church of Rome was then this church, but only a part of it, and
that the most corrupted, and most incorrigible. Secondly, that
if, by adhering to that church, we could have been thus far
secured, this argument had some show of reason. But seeing we
are not warranted thus much by any privilege of that church, that
she cannot err fundamentally, but only from scripture, which
assures us that she doth err very heinously, collect our hope, that
the truths she retains, and the practice of them, may prove an
antidote to her against the- errors which she maintains in such
persons, as, in simplicity of heart, follow this Absalom ; we should
then do against the light of our conscience, and so sin damnably,
if we should not abandon the profession of her errors, though not
fundamental. Neither can we thus conclude, we may safely hold
with the church of Rome in all her points, for she cannot err
damnably ; for this is false, she may, though, perhaps, she doth
not ; but rather thus : these points of Christianity, which have in
them the nature of antidotes against the poison of all sins and
errors, the church of Rome, though otherwise much corrupted,
still retains ; therefore we hope she errs not fundamentally, but
still remains a part of the church. But this can be no warrant to
us to think with her in all things ; seeing the very same scripture,
which puts us in hope she errs not fundamentally, assures us that
in many things, and those of great moment, she errs very griev
ously. And these errors, though to them that believe them, we
hope they will not be pernicious, yet the professing of them
p 2

228 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
against conscience, could not but bring to us certain damnation.
As for the fear of departing from some fundamental truths withal,
while we depart from her errors ; haply it might work upon us,
if adhering to her might secure us from it, and if nothing else
could : but both these are false. For, first, adhering to her in all
things cannot secure us from erring in fundamentals : because
though de facto we hope she doth not err, yet we know no privi
leges she hath but she may err in them herself: and therefore we
had need have better security hereof than her bare authority.
Then, secondly, without dependence on her at all, we may be
secured that we do not err fundamentally : I mean, by believing
all things plainly set down in scripture, wherein all necessary,
and most things profitable, are plainly delivered. Suppose I were
travelling to London, and knew two ways thither ; the one very
safe and convenient, the other very inconvenient and dangerous,
but yet a way to London; and that I overtook a passenger on the
way, who himself believed, and would fain persuade me, there
was no other way but the worse, and would persuade me to
accompany him in it, because I confessed his way, though very
inconvenient and very dangerous, yet a way ; so that going that
way we might come to our journey's end by the consent of both
parties ; but he believed my way to be none at all ; and therefore
I might justly fear, lest out of a desire of leaving the worst way,
I left the true and the only way : if now I should not be more
secure upon my own knowledge, than frighted by this fallacy,
would you not beg me for a fool ? Just so might you think of us,
if we would be frighted out of our own knowledge by this bug
bear. For the only and the main reason why we believe you not
to err in fundamentals, is your holding the doctrine of faith in
Christ and repentance: which knowing we hold as well as you,
notwithstanding our departure from you, we must needs know that
we do not err in fundamentals, as well as we know that you in
some sort do not err in fundamentals, and therefore cannot pos
sibly fear the contrary. Yet let us be more liberal to you, and
grant that which can never be proved, that God had said in plain
terms, — the church of Rome shall never destroy the foundation —
but withal had said — that it might and would lay much hay and
stubble upon it : that you should never hold any error destructive
of salvation, but yet many that were prejudicial to edification : I
demand, might we have dispensed with ourselves in the believing
and professing these errors in regard of the smallness of them?
Or, had it not been a damnable sin to do so, though the errors in
themselves were not damnable ? had we not had as plain direction
to depart from you in some things profitable, as to adhere to you
in things necessary ? In the beginning of your book, when it was
for your purpose to have it so, the greatness or smallness of the
matter was not considerable, the evidence of the revelation was all
in all. But here must we err with you in small things, for fear of
losing your direction in greater ? and for fear of departing too far
from you, not go from you at all, even where we see plainly that
you have departed from the truth ?

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 229
57. Beyond all this, I say, that this which you say is wisdom we
are to do, is not only unlawful, but, if we will proceed according to
reason, impossible. I mean to adhere to you in all things, having
no other ground for it, but because you are (as we will now sup
pose) infallible in some things, that is, in fundamentals. For whether
by skill in architecture a large structure may be supported by a
narrow foundation, I know not ; but sure I am, in reason, no con
clusion can be larger than the principles on which it is founded.
And therefore, I consider what I do, and be persuaded that your
infallibility is but limited, and particular, and partial ; my adherence
upon this ground cannot possibly be absolute, and universal, and
total. I am confident, that should I meet with such a man among
you (as I am well assured there be many) that would grant your
church infallible only in fundamentals, which what they are he
knows not, and therefore upon this only reason adheres to you
in all things; I say that I am confident that it may be demon
strated, that such a man adheres to you with a fiducial and certain
assent in nothing. To make this clear (because at the first hearing
it may seem strange) give me leave, good Sir, to suppose you the
man, and to propose to you a few questions, and to give for you
such answers to them, as upon this ground you must of necessity
give, were you present with me. First, supposing you hold your
church infallible in fundamentals, obnoxious to error in other things,
and that you know not what points are fundamental, I demand, C.
Why do you believe the doctrine of transubstantiation ? K. Because
the church hath taught it, which is infallible. C. What ! infallible
in all things, or only in fundamentals ? K. In fundamentals only.
C. Then in other points she may err ? K. She may. C. And do
you know what points are fundamental, what not ? K. No, and
therefore I believe her in all things, lest I should disbelieve her in
fundamentals. C. How know you then, whether this be a funda
mental point or no ? K. I know not. C. It may be then (for aught
you know) an unfundamental point? K. Yes, it may be so. C.
And in these, you said, the church may err ? K. Yes, I did so. C.
Then possibly it may err in this ? K. It may be so. C. Then what
certainty have you that it does not err in it 1 K. None at all, but
upon this supposition, that this is a fundamental. C. And this sup
position you are uncertain of? K. Yes, I told you so before. C.
And therefore you can have no certainty of that which depends
upon this uncertainty, saving only a suppositive certainty if it be a
fundamental truth ; which is, in plain English, to say, you are
certain it is true, if it be both true and necessary. Verily, Sir,
if you have no better faith than this you are no catholic. K. Good
words, I pray ! I am so, and, God willing, will he so. C. You
mean in outward profession and practice, but in belief you are not,
no more than a protestant is a catholic. For every protestant
yields such a kind of assent to all the proposals of the church ; for
surely they believe them true, if they be fundamental truths. And
therefore you must either believe the church infallible in all her
proposals, be they foundations, or be they superstructions ; or you
must believe all fundamental which she proposes, or else you are

230 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
no catholic. K. But I have been taught, that, seeing I believed
the church infallible in points necessary, in wisdom I was to
believe her in every thing. C. That was a pretty plausible in
ducement to bring you hither ; but now you are here you must go
farther and believe her infallible in all things, or else you were as
good go back again, which will be a great disparagement to you,
and draw upon you both the bitter and implacable hatred of our
part, and even, with your own, the imputation of rashness and
levity. You see, I hope, by this time, that though a man did
believe your church infallible in fundamentals, yet he hath no
reason to do you the courtesy of believing all her proposals ; nay,
if he be ignorant what these fundamentals are, he hath no certain
ground to believe her, upon her authority, in any thing. And
whereas, you say, it can be no imprudence, to err with the church ;
I say, it may be very great imprudence, if the question be, whether
we should err with the present church, or hold true with God
Almighty. 58. But we are, under pain of damnation, to believe and obey
her in greater things, and therefore cannot in wisdom suspect her
credit in matters of less moment. — Ans. I have told you already, that
this is falsely to suppose, that we grant that, in some certain points,
some certain church is infallibly assisted ; and under pain of dam
nation to be obeyed : whereas all that we say is this ; that, in some
place or other, some church there shall be, which shall retain all
necessary truths. Yet, if your suppositions were true, I would not
grant your conclusion, but with this exception, unless the matter
were past suspicion, and apparently certain, that in these things I
cannot believe God and believe the church. For then I hope you
will grant, that be the thing of never so little moment ; were it, for
instance, but that St. Paul left his cloak at Troas, yet I were not
to gratify the church so far, as for her sake to disbelieve what God
himself hath revealed.
59. Whereas you say — Since we are undoubtedly obliged to believe
her in fundamentals, and cannot precisely know what those funda
mentals be, we cannot without hazard of our souls leave her in
any point — I answer, first, that this argument proceeds upon the
same false ground with the former. And then, that I have told you
formerly, that you fear where no fear is ; and though we know not
precisely, just how much is fundamental, yet we know that the scrip
ture contains all fundamentals, and more too ; and therefore that,
in believing that, we believe all fundamentals, and more too ; and,
consequently, in departing from you can be in no danger of depart
ing from that which may prove a fundamental truth : for we are
well assured that certain errors can never prove fundamental truths.
60. Whereas you add that — That visible church, which cannot
err in fundamentals, propounds all her definitions without dis
tinction to be believed under anathemas. — Ans. Again you beg the
question, supposing untruly, that there is any — that visible church.
I mean any visible church of one denomination, which cannot err
in points fundamental. Secondly, proposing definitions to be be
lieved under anathemas, is no good argument that the propounders

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 231
conceive themselves infallible ; but only that they conceive the
doctrine they condemn is evidently damnable. A plain proof hereof
is this, that particular councils, nay, particular men, have been very
liberal of their anathemas, which yet were never conceived infalli
ble, either by others or themselves. If any man should now deny
Christ to be the Saviour of the world, or deny the resurrection, I
should make no great scruple of anathematizing his doctrine, and
yet am very far from dreaming of infallibility.
61. And for the visible church's holding it a point necessary to
salvation, that we believe she cannot err, I know no such tenet;
unless by the church, you mean the Roman church, which you have
as much reason to do, as that petty king in Afric hath, to think him
self king of all the world. And therefore your telling us — If she
speak true, what danger is it not to believe her ? And if false, that
it is not dangerous to believe her — is somewhat like your pope's
setting your lawyers to dispute whether Constantino's donation
were valid or no ; whereas the matter of fact was the far greater
question — whether there were any such donation, or rather when,
without question, there was none such. That you may not seem
to delude us in like manner, make it appear that the visible church
doth hold so as you pretend, and then, whether it be true or false,
We will consider afterwards: but, for the present, with this invisible
tenet of the visible church, we will trouble ourselves no farther.
62. The effect of the next argument is this — I cannot without
grievous sin disobey the church, unless I know she commands
those things which are not in her power to command ; and how far
this power extends, none can better inform me than the church;
therefore I am to obey, so far as the church requires my obedience.
— I answer, first, that neither hath the catholic church, but only a
corrupt part of it, declared herself, nor required our obedience, in
the points contested among us : this, therefore, is falsely and
vainly supposed here by you, being one of the greatest questions
amongst us. Then, secondly, that God can better inform us what
are the limits of the church's power than the church herself; that
is, than the Roman clergy, who being men subject to the same
passions with other men, why they should be thought the best judges
in their own cause, I do not well understand ; but yet we oppose
against them no human decisive judges, nor any sect or person, but
only God and his word. And therefore it is in vain to say that —
in following her, you shall be sooner excused than in following
any sect or man applying scriptures against her doctrine, inasmuch
as we never went about to arrogate to ourselves that infallibility or
absolute authority, which we take away from you. But if you
would have spoken to the purpose, you should have said, that in
following her you should sooner have been excused, than in cleaving
to the scripture, and to God himself.
63. Whereas, you say— The fearful .examples of innumerable
persons, who forsaking the church, upon pretence of her errors,
have failed even in fundamental points, ought to deter all
christians from opposing her in any one doctrine or practice:
this is just as if you should say, divers men have fallen into Scylla

232 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
with going too far from Charybdis ; be sure, therefore, you keep
close to Charybdis : divers, leaving prodigality, have fallen into
covetousness ; therefore be you constant to prodigality : many
have fallen from worshipping God perversely and foolishly, not
to worship him at all ; from worshipping many gods, to worship
ping none ; this, therefore, ought to deter men from leaving su
perstition or idolatry, for fear of falling into atheism and impiety.
This is your counsel and sophistry : but God says, clean contrary
— Take heed you swerve not either to the right hand or to the
left; you must not do evil that good may come thereon; there
fore, neither that you may avoid a greater evil ; you must not
be obstinate in a certain error, for fear of an uncertain. What
if some, forsaking the church of Rome, have forsaken fundamen
tal truths ? Was this because they forsook the church of Rome ?
No sure, this is non causa pro causa ; for else all that have for
saken that church should have done so, which we say they have
not : but because they went too far from her. The golden mean,
the narrow way, is hard to be found, and hard to be kept ; hard,
but not impossible ; hard, but yet you must not please yourself
out of it, though you err on the right hand, though you offend on
the milder part ; for this is the only way " that leads to life, and
few there be that find it." It is true, if we said there was no
danger in being of the Roman church, and there were danger in
leaving it, it were madness to persuade any man to leave it.
But we protest and proclaim the contrary, and that we have
very little hope of their salvation, who, either out of negligence
in seeking the truth, or unwillingness to find it, live and die in the
errors and impieties of that church ; and therefore cannot but con
ceive those fears to be most foolish and ridiculous, which persuade
men to be constant in one way to hell, lest haply, if they leave it,
they should fall into another.
64. But, not only others, but even protestants themselves,
whose example ought most to move us, pretending to reform the
church, are come to affirm that she perished for many ages,
which Dr. Potter cannot deny to be a fundamental error, against
the article of the creed, I believe the catholic church, seeing he
affirms — donatists erred fundamentally in confining it to Africa. —
To this I answer, first, that the error of the donatists was not,
that they held it possible that some, or many, or most parts of
Christendom, might fall away from Christianity, and that the
church may lose much of her amplitude, and be contracted to a
narrow compass, in comparison of her former extent : which is
¦ proved not only possible, but certain, by irrefragable experience :
for who knows not that gentilism, and mahometanism, man's
wickedness deserving it and God's providence permitting it, have
prevailed, to the utter extirpation of Christianity, upon far the
greater part of the world ; and St. Augustine, when he was out of
the heat of disputation, confesses the militant church to be like the
moon, sometimes increasing, and sometimes decreasing. This, there
fore, was no error in the donatists, that they held it possible
that the church, from a large extent, might be contracted to a

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 233
lesser; nor that they held it possible to be reduced to Africa:
(for why not to Afric then, as well as within these few ages you
pretend it was to Europe?) but their error was, that they held de
facto, this was done when they had no just ground or reason to do
so ; and so, upon a vain pretence which they could not justify,
separated themselves from the communion of all other parts of
the church ; and that they required it as a necessary condition, to
make a man a member of the church, that he should be of their
communion, and divide himself from all other communions from
which they were divided ; which was a condition both unnecessary
and unlawful to be required, and therefore the exacting of it was
directly opposite to the church's Catholicism ; in the very same
nature, with their errors who required circumcision, and the keeping
of the law of Moses, as necessary to salvation. For whosoever
requires harder or heavier conditions of men than God requires of
them, he it is that is properly an enemy of the church's universa
lity, by hindering either men or countries from adjoining them
selves to it ; which, were it not for these unnecessary and there
fore unlawful conditions, in probability would have made them
members of it. And seeing the present church of Rome per
suades men they were as good (for any hope of salvation they
have) not to be christians, as not to be Roman catholics ; believe
nothing at all, as not believe all she imposes upon them; be ab
solutely out of the church's communion, as be out of her commu
nion, or be in any other : whether she be not guilty of the same
crime with the donatists, and those zealots of the Mosaical law,
I leave it to the judgment of those that understand reason : this
is sufficient to show the vanity of this argument. But I add,
moreover, that you neither have named those protestants who held
the church to have perished for many ages, who perhaps held not
the destruction, but the corruption, of the church ; not that the
true church, but that the pure church perished ; or rather, that
the church perished not from its life and existence, but from its
purity and integrity, or perhaps from its splendour and visibility ;
neither have you proved by any one reason, but only affirmed it,
to be a fundamental error to hold that the church militant may
possibly be driven out of the world, and abolished for a time from
the face of the earth.
65. But to accuse the church of any error in faith, is to say
she lost all faith : for this is the doctrine of catholic divines, that
one error in faith destroys faith. — To which I answer, that to ac
cuse the church of some error in faith, is not to say, she lost all
faith : for this is not the doctrine of all catholic divines ; but that
he which is an heretic in one article, may have true faith of other
articles. And the contrary is only said, and not shewed, in Charity
Mistaken. 66. Ad. §. 21. Dr. Potter says — We may not depart from the
church absolutely, and in all things — and from hence you conclude
— therefore we may not depart from it in any thing : and this argu
ment you call a demonstration. But, a fallacy a dicto simpliciter
ad dictum secundum quid, was not used heretofore to be called a de-

234 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
monstration. Dr. Potter says not, that you may not depart from
any opinion or any practice of the church ; for you tell us in this
very place, that he says, even the catholic may err ; and every
man may lawfully depart from error. He only says — you may
not cease to be of the church, nor depart from those things which
make it so to be ; and from hence you infer a necessity of forsaking
it in nothing. — Just as if you should argue thus : you may not leave
your friend or brother, therefore you may not leave the vice of your
friend, or the error of your brother. What he says of the catholic
church, p. 75, the same he extends presently after to every true,
though never so corrupted, part of it. And why do you not con
clude from hence, that no particular church (according to his judg
ment) can fall into any error, and call this a demonstration too ?
For as he says, p. 75, that " there can be no just cause to depart
from the whole church of Christ, no more than from Christ
himself;" so, p. 76, he tells you, that " whosoever forsakes any one
true member of the body, forsakes the whole." So that what he
says of the one, he says of the other ; and tells you, that neither
universal nor particular church, so long as they continue so, may be
forsaken ; he means absolutely, no more than Christ himself may
be forsaken absolutely : for the church is the body of Christ, and
whosoever forsakes either the body, or his coherence to any one
part of it, must forsake his subordination and relation to the head.
Therefore, whosoever forsakes the church, or any christian, must
forsake Christ himself.
67. But then he tells you plainly, in the same place, that " it
may be lawful and necessary to depart from a particular church in
some doctrines and practices ;" and this he would have said even
of the catholic church, if there had been occasion ; but there was
none. For there he was to declare and justify our departure, not
from the catholic church, but the Roman, which we maintain to
be a particular church. But, in other places, you confess his
doctrine to be, that even the catholic church may err in points not
fundamental : which you do not pretend that he ever imputed to
Christ himself. And therefore you cannot, with any candour,
interpret his words as if he had said, we may not forsake the
church in any thing, no more than Christ himself; but only
thus — we may not cease to be of the church, nor forsake it ab
solutely and totally, no more than Christ himself: and thus we
see, sometimes, a mountain may travail, and the production be a
mouse. 68. Ad. §. 22. But — Dr. Potter either contradicts himself, or
else must grant the church infallible ; because he says, if we did
not differ from the Roman, we could not agree with the catholic :
which saying supposes the catholic church cannot err. — Ans.
This argument, to give it the right name, is an obscure and in
tricate nothing ; and to make it appear so, let us suppose, in contra
diction to your supposition, either that the catholic church may
err, but doth not, but that the Roman actually doth ; or that the
catholic church doth err, in some few things, but that the Roman
errs in many more. And is it not apparent, in both these cases,

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 235
(which yet both suppose the church's infallibility) a man may truly
say unless I dissent in some opinions from the Roman church, I can
not agree with the catholic : either, therefore, you must retract your
imputation laid upon Dr. Potter, or do that which you condemn in
him, and be driven to say, that the same man may hold some errors
with the church of Rome, and at the same time with the catholic
church, not to hold, but condemn them. For otherwise, in neither
of these cases is it possible for the same man, at the same time, to
agree both with the Roman and the catholic.
69. In all these texts of scripture, which are here alleged in this
last section of this chapter, or in any one of them, or in any other,
doth God say clearly and plainly — the bishop of Rome, and that
society of christians which adheres to him, shall be ever the infal
lible guide of faith? You will confess, I presume, he doth not,
and will pretend it was not necessary. Yet if the king should
tell us, the lord-keeper should judge such and such causes ; but
should either not tell us at all, or tell us but doubtfully, who
should be lord-keeper, should we be any thing the nearer for him
to an end of contentions ? Nay rather, would not the dissensions
about the person who it is, increase contentions rather than end
them ? Just so it would have been, if God had appointed a church
to be judge of controversies, and had not told us which was that
church. Seeing, therefore, God doth nothing in vain, and seeing
it had been in vain to appoint a judge of controversies, and not to
tell us plainly who it is; and seeing, lastly, he hath not told us
plainly, no not at all who it is ; is it not evident he hath appointed
none ? Obj. But (you will say, perhaps) if it be granted once, that
some church of one denomination is the infallible guide of faith, it
will be no difficult thing to prove that yours is the church, seeing
no other church pretends to be so. Ans. Yes, the primitive and
the apostolic church pretends to be so. That assures us, that the
Spirit was promised and given unto them, to lead them into all
saving truth, that they might lead others. Obj. But that church
is not now in the world, and how then can it pretend to be the guide
of faith ? Ans. It is now in the world sufficient to be our guide ;
not by the persons of those men that were members of it, but by
their writings, which do plainly teach us, what truth they were led
into, and so lead us into the same truth. Obj. But these writings were
the writings of some particular men, and not of the church of those
times; how then doth that church guide us by these writings?
Now these places show that a church is to be our guide, therefore
they cannot be so avoided. Ans. If you regard the conception
and production of these writings, they were the writings of parti
cular men : but if you regard the reception and approbation of them,
they may be well called the writings of the church, as having the
attestation of the church, to have been written by those that were
inspired and directed by God. As a statute, though penned by
some one man, yet being ratified by the parliament, is called the
act, not of that man, but of the parliament. Obj. But the words
seem clearly enough to prove, that the church, the present
church of every age, is universally infallible. Ans. For my part

236 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
I know I am as willing and desirous, that the bishop or church
of Rome should be infallible, (provided I might know it) as
they are to be so esteemed. But he that would not be deceived
must take heed, that he take not his desire that a thing should be
so, for a reason that it is so. For, if you look upon scripture
through such spectacles as these, they will appear to you, of what
colour pleases your fancies best; and will seem to say, not what
they do say, but what you would have them. As some say the
manna, wherewith the Israelites were fed in the wilderness, had in
every man's mouth that very taste which was most agreeable to his
palate. For my part I profess, I have considered them a thousand
times, and have looked upon them (as they say) on both sides, and
yet to me they seem to say no such matter.
70. Not the first, for the church may err, and yet " the gates of
hell not prevail against her." It may err, and yet continue still a
true church, and bring forth children unto God, and send souls to
heaven. And therefore this can do you no service, without the
plain begging of the point in question, viz. that every error is one
of the gates of hell : which we absolutely deny, and therefore, you
are not to suppose, but prove it. Neither is our denial without
reason: for seeing you do and must grant that a particular church
may hold some error, and yet be still a true member of the church;
why may not the universal church hold the same error, and yet
remain a true universal ?
71. Not the second or third ; for, the spirit of truth may be with
a man or a church for ever, and teach him all truth — and yet he
may fall into some error, if this all be not simply all, but all of some
kind ; which you confess to be so unquestioned and certain, that
you are offended with Dr. Potter for offering to prove it. Secondly,
he may fall into some error, even contrary to the truth which is
taught him, if it be taught him only sufficiently, and not irre
sistibly, so that he may learn it if he will, not so that he must and
shall, whether he will or no. Now, who can ascertain me that the
Spirit's teaching is not of this nature ? or how can you possibly re
concile it with your doctrine of free-will in believing, if it be not
of this nature. Besides, the word in the original is b&r\yi)o'ti, which
signifies, to be a guide and director only, not to compel or necessitate.
Who knows not, that a guide may set you in the right way, and
you may either negligently mistake it, or willingly leave it ? And
to what purpose does God complain so often and so earnestly of some
that had eyes to see, and would not see ; that stopped their ears,
and closed their eyes, lest they should hear and see ? Of others —
that would not understand, lest they should do good : that the
light shined, and "the darkness comprehended it not; that he
came unto his own, and his own received him not ; that light came
into the world, and men loved darkness more than light ;" to what
purpose should he wonder so few believed his report, and that to
so few his arm was revealed ; and that when he comes, he should
find no faith upon earth, if his outward teaching were not of this
nature, that it might be followed, and might be resisted? And if
it be, then God may teach, and the church not learn ; God may

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 237
lead, and the church be refractory, and not follow. And, indeed,
who can doubt, that hath not his eyes veiled with prejudice, that
God hath taught the church of Rome plain enough in the Epistle
to the Corinthians, that all things in the church are to be done for
edification; and that, in any public prayers, or thanksgiving, or
hymns, or lessons of instruction, to use a language, which the as
sistants generally understand not, is not for edification ? Though
the church of Rome will not learn this, for fear of confessing an error,
and so overthrowing her authority : yet the time will come, when
it shall appear, that not only by scripture, they were taught this
sufficiently and commanded to believe it, but by reason and common
sense. And so for the communion in both kinds, who can deny
but they are taught it by our Saviour (John vi.) in these words,
according to most of your own expositions : " Unless you eat the
flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, you have no life in
you." (If our Saviour speaks there of the sacrament, as to them he
doth, because they conceive he doth so.) For though they may
pretend, that receiving in one kind, they receive the blood together
with the body, yet they can with no face pretend that they drink
it; and so obey not our Saviour's injunction according to the letter,
which yet they profess is literally always to be obeyed, unless some
impiety, or some absurdity, forces us to the contrary : and they are
not yet arrived to that impudence to pretend, that either there is
impiety or absurdity in receiving the communion in both kinds.
This, therefore, they, if not others, are plainly taught by our Saviour
in this place ; but by St. Paul all, without exception, when he says,
" Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of this bread, and
drink of this chalice." This (a man) that is to examine himself, is
every man that can do it ; as is confessed on all hands. And there
fore it is all one, as if he had said, " Let every man examine himself,
and so let him eat of this bread, and drink of this cup." They
which acknowledge St. Paul's epistles, and St. John's Gospel, to be
the word of God, one would think should not deny, but that they
are taught these two doctrines plain enough; yet we see they
neither do, nor will, learn them. I conclude, therefore, that the
Spirit may very well teach the church, and yet the church fall into
and continue in error, by not regarding what she is taught by the
Spirit. 72. But all this I have spoken upon a supposition only, and
showed unto you, that though these promises had been made unto the
present church of every age, (I might have said, though they had been
to the church of Rome by name) yet no certainty of her universal
infallibility could be built upon them. But the plain truth is, that
these promises are vainly arrogated by you, and were never made
to you, but to the apostles only. I pray deal ingenuously, and tell
me, who were they, of whom our Saviour says, "These things have
I spoken unto you being present with you." (Chap. xiv. 25.) "But
the Comforter shall teach you all things, and bring all things to
your remembrance, whatsoever I have told you." (Ver. 26.) Who
are they to whom he says, "I go away, and come again unto you ;"
and, "I have told you before it came to pass." (Ver. 28, 29.)

238 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
" You have been with me from the beginning." (Chap. xv. 27.)
And again ; " These things I have told you, that when the time
shall come, you may remember that I told you of them : and these
things I said not unto you at the beginning, because I was with
you." (Chap. xvi. 4.) And, " Because I said these things unto
you, sorrow hath filled your hearts." (Ver. 6.) Lastly, who are
they, of whom he saith, (ver. 12,) " I have many things to say
unto you, but you cannot bear them now ?" Do not all these cir
cumstances appropriate this whole discourse of our Saviour to
his disciples that were then with him ; and, consequently re
strain the promises of the Spirit of truth, which was to lead
them into all truth, to their persons only ? And seeing it is
so, is it not an impertinent arrogance and presumption, for you
to lay claim unto them, in the behalf of your church? Had Christ
been present with your church ? Did the Comforter bring these
things to the remembrance of your church, which Christ had before
taught, and she had forgotten ? Was Christ then departing from
your church ? and did he tell of his departure before it came to
pass? Was your church with hjm from the beginning? Was
your church filled with sorrow, upon the mentioning of Christ's
departure? or, lastly, did he, or could he, have said to your church,
which was then not extant, " I have yet many things to say unto
you, but ye cannot bear them now ?" as he speaks, in the 12th
verse, immediately before the words by you quoted. And then
goes on, " Howbeit when the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide
you into all truth." Is it not the same you he speaks to in the
13th verse,, and that he speaks to in the 14th? and is it not appa
rent to any one that has but half an eye, that in the 13th verse he
speaks only to them that then were with him ? Besides, in the
very text by you alleged, there are things promised, which your
church cannot with any modesty pretend to : for there it is said,
the Spirit of truth, not only will " guide you into all truth," but
also will " show you things to come." Now your church (for aught
I could ever understand) doth not so much as pretend to the spirit
of prophecy and knowledge of future events: and, therefore, hath
as little cause to pretend to the former promise of being led by the
Spirit into all truth. And this is the reason, why both you in this
place, and generally, your writers of controversies, when they treat
of this argument, cite this text perpetually by halves ; there being
in the latter part of it a clear and convincing demonstration that
you., have nothing to do with the former. Unless you will say,
which is most ridiculous, that when our Saviour said, " He will
teach you," &c. and " he will show you," &c. he meant one you in
the former clause, and another you in the latter.
73. Obj. But this is to confine God's Spirit to the apostles only,
or to the disciples, that then were present with him ; which is
directly contrary to many places of scripture. Ans. I confess, that
to confine the Spirit of God to those that were then present with
Christ, is against scripture. But I hope it is easy to conceive
a difference between confining the Spirit of God to them, and con
fining the promises made in this place to them. God may do many

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 239
things which he doth not promise at all ; much more, which he
doth not promise in such or such a place.
74. Obj. But it is promised in the 13th chap. — that this Spirit
shall abide with them for ever : now they in their persons were not
to abide for ever, and therefore the Spirit could not abide with them
in their persons for ever, seeing the co-existence of two things
supposes of necessity the existence of either. Therefore, the pro
mise was not made to them only in their persons, but by them to
the church, which was to abide for ever. — Ans. Your conclusion is,
not to them only ; but your reason concludes either nothing at all,
or that this promise of abiding with them for ever was not made
to their persons at all ; or, if it were, that it was not performed ; or
if you will not say (as I hope you will not) that it was not per
formed, nor that it was not made to their persons at all ; then must
you grant, that the words for ever are here used in a sense restrained,
and accommodated to the subject here treated of; and that it
signifies, not eternally, without end of time, but perpetually, without
interruption, for the time of their lives : so that the force and sense
of the words is, that they shall never want the Spirit's assistance
in the performance of their functions : and that the Spirit would
not (as Christ was to do) stay with them for a time, and afterwards
leave them, but would abide with them, if they kept their station,
unto the very end of their lives, which is man's for ever. Neither
is this use of the words for ever, any thing strange, either in our
ordinary speech, wherein we use to say — This is mine for ever — ¦
This shall be yours for ever, without ever dreaming of the eternity
either of the thing or persons. And then in scripture, it not only
will bear, but requires this sense very frequently, as Exod. xxi.
6; Deut. xv. 17. " His master shall bore his ear through with an
awl, and he shall serve him for ever." Psal. Iii. 9. " I will praise
thee for ever." Psal. lxi. 4. "I will abide in thy tabernacle for ever."
Psal. cxix. 111. "Thy testimonies have I taken as mine heritage
for ever." And lastly, in the Epistle to Philemon, " He therefore
departed from thee for a time, that thou shouldst receive him for ever."
75. And thus, I presume, I have shewed sufficiently, that this
for ever hinders not, but that the promise may be appropriated to
the apostles, as by many other circumstances I have evinced it
must be. But what now, if the place produced by you, as a main
pillar of your church's infallibility, prove upon trial an engine to
batter and overthrow it ? at least, (which is all one to my purpose)
to take away all possibility of our assurance of it ? This will seem
strange news to you at first hearing, and not far from a prodigy.
And I confess, as you here, in this place, and generally all your
writers of controversy, by whom this text is urged, order the matter,
it is very much disabled to do any service against you in this
question ; for with a bold sacrilege, and horrid impiety, somewhat
like Procrustes' cruelty, you perpetually cut off the head and foot,
the beginning and the end of it ; and presenting your confidants,
(who usually read no more of the bible than is alleged by you)
only these words, " I will ask my Father, and he shall give you
another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever, even the

240 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
Spirit of truth ;" conceal, in the meantime, the words before and the
words after ; that so the promise of God's Spirit may seem to be
absolute, whereas it is indeed most clearly and expressly condi
tional ; being both in the words before, restrained to those only that
love God and keep his commandments; and in the words after,
flatly denied to all, whom the scripture styles by the name of the
world; that is, as the very antithesis gives us plainly to understand,
to all wicked and worldly men. Behold the place entire, as it is
set down in your own bible : " If ye love me, keep my command
ments, and I will ask my Father, and he shall give you another
Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever, even the Spirit of
truth, whom the world cannot receive." Now, from the place thus
restored and vindicated from your mutilation, thus I argue against
your pretence. We can have no certainty of the infallibility of
your church, but upon this supposition, that your popes are infal
lible in confirming the decrees of general councils : we can have no
certainty hereof, but upon this supposition, that the Spirit of truth
is promised to them for their direction in this work : and of this
again we can have no certainty, but upon supposal, that they per
form the condition whereunto the promise of the Spirit of truth is
expressly limited, viz. that they "love God, and keep his com
mandments:" and of this, finally, not knowing the pope's heart,
we can have no certainty at all ; therefore, from the first to the last,
we can have no certainty at all of your church's infallibility. This
is my first argument. From this place another follows, which
will charge you as home as the former. If many of the Roman see
were such men as could not receive the Spirit of truth, even men of
the world, that is, worldly, wicked, carnal, diabolical men ; then
the Spirit of truth is not here promised, but flatly denied them ; and
consequently, we can have no certainty, neither of the decrees of
councils, which the popes confirm, nor of the church's infallibility,
which is guided by these decrees: but many of the Roman see,
even by the confession of the most zealous defenders of it, were such
men ; therefore, the Spirit of truth is not here promised, but denied
them, and consequently, we can have no certainty neither of the
decrees which they confirm, nor of the church's infallibility, which
guides herself by these decrees.
76. You may take as much time as you think fit to answer these
arguments. In the meanwhile I proceed to the consideration of
the next text alleged for this purpose by you, out of St. Paul, 1st
Epist. to Timothy, where he saith, as you say, " the church is the
pillar and ground of truth ;" but the truth is, you are somewhat
too bold with St. Paul ; for he saith not in formal terms what you
make him say, " the church is the pillar and ground of truth ;"
neither is it certain that he means so: for it is neither impossible
nor improbable, that these words, "the pillar and ground of truth,"
may have reference not to the church, but to Timothy, the sense
of the place — " that thou mayest know how to behave thyself, as a
pillar and ground of the truth, in the church of God, which is the
house of the living God ;" which exposition offers no violence at
all to the words, but only supposes an ellipsis of the particle lis,

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 241
in the Greek very ordinary. Neither wants it some likelihood, that
St. Paul, comparing the church to a house, should here exhort
Timothy, to carry himself as a pillar in that house should do, ac
cording as he had given other principal men in the church the name
of pillars ; rather than having called the church a house, to call it
presently a pillar : which may seem somewhat heterogeneous. Yet
if you will needs have St. Paul refer this, not to Timothy, but to
the church, I will not contend about it any farther, than to say,
possibly it may be otherwise. But then, secondly, I am to put you in
mind, that the church, which St. Paul here speaks of, was that in
which Timothy conversed, and that was a particular church, and not
the Roman ; and such you will not have to be universally infallible.
77. Thirdly, If we grant you, out of courtesy (for nothing can
enforce us to it), that he both speaks of the universal church, and
says this of it ; then I am to remember you, that many attributes
in scripture are not notes of performance, but of duty, and teach
us not what the thing or person is of necessity, but what it should
be. " Ye are the salt of the earth," saith our Saviour to his
disciples ; not that this quality was inseparable from their persons,
but because it was their office to be so. For, if they must have
been so of necessity, and could not have been otherwise, in vain
had he put them in fear of that which follows : " If the salt have
lost his savour, wherewith shall it be salted? It is henceforth
good for nothing, but to be cast forth, and trodden under foot."
So the church may be by duty " the pillar and ground ;" that is,
the teacher of truth, of all truth, not only necessary, but profitable
to salvation : and yet she may neglect and violate this duty, and
be in fact the teacher of some error.
78. Fourthly and lastly, If we deal most liberally with you, and
grant that the apostle here speaks of the catholic church, calls it
" the pillar and ground of truth," and that not only because it
should, but because it always shall and will, be so, yet after all
this you have done nothing ; your bridge is too short to bring you
to the bank where you would be, unless you can shew, that by
truth here is certainly meant, not only all necessary to salvation,
but all that is profitable, absolutely and simply all. For that the
true church always shall be the maintainer and teacher of all ne
cessary truth, you know we grant, and must grant ; for it is of the
essence of the church to be so ; and any company of men were no
more a church without it, than any thing can be a man, and not
be reasonable. But as a man may he still a man, though he want
a hand or an eye, which yet are profitable parts ; so the church
may be still a church, though it be defective in some profitable
truth. And as a man may be a man that hath some biles and botches
in his body ; so the church may be the church, though it may have
many corruptions both in doctrine and practice.
79. And thus you see we are at liberty from the former places ;
having shewed that the sense of them either must or may be such
as will do your cause no service. But the last you suppose will be
a Gordian knot, and tie us fast enough : the words are, " He gave
some apostles, and some prophets, &c. to the consummation of

242 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
saints, to the work of the ministry, &c. until we all meet in the
unity of faith, &c. That we be not hereafter children, wavering,
and carried up and down with every wind of doctrine." Out of
which words this is the only argument which you collect, or I can
collect for you.
There is no means to conserve unity of faith, against every wind
of doctrine, unless it be a church universally infallible.
But it is impious to say, there is no means to preserve unity of
faith against every wind of doctrine :
Therefore there must be a church universally infallible.
Whereunto I answer, that your major is so far from being con
firmed, that it is plainly confuted by the place alleged. For that
tells us of another means for this purpose, to wit — the apostles,
and prophets, and evangelists, and pastors, and doctors, which
Christ gave upon his ascension, and that their consummating the
saints, doing the work of the ministry, and edifying the body of
Christ, was the means, to bring those (which are there spoken of,
be they who they will) to the unity of faith, and to perfection in
Christ, that they might not be wavering, and carried about with
every wind of false doctrine. Now the apostles, and prophets, and
evangelists, and pastors, and doctors, are not the present church ;
therefore the church is not the only means for this end, nor that
which is here spoken of.
80. Peradventure by he gave, you conceive it to be understood —
he promised that he would give unto the world's end. But what
reason have you for this conceit ? Can you shew that the word
%&uxe hath this signification in other places, and that it must have
it in this place? Or, will not this interpretation drive you pre
sently to this blasphemous absurdity, that God hath not performed
his promise 1 Unless you will say, which for shame I think you
will not, that you have now, and in all ages since Christ have had,
apostles, and prophets, and evangelists : for as for pastors and
doctors alone, they will not serve the turn. For if God promised
to give all these, then you must say he hath given all, or else that
he hath broken his promise. Neither may you pretend, that the
pastors and doctors were the same with the apostles, and prophets,
and evangelists, and therefore having pastors and doctors you have
all. For it is apparent, that by these names are denoted several
orders of men, clearly distinguished and diversified by the original
texts; but much more plainly by your own translations, for so
you read it — " some apostles, and some prophets, and other some
evangelists, and other some pastors and doctors :" and yet more
plainly in the parallel place, 1 Cor. xii. to which we are referred
by your vulgar translation. " God hath set some in the church;
first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers;" therefore
this subterfuge is stopped against you. Obj. But how can they,
which died in the first age, keep us in the unity, and guard us from
error, that live now, perhaps in the last ? This seems to be all one,
as if a man should say, that Alexander or Julius Caesar should
quiet a mutiny in the King of Spain's army. Ans. I hope you will
grant, that Hippocrates, and Galen, and Euclid, and Aristotle,

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 243
and Sallust, and Caesar, and Livy, were dead many ages since ;
and yet that we are now preserved from error by them, in a great
part of physic, of geometry, of logic, of the Roman story. But
what if these men had writ by divine inspiration, and writ com
plete bodies of the sciences they professed, and writ them plainly
and perspicuously ; you would then have granted, I believe, that
their works had been sufficient to keep us from error, and from
dissension in these matters. And why then should it be incon
gruous to say, that the apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, and
pastors, and doctors, which Christ gave upon his ascension, by
their writings, which some of them writ, but all approved, are even
now sufficient means, to conserve us in unity of faith, and guard
us from error ? Especially, seeing these writings are, by the con
fession of all parts, true and divine, and, as we pretend and are
ready to prove, contain a plain and perfect rule of faith ; and, as
the chiefest* of you acknowledge, " contain immediately all the
principal and fundamental points of Christianity," referring us to
the church and tradition only for some minute particularities. But,
tell me, I pray, the bishops that composed the decrees of the coun
cil of Trent, and the pope that confirmed them, are they the means
to conserve you in unity, and keep you from error, or are they not ?
Peradventure you will say, their decrees are, but not their persons;
but you will not deny, I hope, that you owe your unity and freedom
from error to the persons that made these decrees ; neither will you
deny, that the writings which they have left behind them, are suffi
cient for this purpose. And why then may not the apostles' writings
be as fit for such purpose, as the decrees of your doctors ? Surely
their intent in writing was to conserve us in unity of faith, and to
keep us from error, and we are sure God spake in them ? But
your doctors, from whence they are, we are not so certain. Was
the Holy Ghost then unwilling, or unable, to direct them so, that
their writing should be fit and sufficient to attain the end they
aimed at in writing ? for if he were both able and willing to do so,
then certainly he did do so. And then their writings may be very
sufficient means, if we would use them as we should do, to preserve
us in unity, in all necessary points of faith, and to guard us from all
pernicious error.
81. If yet you be not satisfied, but will still pretend, that all these
words, by you cited, seem clearly enough to prove, that the church is
universally infallible, without which unity of faith could not be con
served against every wind of doctrine ; I answer, that to you which
will not understand, that there can be any means to conserve the
unity of faith, but only that which conserves your authority over
the faithful, it is no marvel that these words seem to prove that the
church, nay, that your church, is universally infallible. But we
that have no such end, no such desires, but are willing to leave all
men to their liberty, provided they will not improve it to a tyranny
over others, we find it no difficulty to discern between dedit and
promisit — he gave at his ascension, and he promised to the world's
end. Besides, though you, whom it concerns, may haply flatter
* Perron.
«2

244 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
yourselves, that you have not only pastors, and doctors, but pro
phets, and apostles, and evangelists, and those distinct from the
former, still in your church ; yet we that are disinterested persons,
cannot but smile at these strange imaginations. Lastly, though
you are apt to think yourselves such necessary instruments for all
good purposes, and that nothing can be well done unless you do
it ; that no unity or constancy in religion can be maintained, but
inevitably Christendom must fall to ruin and confusion, unless
you support it : yet we, that are indifferent, and impartial, and well
content that God should give us his own favours, by means of his
own appointment, not of our choosing, can easily collect out of
these very words, that not the infallibility of yours, or of any
church, but the apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, &c. which
Christ gave upon his ascension, were designed by him for the
compassing all these excellent purposes, by their preaching while
they lived, and by their writings for ever. And if they fail hereof,
the reason is not any insufficiency or invalidity in the means, but
the voluntary perverseness of the subjects they have to deal with ;
who, if they would be themselves and be content that others
should be, in the choice of their religion, the servants of God, and
not of men ; if they would allow, that the way to heaven is not
narrower now than Christ left it, his yoke no heavier than he made
it ; that the belief of no more difficulties is required now to salva
tion, than was in the primitive church ; that no error is in itself
destructive and exclusive from salvation now, which was not then ;
if, instead of being zealous papists, earnest calvinists, rigid lutherans,
they would become themselves, and be content that others should
be, plain and honest christians ; if all men would believe the scrip
ture, and, freeing themselves from prejudice and passion, would
sincerely endeavour to find the true sense of it, and live according
to it, and require no more of others but to do so ; nor denying
their communion to any that do so, would so order their public
service of God, that all which do so may, without scruple, or
hypocrisy, or protestation against any part of it, join with them in
it ; who doth not see that seeing (as we suppose here, and shall
prove hereafter) all necessary truths are plainly and evidently set
down in scripture, there would of necessity be among all men, in
all things necessary, unity of opinion ? and, notwithstanding any
other differences that are, or could be, unity of communion, and
charity, and mutual toleration ? by which means all schism and
heresy would be banished the world, and those wretched conten
tions which now rend and tear in pieces, not the coat, but the
members and bowels of Christ, which mutual pride and tyranny,
and cursing, and killing, and damning, would fain make immortal,
should speedily receive a most blessed catastrophe. But of this
hereafter, when we shall come to the question of schism, wherein
I persuade myself, that 1 shall plainly shew, that the most vehe
ment accusers are the greatest offenders, and that they are indeed,
at this time, the greatest schismatics who make the way to heaven
narrower, the yoke of Christ heavier, the differences of faith greater,
the conditions of ecclesiastical communion harder and stricter,

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 245
than they were made at the beginning by Christ and his apostles ;
they who talk of unity, but aim at tyranny, and will have peace
with none but with their slaves and vassals. In the meanwhile,
though I have shewed how unity of faith, and unity of charity
too, may be preserved without your church's infallibility, yet see
ing you modestly conclude from hence, not that your church is, but
only seems to be, universally infallible, meaning to yourself, of
which you are a better judge than I : therefore I willingly grant
your conclusion, and proceed.
82. Whereas you say, that Dr. Potter limits those promises and
privileges to fundamental points: the truth is, with some of them
he meddles not at all, neither does his adversary give him occasion ;
not with those out of the Epistle to Timothy, and the Ephesians.
To the rest he gives other answer besides this.
83. But the words of scripture by you alleged are universal, and
mention no such restraint to fundamentals as Dr. Potter applies to
them. — I answer, that, of the five texts which you allege, four are
indefinite, and only one universal, and that you confess is to be re
strained, and are offended with Dr. Potter for going about to prove
it. And whereas you say, they mention no restraint, intimating
that therefore they are not to be restrained, I tell you, this is no
good consequence ; for it may appear out of the matter and cir
cumstances, that they are to be understood in a restrained sense,
notwithstanding no restraint be mentioned. That place quoted
by St. Paul, and applied by him to our Saviour, " He hath put all
things under his feet," mentions no exception ; yet St. Paul tells us,
not only that it is true or certain, but, " it is manifest that He is
excepted which did put all things under him."
84. But your interpretation is better than Dr. Potter's because
it is literal. — I answer his is literal as well as yours : and you are
mistaken if you think a restrained sense may not be a literal sense ;
for to restrained, literal is not opposed, but unlimited or absolute ;
and to literal is not opposed restrained, but figurative.
85. Whereas you say, Dr. Potter's brethren, rejecting his limita
tion, restrain the mentioned texts to the apostles — implying hereby
a contrariety between them and him ; I answer, so doth Dr. Potter
restrain all of them which he speaks of, in the pages by you quoted,
to the apostles, in the direct and primary sense of the words :
though he tells you there, the words in a more restrained sense are
true, being understood of the church universal.
86. As for your pretence, that — to find the meaning of those
places, you confer divers texts, you consult originals, you examine
translations, and use all the means by protestants appointed. I
have told you before, that all this is vain and hypocritical, if (as
your manner and your doctrine is) you give not yourselves liberty
of judgment in the use of these means : if you make not yourselves
judges of, but only advocates for, the doctrine of your church, re
fusing to see what these means show you, if it any way make
against the doctrine of your church, though it be as clear as the
light at noon. Remove prejudice, even the balance, and hold it
even, make it indifferent to you which way you go to heaven so

246 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
you go the true, which religion be true, so you be of it, then use
the means, and pray for God's assistance, and as sure as God is true,
you shall be led into all necessary truth.
87. Whereas you say — you neither do, nor have, any possible
means to agree, as long as you are left to yourselves : the first is
very true, that while you differ you do not agree. But for the
second, that you have no possible means of agreement, as long as
you are left to yourselves, i. e. to your own reasons and judgment,
this sure is very false, neither do you offer any proof of it, unless
you intend this, that you do not agree, for a proof that you can
not ; which sure is no good consequence, nor half so good as this
which I oppose against it. Dr. Potter and I, by the use of these
means by you mentioned, do agree, concerning the sense of these
places, therefore there is a possible means of agreement ; and
therefore you, also, if you would use the same means, with the
same minds, might agree so far as it is necessary, and it is not
necessary that you should agree farther. Or if there be no possible
means to agree about the sense of these texts, whilst we are left
to ourselves, then sure it is impossible that we should agree in your
sense of them, which was, that the church is universally infallible.
For if it were possible for us to agree in this sense of them, then
it were possible for us to agree. And why then said you of the self
same texts but in the page next before, " These words seem clearly
enough to prove that the church is universally infallible." A
strange forgetfulness, that the same man, almost in the same
breath, should say of the same words, they seem clearly enough to
prove such a conclusion true, and yet that three indifferent men,
all presumed to be lovers of truth, and industrious searchers of it,
should have no possible means, while they follow their own reason,
to agree in the truth of this conclusion !
88. Whereas you say, that — It were great impiety to imagine
that God, the lover of souls, hath left no certain infallible means
to decide both this and all other differences arising about the in
terpretation of scripture, or upon any other occasion — I desire
you to take heed you commit not an impiety in making more
impieties than God's commandments make. Certainly, God is no
way obliged, either by his promise or his love, to give us all things
that we may imagine would be convenient for us, as formerly I have
proved at large. It is sufficient that he denies us nothing necessary
to salvation. Deus non deficit in necessariis, nee redundat in super-
fluis : so Dr. Stapleton. But that the ending of all controversies,
or having a certain means of ending them, is necessary to salvation,
that you have often said and supposed, but never proved, though
it be the main pillar of your whole discourse. So little care you
take how slight your foundations are, so your building make a fair
show : and as little care, how you commit those faults yourself,
which you condemn in others. For here you charge them with great
impiety, who imagine that God, the lover of souls, hath left no in
fallible means to determine all differences arising about the inter
pretation of scripture, or upon any other occasion : and yet after
wards being demanded by Dr. Potter, why the questions between

No Church of one Denomination infallible. 247
the Jesuits and dominicans remain undetermined ? you return
him this cross interrogatory, Who hath assured you that the point,
wherein these learned men differ, is a revealed truth, or capable of
definition ; or is it not rather by plain scripture indeterminable, or
by any rule of faith ? So then when you say, it were great im
piety to imagine that God hath not left infallible means to decide
all differences; I may answer, it seems you do not believe your
self. For in this controversy, which is of as high consequence as
any can be, you seem to be doubtful whether there be any means
to determine it. On the other side, when you ask Dr. Potter, who
assured him that there is any means to determine this controversy ?
I answer for him, that you have ; in calling it a great impiety to
imagine that there is not some infallible means to decide this and
all other differences arising about the interpretation of scripture, or
upon any other occasion. For what trick you can devise to show
that this difference between the dominicans and Jesuits, which in
cludes a difference about the sense of many texts of scripture, and
many other matters of moment, was not included under this, and
all other differences, I cannot imagine. Yet if you can find out any,
thus much at least we shall gain by it, that general speeches are
not always to be understood generally, but sometimes with excep
tions and limitations.
89. But if there be any infallible means to decide all differences,
I beseech you name them. You say it is to consult and hear God's
visible church with submissive acknowledgment of her infallibility.
But suppose the difference be (as here it is) whether your church
be infallible, what shall decide that ? If you would say (as you
should do) scripture and reason, then you foresee that you should
be forced to grant, that these are fit means to decide this controversy,
and therefore may be as fit to decide others. Therefore, to avoid
this, you run into a most ridiculous absurdity, and tell us, that this
difference also, whether the church be infallible, as well as others,
must be agreed by a submissive acknowledgment of the church's
infallibility ; as if you should have said, My brethren, I perceive this
is a great contention among you, whether the Roman church be infal
lible ! If you will follow my advice, I will show you a ready means to
end it ; you must first agree that the Roman church is infallible,
and then your contention, whether the Roman church be infallible,
will quickly be at an end. Verily, a most excellent advice, and
most compendious way of ending all controversies, even without
troubling the church to determine them ! For why may not you say
in all other differences as you have done in this ? Agree that the
pope is supreme head of the church ; that the substance of the
bread and wine, in the sacrament, is turned into the body and blood
of Christ ; that the communion is to be given to laymen but in one
kind ; that pictures may be worshipped ; that saints are to be in-
vocated ; and so in the rest : and then your differences about the
pope's supremacy, transubstantiation, and all the rest, will speedily
be ended. If you say, the advice is good in this, but not in other
cases, I must request you, not to expect always to be believed upon
your word, but to show us some reason, why any one thing, namely,

248 No Church of one Denomination infallible.
the church's infallibility ; is fit to prove itself; and any other thing,
by name the pope's supremacy, or transubstantiation, is not as fit?
Or if for shame you will at length confess, that the church's infal
libility is not fit to decide this difference, whether the church be
infallible, then you must confess it is not fit to decide all : unless
you will say it may be fit to decide all, and yet not fit to decide
this, or pretend that this is not comprehended under all. Besides,
if you grant that your church's infallibility cannot possibly be well
grounded upon, or decided by itself, then having professed before,
that there is no possible means besides this for us to agree here
upon, I hope you will give me leave to conclude, that it is impossi
ble upon good ground for us to agree that the Roman church is in
fallible. For certainly, light itself is not more clear than the evi
dence of this syllogism :
If there be no other means to make men agree upon your church's
infallibility, but only this, and this be no means ; then it is
simply impossible for men upon good grounds to agree that
your church is infallible :
But there is (as you have granted) no other possible means to
make men agree hereupon, but only a submissive acknowledg
ment of her infallibility ; and this is apparently no means ;
Therefore it is simply impossible for men upon good grounds to
agree that your church is infallible.
90. Lastly, to the place of St. Augustine, wherein we are advised
to follow the way of catholic discipline, which from Christ himself
by the apostles hath come down even to us, and from us shall de
scend to all posterity — I answer, that the way which St. Augustine
speaks of, and the way which you commend, being diverse ways,
and in many things, clean contrary, we cannot possibly follow
them both; and therefore, for you to apply the same words to
them is a vain equivocation. Show us any way, and do not say,
but prove it to have come from Christ and his apostles down to us,
and we are ready to follow it. Neither do we expect demonstra
tion hereof, but such reasons as may make this more probable than
the contrary. But if you bring in things into your now catholic
discipline, which christians in St. Augustine's time held abominable,
(as the picturing of God,) and which you must, and some of you
do confess to have come into the church seven hundred years after
Christ : if you will bring in things, as you have done the half com
munion, with a non obstante, notwithstanding Christ's institution,
and the practice of the primitive church were to the contrary ; if
you will do such things as these, and yet would have us believe,
that your whole religion came from Christ and his apostles, this
we conceive a request too unreasonable for modest men to make,
or for wise men to grant.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 249
CHAPTER IV.
To say that the creed contains all points necessarily to be believed,
is neither pertinent to the question in hand ; nor in itself true.
"I say, neither pertinent nor true. Not pertinent; because
our question is not what points are necessary to be explicitly
believed ; but what points may be lawfully disbelieved, or rejected
after sufficient proposition that they are divine truths. You say,
the creed contains all points necessary to be believed : be it so :
but doth it likewise contain all points not to be disbelieved?
Certainly it doth not. For how many truths are there in holy
scripture not contained in the creed, which we are not obliged
distinctly and particularly to know and believe, but are bound
under pain of damnation not to reject, as soon as we come to
know that they are found in holy scripture ; and we having al
ready shewed that whatsoever is proposed by God's church as a
point of faith, is infallibly a truth revealed by God; it followeth,
that whosoever denieth any such point, opposeth God's sacred
testimony, whether that point be contained in the creed or no. In
vain then was your care employed to prove, that all points of
faith necessary to be explicitly believed, are contained in the
creed. Neither was that the catalogue which Charity Mistaken
demanded. His demand was (and it was most reasonable) that
you would once give us a list of all fundamentals, the denial
whereof destroys salvation ; whereas the denial of other points
not fundamental may stand with salvation, although both these
kinds of points be equally proposed as revealed by God. For if
they be not equally proposed, the difference will arise from diversi
ty of the proposal, and not of the matter fundamental, or not fun
damental. This catalogue only can shew how far protestants may
disagree without breach of unity in faith ; and upon this many other
matters depend according to the ground of protestants. But you
will never adventure to publish such a catalogue. I say more ;
you cannot assign any one point so great, or fundamental, that the
denial thereof will make a man a heretic, if it be not sufficiently
propounded as a divine truth. Nor can you assign any one point so
small, that it can without heresy be rejected, if once it be suffi
ciently represented as revealed by God.
" 2. Nay, this your instance hi the creed is not only impertinent,
but directly against you. For all points in the creed are not of
their own nature fundamental, as I shewed* before : and yet it is
damnable to deny any one point contained in the creed. So that
it is clear, that to make an error damnable, it is not necessary that
the matter be of itself fundamental.
" 3. Moreover, you cannot ground any certainty upon the creed
itself, unless first you presuppose that the authority of the church
is universally infallible, and consequently that it is damnable to
oppose her declarations, whether they concern matters great or
small, contained or not contained in the creed. This is clear ; be-
* Cap. iii. n. 3.

250 Charity maintained by Catholics.
cause we must receive the creed itself upon the credit of the
church, without which we could not know that there was any such
thing as that which we call the apostles' creed. And yet the ar
guments whereby you endeavour to prove, that the creed contains
all fundamental points, are grounded upon supposition, that the
creed was made either by the apostles themselves, or by the
church* of their times from them : which thing we could not cer
tainly know, if the succeeding and still continued church may err
in her traditions ; neither can we be assured, whether all funda
mental articles which you say were, out of the scriptures, summed
and contracted into the apostles' creed, were faithfully summed
and contracted, and not one pretermitted, altered or mistaken,
unless we undoubtedly know that the apostles composed the
creed ; and that they intended to contract all fundamental points
of faith into it; or at least that the church of their times (for
it seemeth you doubt whether indeed it were composed by the
apostles themselves) did understand the apostles aright ; and that
the church of their times did intend that the creed should contain
all fundamental points. For if the church may err in points not
fundamental, may she not also err in the particulars which I have
specified ? Can you shew it to be a fundamental point of faith, that
the apostles intended to comprise all points of faith necessary to sal
vation in the creed ? Yourself say no more than that it is veryf
probable ; which is far from reaching to a fundamental point of
faith. Your probability is grounded upon the judgment of anti
quity, and even of the Roman doctors, as you say in the same place.
But if the catholic church may err, what certainty can you expect
from antiquity or doctors ? Scripture is your total rule of faith.
Cite therefore some text of scripture, to prove that the apostles, or
the church of their times composed the creed, and composed it with
a purpose that it should contain all fundamental points of faith ;
which being impossible to be done, you must for the creed itself
rely upon the infallibility of the church.
" 4. Moreover, the creed consisteth not so much in the words,
as in their sense and meaning. All such as pretend to the name
of christians, recite the creed, and yet many have erred funda
mentally, as well against the articles of the creed, as other points
of faith. It is then very frivolous to say, the creed contains all
fundamental points ; without specifying, both in what sense the
articles of the creed be true, and also in what true sense they be
fundamental. For, both these tasks you are to perform, who
teach that all truth is not fundamental : and you do but delude
the ignorant when you say, that the creed, taken in a catholicj
sense, comprehendeth all points fundamental ; because with you,
all catholic sense is not fundamental ; for so it were necessary to
salvation that all christians should know the whole scripture,
wherein every least point hath a catholic sense. Or if, by catholic
sense, you understand that sense which is so universally to be
known and believed by all, that whosoever fails therein cannot be
saved, you trifle, and say no more than this — all points of the
* Page 216. t Page 241. } Page 216.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 251
creed, in a sense necessary to salvation, are necessary to salvation :
or, all points fundamental are fundamental.— After this manner it
were an easy thing to make many true prognostications, by saying
it will certainly rain when it raineth. You say the creed* was
opened and explained in some parts in the creeds of Nice, &c. But
how shall we understand the other parts, not explained in those
creeds ?
" 5. For what article in the creed is more fundamental, or may
seem more clear, than that wherein we believe Jesus Christ to be
the Mediator, Redeemer, and Saviour of mankind, and the founder
and foundation of a catholic church, expressed in the creed ? And
yet about this article, how many different doctrines are there, not
only of old heretics, as Arius, Nestorius, Eutiches, &c, but also
of protestants, partly against catholics, and partly against one
another ? For the said main article of Christ's being the only
Saviour of the world, &c, according to different senses of dis
agreeing sects, doth involve these and many other such questions :
that faith in Jesus Christ doth justify alone ; that sacraments have
no efficiency in justification ; that baptism doth not avail infants
for salvation, unless they have an act of faith ; that there is no
sacerdotal absolution from sins ; that good works proceeding from
God's grace are not meritorious ; that there can be no satisfaction
for the temporal punishment due to sin, after the guilt or offence
is pardoned ; no purgatory ; no prayers for the dead ; no sacrifice
of the mass ; no invocation ; no mediation or intercession of saints ;
no inherent justice ; no supreme pastor ; yea, no bishop by divine
ordinance ; no real presence ; no transubstantiation, with divers
others. — And why? because (forsooth) these doctrines derogate
from the titles of Mediator, Redeemer, Advocate, Foundation,
&c. Yea, and are against the truth of our Saviour's human nature,
if we believe divers protestants writing against transubstantiation.
Let then any judicious man consider, whether Dr. Potter, or
others, do really satisfy, when they send men to the creed for a
perfect catalogue, to distinguish points fundamental, from those
which they say are not fundamental. If he will speak indeed to
some purpose, let him say, this article is understood in this sense,
and in this sense it is fundamental — that other is to be understood
in such a meaning ; yet according to that meaning it is not so
fundamental, but that men may disagree, and deny it without
damnation. But it were no policy for any protestant to deal so
plainly. "6. But to what end should we use many arguments? Even
yourself are forced to limit your own doctrine, and come to say,
that the creed is a perfect catalogue of fundamental points, taken
as it was further opened and explained in some parts (by occasion
of emergent heresies) in the other catholic creeds of Nice, Con
stantinople, Ephesus.f Chalcedon, and Athanasius. But this ex
plication, or restriction, overthroweth your assertion. For as the
apostles' creed was not to us a sufficient catalogue, till it was
explained by the first council, nor then till it was declared by
* Page 216. t Ibid.

252 Charity maintained by Catholics.
another, &c, so now, also, as new heresies may arise, it will need
particular explanation against such emergent errors ; and so it is
not yet, nor ever will be, of itself alone, a particular catalogue,
sufficient to distinguish betwixt fundamental and not fundamental
points. " 7. I come to the second part — that the creed doth not contain
all main and principal points of faith : and to the end we may not
strive about things either granted by us both, or nothing concerning
the point in question, I must premise these observations:
" 8. First, that it cannot be denied, but that the creed is most
full and complete, to that purpose for which the holy apostles, in
spired by God, meant that it should serve, and in that manner as
they did intend it ; which was, not to comprehend all particular
points of faith, but such general heads as were most befitting and
requisite for preaching the faith of Christ to Jews and Gentiles,
and might be briefly and compendiously set down, and easily
learned and remembered. And therefore, in respect of gentiles,
the creed doth mention God as Creator of all things; and for both
Jews and Gentiles, the trinity, the Messias and Saviour, his birth,
life, death, resurrection, and glory, from whom they were to hope
remission of sins, and life everlasting, and by whose sacred name
they were to be distinguished from all other professions, by being
called christians : according to which purpose St. Thomas of
Aquine* doth distinguish all the articles of the creed into these
general heads : that some belong to the majesty of the Godhead,
others to the mystery of our Saviour Christ's human nature :
which two general objects of faith the Holy Ghost doth express
and conjoin, John xvii. hac est vita aterna, &c. ' This is life
everlasting, that they know thee, the true God, and whom thou
hast sent, Jesus Christ.' But it was not their meaning to give us,
as it were, a course of divinity, or a catechism, or a particular
expression of all points of faith, leaving those things to be per
formed as occasion should require, by their own word or writing,
for their time, and afterwards by their successors in the catholic
church. Our question then is not, whether the creed be perfect,
as far as the end for which it was composed did require ; for we
believe and are ready to give our lives for this; but only we deny,
that the apostles did intend to comprise therein all particular
points of belief, necessary to salvation, as even by Dr. Potter's
own confession,! it doth not comprehend agenda, or things be
longing to practice ; as sacraments, commandments, the acts of
hope, and duties of charity which we are obliged not only to
practise, but also to believe by divine infallible faith. Will he
therefore infer that the creed is not perfect, because it contains
not all those necessary and fundamental objects of faith ? He will
answer, no, because the apostles intended only to express credenda,
things to be believed, not practised. Let him therefore give us
leave to say, that the creed is perfect, because it wanteth none of
those objects of belief which were intended to be set down, as we
explicated before.
» 2, 2. q. 1. Art. 8. t Page 235, 215.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 253
"9. The second observation is, that to satisfy our question
what points in particular be fundamental, it will not be sufficient
to allege the creed, unless it contains all such points, either ex
pressly and immediately ; or else in such manner, that by evident
and necessary consequence they may be deduced from articles both
clearly and particularly contained "therein. For if the deduction
be doubtful, we shall not be sure, that such conclusions be funda
mental ; or if the articles themselves which are said to be funda
mental, be not distinctly and particularly expressed, they will
not serve us to know and distinguish all points fundamental, from
those which they call not fundamental. We do not deny but that
all points of faith, both fundamental and not fundamental, may
be said to be contained in the creed, in some sense; as for ex
ample, implicitly, generally, or in some such involved manner. For
when we explicitly believe the catholic church, we do implicitly
believe whatsoever she proposeth as belonging to faith ; or else by
way of reduction, that is, when we are once instructed in the belief
of particular points of faith, not expressed, nor by necessary con
sequence deducible from the creed ; we may afterwards by some
analogy, or proportion, and resemblance, reduce it to one or more
of those articles, which are explicitly contained in the symbol.
Thus St. Thomas, the cherubim among divines, teacheth* that the
miraculous existence of our blessed Saviour's body in the eucharist,
as likewise all his other miracles, are reduced to God's omnipo-
tency expressed in the creed. And Dr. Potter saith, ' The eucharistf
being a seal of that holy union which we have with Christ our
head by his Spirit and faith, and with the saints his members by
charity, is evidently included in the communion of saints.' But
this reductive way is far from being sufficient to infer out of the
articles of God's omnipotency, or of the communion of saints, that
our Saviour's body is in the eucharist, and much less whether it be
only in figure, or else in reality ; by transubstantiation or consub
stantiation, &c. ; and least of all, whether or no these points be
fundamental. And you hyperbolize in saying, the eucharist is
evidently included in the communion of saints, as if there could
not have been, or was not, a communion of saints before the
blessed sacrament was instituted. Yet it is true, that after we
know and believe there is such a sacrament, we may refer it to
some of those heads expressed in the creed, and yet so, as St.
Thomas refers it to one article, and Dr. Potter to another ; and in
respect of different analogies or effects, it may be referred to several
articles. The like I say of other points of faith, which may in
some sort be reduced to the creed, but nothing to Dr. Potter's
purpose; but contrarily it sheweth that your affirming such and
such points to be fundamental or not fundamental, is merely arbi
trary to serve your turn, as necessity and your occasions may re
quire. Which was an old custom amongst heretics, as we read
inj St. Augustine, Pelagius, and Ccelestius, ' desiring fraudulently
to avoid the hateful name of heresies, affirmed that the question of
* 2. 2. q. 1. Art. 8. ad. 6. t Page 231.
X De peccat. Orig. cont. Pelag. 1. ii. c. 22.

254 Charity maintained by Catholics.
original sin may be disputed without danger of faith.' But this
holy father affirms that it belongs to the foundation of faith. ' We
may (saith he) endure a disputant who errs in other questions not
yet diligently examined, not yet diligently established by the
whole authority of the church; their error may be borne with;
but it must not pass so far as to attempt to shake the founda
tion of the church.' We see St. Augustine placeth the being of
a point fundamental, or not fundamental, in that it hath been
examined and established by the church, although the points of
which he speaketh, namely, original sin, be not contained in the
creed. " 10. Out of that which hath been said, I infer, that Dr. Potter's
pains in alleging catholic doctors, the ancient fathers, and the coun
cil of Trent, to prove that the creed contains all points of faith, was
needless ; since we grant it in manner aforesaid. But Dr. Potter
cannot in his conscience believe, that catholic divines, or the coun
cil of Trent, and the holy fathers did intend, that all points in par
ticular which we are obliged to believe, are contained explicitly in
the creed ; he knowing well enough, that all catholics hold them
selves obliged to believe all those points, which the said council de
fines to be believed under an anathema, and that all christians be
lieve the commandments, sacraments, &c. which are not expressed
in the creed.
"11. Neither must this seem strange. For who is ignorant,
that summaries, epitomes, and the like brief extracts, are not
intended to specify all particulars of that science or subject, to
which they belong. For as the creed is said to contain all points
of faith ; so the decalogue comprehends all articles (as I may term
them) which concern charity and good life; and yet this cannot
be so understood, as if we were disobliged from performance of
any duty, or the eschewing of any vice, unless it be expressed in
the ten commandments. For, (to omit the precepts of receiving
sacraments, which belong to practice or manners, and yet are not
contained in the decalogue) there are many sins, even against the
law of nature, and light of reason, which are not contained in the
ten commandments, except only by similitude, analogy, reduc
tion, or some such way. For example, we find not expressed in
the decalogue, either divers sins, as gluttony, drunkenness, pride,
sloth, covetousness in desiring either things superfluous, or with too
much greediness ; or divers of our chief obligations, as obedience to
princes, and all superiors, not only ecclesiastical but also civil ;
whose laws Luther, Melancthon, Calvin, and some other protestants
do dangerously affirm not to oblige in conscience, and yet these men
think they know the ten commandments ; as likewise divers protes
tants defend usury to be lawful, and the many treatises of civilians,
canonists, and casuists are witnesses, that divers sins against the
light of reason, and law of nature, are not distinctly expressed in
the ten commandments; although when by other diligence they are
found to be unlawful, they may be reduced to some of the com
mandments, and yet not so evidently and particularly but that divers
do it in divers manners.
" 12. My third observation is that our present question being,

Charity maintained by Catholics. 255
whether or no the creed contains so fully all fundamental points
of faith, that whosoever do not agree in all and every one of those
fundamental articles, cannot have the same substance of faith, nor
hope of salvation ; if I can produce one or more points, not contained
in the creed, in which if two do not agree, both of them cannot ex
pect to be saved, I shall have performed as much as I intend ; and
Dr. Potter must seek out some other catalogue for points fundamental
than the creed. Neither is it material to the said purpose, whether
such fundamental points rest only in knowledge, and speculation,
or belief; or else be farther referred to work and practice. For
the habit, or virtue of faith, which inclineth and enableth us to be
lieve both speculative and practical verities, is of one and the self
same nature and essence. For example, by the same faith, whereby
I speculatively believe there is a God, I likewise believe that he is
to be adored, served, and loved ; which belong to practice. The
reason is, because the formal object or motive, for which I yield
assent to those different sorts of material objects, is the same in
both, to wit, the revelation or word of God. Where, by the way,
I note, that if the unity or distinction and nature of faith were to be
taken from the diversity of things revealed, by one faith I should
believe speculative verities, and by another such as tend to practice,
which I doubt whether Dr. Potter himself will admit.
" 13. Hence it followeth, that whosoever denieth any one main
practical revealed truth, is no less a heretic, than if he should
deny a point resting in belief alone. So that when Dr. Potter (to
avoid our argument, that all fundamental points are not contained
in the creed, because in it there is no mention of the sacraments,
which yet are points of so main importance, that protestants make
the due administration of them to be necessary and essential to
constitute a church) answereth, that the sacraments are to be*
reckoned rather among the agendaof the church, than the credenda;
they are rather divine rites and ceremonies, than doctrines ; he
either grants that we affirm, or in effect says, of two kinds of re
vealed truths which are necessary to be believed, the creed contains
one sort only ; ergo, it contains all kinds of revealed truths neces
sary to be believed. Our question is not de nomine, but re, not
what be called points of faith, or of practice, but what points in
deed be necessarily to be believed, whether they be termed agenda
or credenda; especially the chiefest part of christian perfection, con
sisting more in action than in barren speculation ; in good works,
than bare relief; in doing than knowing. And there are no less con
tentions concerning practical, than speculative, truths; as sacra
ments, obtaining remission of sin, invocation of saints, prayers for
the dead, adoration of Christ in the sacrament, and many other ;
all which do so much the more import, as on them, beside right
belief, doth also depend our practice, and the ordering of our life.
Though Dr. Potter could therefore give us (as he will never be
able to do) a minute and exact catalogue of all truths to be believed;
that would not make me able enough to know whether or no I
» Page 235.

256 Charity maintained by Catholics.
have faith sufficient for salvation, till he also did bring in a par
ticular list of all believed truths, which tend to practice, decla
ring which of them be fundamental, which not ; that so every man
might know, whether he be not in some damnable error, for some
article of faith, which farther might give influence into damnable
works. " 14. These observations being premised, I come to prove, that
the creed doth not contain all points of faith necessary to be known
and believed. And, to omit that in general it doth not tell us
what points be fundamental or not fundamental, which, in the way
of protestants, is most necessary to be known ; in particular, there
is no mention of the greatest evils from which man's calamity pro
ceeded ; I mean, the sin of the angels, of Adam, and of original
sin in us ; nor of the greatest good, from which we expect all good,
to wit, the necessity of grace for all works tending to piety. Nay,
there is no mention of angels, good or bad. The meaning of that
most general head (Oportet accedentem, &c. ' It behoves* him
that comes to God, to believe that he is, and is a remunerator') is
questioned by the denial of merit, which makes God a giver, but
not a rewarder. It is not expressed whether the article of remis
sion of sins be understood by faith alone, or else may admit the
efficiency of sacraments. There is no mention of ecclesiastical,
apostolical, Divine traditions, one way or other ; or of holy scrip
tures in general, and much less of every book in particular ; nor
of the name, nature, number, effects, matter, form, ministry, inten
tion, necessity of sacraments; and yet the due administration of
the sacraments is with protestants an essential note of the church.
There is nothing for baptism of children, nor against rebaptization.
There is no mention in favour or against the sacrifice of the mass,
of power in the church to institute rites, holy days, &c. and to in
flict excommunication, or other censures; of priesthood, bishops,
and the whole ecclesiastical hierarchy, which are very fundamental
points ; of St. Peter's primacy, which to Calvin seemeth a funda
mental error ; nor of the possibility or impossibility to keep God's
commandments; of the procession of the Holy Ghost from the
Father and Son ; of purgatory, or prayer for the dead, in any sense.
And yet Dr. Potter doth not deny, but that Arius was esteemed
a heretic, for denyingf all sort of commemoration from the dead.
Nothing of the church's visibility or invisibility, fallibility or infal
libility, nor of other points controverted betwixt protestants them
selves, and between protestants and catholics, which to Dr. Potter
seem so heinous corruptions, that they cannot without damnation
join with us in profession thereof. There is no mention of the
cessation of the old law, which yet is a very main point of faith.
And many other might be also added.
" 15. But what need we labour to specify particulars? There
are many important points of faith not expressed in the creed, as,
since the world's beginning, now, and for all future times there
have been, are, and may be, innumerable gross damnable heresies,
* Heb. xi. 6. t Page 35.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 257
whose contrary truths are not contained in the creed. For every
fundamental error must have a contrary fundamental truth: because
of two contradictory propositions in the same degree, if the one is
false the other must be true. As for example, if it be a damnable
error to deny the blessed Trinity, or the Godhead of our Saviour,
the belief of them must be a truth necessary to salvation : or rather,
if we will speak properly, the error is damnable, because the op
posite truth is necessary ; as death is frightful, because life is sweet;
and, according to philosophy, the privation is measured by the
form to which it is repugnant. If therefore the creed contain in
particular all fundamental points of faith, it must explicitly, or by
clear consequence, comprehend all truths opposite to innumerable
heresies of all ages past, present, and to come, which no man in
his wits will affirm it to do.
" 16. And here I cannot omit to signify how you* applaud the
saying of Dr. Usher, ' That in those propositions, which without
all controversy are universally received in the whole christian
world, so much truth is contained, as being joined with holy
obedience, may be sufficient to bring a man to everlasting salva
tion; neither have we cause to doubt, but that — as many as
walk according to this rule (neither overthrowing that which they
have builded, by superinducing any damnable heresies thereupon,
nor otherwise vitiating their holy faith with a lewd and wicked
conversation) peace shall be upon them, and upon the Israel of
God.' Now Dr. Potter knows, that the mystery of the blessed
Trinity is not universally received in the whole christian world,
as appears in very many heretics in Polony, Hungary, and Tran-
silvania, and therefore according to this rule of Dr. Usher,
approved by Dr. Potter, the denial of the blessed Trinity shall
not exclude salvation.
" 17. Let me note, by the way, that you might have easily espied
a foul contradiction in the said words of Dr. Usher, by you cited,
and so much applauded. For he supposeth that a man agrees
with other churches in belief which, joined with holy obedience,
may bring him to everlasting salvation, and yet that he may
superinduce damnable heresies. For how can he superinduce
damnable heresies, who is supposed to believe all truths necessary
to salvation ? Can there be any damnable heresy, unless it con
tradict some necessary truth, which cannot happen in one who is
supposed to believe all necessary truths? Besides, if one be
lieving all fundamental articles in the creed, may superinduce
damnable heresies, it followeth, that the fundamental truths,
contrary to those damnable heresies, are not contained in the
creed. " 18. According to this model of Dr. Potter's foundation, con
sisting in the agreement of scarcely one point of faith ; what a
strange church would he make of men concurring in some one
or few articles of belief, who yet for the rest should be holding
conceits plainly contradictory ; so patching up a religion of men
* Page 255.

258 Charity maintained by Catholics.
who agree only in the article, that Christ is our Saviour, but for
the rest, are like to the parts of a chimera ; having the head of a
man, the neck of a horse, the shoulders of an ox, the foot of a
lion, &.c. I wrong them not herein. For in good philosophy,
there is greater repugnancy between assent and dissent, affirma
tion and negation, est, est, non, non, (especially when all these
contradictories pretend to rely upon one and the self-same motive —
the infallible truth of Almighty God) than between the integral
parts, as head, neck, &c. of a man, horse, lion, &c. And thus
protestants are far more bold to disagree, even in matters of faith,
than catholic divines, in questions merely philosophical, or not de
termined by the church. And while thus they stand only upon
fundamental articles, they do by their own confession destroy the
church, which is the house of God. For the foundation alone of a
house is not a house, nor can they, in such an imaginary church,
any more expect salvation, than the foundation alone of a house is
fit to afford a man habitation.
" 19. Moreover, it is most evident that protestants, by this chaos
rather than church, do give unavoidable occasion of desperation
to poor souls. Let some one who is desirous to save his soul repair
to Dr. Potter, who maintains these grounds, to know upon whom
he may rely in a matter of so great consequence : I suppose the
doctor's answer will be, upon the truly catholic church. She
cannot err damnably. What understand you by the catholic
church? Cannot general councils, which are the church repre
sentative, err? Yes, they may weakly or* wilfully misapply, or
misunderstand, or neglect scripture, and so err damnably. To
whom then shall I go for my particular instruction ? I cannot
confer with the united body of the whole church about my par
ticular difficulties, as yourself affirms, that the catholic church
cannot be toldf of private injuries. Must I then consult with
every particular person of the catholic church ? So it seems by
what you write in these words, 'The wholej militant church (that
is, all the members of it) cannot possibly err, either in the whole
faith, or any necessary article of it.' You say, M. Doctor, I
cannot for my instruction acquaint the universal church with
my particular scruples. You say the prelates of God's church
meeting in a lawful general council may err damnably: it
remains then for my necessary instruction, I must repair to
every particular member of the universal church, spread over the
face of the earth : and yet you teach that the promises^ which
our Lord hath made unto his church for his assistance, are in
tended not to any particular persons or churches, but only to the
church catholic, with which (as I said) it is impossible for me to
confer. Alas! O most uncomfortable ghostly father, you drive
me to desperation ! How shall I confer with every christian soul,
man and woman, by sea and by land, close prisoner or at liberty ?
&c. Yet upon supposal of this miraculous pilgrimage for faith,
before I have the faith of miracles, how shall I proceed at our
* Page 167. t Page 27. X Page 150, 151. § Page 151.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 259
meeting ? Or how shall I know the man on whom I may securely
rely? Procure (will you say) to know whether he believe all
fundamental points of faith : for if he do, his faith for point of
belief, is sufficient for salvation, though he err in a hundred
things of less moment. But how shall I know, whether he hold
all fundamental points or no ? For till you tell me this, I cannot
know whether or no his belief be sound in all fundamental points.
Can you say the creed ? Yes, and so can many damnable
heretics. But why do you ask me this question? Because the
creed contains all fundamental points of faith. Are you sure of
that? Not sure; I hold it very probable.* Shall I hazard my
soul on probabilities, or even wagers? This yields a new cause
of despair. But what ? doth the creed contain all points neces
sary to be believed, whether they rest in the understanding or
else do further extend to practice ? No. It was composed to
deliver credenda, not agenda to us; faith, not practice. How
then shall I know what points of belief, which directs my prac
tice, be necessary to salvation ? Still you chalk out new paths
for desperation. Well, are all articles of the creed, for their
nature and matter, fundamental? I cannot say so. How then
shall I know which in particular be and which be not funda
mental? Read my answer to a late popish pamphlet, entitled
Charity Mistaken, &c. : there you shall find, that fundamental doc
trines are such catholic verities, as principally and essentially per
tain fto the faith, such as properly constitute a church, and are
necessary (in ordinary course) to be distinctly believed by every
christian that will be saved. They are those grand and capital
doctrines which make up our faith in Christ ; that is, that com
mon faith which is alike precious in all, being one and the same
in the highest apostle and the meanest believer, which the apos
tle elsewhere calls the first principles of the oracles of God, and
the form of sound words. But how shall I apply these gene
ral definitions, or descriptions, or (to say the truth) these only
varied words and phrases (for I understand the word fundamen
tal as well as the words principal, essential, grand, and capital
doctrines, &c.) to the particular articles of the creed in such
sort, as that I may be able* precisely, exactly, particularly, to
distinguish fundamental articles from points of less moment?
You labour to tell us what fundamental points be, but not which
they be; and yet unless you do this, your doctrine serves only
either to make men despair, or else to have recourse to those
whom you call papists, and who give one certain rule, that all
points defined by Christ's visible church belong to the foundation
of faith, in such sense as that to deny any one cannot stand with
salvation. And seeing yourself acknowledges that these men do
not err in points fundamental, I cannot but hold it most safe for
me to join with them, for the securing of my soul, and the avoid
ing of desperation, into which this your doctrine must cast all
them who understand and believe it. For the whole discourse
* Page 241. t Page 211, 213, 214.'
r2

260 Charity maintained by Catholics.
and inference which here I have made, are either your own direct
assertions, or evident consequences clearly deduced from them.
" 20. But now let us answer some few objections of Dr. Potter's,
against that which we have said before : to avoid our argument,
that the scripture is not so much as mentioned in the creed, he
saith, ' the creed is an abstract of such necessary *doctrines as
are delivered in scripture, or collected out of it; and therefore
needs not express the authority of that which it supposes.'
"21. This answer makes for us. For by giving a reason why
it was needless that scripture should be expressed in the creed,
you grant as much as we desire ; namely, that the apostles judged
it needless to express all necessary points of faith in their creed.
Neither doth the creed suppose, or depend on scripture in such
sort as that we can, by any probable consequence, infer from the
articles of the creed, that there is any canonical scripture at all;
and much less that such books in particular be canonical. Yea,
the creed might have been the same, although holy scripture had
never been written ; and, which is more, the creed, even in
priority of time, was before all the scripture of the New Testa
ment, except the gospel of St. Matthew. And so, according to
this reason of his, the scripture should not mention articles con
tained in the creed. And I note in a word, how little connexion
Dr. Potter's arguments have, while he tells us, that 'the creed f
is an abstract of such necessary doctrines as are delivered in scrip
ture, or collected out of it, and therefore needs not express the
authority of that which it supposes;' it doth not follow: the arti
cles of the creed are delivered in scripture ; therefore the creed
supposeth scripture. For two distinct writings may well deliver
the same truths, and yet one of them not suppose the other, unless
Dr. Potter be of opinion that two doctors cannot, at one time,
speak the same truth.
" 22. And notwithstanding that Dr. Potter hath now told us,
it was needless that the creed should express scripture, whose
authority it supposes ; he comes at length to say, that the Nicene
fathers in their creed confessing that the Holy Ghost spake by
the prophets, do thereby sufficiently avow the divine authority of"
all canonical scripture. But I would ask him, whether the Nicene
Creed be not also an abstract of doctrines delivered in scripture,
as he said of the Apostles' Creed, and thence did infer, that it was
needless to express scripture, whose authority it supposes? Be
sides, we do not only believe, in general, that canonical scripture
is of divine authority, but we also are bound, under pain of dam
nation, to believe, that such and such particular books, not men
tioned in the Nicene Creed, are canonical. And, lastly, Dr.
Potter in this answer grants as much as we desire : which is, that
all points of faith are not contained in the Apostles' Creed, even
as it is explained by other creeds. For these words, ' who spake
by the prophets,' are no way contained in the Apostles' Creed, and
therefore contain an addition, not an explanation thereof.
" 23. But ' how can it be necessary (saith Dr. Potter) for any
* Page 234. t Ibid.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 261
christian to have more in his creed than the * apostles had, and
the church of their times?' I answer, you trifle, not distinguish
ing between the apostles' belief, and that abridgment of some
articles of faith, which we call the Apostles' Creed ; and withal.
you beg the question, by supposing the apostles believed no
more than is contained in their creed, which every unlearned
person knows and believes ; and I hope you will not deny but
the apostles were endued with greater knowledge than ordinary
persons. " 24. Your pretended proof out of the Acts, that the apostles
revealed to the church ' the whole counsel of God,' keeping f back
nothing, with your gloss (needful for our salvation) is no proof,
unless you still beg the question, and do suppose, that whatsoever
the apostles revealed to the church is contained in the creed,
And I wonder you do not reflect that those words were by Sff
Paul particularly directed to pastors and governors of the church,
as is clear by the other words, ' he called the ancients of the
church.' And afterward, ' take heed to yourselves, and to the
whole flock wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you bishops to
rule the church. And yourself say, that ' more knowledge is
J necessary in bishops, and priests, to whom is committed the
government of the church, and care of souls, than in vulgar laics.'
Do you think that the apostles taught Christians nothing but their
creed ? Said they nothing of the sacraments, commandments, duties
of hope, charity, &c. ?
" 25. Upon the same affected ambiguity is grounded your other
objections : ' to say, the whole faith of those times § is not con
tained in the Apostles' Creed, is all one as if a man should say,
this is not the Apostles' Creed, but a part of it.' For the faith of
the apostles is not all one with that which we commonly call their
creed. Did not, I pray you, St. Matthew and St. John believe
their writings to be canonical scripture ? And yet their writings
are not mentioned in the creed. It is therefore more than clear
that the faith of the apostles is of larger extent than the Apostles'
Creed. " 26. To your demand, why, amongst many things of equal
necessity to be believed, the apostles should || so distinctly set
down some, and be altogether silent of others ? 1 answer, that
you must answer your own demand. For in the creed there be
diverse points, in their nature, not fundamental or necessary to
be explicitly and distinctly believed, as above we showed ; why
are these points which are not fundamental expressed rather than
other of the same quality ? Why our Saviour's descent to hell,
and burial, expressed, and not his circumcision, his manifestation
to the three kings, working of miracles, &c. Why did they not
express scriptures, sacraments, and all fundamental points of faith
tending to practice, as well as those which rest in belief? Their
intention was, particularly to deliver such articles as were fittest
for those times, concerning the Deity, Trinity, and Messias, (as
* Page 221. t Acts xx. 27. X Page 244.
§ Page 222, 223. || Page 225.

262 Charity maintained by Catholics.
heretofore I have declared) leaving many things to be taught by
the catholic church, which in the creed we all profess to believe.
Neither doth it follow as you infer — that 'as well, nay better,
they might have given no article, but that (of the church) and
sent us to the church for all the rest. For in setting down others
besides that, and not all, they make us believe we have all, when
* we have not all.' For by this kind of arguing, what may not
be deduced? One might, quite contrary to your inference, say,
if the Apostles' Creed contain all points necessary to salvation,
what need we any church to teach us ? and, consequently, what
need of the article concerning the church ? What need we the creeds
of Nice, Constantinople, &.c. ? Superfluous are your catechisms,
wherein, besides the articles of the creed, you add divers other
particulars. These would be poor consequences, and so is yours.
But shall I tell you news? for so you are pleased to esteem it.
We grant your inference thus far ; that our Saviour Christ re
ferred us to his church, by her to be taught, and by her alone.
For she was before the creed, and scripture ; and she, to discharge
this imposed office of instructing us, hath delivered us the creed,
but not it alone, as if nothing else were to be believed. We have,
besides it, holy scripture ; we have unwritten, divine, apostolical,
ecclesiastical traditions. It were a childish argument, the creed
contains not all things which are necessary to be believed : ergo, it
is not profitable. Or, the church alone is sufficient to teach us by
some convenient means : ergo, she must teach us without all means,
without creeds, without councils, without scripture, &c. If the
apostles had expressed no article, but that of the catholic church,
she must have taught us the other articles in particular, by creeds,
or other means, as in fact we have even the Apostles' Creed from
the tradition of the church. If you will believe you have all in
the creed, when you have not all, it is not the apostles, or the
church, that makes you so believe, but it is your own error,
whereby you will needs believe that the creed must contain all.
For neither the apostles, nor the church, nor the creed itself tell
you any such matter ; and what necessity is there that one means
of instruction must involve whatsoever is contained in all the
rest ? We are not to recite the creed with anticipated persuasion,
that it must contain what we imagine it ought, for better main
taining some opinions of our own ; but we ought to say, and be
lieve, that it contains what we find in it, of which one article is,
to believe the catholic church, surely to be taught by her, which
presupposeth that we need other instruction beside the creed;
and in particular we may learn of her what points be contained
in the creed, what otherwise ; and so we shall not be deceived,
by believing we have all in the creed, when we have not all ; and
you may in the same manner say — as well, nay better, the apostles
might have given us no articles at all, as have left out articles
tending to practice. For in setting down one sort of article, and
not the other, they make us believe we have all, when we have
not all.  * Page 223.

Chanty maintained by Catholics. 263
"27. To our argument, that baptism is not contained in the
creed, Dr. Potter, besides his answer, that sacraments belong
rather to practice than faith, (which I have already confuted, and
which indeed maketh against himself, and serveth only to shew
that the apostles intended not to comprise all points in the creed
which we are bound to believe) adds that the creed of * Nice, ex
pressed baptism by name (' I confess one baptism for the remis
sion of sins'). Which answer is directly against himself, and
manifestly proves that baptism is an article of faith, and yet is not
contained in the Apostles' Creed, neither explicitly, nor by any
necessary consequence from other articles expressed therein. If,
to make it an article of faith, it be sufficient that it is contained in
the Nicene council ; he will find that protestants maintain many
errors against faith, as being repugnant to definitions of general
councils: as, in particular, that the very council of Nice (which,
saith Mr. Whitgift,f is of all wise and learned men reverenced,
esteemed, and embraced, next unto the scriptures themselves)
decreed, that to those who were chosen to the ministry unmarried,
it was not lawful to take any wife afterwards, is affirmed by pro
testants. And your grand reformer, Luther (Lib. de Conciliis
parte prima) saith, that he understands not the Holy Ghost in that
council. For in one canon it saith, that those who have gelded
themselves are not fit to be made priests, in another it forbids
them to have wives. Hath (saith he) the Holy Ghost nothing to
do in councils, but to bind and load his ministers, with impossible,
dangerous, and unnecessary laws? I forbear to show that this
very article, ' I confess one baptism for the remission of sins,' will
be understood by protestants in a far different sense from catholics;
yea, protestants among themselves do not agree, how baptism for
gives sins, nor what grace it confers. Only concerning the unity
of baptism against rebaptization of such as were once baptized,
(which I noted as a point not contained in the Apostles' Creed) I
cannot omit an excellent place of St. Augustine, where, speaking
of the donatists, he hath these words : ' they are so bold as J to re-
baptize catholics, wherein they shew themselves to be the greater
heretics, since it hath pleased the universal catholic church not
to make baptism void even in the very heretics themselves.' In
which few words, this holy father delivereth against the donatists
these points which do also make against protestants : that to make
a heresy, or a heretic, known to such, it is sufficient to oppose the
definition of God's church : that a proposition may be heretical,
though it be not repugnant to any texts of scripture. For St.
Augustine teacheth that the doctrine of rebaptization is heretical,
and yet acknowledgeth it cannot be convinced for such out of
scripture. And that neither the heresy of rebaptization of those
who were baptized by heretics, nor the contrary catholic truth
being expressed in the Apostles' Creed, it followeth that it doth
not contain all points of faith necessary to salvation. And so we
must conclude, that to believe the creed is not sufficient for unity
of faith, and spirit, in the same church ; unless there be also a
* Page 237. t In his Defence, p. 330. X Lib. de Hreres. in 69.

264 The Creed contains all
total agreement both in belief of other points of faith, and in ex
ternal profession, and communion also : (whereof we are to speak
in the next chapter) according to the saying of St. Augustine:
5 you are * with us in baptism, and in the creed ; but in the spirit
of unity, and bond of peace, and, lastly, in the catholic church,
you are not with us.' "

THE ANSWER TO THE FOURTH CHAPTER.
Wherein is shewed, that the creed contains all necessary points of
mere belief.
1. Ad. \. 1 — 6. Concerning the creed's containing the fundamen
tals of Christianity, this is Dr. Potter's assertion, delivered in the
207th page of his book. " The creed of the apostles (as it is ex
plained in the latter creeds of the catholic church) is esteemed a
sufficient summary or catalogue of fundamentals by the best learned
Romanists, and by antiquity."
2. By fundamentals he understands not the fundamental rules
of good life and action (though every one of these is to be believed
to come from God, and therefore virtually includes an article of
the faith) : but the fundamental doctrines of faith, such as though
they have influence upon our lives, as every essentia] doctrine of
Christianity hath, yet we are commanded to believe them, and not
to do them. The assent of our understandings is required to them,
but not obedience from our wills.
3. But these speculative doctrines again he distinguisheth out
of Aquinas, Occham, and Canus, and others, into two kinds : of the
first are those which are the objects of faith, in and for themselves,
which, by their own nature and God's prime intention, are essen
tial parts of the gospel ; such as the teachers in the church cannot
without mortal sin omit to teach the learners ; such as are in-
trinsical to the covenant between God and man ; and not only
plainly revealed by God, and so certain truths, but also command
ed to be preached to all men, and to be believed distinctly by all,
and so necessary truths. Of the second sort are accidental, cir
cumstantial, occasional objects of faith ; millions whereof there are
in holy scripture; such as are to be believed, not for themselves,
but because they are joined with others, that are necessary to be
believed, and delivered by the same authority which delivered
these. Such as we are not bound to know to be divine revelations
(for without any fault we may be ignorant hereof, nay, believe the
contrary) ; such as we are not bound to examine, whether or no
they be divine revelations ; such as pastors are not bound to teach
their flock, nor their flock bound to know and remember ; no, nor
the pastors themselves to know them or believe them, or not to
disbelieve them absolutely and always; but then only when they
do see and know them to be delivered in scripture, as divine
revelations. * Aug. Ep. 48.

necessary Points of mere Belief. 265
4. I say when they do so, and not only when they may do.
For to lay an obligation upon us of believing, or not disbelieving
any verity, sufficient revelation on God's part is not sufficient:
for then, seeing all the express verities of scripture are either to all
men, or at least to all learned men, sufficiently revealed by God, it
should be a damnable sin in any learned man actually to disbelieve
any one particular historical verity contained in scripture, or to be
lieve the contradiction of it, though he knew it not to be there con
tained. For though he did not, yet he might have known it ; it
being plainly revealed by God, and this revelation being extant in
such a book, wherein he might have found it recorded, if with dili
gence he had perused it. To make, therefore, any points neces
sary to be believed, it is requisite that either we actually know
them to be divine revelations; and these though they be not
articles of faith nor necessary to be believed, in and for themselves,
yet indirectly, and by accident, and by consequence they are so ;
the necessity of believing them being enforced upon us by a ne
cessity of believing this essential and fundamental article of faith —
that all divine revelations are true — which to disbelieve, or not to
believe, is for any christians not only impious, but impossible.
Or else it is requisite that they be, first, actually revealed by God :
Secondly, commanded, under pain of damnation, to be parti
cularly known, (I mean known to be divine revelations) and dis
tinctly to be believed. And of this latter sort of speculative divine
verities, Dr. Potter affirmed, that the Apostles' Creed was a suffi
cient summary ; yet he affirmed it not as his own opinion, but
as the doctrine of the ancient fathers, and your own doctors.
And besides, he affirmed it not as absolutely certain, but very
probable. 5. In brief, all that he says is this : — It is very probable, that ac
cording to the judgment of" the Roman doctors, and the ancient
fathers, the Apostles' Creed is to be esteemed a sufficient summary
of all those doctrines which being merely credenda, and not agenda,
all men are ordinarily, under pain of damnation, bound particu
larly to believe.
6. Now this assertion (you say) is neither pertinent to the ques
tion in hand, nor in itself true. Your reasons to prove it imperti
nent, put into form, and divested of impertinences, are these : 1.
because the question was not — What points were necessary to be
explicitly believed, but what points were necessary not to be disbe
lieved after sufficient proposal ? And therefore, to give a catalogue
of points necessary to be explicitly believed, is impertinent.
7. Secondly, because errors may be damnable, though the con
trary truths be not of themselves fundamental; as, that Pontius
Pilate was our Saviour's judge is not in itself a fundamental truth,
yet to believe the contrary were a damnable error. And there
fore, to give a catalogue of truths, in themselves fundamental, is
of pertinent satisfaction to this demand, what errors are damnable.
8. Thirdly, because, if the church be not universally infallible,
we cannot ground any certainty upon the creed, which we must
receive upon the credit of the church : and, if the church be uni-

266 The Creed contains all
versally infallible, it is damnable to oppose her declaration in any
thing, though not contained in the creed.
9. Fourthly, because not to believe the articles of the creed in
the true sense is damnable, therefore it is frivolous to say the
creed contains all fundamentals, without specifying in what sense
the articles of it are fundamental.
10. Fifthly, because the Apostles' Creed (as Dr. Potter himself
confesseth) was not a sufficient catalogue until it was explained
by the first council ; nor then until it was declared in the second,
&c. by occasion of emergent heresies : therefore now, also, as new
heresies may arise, it will need particular explanation ; and so is
not yet, nor ever will be, a complete catalogue of fundamentals.
11. Now to the first of these objections, I say, first, that your
distinction, between points necessary to be believed and necessary
not to be disbelieved, is more subtle than sound ; a distinction
without a difference ; there being no point necessary to be believed
which is not necessary not to be disbelieved ; nor no point to any
man, at any time, in any circumstances, necessary not to be dis
believed, but it is to the same man at the same time, in the same
circumstances, necessary to be believed. Yet that which (I believe)
you would have said, I acknowledge true ; that many points which
are not necessary to be believed absolutely, are yet necessary to
be believed upon a supposition, that they are known to be revealed
by God; that is, become then necessary to be believed, when
they are known to be divine revelations. But then I must needs
say, you do very strangely, in saying, that the question was —
What points might lawfully be disbelieved, after sufficient propo
sition that they are divine revelation ? You affirm, that none
may ; and so doth Dr. Potter, and with him all protestants, and all
christians. And how then is this the question ? Who ever said
or thought, that of divine revelations, known to be so, some
might safely and lawfully be rejected, and disbelieved, under pre
tence that they are not fundamental ? Which of us ever taught,
that it was not damnable, either to deny, or so much as doubt of
the truth of any thing whereof we either know, or believe, that
God hath revealed it ? What protestant ever taught that it was
not damnable, either to give God the lie, or to call his veracity
into question ? Yet, you say, " the demand of Charity Mistaken
was, and it was most reasonable, that a list of fundamentals should
be given, the denial whereof destroys salvation, whereas the denial
of other points may stand with salvation, although both kinds be
equally proposed as revealed by God."
12. Let the reader peruse Charity Mistaken, and he will find
that this qualification, " although both kinds of points be equally
proposed as revealed by God," is your addition, and no part of the
demand. And if it had, it had been most unreasonable, seeing he
and you know well enough, that (though we do not presently,
without examination, fall down and worship all your church's pro
posals as divine revelations) yet we make no such distinction of
known divine revelations, as if some only of them were necessary
to be believed, and the rest might safely be rejected. So that to

necessary Points of mere Belief . 267
demand a particular minute catalogue of all points that may not be
disbelieved after sufficient proposition, is indeed to demand a ca
talogue of all points that are or may be, inasmuch as none may be
disbelieved after sufficient proposition that it is a divine revelation.
At least it is to desire us, first, to transcribe into this catalogue
every text of the whole bible. Secondly, to set down distinctly
those innumerous millions of negative and positive consequences,
which may be evidently deduced from it : for these, we say, God
hath revealed. And, indeed, you are not ashamed in plain terms to
require this of us. For having first told us that the demand was
what points were necessary not to be disbelieved after sufficient
proposition that they are divine truth : you come to say, " certainly
the creed contains not all these." And this you prove by asking,
"How many truths are there in holy scripture, or contained in
the creed, which we are not bound to know and believe, but are
bound, under pain of damnation, not to reject, as soon as we come
to know that they are found in holy scripture ?" So that, in re
quiring a particular catalogue of all points not to be disbelieved
after sufficient proposal, you require us to set you down all points
contained in scripture, or evidently deducible from it. And yet
this you are pleased to call a reasonable, nay, a most reasonable
demand ; whereas, having engaged yourself to give a catalogue of
your fundamentals, you conceive your engagement very well sat
isfied by saying — All is fundamental which the church proposeth,
without going about to give us an endless inventory of her propo
sals. And therefore from us, instead of a perfect particular of
divine revelations of all sorts, (of which, with a less hyperbole
than St. John useth, we might say, " if they were to be written,
the world would not hold the books that must be written ;") me
thinks you should accept of this general — All divine revelations
are true, and to be believed : which yet I say, not as if I thought
the belief of this general sufficient to salvation ; but because I
conceive it as sufficient as the belief of your general ; and therefore
I said not — Methinks all should accept of this general, but me
thinks you should accept of it.
13. The very truth is, the main question in this business is not
— What divine revelations are necessary to be believed or not reject
ed when they are sufficiently proposed? for all, without exception,
all without question are so : but — what revelations are simply and
absolutely necessary to be proposed to the belief of christians,
so that that society, which doth propose, and indeed believe them,
hath, for matter of" faith, the essence of a true church ; that which
doth not, hath not? Now to this question, though not to yours,
Dr. Potter's assertion (if it be true) is apparently very pertinent.
And though not a full and total satisfaction to it, yet very effectual,
and of great moment towards it. For the main question being —
what points are necessary to salvation? and points necessary to
salvation being of two sorts, some of simple belief, some of practice
and obedience, he that gives you a sufficient summary of the first
sort of necessary points, hath brought you half way towards your
journey's end. And therefore that which he doth, is no more to be

268 The Creed contains all
slighted, as vain and impertinent, than an architect's work is to be
thought impertinent towards the making of a ,house, because he
doth it not all himself. Sure I am, if his assertion be true, as I be
lieve it is, a corollary may presently be deduced from it, which, if
it were embraced, cannot in all reason but do infinite service, both
to the truth of Christ, and the peace of Christendom. For seeing
falsehood and error could not long stand against the power of truth,
were they not supported by tyranny and worldly advantage, he that
could assert christians to that liberty which Christ and his apostles
left them, must needs do truth a most heroical service. And seeing
the overvaluing of the differences among christians, is one of the
greatest maintainers of the schisms of Christendom, he that could
demonstrate, that only these points of belief are simply necessary
to salvation, wherein christians generally agree, should he not lay
a very fair and firm foundation of the peace of Christendom? Now
the corollary, which, I conceive, would produce these good effects,
and which flows naturally from Dr. Potter's assertion, is this : — That
what man or church soever believes the creed, and all the evident
consequences of it, sincerely and heartily, cannot possibly (if also
he believe the scripture) be in any error of simple belief which is
offensive to God ; nor therefore deserve for any such error to be de
prived of his life, or to be cut off from the church's communion, and
the hope of salvation. — And the production of this again would be
this (which highly concerns the church of Rome to think of,) — That
whatsoever man or church doth for any error of simple belief, de
prive any man so qualified as above, either of his temporal life, or
livelihood, or liberty, or of the church's communion, and hope of
salvation, is for the first, unjust, cruel, and tyrannous; schismatical,
presumptuous, and uncharitable for the second.
13. Neither yet is this (as you pretend) to take away the necessity
of believing those verities of scripture, which are not contained in
the creed, when once we come to know that they are written in
scripture, when once they know them to be there written. For he
that believes not all known divine revelations to be true, how doth
he believe in God ? Unless you will say, that the same man, at
the same time, may not believe God, and yet believe in him. The
greater difficulty is, how it will not take away the necessity of
believing scripture to be the word of God? But that it will
not neither. For though the creed be granted a sufficient summary
of articles of mere faith, yet no man pretends that it contains the
rules of obedience ; but for them all men are referred to scripture.
Besides, he that pretends to believe in God, obligeth himself to be
lieve it necessary to obey that which reason assures him to be the
will of God. Now reason will assure him that believes the creed,
that it is the will of God he should believe the scripture : even the
very same reason which moves him to believe the creed : universal
and never-failing tradition having given this testimony both to creed
and scripture, that they both by the works of God were sealed,
and testified to be the words of God. And thus much be spoken
in answer to your first argument ; the length whereof will be the
more excusable, if I oblige myself to say but little to the rest.

necessary Points of mere Belief. 269
14. I come then to your second ; and, in answer to it, deny
flatly, as a thing destructive of itself, that any error can be damna
ble, unless it be repugnant, immediately or mediately, directly or
indirectly, of itself, or by accident, to some truth for the matter of
it fundamental. And to your example of Pontius Pilate being
judge of Christ, I say, the denial of it in him that knows it to be
revealed by God, is manifestly destructive of this fundamental
truth, that all divine revelations are true. Neither will you find
any error so much as by accident damnable, but the rejecting of it
will be necessarily laid upon us, by a real belief of all fundamen
tals, and simply necessary truths. And I desire you would reconcile
with this, that which you have said §. 15. " Every fundamental
error must have a contrary fundamental truth, because of two con
tradictory propositions, in the same degree, if the one is false, the
other must be true," &c.
15. To the third I answer, that the certainty I have of the creed,
that it was from the apostles, and contains the principles of faith, I
ground it not upon scripture, and yet not upon the infallibility of
any present, much less of your church, but upon the authority of
the ancient church, and written tradition, which (as Dr. Potter hath
proved) gave this constant testimony unto it. Besides, I tell you, it
is guilty of the same fault which Dr. Potter's assertion is here ac
cused of; having, perhaps, some colour towards proving it false,
but none at all to show it impertinent.
16. To the fourth, I answer plainly thus, that you find fault
with Dr. Potter for his virtues : you are offended with him for not
usurping the authority which he hath not ; in a word, for not play
ing the pope. Certainly, if protestants be faulty in this matter,
it is for doing it too much, and not too little. This presumptuous
imposing of the senses of men upon the words of God, the special
senses of men upon the general words of God, and laying them
upon men's consciences together, under the equal penalty of death
and damnation ; this vain conceit that we can speak of the things
of God, better than in the words of God : this deifying our own in
terpretations, and tyrannous enforcing them upon others : this
restraining of the word of God from that latitude and generality,
and the understandings of men from that liberty, wherein Christ
and the apostles left them,* is, and hath been, the only fountain of
all the schisms of the church, and that which makes them immortal ;
the common incendiary of Christendom, and that which (as I said
before) tears into pieces, hot the coat, but the bowels and members
of Christ : Ridente Turca nee dolente Judao. Take away these
walls of separation, and all will quickly be one. Take away this
persecuting, burning, cursing, damning of men for not subscribing
to the words of men, as the words of God ; require of christians only
to believe Christ, and to call no man master but him only ; let
* This persuasion is no singularity of mine, but the doctrine which I have learned
from divines of great learning and judgment. Let the reader be pleased to peruse the
seventh book of Acont. de Strat. Santanoe, and Zanchius' last oration, delivered by him
after the composing of the discord between him aiid Amerbachius, and he shall confess
as much.

270 The Creed contains all
those leave claiming infallibility that have no title to it, and let
them that in their words disclaim it, disclaim it likewise in their
actions. In a word, take away tyranny, which is the devil's instru
ment to support errors, and superstitions, and impieties, in the seve
ral parts of the world, which could not otherwise long withstand
the power of truth ; I say take away tyranny, and restore chris
tians to their just and full liberty of captivating their understanding
to scripture only, and as rivers, when they have a free passage, run
all to the ocean, so it may well be hoped, by God's blessing, that
universal liberty, thus moderated, may quickly reduce Christendom
to truth and unity. These thoughts of" peace (I am persuaded)
may come from the God of peace, and to his blessing I commend
them, and proceed.
18. Your fifth and last objection stands upon a false and dan
gerous supposition — that new heresies may arise. For a heresy
being in itself nothing else but a doctrine repugnant to some article
of the christian faith, to say that new heresies may arise, is to say,
that new articles of faith may arise: and so some great ones among
you stick not to profess in plain terms, who yet, at the same time,
are not ashamed to pretend that your whole doctrine is catholic and
apostolic ; so Salmeron : Non omnibus omnia dedit Deus, ut qualibet
atas suis gaudeat veritatibus, quas prior atas ignoravit. " God hath
not given all things to all ; so that every age hath its proper veri
ties, which the former age was ignorant of." Dis. 57, in Epist. ad
Rom. — And again in the margin, Habet unumquodque seculum pe-
culiares revelationes Divinas. " Every age hath its peculiar divine
revelations." Where he that speaks of such revelations, as are,
or may by the church be made matters of faith, no man can doubt
that reads him ; an example whereof he gives us a little before in
these words : Unius Agustini doctrina assumptionis B. Deipara out
turn in ecclesiam introduxit. " The doctrine of Augustine only hath
brought into the church the worship of the assumption of the mo
ther of God," &c. Others again mince and palliate the matter
with this pretence, that your church undertakes not to coin new
articles of faith, but only to declare those that want sufficient de
claration : but if sufficient declaration be necessary to make any
doctrine an article of faith, then this doctrine which before wanted
it, was not before an article of faith ; and your church by giving
it the essential form and last complement of an article of faith,
makes it, though not a truth, yet certainly an article of faith. But
I would fain know, whether Christ and his apostles knew this doc
trine, which you pretend hath the matter, but wants the form, of
an article of faith ; that is, sufficient declaration, whether they
knew it to be a necessary article of the faith or no ? If they knew
it not to be so, then either they taught what they knew not, which
were very strange, or else they taught it not ; and, if not, I would
gladly be informed, seeing you pretend to no new revelations, from
whom you learned it ? If they knew it, then either they concealed
or declared it. To say, they concealed any necessary part of the
gospel, is to charge them wifh far greater sacrilege, than what was
punished in Ananias and Sapphira. It is to charge these glorious

necessary Points of mere Belief. 271
stewards and dispensers of the mystery of Christ, with want of the
great virtue requisite in a steward, which is fidelity. It is to charge
them with presumption for denouncing anathemas even to angels,
in case they should teach any other doctrine than what they had
received from them, which sure could not merit an anathema, if
they left any necessary part of the gospel untaught. It is, in a
word, in plain terms, to give them the lie, seeing they profess,
plainly and frequently, that they taught christians the whole doc
trine of Christ. If they did know and declare it, then was it a full
and formal article of faith, and the contrary a full and formal
heresy, without any need of further declaration ; and then their
successors either continued the declaration of it, or discontinued
it : if they did the latter, how are they such faithful depositaries
of apostolic doctrine as you pretend ? Or, what assurance can you
give us, that they might not bring in new and false articles, as
well as suffer the old and true ones to be lost ? If they did con
tinue the declaration of it, and deliver it to their successors, and
they to theirs, and so on perpetually ; then continued it still a full
and formal article of faith, and the repugnant doctrine a full and
formal heresy, without and before the definition or declaration of
a council. So that councils, as they cannot make that a truth or
falsehood, which before was not so : so neither can they make or
declare that to be an article of faith, or a heresy, which before was
not so. The supposition therefore on which this argument stands,
being false and ruinous, whatsoever is built upon it, must together
with it fall to the ground. This explication therefore, and restric
tion of this doctrine, (whereof you make your advantage) was to
my understanding unnecessary. The fathers of the church in
after-times might have just cause to declare their judgment,
touching the sense of some general articles of the creed : but to
oblige others to receive their declarations, under pain of damna
tion, what warrant they had I know not. He that can shew,
either that the church of all ages was to have this authority, or
that it continued in the church for some ages, and then expired :
he that can shew either of these things, let him : for my part, I
cannot. Yet I willingly confess the judgment of a council, though
not infallible, is yet so far directive and obliging, that without ap
parent reason to the contrary, it may be a sin to reject it, at
least not to afford it an outward submission for public peace
sake. 19. Ad. §. 7 — 9. Were I not peradventure more fearful than
I need be of the imputation of tergiversation, I might very easily
rid my hands of the remainder of this chapter : for in the question
there discussed, you grant (for aught I see) as much as Dr. Potter
desires ; and Dr. Potter grants as much as you desire : and there
fore that I should disease myself, or my reader with a punctual
examination of it, may seem superfluous. First, that which you
would have, and which your arguments wholly drive at, is this —
that the creed doth not contain all main and principal points of
faith of all sorts, whether they be speculative, or practical, whether

272 The Creed contains all
they contain matter of simple belief, or whether they contain matter
of practice and obedience. This Dr. Potter grants, p. 215, 235.
And you grant that he grants it, §. 8, where your words are, "even
by Dr. Potter's own confession, it (the creed) doth not comprehend
agenda, or things belonging to practice, as sacraments, command
ments, the act of hope, and duties of charity." And if you will in
fer from hence, that therefore C. M. hath no reason to rest in the
Apostles' Creed, as a perfect catalogue of fundamentals, and a full
satisfaction to his demand, I have, without any offence of Dr.
Potter, granted as much, if that would content you. But seeing
you go on, and because his assertion is not (as neither is it pre
tended to be) a total satisfaction to the demand, cashier it as im
pertinent, and nothing towards it, here I have been bold to stop
your proceeding as unjust and unreasonable. For, as if you should
request a friend to lend you, or demand of a debtor to pay you, a
hundred pounds, and he could or should let you have but fifty,
this were not fully to satisfy your demand, yet sure it were not
to do nothing towards it : or, as this rejoinder of mine, though it
be not an answer to all your book, but only to the first consider
able part of it, and so much of the second, as is material and falls
into the first, yet I hope you will not deal so unkindly with me,
as for this reason, to condemn it of impertinence : so Dr. Potter be
ing demanded a catalogue of fundamentals of faith, and finding
them of two kinds, and those of one kind summed up to his hand
in the Apostles' Creed, and this creed consigned unto him for
such a summary by very great authority ; if upon these consi
derations he hath entreated his demander to accept of thus much,
in part of payment, of the Apostles' Creed as a sufficient sum
mary of these articles of faith, which are merely credenda, me
thinks he has little reason to complain, that he hath not been
fairly and squarely dealt with. Especially, seeing for full satisfac
tion, by Dr. Potter, and all protestants, he is referred to scripture,
which we affirm contains evidently all necessary points of faith,
and rules of obedience : and seeing Dr. Potter in this very place
hath subjoined, though not a catalogue of fundamentals, which
(because to some, more is fundamental, to others less, to others
nothing at all) had been impossible, yet such a comprehension of
them, as may serve every one that will make a conscionable use
of it, instead of a catalogue. For thus he says, "It seems to be
fundamental to the faith, and for the salva'tion of every member
of the church, that he acknowledge and believe all such points of
faith, whereof he may be sufficiently convinced that they belong
to the doctrine of Jesus Christ." This general rule, if I should call
a catalogue of fundamentals, I should have a precedent for it with
you above exception, I mean yourself; for chap. 3, §. 19, just such
another proposition you have called by this name. Yet because
it were a strange figure of speech, I forbear it: only I will be bold
to say, that this assertion is as good a catalogue of fundamentals,
as any you will bring of your church proposals, though you take
as much time to do it, as he that undertook to make an ass speak.

necessary Points of mere Belief. 273
20. I come now to show that you also have requited Dr. Potter
with a mutual courteous acknowledgment of his assertion, that the
creed is a sufficient summary of all the necessary articles of faith
which are merely credenda.
21. First, then, §. 8, you have these words: "It cannot be
denied that the creed is most full and complete to that purpose,
for which the holy apostles, inspired by God, meant that it should
serve, and in that manner as they did intend it; which was, not
to comprehend all particular points of faith, but such general
heads as were most befitting and requisite for preaching the faith
of Christ to Jews and gentiles, and might be briefly and com
pendiously set down, and easily learned and remembered." These
words, I say, being fairly examined without putting them on the
rack, will amount to a full acknowledgment of Dr. Potter's
assertion. But before I put them to the question, I must crave
thus much right of you, to grant me this most reasonable postu
late, that the doctrine of repentance from dead works, which St.
Paul saith was one of the two only things which he preached,
and the doctrine of charity, without which (the same St. Paul
assures us that) the knowledge of all mysteries, and all faith
is nothing, were doctrines more necessary and requisite, and
therefore more fit to be preached to Jews and gentiles than these,
under what judge our Saviour suffered, that he was buried, and
what time he rose again; which you have taught us, chap. 3,
§. 2, for their matter and nature in themselves not to be funda
mental. 22. And upon this grant, I will ask no leave to conclude, that
whereas you say, " the Apostles' Creed was intended for a com
prehension of such heads of faith, as were most befitting and re
quisite, for preaching the faith of Christ," &c. ; you are now, for
fear of too much debasing those high doctrines of repentance and
charity, to restrain your assertion, as Dr. Potter doth his, and
(though you speak indefinitely) to say you meant it, only of those
heads of faith, which are merely credenda. And then the mean
ing of it (if it hath any) must be this : that the creed is full
for the apostles' intent, which was to comprehend all such
general heads of faith, which, being points of simple belief, were
most fit and requisite to be preached to Jews and gentiles, and
might be briefly and compendiously set down, and easily learned
and remembered. Neither I nor you, I believe, can make any
other sense of your words than this ; and upon this ground thus I
subsume. But all the points of belief, which were necessary under
pain of damnation for the apostles to preach, and for those to
whom the gospel was preached particularly to know and believe,
were most fit and requisite, nay, more than so, necessary to be
preached to all, both Jews and gentiles, and might be briefly and
compendiously set down, and easily learned and remembered :
therefore the apostles' intent by your confession was in this creed
to comprehend all such points. And you say, " the creed is
most full and complete, for the purpose which they intended."
The major of this syllogism is your own. The minor, I should

274 The Creed contains all
think, needs no proof; yet, because all men may not be of my mind,
I will prove it by its parts ; and the first part thus :
There is the same necessity for the doing of these things, which
are commanded to be done, by the same authority under the
same penalty :
But the same authority, viz. divine, under the same penalty, to
wit, of damnation, commanded the apostles to preach all these
doctrines which we speak of, and those to whom they were
preached, particularly to know and believe them; for we
speak of those only, which were so commanded, to be preach
ed and believed :
Therefore all these points were alike necessary to be preached to
all, both Jews and gentiles.
Now that all these doctrines we speak of, may be briefly and com
pendiously set down and easily learned and remembered ; he that
remembers that we speak only of such doctrines as are necessary
to be taught and learned, will require hereof no farther demon
stration. For (not to put you in mind of what the poet says,
Non sunt longa quibus nihil est quod demere possis), who sees not,
that seeing the greatest part of men are of very mean capacities,
that it is necessary that they may be learned easily, which is to
be learned of all ? What then can hinder me from concluding
thus :
All the articles of simple belief, which are fit and requisite to be
preached, and may easily be remembered, are by your confession
comprised in the creed :
But all the necessary articles of faith are requisite to be preach
ed, and easy to be remembered :
Therefore they are all comprised in the creed.
Secondly, From grounds granted by you, I argue thus :
Points of belief in themselves fundamental are more requisite
to be preached than those which are not so: (this is evi
dent.)
But the apostles have put into their creed some points that are
not in themselves fundamental : (so you confess, ubi supra.)
Therefore if they have put in all most requisite to be preached,
they have put in all that in themselves are fundamental.
Thirdly, and lastly, from your own words, §. 26, thus I conclude
my purpose:
The apostles' intention was, particularly to deliver in the creed
such articles as were fittest for those times, concerning
the Deity, Trinity, and Messias; (thus you) now I sub
sume,
But all points simply necessary, by virtue of God's command, to
be preached and believed in particular, were as fit for those
times as these here mentioned ;
Therefore their intention was, to deliver in it particularly all the
necessary points of belief.
23. And certainly, he that considers the matter advisedly either
must say that the apostles were not the authors of it, or that this
was their design in composing it, or that they had none at all.

necessary Points of mere Belief. 275
For whereas, you say, "their intent was, to comprehend in it
such general heads as Were most befitting and requisite for
preaching the faith :" and elsewhere, " particularly to deliver
such articles as were fittest for those times;" every wise man may
easily see that your desire here was, to escape away in a cloud of
indefinite terms. For otherwise, instead of such general heads
and such articles, why did not you say plainly, all such, or some
such? This had been plain dealing: but I fear, cross to your
design, which yet you have failed of. For that which you have
spoken (though you are loath to speak out) either signifies no
thing at all, or that which I and Dr. Potter affirm ; viz. that the
Apostles' Creed contains all those points of belief, which were, by
God's command, of necessity to be preached to all, and believed
by all. Neither when I say so, would I be so mistaken, as if I
said, that all points in the creed are thus necessary ; for punies
in logic know that universal affirmatives are not simply converted.
And therefore it may be true, that all such necessary points are in
the creed; though it be not true, that all points in the creed are
thus necessary: which I willingly grant of the points by you
mentioned. But this rather confirms, than any way invalidates
my assertion. For how could it stand with the apostles' wisdom,
to put in any points circumstantial and not necessary, and, at the
same time, to leave out any that were essential and necessary
for that end, which, you say, they proposed to themselves in
making the creed ; that is, the preaching of the faith to Jews and
gentiles ?
24. Neither may you hope to avoid the pressure of these ac
knowledgments by pretending as you do, §. 10, that you do indeed
acknowledge the creed to contain all the necessary articles of
faith ; but yet so, that they are not either there expressed in it,
or deducible from it by evident consequence, but only by way of
implication or reduction. For, first, not to tell you, that no pro
position is implied in any other, which is not deducible from it ;
nor, secondly, that the article of the catholic church, wherein
you will have all implied, implies nothing to any purpose of
yours, unless out of mere favour we will grant the sense of it
to be, that the church is infallible, and that yours is the
church. To pass by all this, and require no answer to it,
this one thing I may not omit ; that the apostles' intent was (by
your own confession) particularly to deliver in the creed such
articles of belief as were fittest for those times (and all necessary
articles I have proved were such) : now to deliver particularly,
and to deliver only implicitly ; to be delivered particularly in the
creed, and only to be reducible to it ; I suppose are repugnances
hardly reconcileable. And therefore, though we desire you not
to grant, that the creed contains all points of faith of all sorts,
any other way than by implication or reduction, no, nor so neither;
yet you have granted, and must grant, of the fundamental points
of simple belief, those which the apostles were commanded in
particular to teach all men, and all men in particular to know
and believe, that these are delivered in the creed, after a more
s2

276 The Creed contains all
particular, and punctual manner, than implication or reduction
comes to.
25. Ad. §. 10 — 15. It is vain for you to hope, that the testi
monies of the ancient and modern doctors, alleged to this pur
pose by Dr. Potter in great abundance, will be turned off with
this general deceitful answer, that the allegation of them was
needless to prove, that the creed contains all points of faith, under
pretence that you grant it in manner aforesaid. For what if you
grant it in manner aforesaid, yet if you grant it not (as indeed
you do but inconsistently) in the sense which their testimonies re- -
quire, then for all this their testimonies may be alleged to very
good purpose. Now let any man read them with any tolerable
indifference, and he shall find they say plainly, that all points
of faith, necessary to be particularly believed, are explicitly con
tained in the creed; and that your gloss of implication and re
duction, had it been confronted with their sentences, would have
been much out of countenance, as having no ground nor colour
of ground in them. For example, if Azorius had thought thus of
it, how could he have called it * " a brief comprehension of the
faith, and a sum of all things to be believed, and, as it were, a
sign or cognizance whereby christians are to be differenced and
distinguished from the impious and misbelievers, who profess
either no faith, or not the right?" If Huntly had been of this
mind, how could he have said of it, with any congruity, f " that
the rule of faith is expressly contained in it, and all the prime
foundations of faith :" and, that " the apostles were not so forgetful
as to omit any prime principal foundation of faith in that creed
which they delivered to be believed by all christians?" The
words of Filiucius are pregnant to the same purpose : J " There
cannot be a fitter rule from whence christians may learn that
they are explicitly to believe, than that which is contained in the
creed." Which words cannot be justified, if all points necessary
to be believed explicitly be not comprised in it. " To this end
(saith Putean) § was the creed composed by the apostles, that
christians might have a form whereby they might profess them
selves catholics." But certainly, the apostles did this in vain, if
a man might profess this, and yet for matter of faith be not a
catholic. 26. The words of Cardinal Richelieu|| exact this sense, and
refuse your gloss as much as any of the former : " The Apostles'
Creed is the summary and abridgment of that faith which is neces
sary for a christian : these holy persons being by the command
ment of Jesus Christ to disperse themselves over the world,
and in all parts by preaching the gospel to plant the faith, es
teemed it very necessary to reduce into a short sum, all that
which christians ought to know, to the end that being dispersed
into divers parts of the world, they might preach the same thing
in a short form, that it might be the easier remembered. For this
effect they called this abridgment a symbol, which signifies a
* Azor. part 1, c. v. t Cont. 2, c. x. n. 10. X Moral, quest. Tr. 22, c. ii. n. 34.
§ In 2. 2. qu. Art. 3, Dub. ult. || Instruction du Chrestien. Lecon premiere.

necessary Points of mere Belief. 277
mark, or sign, which might serve to distinguish true christians
which embraced it, from infidels which rejected it." Now I
would fain know how the composition of the creed could serve
for this end, and secure the preachers of it, that they should preach
the same thing, if there were other necessary articles, not com
prised in it? Or how could it be a sign to distinguish true christians
from others, if a man might believe it all, and for want of believing
something else, not be a true christian ?
27. The words of the *author of the consideration of four heads
propounded to King James, require the same sense, and utterly
renounce your qualification. " The symbol is a brief yet entire
methodical sum of christian doctrine, including all points of faith
either to be preached by the apostles, or to be believed by their
disciples; delivered both for a direction unto them, what they
were to preach, and others to believe, as also to discern and put
a difference betwixt all faithful christians and misbelieving in
fidels?" 28. Lastly, fGregory of Valence affirms our assertion even in
terms : " The articles of faith contained in the creed, are, as it
were, the first principles of the christian faith, in which is con
tained the sum of evangelical doctrine, which all men are bound
explicitly to believe."
29. To these testimonies of your own doctors, I should have
added the concurrent suffrages of the ancient fathers, but the full
and free acknowledgment of the same Valentia, in the place above
quoted, will make this labour unnecessary. " So judge (saith he)
the holy fathers, affirming that this symbol of faith was composed
by the apostles, that all might have a short sum of those things
which are to be believed, and are dispersedly contained in scrip
ture." 30. Neither is there any discord between this assertion of your
doctors, and their holding themselves obliged to believe all the
points which the council of Trent defines. For protestants and
papists may both hold, that all points of belief necessary to be
known and believed, are summed up in the creed : and yet both
the one and the other think themselves bound to believe whatsoever
other points they either know, or believe to be revealed by God.
For the articles which are necessary to be known that they are
revealed by God, may be very few; and yet those which are neces
sary to be believed, when they are revealed and known to be so,
may be very many.
31. But summaries and abstracts are not intended to specify all
the particulars of the science or subject to which they belong.
Yes, if they be intended for perfect summaries, they must not
omit any necessary doctrine of that science whereof they are sum
maries ; though the illustration and reasons of it they may omit.
If this were not so, a man might set down forty or fifty of the
principal definitions and divisions, and rules of logic, and call it a
summary or abstract of logic. But sure, this were no more a
* Ch, 3, Confid. 1, Sect. v. p. 110. t 2. 2. dis. i. q. 2, p. 4, in fin.

278 The Creed contains all
summary, than that were the picture of a man in little, that
wanted any of the parts of a man ; or that a total sum wherein
all the particulars were not cast up. Now the Apostles' Creed,
you here intimate that it was intended for a summary; otherwise
why talk you here of summaries, and tell us that they need not
contain all the particulars of their science ; and of what I pray
may it be a summary, but of the fundamentals of christian faith ?
Now you have already told us — that it is most full and complete
to that purpose for which it was intended. Lay all this to
gether, and I believe the product will be, that the Apostles' Creed
is a perfect summary of the fundamentals of the christian faith ;
and what the duty of a perfect summary is, I have already told
you. 32. Whereas therefore to disprove this assertion, in divers
particles of this chapter, but especially the fourteenth, you
muster up whole armies of doctrines, which you pretend are
necessary, and not contained in the creed ; I answer very briefly
thus: that the doctrines you mention, are either concerning
matters of practice, and not simple belief; or else they are such
doctrines wherein God hath not so plainly revealed himself, but
that honest and good men, true lovers of God and of truth, those
that desire above all things to know his will and do it, may err,
and yet commit no sin at all, or only a sin of infirmity, and not
destructive of salvation ; or lastly, they are such doctrines which
God hath plainly revealed, and so are necessary to be believed,
when they are known to be divine, but not necessary to be known
and believed : not necessary to be known for divine, that they may
be believed. Now all these sorts of doctrines are impertinent to the
present question. For Dr. Potter never affirmed, either that the
necessary duties of a christian, or that all truths piously credible,
but not necessary to be believed, or that all truths necessary to be
believed upon the supposal of divine revelation, were specified in
the creed. For this he affirms only of such speculative divine
verities which God hath commanded particularly to be preached
to all, and be believed by all. Now let the doctrines objected by
you be well considered, and let all those that are reducible to
the three former heads be discarded ; and then of all these instan
ces against Dr. Potter's assertion, there will not remain as much
as one.
33. First, questions touching the conditions to be performed by
us to obtain remission of sins : the sacraments, the commandments,
and the possibility of keeping them ; the necessity of imploring the
assistance of God's grace and Spirit for the keeping of them ; how
far obedience is due to the church ; prayer for the dead ; the ces
sation of the old law ; are all about agenda, and so cut off upon
the first consideration.
34. Secondly, the question touching fundamentals is profitable,
but not fundamental. He that believes all fundamentals cannot
be damned for any error in faith, though he believe more or less
to be fundamental than is so. That also of the procession of the
Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son, of purgatory, of the

necessary Points of mere Belief. 279
church's visibility, of the books of the New Testament, which were
doubted of by a considerable part of the primitive church, (until I
see better reason for the contrary than the bare authority of men)
I shall esteem of the same condition.
35. Thirdly, these doctrines are — That Adam and the angels
sinned; that there are angels, good and bad; that those books
of scripture which were never doubted of by any considerable
part of the church, are the word of God ; that St. Peter had no
such primacy as you pretend ; that the scripture is a perfect rule
of faith, and consequently that no necessary doctrine is unwritten ;
that there is no one society or succession of christians absolutely
infallible. These to my understanding are truths plainly revealed
by God, and necessary to be believed by them who know they are
so. But not so necessary, that every man and woman is bound
under pain of damnation particularly to know them to be divine
revelations, and explicitly to believe them. And for this reason,
these with innumerable other points, are to be referred to the
third sort of doctrines above mentioned, which were never
pretended to have place in the creed. There remains one
only point of all that army you mustered together, reducible
to none of these heads ; and that is, that God is, and is a remu-
nerator, which you say is questioned by the denial of merit:
but if there were such a necessary indissoluble coherence, be
tween this point, and the doctrine of merit, methinks with as
much reason, and more charity, you might conclude that we
hold merit, because we hold this point; than that we deny this
point, because we deny merit. Besides, when protestants deny
the doctrine of merits, you know right well, for so they have
declared themselves a thousand times, that they mean nothing
else, but with David, that their well-doing extendeth not, is
not truly beneficial to God : with our Saviour, when they
have done all which they are commanded, they have done their
duty only, and no courtesy. And, lastly, with St. Paul, that
all which they can suffer for God (and yet suffering is more
than doing) " is not worthy to be compared to the glory which
shall be revealed." So that you must either misunderstand their
meaning in denying merit, or you must discharge their doctrine
of this odious consequence, or you must charge it on David and
Paul, and Christ himself. Nay, you must either grant their
denial of true merit just and reasonable ; or you must say, that
our good actions are really profitable to God ; that they are not
debts already due to him, but voluntary and undeserved favours ;
and that they are equal unto and well worthy of eternal glory
which is prepared for them. As for the inconvenience which you
so much fear, that the denial of merit makes God a giver only
and not a rewarder ; I tell you, good sir, you fear where no fear
is ; and that it is both most true, on the one side, that you in
holding good works meritorious of eternal glory, make God a
rewarder only, and not a giver, contrary to plain scripture, affirm
ing that " the gift of God is eternal life ;" and that it is most false,
on the other side, that the doctrine of protestants makes God a giver

280 The Creed contains all
only, and not a rewarder ; inasmuch as their doctrine is — That
God gives not heaven but to those which do something for it, and
so his gift is also a reward : but withal, that whatsoever they do is
due unto God beforehand, and worth nothing to God, and worth
nothing in respect of heaven, and so man's work is no merit, and
God's reward is still a gift.
36. Put the case the pope, for a reward of your service done
him in writing this book, had given you the honour and means of
a cardinal, would you not, not only in humility, but in sincerity,
have professed that you have not merited such a reward ? And
yet the pope is neither your creator, nor redeemer, nor preserver,
nor perhaps your very great benefactor ; sure I am not so great as
God Almighty, and therefore hath no such right and title to your
service as God hath, in respect of precedent obligations. Besides,
the work you have done him hath been really advantageous to
him : and, lastly, not altogether unproportionable to the fore-
named reward. And, therefore, if by the same work you will
pretend that either you have, or hope to have, deserved immortal
happiness, I beseech you consider well, whether this be not to set
a higher value upon a cardinal's cap than a crown of immortal
glory, and with that cardinal to prefer a part in Paris before a part
in paradise.
37. In the next paragraph you beat the air again, and fight
manfully with your own shadow. The point you should have
spoken to was this : — that there are some points of simple belief
necessary to be explicitly believed, which yet are not contained in
the creed. Instead hereof you trouble yourself in vain to de
monstrate, that many important points of faith are not contained
in it, which yet Dr. Potter had freely granted, and you yourself
take particular notice of his granting of it. All this pains, there
fore, you have employed to no purpose ; saving that to some neg
ligent reader you may seem to have spoken to the very point, be
cause that which you speak to, at the first hearing, sounds somewhat
near it. But such a one I must entreat to remember, there be
many more points of faith than there be articles of simple belief
necessary to be explicitly believed : and that though all of the former
sort are not contained in the creed, yet all of the latter sort may be.
As for your distinction between heresies that have been, and here
sies that are, and heresies that may be, I have already proved it
vain ; and that whatsoever may be a heresy, that is so ; and what
soever is so, that always hath been so, ever since the publication
of the gospel of Christ. The doctrine of your church may like a
snow-ball increase with rolling, and again, if you please, melt away
and decrease : but as Christ Jesus, so his gospel, is yesterday, and
to-day, and the same for ever.
38. Our Saviour sending his apostles to preach, gave them no
other commission than this: " Go teach all nations, baptizing
them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost,
teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I have com
manded you." These were the bounds of their commission. If
your church have any larger, or if she have a commission at large,

necessary Points of mere Belief. 281
to teach what she pleaseth, and call it the gospel of Christ, let her
produce her letters patent from heaven for it. But if this be all
you have, then must you give me leave to esteem it both great
sacrilege in you to forbid any thing, be it never so small or ceremo
nious, which Christ hath commanded ; as the receiving of the com
munion in both kinds; and as high a degree of presumption, to
enjoin men to believe, that there are or can be any other funda
mental articles of the gospel of Christ, than what Christ himself
commanded his apostles to teach all men ; or any damnable heresies,
but such as are plainly repugnant to these prime verities.
39. Ad. §. 16, 17. The saying of the most learned prelate, and
excellent man, the Archbishop of Armagh, is only related by
Dr. Potter, p. 155, and not applauded: though the truth is, both
the man deserves as much applause as any man, and his saying as
much as any saying ; it being as great and as good a truth, and as
necessary for these miserable times, as possibly can be uttered.
For this is most certain, and I believe you will easily grant it,
that to reduce christians to unity of communion, there are but two
ways that may be conceived probable : the one, by taking away
the diversity of opinions touching matters of religion ; the other, by
showing that the diversity of opinions, which is among the several
sects of christians, ought to be no hinderance to their unity in
communion. 40. Now the former of these is not to be hoped for without a
miracle, unless that could be done, which is impossible to be per
formed, though it be often pretended ; that is, unless it could be
made evident to all men, that God hath appointed some visible
judge of controversies, to whose judgment all men are to submit
themselves. What then remains, but that the other way must be
taken, and christians must be taught to set a higher value upon
these high points of faith and obedience wherein they agree,
than upon these matters of less moment wherein they differ ; and
understand that agreement in those ought to be more effectual
to join them in one communion, than their difference in other
things of less moment to divide them? When I say, in one com
munion, I mean in a common profession of those articles of faith,
wherein all consent : a joint worship of God, after such a way as
all esteem lawful ; and a mutual performance of all those works
of charity, which christians owe one to another. And to such a
communion what better inducement could be thought of, than to
demonstrate that what was universally believed of all christians,
if it were joined with a love of truth, and with holy obedience,
was sufficient to bring men to heaven ? For why should men be
more rigid than God ? Why should any error exclude any man
from the church's communion, which will not deprive him of
eternal salvation ? Now that christians do generally agree in all
those points of doctrine, which are necessary to salvation, it is
apparent, because they agree with one accord in believing all
those books of the Old and New Testament, which in the church
were never doubted of to be the undoubted word of God. And
it is so certain that in all these books, all necessary doctrines are

282 The Creed contains all
evidently contained, that of all the four evangelists this is very
probable, but of St. Luke most apparent, that in every one of
their books they have comprehended the whole substance of the
gospel of Christ. For what reason can be imagined, that any of
them should leave out any thing which he knew to be necessary,
and yet (as apparently all of them have done) put in many things
which they knew to be only profitable, and not necessary? What
wise and honest man that were now to write the gospel of Christ,
would do so great a work of God after such a negligent fashion ?
Suppose Xaverius had been to write the gospel of Christ for the
Indians, think you he would have left out any fundamental doc
trine of it ? If not, I must beseech you to conceive as well of St.
Matthew, and St. Mark, and St. Luke, and St. John, as you do
of Xaverius. Besides, if every one of them have not in them all
necessary doctrines, how have they complied with their own de
sign, which was, as the titles of their books shew, to write the
gospel of Christ, and not a part of it ? Or how have they not de
ceived us, in giving them such titles? By the whole gospel of
Christ I understand not the whole history of Christ, but all that
makes up the covenant between God and man. Now if this be
wholly contained in the gospel of St. Mark, and St. John, I be
lieve every considering man will be inclinable to believe, that
then without doubt it is contained, with the advantage of many
other profitable things, in the larger gospels of St. Matthew and
St. Luke. And that St. Mark's gospel wants no necessary ar
ticle of this covenant, I presume you will not deny, if you believe
Irenaeus, when he says, "Matthew, to the Hebrews in their
tongue published the scripture of the gospel : when Peter and
Paul did preach the gospel, and found the church, or a church at
Rome, or of Rome, and after their departure Mark, the scholar
of Peter, delivered to us in writing those things which had been
preached by Peter ; and Luke, the follower of Paul, compiled in a
book the gospel which was preached by him : and afterwards John,
residing in Asia, in the city of Ephesus, did himself also set forth a
gospel." 41. In which words of Irenaeus, it is remarkable that they are
spoken by him against some heretics, that pretended (as you know
who do now-a-days) that — some necessary doctrines of the gospel
were unwritten, and that out of the scriptures truth (he must
mean sufficient truth) cannot be found by those which know not
tradition. Against whom to say, that part of the gospel, which
was preached by Peter, was written by St. Mark, and some other
necessary points of it omitted, had been to speak impertinently,
and rather to confirm than confute their error. It is plain, there
fore, that he must mean, as I pretend, that all the necessary doc
trine of the gospel, which was preached by St. Peter, was written
by St. Mark. Now you will not deny, I presume, that St. Peter
preached all ; therefore, you must not deny but St. Mark wrote
all. 42. Our next inquiry, let it be touching St. John's intent in
writing his gospel, whether it' were to deliver so much truth, as

necessary Points of mere Belief. 283
being believed and obeyed would certainly bring men to an eternal
life, or only part of it, and to leave part unwritten ? A great man
there is, but much less than the apostle, who saith, that " writing
last, he purposed to supply the defects of the other evangelists
that had wrote before him :" which, if it were true, would suffi
ciently justify what I have undertaken, that at least all the four
evangelists have them in all the necessary parts of the gospel of
Christ. Neither will I deny, but St. John's secondary intent
might be to supply the defects of the former three gospels, in
some things very profitable. But he that pretends, that any ne
cessary doctrine is in St. John, which is in none of the other evan
gelists, hath not so considered them as he should do, before he
pronounce sentence in so weighty a matter. And for his prime
intent in writing his gospel, what that was, certainly no father in
the world understood it better than himself, therefore let us hear
him speak : " Many other signs (saith he) also did Jesus in the
sight of his disciples, which are not written in this book ; but
these are written, that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the
Son of God, and that believing you may have life in his name."
By " these are written," may be understood these things are writ
ten, or these signs are written. Take it which way you will, this
conclusion will certainly follow ; that either all that which St. John
wrote in his gospel, or less than all, and therefore all much more,
was sufficient to make them believe that, which being believed with
lively faith, would certainly bring them to eternal life.
43. This which hath been spoken, I hope, is enough to justify
my undertaking to the full, that it is very probable that every one
of the four evangelists hath in his book the whole substance, all
the necessary parts of the gospel of Christ. But for St. Luke, that
he hath written such a perfect gospel, in my judgment, it ought
to be with them that believe him no manner of question. Consi
der first the introduction to his gospel, where he declares what
he intends to write in these words : " Forasmuch as many have
taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of those things
which are most surely believed amongst us, even as they delivered
them unto us, which from the beginning were eyerwitnesses, and
ministers of the word ; it seemed good to me also, having had per
fect understanding of all things from the first, to write to thee in
order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the cer
tainty of those things wherein thou hast been instructed." Add to
this place the entrance to his history of the acts of the Apostles :
" The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, of all that
Jesus began both to do and teach, until the day in which he was
taken up." Weigh well these two places, and then answer me
freely and ingenuously to these demands. 1. Whether St. Luke
doth not undertake the very same thing which he says "many
had taken in hand ?" 2. Whether this were not " to set forth in
order a declaration of those things which are most surely believed
amongst" christians? 3. Whether the whole gospel of Christ, and
every necessary doctrine of it, were not surely believed among
christians ? 4. Whether they which were " eye-witnesses and

284 The Creed contains all
ministers of the word from the beginning," delivered not the
whole gospel of Christ? 5. Whether he doth not undertake to
write in order these things, whereof he had perfect understanding
from the first ? 6. Whether he had not perfect understanding of
the whole gospel of Christ? 7. Whether he doth not undertake
to write to Theophilus of all those things wherein he had been
instructed? 8. And whether he had not been instructed in all
the necessary parts of the gospel of Christ ? 9. Whether in the
other text, " all things which Jesus began to do and teach," must
not at least imply all the principal and necessary things? 10.
Whether this be not the very interpretation of your Rhemish
doctors, in their annotation upon this place? 11. Whether all
these articles of the christian faith, without the belief whereof no
man can be saved, be not the principal and most necessary things
which Jesus taught? 12. And, lastly, Whether many things
which St. Luke hath wrote in his gospel be not less principal,
and less necessary, than all and every one of these? When you
have well considered these proposals, I believe you will be very
apt to think (if St. Luke be of credit with you) that all things ne
cessary to salvation are certainly contained in his writings alone.
And from hence you will not choose but conclude, that seeing all
the christians in the world agree in the belief of what St. Luke
hath written ; and, not only so, but in all other books of canonical
scripture, which were never doubted of, in and by the church, the
learned archbishop had very just and certain ground to say, that
" in these propositions, which, without controversy, are universally
received in the whole christian world, so much truth is contained,
as, being joined with holy obedience, may be sufficient to bring a
man to everlasting salvation ; and that we have no cause to doubt,
but that as many as walk according to this rule, neither overthrow
ing that which they have builded, by superinducing any damnable
heresy thereupon, nor otherwise vitiating their holy faith, with a
lewd and wicked conversation, peace shall be upon them, and
upon the Israel of God."
44. Against this you object two things : the one, that by this
rule, " seeing the doctrine of the trinity is not received universally
among christians, the denial of it shall not exclude salvation."
The other, " that the bishop contradicts himself, in supposing a man
may believe all necessary truths, and yet superinduce some damna
ble heresies."
45. To the first I answer, what I conceive he would, whose
words I here justify, that he hath declared plainly in this very
place, that he meant not an absolute, but a limited universality,
and speaks not of propositions universally believed by all profes
sions of Christianity that are, but only by all those several pro
fessions of Christianity that have any large spread in any part of
the world: by which words he excludes from the universality,
here spoken of, the deniers of the doctrine of the trinity, as being
but a handful of men, in respect of all, nay, in respect of any of
these professions which maintain it. And, therefore, it was a
great fault in you, either willingly to conceal these words, which

necessary Points of mere Belief. 285
evacuate your objection, or else negligently to oversee them.
Especially "seeing your friend, to whom you are so much beholden,
Paulus Veridicus, in his scurrilous and sophistical pamphlet against
Bishop Usher's sermon, hath so kindly offered to lead you by
the hand to the observation of them, in these words j "To con
sider of your coinopista, or communiter credenda, articles as you
call them, universally believed of all these several professions of
Christianity, which have any large spread in the world; these
articles, for example, may be the unity of the Godhead, the
trinity of persons, immortality of the soul," &c. Where you see
that your friend, whom you so much magnify, hath plainly con
fessed, that notwithstanding the bishop's words, the denial of the
doctrine of the trinity may exclude salvation; and, therefore, in
approving and applauding his answer to the bishop's sermon, you
have unawares allowed this answer of mine to your own greatest
objection. 46. Now for the foul contradiction, which you say the doctor
might easily have espied in the bishop's saying, he desires your
pardon for his oversight, for Paulus Veridicus' sake ; who, though
he set himself to find fault with the bishop's sermon, yet it seems
this he could not find, or else, questionless, we should have heard
it from him. And, therefore, if Dr. Potter, being the bishop's
friend, has not been more sharp-sighted than his enemies, this,
he hopes, to indifferent judges will seem no unpardonable offence.
Yet this, I say, not as if there were any contradiction at all, much
less any foul contradiction, in the bishop's words; but as Anti-
pheron's picture, which he thought he saw in the air before him,
was not in the air, but in his disturbed fancy ; so all the contra
diction, which here you descant upon, is not indeed in the bishop's
saying, but in your imagination : for wherein, I pray, lies this
foul contradiction ? " In supposing, (say you) a man may believe
all truths necessary to salvation, and superinduce a damnable
heresy." I answer, it is not certain that his words do suppose
this ; neither, if they do, doth he contradict himself. I say, it is
not certain that his words import any such matter : for ordinarily
men use to speak and write so, as here he doth, when they intend
not to limit or restrain, but only to repeat, and press, and illus
trate what they have said before. And I wonder why, with your
eagle's eyes, you did not espy another foul contradiction in his
words as well as this, and say, that he supposes a man may walk
according to the rule of holy obedience, and yet vitiate his holy
faith with a lewd and wicked conversation. Certainly, a lewd
conversation is altogether as contradictious to holy obedience, as
a damnable heresy to necessary truth. What then was the reason
that you espied not this foul contradiction in his words as well as
that ? Was it because, according to the spirit and genius of your
church, your zeal is greater to that which you conceive true doc
trine than holy obedience ; and think simple error a more capi
tal crime, than sins committed against knowledge and conscience?
Or was it because your reason told you, that herein he meant
only to repeat and not to limit what he said before? And why

286 The Creed contains all
then had you not so much candour to conceive that he might have
the same meaning in the former part of the disjunction ; and in
tend no more but this — whosoever walks according to this rule
of believing all necessary truths, and holy obedience, (neither
poisoning his faith of those truths which he holds with the mixture
of any damnable heresy, nor vitiating it with a wicked life) peace
shall be upon him ! In which words what man of any ingenuity-
will not presently perceive, that the words within the parenthesis,
are only a repetition of, and no exception from, those that are
without ? St. Athanasius, in his creed, tells us, " The catholic
faith is this, that we worship one God in trinity, and trinity in
unity, neither confounding the persons, nor dividing the sub
stance;" and why now do you not tell him that he contradicts
himself, and supposes that we may worship a trinity of persons,
and one God in substance, and yet confound the persons, or divide
the substance ; which yet is impossible, because three remaining
three cannot be confounded, and one remaining one cannot be
divided ? If a man should say unto you, he that keeps all the
commandments of God, committing no sin either against the love
of God, or the love of his neighbour, is a perfect man : or thus,
he that will live in constant health had need to be exact in his
diet, neither eating too much nor too little : or thus, he that will
come to London, must go on straight forward in such a way, and
neither turn to the right hand nor to the left, I verily believe you
would not find any contradiction in his words, but confess them
as coherent and consonant as any in your book. And certainly,
if you would look upon this saying of the bishop with any indiffer
ence, you would easily perceive it to be of the very same kind,
and capable of the very same construction. And, therefore, one
of the grounds of your accusation is uncertain. Neither can you
assure us, that the bishop supposes any such matter as you pre
tend. Neither, if he did suppose this (as perhaps he did) were
this to contradict himself: for though there can be no damnable
heresy, unless it contradict some necessary truth, yet there is no
contradiction but the same man may at once believe this heresy
and this truth ; because, there is no contradiction that the same
man, at the same time, should believe contradictions. For, first,
whatsoever a man believes true, that he may and must believe;
but there have been some who have believed and taught that con
tradictions might be true, against whom Aristotle disputes in the
third of his Metaphysics: therefore, it is not impossible that a
man may believe contradictions. Secondly, They which believe
there is no certainty in reason, must believe that contradictions
may be true ; for otherwise there will be no certainty in this rea
son : this contradicts truth, therefore it is false. But there be now
divers in the world, who believe there is no certainty in reason
(and whether you be of their mind or no, I desire to be informed) ;
therefore, there be divers in the world who believe contradictions
may be true. Thirdly, They which do captivate their understand
ings to the belief of those things which to their understanding
seem irreconcileable contradictions, may as well believe real con-

necessary Points of mere Belief. 287
tradictiOns ; (for the difficulty of believing arises not from their
being repugnant, but from their seeming to be so ;) but you do
captivate your understandings to the belief of those things which
seem to your understandings irreconcileable contradictions ; there
fore, it is as possible and easy for you to believe those that indeed
are so. Fourthly, Some men may be confuted in their errors,
and persuaded out of them ; but no man's error can be confuted,
who, together with his error, doth not believe and grant some
true principle that contradicts his error : for nothing can be proved
to him who grants nothing, neither can there be (as all men know)
any rational discourse but out of grounds agreed on by both par
ties. Therefore, it is not impossible, but absolutely certain, that
the same man at the same time may believe contradictions.
Fifthly, It is evident, neither can you, without extreme madness
and uncharitableness, deny that we believe the bible ; those books,
I mean, which we account canonical. Otherwise, why dispute
you with us out of them, as out of a common principle ? Either,
therefore, you must retract your opinion, and acknowledge that
the same man at the same time may believe contradictions ; or
else, you will run into a greater inconvenience, and be forced to
confess, that no part of our doctrine contradicts the bible.
Sixthly, I desire you to vindicate from contradiction these follow
ing assertions : that there should be length, and nothing long :
breadth, and nothing broad ; thickness, and nothing thick ; white
ness, and nothing white; roundness, and nothing round: weight,
and nothing heavy ; sweetness, and nothing sweet ; moisture, and
nothing moist; fluidness, and nothing flowing; many actions, and
no agent; many passions, and no patient; that is, that there
should be a long, broad, thick, white, round, heavy, sweet,
moist, flowing, active, passive, nothing ! That bread should be
turned into the substance of Christ, and yet not any thing of
the bread become any thing of Christ; neither the matter, nor
the form, nor the accidents of bread, be made either the matter,
or form, or the accidents of Christ. That bread should be turned
into nothing ; and at the same time with the same action turned
into Christ, and yet Christ should not be nothing. That the
same thing, at the same time, should have its just dimensions,
and just distance of its parts one from another, and at the same
time not have it, but all its parts together in one and the self
same point. That the body of Christ, which is much greater,
should be contained wholly, and in its full dimensions, without
any alteration, in that which is the lesser ; and that not once only,
hut as many times over as there are several points in the bread
and wine. That the same thing, at the same time, should be
wholly above itself, and wholly below itself, within itself, and
without itself, on the right hand, and on the left hand, and round
about itself. That the same thing, at the same time, should
move to and from itself, and lie still ; or that it should be carried
from one place to another through the middle space, and yet not
move. That it should be brought from heaven to earth, and yet
not come out of heaven, nor be at all in any of the middle spaces

288 The Creed contains all
between heaven and earth. That to be one, should be to be
undivided from itself, and yet that one and the same thing should
be divided from itself. That a thing may be, and yet be no
where ; that a finite thing may be in all places at once. That a
body may be in a place, and have there its dimensions, and colour,
and all other qualities, and yet that it is not in the power of God
to make it visible, and tangible there, nor capable of doing or
suffering any thing. That there should be no certainty in our
senses, and yet that we should know something certainly, and yet
know nothing but by our senses. That that which is, and was
long ago, should now begin to be. That that is now to be made
of nothing, which is not nothing but something. That the same
thing should be before and after itself. That it should be truly
and really in a place, and yet without locality. Nay, that he
which is omnipotent, should not be able to give it locality in this
place, where it is, as some of you hold ; or, if he can, as others
say he can, that it should be possible that the same man, for
example, you or I, may at the same time be awake in London,
and not awake but asleep at Rome ; there run or walk, here not
run or walk, but stand still, sit, or lie along ; there study or
write, here do neither but dine or sup ; there speak, here be
silent. That he may in one place freeze with cold, in another
burn with heat. That he may be drunk in one place, and sober
in another; valiant in one place, and a coward in another; a
thief in one place, and honest in another. That he may be a
papist, and go to mass in Rome ; a protestant and go to church
in England. That he may die in Rome and live in England ; or,
dying in both places, may go to hell from Rome, and to heaven
from England. That the body and soul of Christ should cease
to be where it was, and yet not go to another place, nor be
destroyed. All these and many other of the like nature are the
unavoidable, and most of them the acknowledged, consequences
of your doctrine of transubstantiation, as it is explained one way
or other by your schoolmen. Now I beseech you, Sir, to try your
skill : and, if you can compose their repugnance, and make peace
between them, certainly none but you shall be catholic moderator.
But, if you cannot do it, and that after an intelligible manner,
then you must give me leave to believe, that either you do not
believe transubstantiation, or else, that it is no contradiction, that
men should subjugate their understandings to the belief of contra
dictions. 47. Lastly, I pray tell me whether you have not so much
charity in store for the bishop of Armagh, and Dr. Potter, as
to think that they themselves believe this saying which the one
preached and printed, the other reprinted, and as you say ap
plauded? If you think they do, then certainly you have done
unadvisedly, either in charging it with a foul contradiction, or
in saying, it is impossible that any man should at once believe
contradictions. Indeed, that men should assent to contradictions,
and that it is unreasonable to do so, I willingly grant; but
to say, it is impossible to be done, is against every man's experi-

necessary Points of mere Belief. 289
ence, and almost as unreasonable, as to do the thing which is
said to be impossible : for though perhaps it may be very difficult
for a man in his right wits to believe a contradiction expressed in
terms, especially if he believe it to be a contradiction ; yet for
men, being cowed and awed by superstition, to persuade them
selves upon slight and trivial grounds, that these or these, though
they seem contradictions, yet indeed are not so, and so to believe
them : or, if the plain repugnance of them be veiled or disguised
a little with some empty unintelligible nonsense distinction ; or
if it be not expressed but implied, not direct but by consequence,
so that the parties, to whose faith the propositions are offered, are
either innocently, or perhaps affectedly, ignorant of the contrariety
of them : for men, in such cases, easily to swallow and digest con
tradictions, he that denies it possible must be a mere stranger in
the world.
48. Ad. §. 18. This paragraph consists of two immodest un
truths, obtruded upon us without show or shadow of reason : and an
evident sophism, grounded upon an affected mistake of the sense
of the word fundamental.
49. The first untruth is, that " Dr. Potter makes a church, of
men agreeing scarcely in one point of faith : of men concurring
in some one or few articles of belief, and in the rest holding con
ceits plainly contradictory : agreeing only in this one article, that
Christ is our Saviour ; but, for the rest, like to the parts of a
chimera," &c. which I say is a shameless calumny, not only be
cause Dr. Potter in this point delivers not his own judgment, but
relates the opinion of others, Mr. Hooker and Mr. Merton ; but,
especially, because even these men (as they are related by Dr.
Potter) to the constituting the very essence of a church in the
lowest degree, require not only faith in Christ Jesus, the Son of
God and the Saviour of the world, but also submission to his
doctrine in mind and will. Now I beseech you, Sir, tell me in
genuously, whether the doctrine of Christ may be called without
blasphemy scarcely one point of faith ? Or whether it consists
only of some one or few articles of belief? Or whether there be
nothing in it, but only this article, that Christ is our Saviour? Is
it not manifest to all the world, that christians of all professions do
agree with one consent in the belief of all those books of scrip
ture, which were not doubted of in the ancient church, without
danger of damnation ? Nay, is it not apparent that no man, at
this time, can without hypocrisy pretend to believe in Christ, but
of necessity he must do so ? Seeing he can have no reason to be
lieve in Christ, but he must have the same to believe the scripture.
I pray then read over the scripture once more, or, if that be too
much labour, the New Testament only ; and then say, whether
there be nothing there, but "scarcely one point of faith? But
some one or two articles of belief? Nothing but this article only,
that Christ is our Saviour?" Say, whether there be not there an
infinite number of divine verities, divine precepts, divine pro-
Iniises, and those so plainly and undoubtedly delivered, that if any
sees them not, it cannot be because he cannot, but because he

290 The Creed contains all
will not ! So plainly, that whosoever submits sincerely to the
doctrine of Christ, in mind and will, cannot possibly but submit
to these in act and performance. And in the rest, which it hath
pleased God, for reasons best known to himself, to deliver ob
scurely or ambiguously, yet thus far at least they agree, that the
sense of them intended by God is certainly true, and that they are
without passion or prejudice to endeavour to find it out; the dif
ference only is, which is that true sense which God intended.
Neither would this long continue, if the walls of separation,
whereby the devil hopes to make their divisions eternal, were
pulled down ; and error were not supported against truth by hu
man advantages. But, for the present, God forbid the matter
should be so ill as you make it ! For whereas you looking upon
their points of difference and agreement, through I know not
what strange glasses, have made the first innumerable, and the
other scarce a number: the truth is clean contrary; that those
divine verities," speculative and practical, wherein they universally
agree, (which you will have to be but a few, or but one, or scarcely
one) amounting to many millions (if an exact account were taken
of them) : and, on the other side, the points in variance are in
comparison but few, and those not of such a quality, but the
error in them may well consist with the belief and obedience of
the entire covenant, ratified by Christ between God and man.
Yet I would not be so mistaken, as if I thought the errors even
of some protestants inconsiderable things, and matters of no mo
ment. For the truth is, I am very fearful that some of their
opinions, either as they are, or as they are apt to be mistaken,
(though not of themselves so damnable, but that good and holy
men may be saved with them, yet,) are too frequent occasions of
our remissness, and slackness, in running the race of christian
perfection, of our deferring repentance and conversion to God,
of our frequent relapses into sin, and not seldom of security in
sinning ; and, consequently, though not certain causes, yet too
frequent occasions of many men's damnation : and such I conceive
all these doctrines, which either directly or obliquely put men in
hopes of eternal happiness by any other means, saving only the
narrow way of sincere and universal obedience, grounded upon a
true and lively faith. These errors, therefore, I do not elevate
or extenuate : and, on condition the ruptures made by them might
be composed, do heartily wish, that the cement were made of my
dearest blood, and only not to be an anathema from Christ : only
this I say, that neither are their points of agreement so few,
nor their differences so many as you make them ; nor so great
as to exclude the opposite parties from being members of the
church militant, and joint-heirs of the glory of the church tri
umphant. 50. Your other palpable untruth is, that "protestants are far
more bold to disagree, even in matters of faith, than catholic
divines (you mean your own) in questions only merely philoso
phical, or not determined by the church." For neither do the^
differ at all in matters of faith, if you take the word in the highest

necessary Points of mere Belief. 291
sense, and mean by matters of faith, such doctrines as are abso
lutely necessary to salvation to be believed, or not to be disbelieved.
And then in those wherein they do differ, with what colour or
shadow of argument can you make good, that they are more bold
to disagree, than you are in questions merely philosophical, or not
determined by the church ? For is there not as great repugnancy
between your assent and dissent, your affirmation and negation,
your est est, non non, as there is between theirs? You follow
your reason in those things which are not determined by your
church ; and they theirs, in things not plainly determined in
scripture. And wherein then consists their greater, their far
greater boldness ? And what if they, in their contradictory
opinions, pretend both to rely upon the truth of God, doth this
make their contradictions ever a whit the more repugnant ? I had
always thought that all contradictions had been equally contradic
tions, and equally repugnant ; because the least of them are as far
asunder as est and non est can make them, and the greatest are no
farther. But then you in your differences (by name, about prede
termination, the immaculate conception, the pope's infallibility)
upon what other motive do you rely ? Do not you cite scripture
or tradition, or both, on both sides ? And do you not pretend, that
both these are the infallible truths of Almighty God ?
51. You close up this section with a fallacy, proving forsooth,
that — we destroy, by our confession, the church which is the house
of God, because we stand only upon fundamental articles, which
cannot make up the whole fabric of the faith, no more than the
foundation of a house alone can be a house.
52. But I hope, Sir, that you will not be difficult in granting,
that that is a house which hath all the necessary parts belonging
to a house : now by fundamental articles, we mean all those which
are necessary. And you yourself, in the very leaf after this, take
notice that Dr. Potter doth so. Where to this question, how
shall I know in particular which points be, and which be not
fundamental ; you scurrilously bring him in making this ridicu
lous answer, " read my answer to a late pamphlet entitled
Charity Mistaken, &c. There you shall find that fundamental
doctrines are such catholic verities, as principally and essentially
pertain to the faith, such as properly constitute a church, and are
necessary (in ordinary course) to be distinctly believed by every
christian that will be saved." All which words he used, not to tell
you what points be fundamental, as you dishonestly impose upon
him, but to explain what he meant by the word fundamental. May
it please you therefore now at last to take notice, that by funda
mental we mean all and only that which is necessary ; and then I
hope you will grant, that we may safely expect salvation in a church
which hath all things fundamental to salvation. Unless you will
say, that more is necessary than that which is necessary.
53. Ad. §. 19. This long discourse, so full of uningenuous deal
ing with your adversary, perhaps would have done reasonably well
in a farce or a comedy, and 1 doubt not but you have made your
self, and your courteous readers, good sport with it. But if Dr.
t2

292 The Creed contains all
Potter, or I, had been by when you wrote it, we should have
stopped your career at the first starting, and have put you in mind
of these old school proverbs, Ex f also supposito sequitur quodlibet,
and Uno absurdo data, sequuntur mille. For whereas you sup
pose, first, that to a man desirous to save his soul, and inquiring
whose direction he might rely upon ? the doctor's answer would
be — upon the true catholic church : I suppose, upon better reason,
because I know his mind, that he would advise him to call no
man master on earth, but according to Christ's command, to rely
upon the direction of God himself. If he should inquire, wheie
he should find this direction ? He would answer him — in his
word contained in scripture. If he should inquire what assurance
he might have, that the scripture is the word of God? he would
answer him — that the doctrine itself is very fit and worthy to be
thought to come from God, nee vox hominem sonat, and that they
which wrote and delivered it, confirmed it to be the word of God,
by doing such works as could not be done but by power from God
himself. For assurance of the truth hereof he would advise him
to rely upon that which all wise men in all matters of belief rely
upon ; and that is the consent of ancient records and universal tradi
tion. And that he might not mistrust him as partial in this advice,
he might farther tell him, that a gentleman that would be nameless,
that hath written a book against him, called Charity Maintained
by Catholics, though in many things he differ from him, yet
agrees with him in this — that tradition is such a principle as may
be rested in, and which requires no other proof. As, indeed, no
wise man doubts but there was such a man as Julius Caesar, or
Cicero, that there are such cities as Rome or Constantinople, though
he have no other assurance for the one or the other, but only the
speech of people. This tradition, therefore, he would counsel him
to rely upon, and to believe that the book which we call scripture,
was confirmed abundantly by the works of God to be the word of
God. Believing it the word of God, he must of necessity believe
it true : and if he believe it true, he must believe it contains all ne
cessary direction to eternal happiness, because it affirms itself to do
so. Nay, he might tell him that so far is the whole book from want
ing any necessary direction to his eternal salvation, that one only
author, that hath writ two little books of it, St. Luke by name, in
the beginning of his gospel, and in the beginning of his story, shews
plainly that he alone hath written at least so much as is necessary.
And what they wrote, they wrote by God's direction for the direc
tion of the world, not only for the learned, but for all that would do
their true endeavour to know the will of God, and to do it ; there
fore you cannot but conceive, that writing to all, and for all, they
wrote so as that in things necessary they might be understood
by all. Besides that, here he should find, that God himself has
engaged himself by promise, that if he would love him and keep
his commandments, and pray earnestly for his Spirit, and be willing
to be directed by it, he should undoubtedly receive it, even the
Spirit of truth, which shall lead him into all truth ; that is cer
tainly, at least, into all necessary truth, and suffer him to fall into

necessary Points of mere Belief. 293
no pernicious error. The sum of his whole direction to him
briefly would be this : believe the scripture to be the word of
God, use your true endeavour to find the true sense of it, and to
live according to it, and then you may rest securely that you are
in the true way of eternal happiness. This is the substance of that
answer which the doctor would make to any man in this case:
and this is a way so plain, that fools, unless they will, cannot err
from it. Because, not knowing absolutely all truth, nay, not all
profitable truth, and being free from error; but endeavouring to
know the truth and obey it, and endeavouring to be free from
error, is by this way made the only condition of salvation. As for
your supposition, that he would advise such a man to rely upon
the catholic church for finding out the doctrine of Christ ; he
utterly disclaims it, and truly very justly : there being no certain
way to know that any company is a true church, but only by their
professing the true doctrine of Christ. And therefore as it is
impossible that I should know that such a company of philoso
phers are peripatetics, or stoics, unless I first know what was the
doctrine of the peripatetics, and stoics ; so it is as impossible that
I should certainly know any company to be the church of Christ,
before I know what is the doctrine of Christ, the profession where
of constitutes the visible church, the belief and obedience the in
visible. And, therefore, whereas you would have him directed by
the catholic church to the doctrine of Christ; the contrary rather
is most certain and necessary, that by the foreknowledge of the
doctrine of Christ, he must be directed to a certain assurance,*
which is the catholic church, if he mean not to choose at a venture,
but desire to have certain direction to it. This supposition, there
fore, being the hinge whereon your whole discourse turns, is the
Minerva of your own brain ; and, therefore, were it but for this,
have we not great reason to accuse you of strange immodesty, in
saying, as you do, that the whole discourse and inferences, which
here you have made, are either Dr. Potter's own direct assertions,
or evident consequences clearly deduced from them ? Especially,
seeing your proceeding in it is so consonant to this ill beginning,
that it is in a manner wholly made up, not of Dr. Potter's asser
tions, but your own fictions obtruded on him.
54. To the next question — cannot general councils err ? You
pretend, he answers,! — they may err damnably. Let the reader
see the place, and he shall find damnably is your addition. To the
third demand, " must I consult (about my difficulties) with every
particular person of the catholic church ?" you answer for him,
(that which is most false) that " it seems so by his words ; the
whole militant church ; that is, all the members of it cannot pos
sibly err either in the whole faith, or any necessary article of it :"
which is very certain, for should it so do, it should be the church
no longer. But what sense is there that you should collect out of
these words, that every member of the militant church must be
consulted with ? By like reason, if he had said that all men in
* Which is the church. t Answers, §• 19- Lond.

294 The Creed contains all
the world cannot err ; if he said that God in his own person, or
his angels could not err in these matters, you might have gathered
from thence, that he laid a necessity upon men in doubt, to con
sult with angels, or with God in his own person, or with all men
in the world. Is it not evident to all sober men, that to make any
man or men fit to be consulted with, besides the understanding of
the matter, it is absolutely requisite that they may be spoken with ?
And is it not apparently impossible, that any man should speak
with all the members of the militant church ? Or if he had spoken
with them all, know that he had done so? Nay, does not Dr.
Potter say as much in plain terms ? Nay more, do not you take
notice that he does so in the very next words before these, where
you say, "he affirms that the catholic church cannot be told of
private injuries :" unless you will persuade us there is a difference
between the catholic church and the whole militant church. For
whereas you make him deny this of the catholic church united,
and affirm it of the militant church dispersed into particulars:
the truth is, he speaks neither of united nor dispersed, but affirms
simply (as appears to your shame, by your own quotations) that
" the catholic church cannot be told of private injuries :" and then,
that the whole militant church cannot err. But then, besides that
the united church cannot be consulted, and the dispersed may;
what a wild imagination is it, and what a strange injustice was it in
you to father it upon him? I beseech you, sir, to consider seriously,
how far blind zeal to your superstition hath transported you be
yond all bounds of honesty and discretion, and made you careless
of speaking either truth or sense, so you speak against Dr. Potter ?
55. Again you make him say, " the prelates of God's church
meeting in a lawful council may err damnably :" and from this
you collect, " it remains then, for your necessary instruction you
must repair to every particular member of the universal church
spread over the face of the earth." And this is also pergula pic-
toris, veri nihil, omnia ficta. The antecedent false, (not for the
matter of it, but) that Dr. Potter says it. And the consequence
as far from it as Gades from Ganges ; and as coherent as a rope
of sand. A general council may err ; therefore you must travel
all the world over, and consult with every particular christian !
As if there were nothing else to be consulted with : nay, as if ac
cording to the doctrine of protestants (for so you must say), there
was nothing to be consulted with, but only a general council, or
all the world ! Have you never heard that protestants say, that
men for their direction must consult with scripture? Nay, doth
not Dr. Potter say it often in this very book which you are con
futing ? Nay more, in this very page out of which you take this
piece of your cento, " a general council may err damnably," are
there not these plain words: "in searchers of truth (he means
divine truth) God ever directs us to the infallible rule of truth,
the scripture ?" With what conscience, then, or modesty, can you
impose upon him this unreasonable consequence, and yet pretend
that your whole discourse is either his own direct assertions, or
evident consequences, clearly deduced from them ? You add, that

necessary Points of mere Belief. 295
yet he teaches (as if he contradicted himself) that " the promises
of God made to the church for his assistance, are not intended to
particular persons, but only to the catholic church :" which sure
agrees very well with any thing said by Dr. Potter. If it be re
pugnant to what you said for him falsely, what is that to him ?
56. Neither yet is this to drive any man to desperation : unless
it be such an one, as hath such a strong affection to this word
church, that he will not go to heaven, unless he hath a church to
lead him thither. For what though a council may err, and the
whole church cannot be consulted with, yet this is not to send you
on the fool's pilgrimage for faith, and bid you go and "confer
with every christian soul, man and woman, by sea and by land,
close prisoner or at liberty," as you dilate the matter : but to tell
you very briefly, that universal tradition directs you to the word of
God, and the word of God directs you to heaven. And therefore
here is no cause of desperation, no cause for you to be so vain, and
tragical, as here you would seem. " Yet upon supposal (you say)
of this miraculous pilgrimage for faith, before I have the faith of
miracles, how shall 1 proceed at our meeting ? Or how shall I
know the man, on whom I may securely rely ?" And hereunto you
frame this answer for the doctor : " procure to know whether he
believe all fundamental points of faith :" whereas, in all the doctor's
book, there is no such answer to any such question, or any like it.
Neither do you, as your custom is, note any page where it may be
found ; which makes me suspect, that sure you have some private
license to use heretics (as you call them) at your pleasure, and
make them answer any thing to any thing.
57. Wherein J am yet more confirmed by the answer you put
in his mouth to your next demand : " how shall I know whether
he hold all fundamental points or no?" For whereas hereunto
Dr. Potter, having given one answer fully satisfactory to it, which
is : "if he truly believe the undoubted books of canonical scrip
ture, he cannot but believe all fundamentals :" and another, which
is but something towards a full satisfaction of it, that " the creed
contains all the fundamentals of simple belief;" you take no no
tice of the former, and pervert the latter, and make him say — the
creed contains all fundamentals of faith. Whereas you know, and,
within six or seven lines after this, confess that he never pre
tended it to contain all simply, but all of one sort, all necessary
points of simple belief. Which assertion, because he modestly
delivers as very probable (being willing to conclude rather less
than more than his reasons require) hereupon you take occasion
to ask, "shall I hazard my soul on probabilities, or even wagers?"
As if whatsoever is but probable, though in the highest degree of
probability, were as likely to be false as true ! Or, because it is
but morally, not mathematically, certain, that there was such a
woman as Queen Elizabeth, such a man as Henry VIII., that is,
in the highest degree probable, therefore it were an even wager
there were none such ! By this reason, seeing the truth of your
whole religion depends finally upon prudential motives, which
you do but pretend to be very credible, it will be an even wager

296 The Creed contains all
that your religion is false. And, by the same reason, or rather
infinitely greater, seeing it is impossible for any man (according
to the grounds of your religion) to know himself, much less
another, to be a true pope, or a true priest ; nay, to have a moral
certainty of it ; because these things are obnoxious to innumerable
secret and undiscernible nullities, it will be an even wager, nay,
(if we proportion things indifferently), a hundred to one, that
every consecration and absolution of yours is void, and that when
soever you adore the host, you and your assistants commit idol
atry : that there is a nullity in any decree that a pope shall make,
or any decree of a council which he shall confirm : particularly,
it will be at least an even wager, that all the decrees of the coun
cil of Trent are void, because it is at most but very probable that
the pope which confirmed them was the true pope. If you mislike
these inferences, then confess you have injured Dr. Potter in this
also, that you have confounded, and made all one, probabilities,
and even wagers. Whereas every ordinary gamester can inform
you, that though it be a thousand to one that such a thing will hap
pen, yet it is not sure, but very probable.
58. To make the measure of your injustice yet fuller, you de
mand, " if the creed contains only points of simple belief, how
shall we know what points of belief are necessary which direct our
practice ?" Dr. Potter would have answered you in our Saviour's
words, " search the scriptures." But you have a great mind, it
seems, to be despairing; and, therefore, having proposed your
questions, will not suffer him to give you an answer, but shut
your ears and tell him, " still he chalks out new paths for despe
ration." 59. In the rest of your interlude, I cannot but commend one
thing in you, that you keep a decorum, and observe very well the
rule given you by the great master of your art,
Servetur ad imum

Qualis ab incepto processerat, et sibi constet :
one vein of scurrility and dishonesty runs clean through it, from
the beginning to the end. Your next demand then is, " are all
the articles of the creed for their nature and matter fundamental ?"
And the answer, " I cannot say so." Which answer (though it be
true) Dr. Potter no where gives it, neither hath he occasion, but
you make it for him, to bring in another question, and this is,
" how then shall I know, which in particular be, and which be
not, fundamental ?" Dr. Potter would have answered, it is a vain
question : believe all, and you shall be sure to believe all that is
fundamental. 60. But what says now his prevaricating proxy ? What does
he make him say ? This which follows : " Read my answer to a
late popish pamphlet, entitled, Charity Mistaken : there you shall
find that fundamental doctrines are such catholic verities, as
principally and essentially pertain to the faith, such as properly
constitute a church, and are necessary, in ordinary course, to be
distinctly believed by every christian that will be saved. They

necessary Points of mere Belief. 297
are those grand and capital doctrines which make up our faith,
that is, the common faith, which is alike precious in all ; being
one and the same, in the highest apostle and the meanest believer,
which the apostle elsewhere calls, ' the first principles of the
oracles of God, and the form of sound words.' "
61. But in earnest, good sir, doth the doctor, in these places
by you quoted, make to this question this same sottish answer?
Or do you think that against a heretic nothing is unlawful ? Cer
tainly, if he doth answer thus, I will make bold to say, he is a
very fool. But, if he does not, (as indeed he does not) then — :
but I forbear you, and beseech the reader to consult the places of
Dr. Potter's book ; and there he shall find, that, in the former
half of these (as you call them) varied words and phrases, he de
clared only what he means by the word fundamental, which was
needful to prevent mistakes, and cavilling about the meaning of
the word, which is metaphorical, and therefore ambiguous; and
that the latter half of them are several places of scripture em
ployed by Dr. Potter, to show that his distinction of fundamental
and not fundamental hath express ground in it. Now of these two
places, very pertinent unto two very good purposes, you have ex
ceedingly fairly patched together a most ridiculous answer to a
question, that Dr. Potter never dreamed of. But the words you
will say are in Dr. Potter's book, though in divers places, and to
other purposes. Very true ! And so the words of Ausonius's ob
scene Fescennine are taken out of Virgil, yet Virgil surely was
not the author of this poem. Besides, in Dr. Potter's book there
are these words : " Dread sovereign, amongst the many excellent
virtues, which have made your majesty's person so dear unto
God," &c. And why now may not you say as well, that in these
he made answer to your former question, what points of the creed
were, and what were not, fundamentals ?
62. But — unless this question may be answered, his doctrine
(you say) serves only either to make men despair, or else to have
recourse to these whom we call papists. — It seems a little thing
will make you despair, if you be so sullen as to do so, because
men will not trouble themselves to satisfy your curious questions.
And I pray be not offended with me for so esteeming it, because,
as I before told you, if you will believe all the points of the creed,
you cannot choose but believe all the points of it that are funda
mental, though you be ignorant which are so, and which are not
so. Now, I believe, your desire to know which are fundamentals,
proceeds only from a desire to be assured that you do believe them;
which, seeing you may be assured of, without knowing which they
be, what can it be but curiosity to desire to know it ? Neither
may you think to mend yourself herein one whit by having re
course to them whom we call papists; for they are as far to seek
as we in this point, which of the articles of the creed are, for their
nature and matter, fundamental, and which are not. Particularly
you will scarce meet with any amongst their doctors, so adven
turous as to tell you for a certain, whether or no the conception
of Christ by the Holy Ghost, his being born of a virgin, his

298 The Creed contains all
burial, his descent into hell, and the communion of saints, be points
of their own nature and matter fundamental. Such, I mean, as
without the distinct and explicit knowledge of them no man can
be saved.
63. But you will say — at least they give this certain rule, that
all points defined by Christ's visible church, belong to the founda
tion of faith, in such sense, as to deny any such, cannot stand with
salvation. — So also protestants give you this more certain rule, that
whosoever believes heartily those books of scripture, which all the
christian churches in the world acknowledge to be canonical, and
submits himself indeed to this, as to the rule of his belief, must of
necessity believe all things fundamental; and if he live according
to his faith, cannot fail of salvation : but, besides, what certainty
have jrou that the rule of papists is so certain? By the visible
church it is plain, they mean only their own : and why their own
only should be the visible church, I do not understand : and as
little why all points defined 'by this church should belong to the
foundation of faith. These things you had need see well and sub
stantially proved, before you rely upon them, otherwise you expose
yourself to danger of embracing damnable errors instead of funda
mental truths. But you will say, Dr. Potter himself acknowledges,
that you do not err in fundamentals. If he did so, yet methinks
you have no reason to rest upon his acknowledgment with any
security, whom you condemn of error in many other matters.
Perhaps, excess of charity to your persons, may make him censure
your errors more favourably than he should do. But the truth is,
and so I have often told you, though the Doctor hopes that your
errors are not so unpardonably destructive, but that some men
who ignorantly hold them may be saved, yet, in themselves, he
professes and proclaims them damnable, and such as, he fears, will
be certainly destructive to such as you are ; that is, to all those
who have eyes to see, and will not see.
64. Ad. §. ?0 — 23. In the remainder of this chapter, you
promise to answer Dr. Potter's arguments against that which you
said before. But, presently forgetting yourself, instead of an
swering his arguments, you fall a confuting his answers to your
own. The arguments objected by you, which here you vindicate,
were two: 1. "The scripture is not so much as mentioned in the
creed, therefore the creed contains not all things necessary to be
believed. Baptism is not contained in the creed, therefore not all
things necessary." To both which arguments my answer shortly
is this — that they prove something, but it is that which no man
here denies. For Dr. Potter (as you have also confessed) never
said, nor undertook to show, that the apostles intended to com
prise in the creed all points absolutely, which we are bound to be
lieve, or, after sufficient proposal, not to disbelieve: which yet
here, and every where, you are obtruding upon him : but only that
they purposed to comprise in it all such doctrines purely specu
lative, all such matters of simple belief, as are, in ordinary course,
necessary to be distinctly and explicitly believed by all men : now
neither of these objections do any way infringe or impeach the truth

necessary Points of mere Belief. 299
of this assertion. Not the first, because, according co your own
doctrine, all men are not bound to know explicitly what books of
scripture are canonical. Nor the second, because baptism is not a
matter of faith, but practice : not so much to be believed as to be
given and received. And against these answers, whether you have
brought any considerable new matter, let the indifferent reader
judge. As for the other things, which Dr. Potter rather glanceth
at, than builds upon, in answering these objections, as the creed's
being collected out of scripture ; and, supposing the authority of it,
which Gregory of Valentia, in the place above cited, seems to me
to confess to have been the judgment of the ancient fathers ; and
the Nicene Creed's intimating the authority of canonical scripture,
and making mention of baptism: these things are said ex abundanti,
and therefore I conceive it superfluous to examine your exceptions
against them. Prove that Dr. Potter did affirm that the creed con
tains all things necessary to be believed of all sorts, and then these
objections will be pertinent, and deserve an answer. Or produce
some point of simple belief, necessary to be explicitly believed,
which is not contained either in terms, or by consequence in the
creed, and then I will either answer your reasons, or confess I can
not. But all this while you do but trifle, and are so far from hit
ting the mark, that you rove quite beside the butt.
65. Ad. §. 23 — 25. Dr. Potter demands — how can it be neces
sary for any christian to have more in his creed than the apostles
had, and the church of their times ? You answer — that he trifled,
not distinguishing between the apostles' belief, and that abridgment
of some articles of faith, which we call the Apostles' Creed. — I re
ply, that it is you which trifle, affectedly confounding (what Dr.
Potter hath plainly distinguished) the apostles' belief of the whole
religion of Christ, as it comprehends both what we are to do, and
what we are to believe, with their belief of that part of it, which
contains not duties of obedience, but only the necessary articles
of simple faith. Now though the apostles' belief be in the former
sense a larger thing than that which we call the Apostles' Creed,
yet, in the latter sense of the word, the creed (I say) is a full com
prehension of their belief, which you yourself have formerly con
fessed, though somewhat fearfully and inconstantly ; and here
again, unwillingness to speak the truth makes you speak that which
is hardly sense, and call it — an abridgment of some articles of
faith. For I demand, these some articles which you speak of,
which are they ? Those that are out of the creed, or those that
are in it ? Those that are in it, it comprehends at large, and there
fore it is not an abridgment of them : those that are out of it, it
comprehends not at all, and therefore it is not an abridgment of
them. If you would call it now an abridgment of the faith, this
would be sense, and signify thus much, that all the necessary arti
cles of the christian faith are comprised in it. For this is the pro
per duty of abridgments, to leave out nothing necessary, and to
take in nothing unnecessary.
66. Moreover, in answer to this demand, you tell us, that
" the Doctor begs the question, supposing that the apostles

300 The Creed contains all
believed no more than is contained in their creed." I answer,
he supposes no such matter; but only that they knew no more ne
cessary articles of simple belief, than what are contained in their
creed. So that here you abuse Dr. Potter and your reader, by
taking sophistically without limitation, that which is delivered with
limitation. 67. But this demand of Dr. Potter's was equivalent to a ne
gation, and intended • for one : how can it be necessary for any
christian to have more in his creed than the apostles had ? All one
with this — It cannot be necessary, &c. And this negation of his,
he forces with many arguments which he proposes by way of
interrogation, thus : " May the church of after ages make the nar
row way to heaven narrower than our Saviour left it? Shall it
be a fault to straiten and encumber the king's highway with
public nuisances? And is it lawful, by adding new articles to
the faith, to retrench any thing from the latitude of the King of
heaven's highway to eternal happiness? The yoke of Christ,
which he said was easy, may it be justly made heavier by the
governors of the church in after ages ? The apostles profess they
revealed to the church the whole counsel of God, keeping back
nothing needful for our salvation ; what tyranny, then, to impose
any new unnecessary matters on the faith of christians, especially
(as the late popes have done) under the high commanding form,
qui non crediderit, damnabitur. If this may be done, why then
did our Saviour reprehend the pharisees so sharply for binding
heavy burdens, and laying them on men's shoulders ? And why did
he teach them, that in vain they worshipped God, teaching for doc
trines men's traditions ? And why did the apostles call it tempting
of God, to lay those things upon the necks of christians that were
not necessary ?"
68. All which interrogations seem to me to contain so many
plain and convincing arguments of the premised assertion ; to all
which (one excepted) according to the advice of the best masters
of rhetoric in such cases, you have answered very discreetly by
saying 0. But when you write again, I pray take notice of them ;
and, if you can devise no fair and satisfying answer to them, then
be so ingenuous as to grant the conclusion, that no more can be
necessary for christians to believe now, than was in the apostles'
time. A conclusion of great importance, for the decision of many
controversies, and the disburdening of the faith of Christ from
many incumbrances.
69. As for that one, which you thought you could fasten upon,
grounded on the xx. Act. 27, let me tell you plainly, that, by
your answering this, you have shewed plainly that it was wisely
done of you to decline the rest. You tell Dr. Potter, that need
ful for salvation is his gloss, which, perhaps you intended for a
piece of an answer. But, good Sir, consult the place, and you
shall find that there St. Paul himself says, that he kept back
ovSlv <ruv ifufwpspoVruv, "not any thing that was profitable:" and, I
hope, you will make no difficulty to grant that whatsoever is need
ful for salvation is very profitable.

necessary Points of mere Belief . 301
70. But then, you say — this is no proof unless he beg the
question, and suppose that whatsoever the apostle revealed to
the church is contained in the creed. — I answer, it is not Dr.
Potter that begs the question, but you that mistake it ; which is
not here in this particular place, whether all points of simple
belief necessary for the salvation of the primitive christians, were
contained in the apostles' symbol ? (for that and the proofs of it
follow after in the next §. p. 223, of Dr. Potter's book :) but,
whether any thing can be necessary for christians to believe now,
which was not so from the beginning ? Dr. Potter maintains the
negative : and, to make good his opinion, thus he argues : St. Paul
declared to the Ephesians the whole counsel of God, touching their
salvation ; therefore that which St. Paul did not declare can be
no part of the counsel of God, and therefore not necessary. And,
again : St. Paul kept back nothing from the Ephesians that was
profitable ; therefore he taught them all things necessary to salva
tion. Consider this, I pray, a little better, and then I hope you
will acknowledge, that there was no petitio principii in Dr. Potter :
but rather ignoratio elenchi in you.
71. Neither is it material that these words were particularly
directed by St. Paul to the pastors of the church: for (to say
nothing that the point here issuable, is not, whom he taught,
whether priests or laymen ? but how much he taught, and whe
ther all things necessary?) it appears plainly out of the text, and
I wonder you should read it so negligently, as not to observe it,
that though he speaks now to the pastors, yet he speaks of what
he taught not only them, but also the laity as well as them. " I
have kept back nothing," says St. Paul, " that was profitable, but
have shewed, and have taught you publicly, and from house to
house testifying (I pray observe) both to the Jews and also to the
Greeks, repentance towards God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus
Christ." And a little after, " I know that all ye, among whom I
have gone preaching the kingdom of God, shall see my face no
more : wherefore I take you to record this day, that I am innocent
from the blood of all men ; for I have kept nothing back, but have
showed you all the counsel of God." And again, " remember that
by the space of three years I ceased not to warn every one night
and day with tears." Certainly, though he did all things to the pas
tors among the rest, nay, above the rest, yet, without controversy
they whom he taught publicly, and from house to house : the Jews
and Greeks to whom he testified, i. e. preached faith and repent
ance : those all, among whom he went preaching the kingdom of
God : those every one, whom for three years together he warned,
were not bishops and pastors only.
72. Neither is this to say, that the apostles taught christians
nothing but their creed, nothing of the sacraments, command
ments, &c. for that is not here the point to be proved ; but only,
that they taught them all things necessary, so that nothing can be
necessary which they did not teach them. But how much of this
they put into their creed, whether all the necessary points of

302 The Creed contains all
simple belief, as we pretend, or only as you say, I know not what,
is another question, and which comes now to be farther examined.
Dr. Potter, in confirmation of it, besides the authorities which you
formerly shifted off with so egregious tergiversation, urges five
several arguments.
73. We urge against you — that if all necessary points of simple
belief be not comprised in the creed, it can no way deserve the
name of the Apostles' Creed, as not being their creed in any sense,
but only a part of it. — To this you answer, §. 25, " Upon the same
affected ambiguity," &c. Ans. It is very true that their whole
faith was of a larger extent, but that was not the question ; but
whether all the points of simple belief which they taught as ne
cessary to be explicitly believed, be not contained in it ? And if
thus much at least of christian religion be not comprised in it, I
again desire you to inform me, how it could be called the Apostles'
Creed? 74. Four other reasons Dr. Potter urges to the same purpose,
grounded upon the practice of the ancient church; the last
whereof you answer in the second part of your book. But to the
rest, drawn from the ancient church's appointing her infants to be
instructed (for matter of simple belief,) only in the creed ; from her
admitting catechumens unto baptism ; and of strangers to her com
munion upon their only profession of the creed, you have not for
aught I can perceive, thought fit to make any kind of answer.
75. The difficulties of the 27th and last §. of this chapter, have
been satisfied, so that there remains unexamined only the 26th §.
wherein you exceed yourself in sophistry : especially, in that
trick of cavillers, which is to answer objections by other objec
tions ; an excellent way to make controversies endless ! Dr. Pot
ter desires to be resolved — why, amongst so many things of
equal necessity to be believed, the apostles should distinctly set
down some in the creed, and be altogether silent of others ? —
instead of resolving him in this difficulty, you put another to him,
and that is — why are some points not fundamental expressed in it
rather than others of the same quality ? — Which demand is so far
from satisfying the former doubt, that it makes it more intricate.
For upon this ground it may be demanded — how was it possible
that the apostles should leave out any articles simply necessary,
and put in others not necessary, especially if their intention were
(as you say it was) to deliver in it such articles as were fittest for
those times ? Unless (which were wondrous strange) unnecessary
articles were fitter for those times than necessary. But now to
your question, the answer is obvious; these unnecessary things
might be put in, because they were circumstances of the neces
sary ; Pontius Pilate, of Christ's passion ; the third day of the re
surrection. Neither doth the adding of them make the creed
ever a whit the less portable, the less fit to be understood and re
membered. And for the contrary reasons, other unnecessary
things might be left out. Besides, who sees not that the addition
of some unnecessary circumstances is a thing that can hardly be

necessary Points of mere Belief. 303
avoided without affectation : and therefore not so great a fault,
nor deserving such a censure, as the omission of any thing essen
tial to the work undertaken, and necessary to the end proposed
in it.
76. You demand again (as it is no hard matter to multiply
demands) " why our Saviour's descent to hell, and burial, was
expressed, and not his circumcision, his manifestation to the three
kings, and working of miracles 1" I answer : his resurrection,
ascension, and sitting at the right hand of God are very great
miracles, and they are expressed. Besides, St. John assures us,
that the miracles which Christ did, were done and written not for
themselves, that they might be believed ; but for a further end,
that we might believe that Jesus was the Christ, and believing
have eternal life. He therefore that believes this may be saved,
though we have no explicit and distinct faith of any miracle that
our Saviour did. His circumcision and manifestation to the wise
men, (for I know not upon what grounds you call them kings) are
neither things simply necessary to be known, nor have any near
relation to those that are so. As for his descent into hell, it may
(for aught you know) be put in as a thing necessary of itself to be
known. If you ask, why more than his circumcision ? I refer
you to the apostles for an answer, who put that in, and left this
out of their creed : and yet, sure, were not so forgetful, after the
receiving of the Holy Ghost, as to leave out any prime and prin
cipal foundation of the faith, which are the very words of your
own Gordonius Huntlaeus, contr. 2, c. x. n. 10. Likewise his
burial was put in, perhaps, as necessary of itself to be known.
But though it were not, yet hath it manifestly so near relation to
these that are necessary, (his passion and resurrection ; being the
consequent of the one, and the antecedent of the other) that it is
no marvel if for their sakes it was put in. For though I verily
believe that there is no necessary point of this nature, but what is
in the creed, yet I do not affirm, because I cannot prove it, that
there is nothing in the creed but what is necessary. You demand,
thirdly, " why did they not express scriptures, sacraments, and
all fundamental points of faith tending to practice, as well as
those which rest in belief?" I answer, because their purpose was
to comprise in it only these necessary points which rest in belief:
which appears, because of practical points there is not in it so much
as one.
77. Dr. Potter subjoins to what is said above, " That as well,
nay better, they might have given no article but that of the
church, and sent us to the church for all the rest : for in setting
down others besides that, and not all, they make us believe we
have all, when we have not all." The consequence you deny:
and neither give reason against it, nor satisfy his reason for it,
which yet, in my judgment, is good and concluding. The propo
sition to be proved is this : that, if your doctrine were true, this
short creed — I believe the Roman church to be infallible — would
have been better ; that is, more effectual to keep the believers of
it from heresy, and in the true faith, than this cTeed which now

304 The Creed contains all
we have. A proposition so evident, that I cannot see how either
you, or any of your religion, or indeed any sensible man, can from
his heart deny it. Yet, because you make show of doing so, or else,
which I rather hope, do not rightly apprehend the force of the rea
son, I will endeavour briefly to add some light and strength to it, by
comparing the effects of these several supposed creeds.
78. The former creed, therefore, would certainly produce these
effects in the believers of it : an impossibility of being in any formal
heresy : a necessity of being prepared in mind to come out of all
error in faith, or material heresy, which certainly you will not deny ;
or, if you do, you pull down the only pillar of your church and re
ligion, and deny that which is in effect the only thing you labour to
prove through your whole book.
79. The latter creed which now we have, is so ineffectual for
these good purposes, that you yourself tell us of innumerable,
gross, damnable heresies, that have been, are, and may be, whose
contrary truths are neither explicitly, nor by consequence, com
prehended in this creed ; so that no man, by the belief of this
creed without the former, can be possibly guarded from falling
into them, and continuing obstinate in them. Nay, so far is this
creed from guarding them from these mischiefs, that it is more
likely to ensnare them into them, by seeming, and yet not being a
full comprehension of all necessary points of faith : which is apt
(as experience shows) to misguide men into this (as you conceive
it) pernicious error, that believing the creed, they believe all ne
cessary points of faith ; whereas, indeed, according to you, they do
not so. Now upon these grounds I thus conclude : that creed, which
hath great commodities and no danger, would certainly be better .
than that which hath great danger, and wants many of these great
commodities; but the former short creed proposed by me — I be
lieve the Roman church to be infallible — (if your doctrine be true)
is of the former condition, and the latter, that is the Apostles'
Creed, is of the latter; therefore the former (if your doctrine be
true) would, without controversy, be better than the latter.
80. But (say you) by this kind of arguing, one might infer
quite contrary. — If the Apostles' Creed contain all points necessary
to salvation, what need have we of any church to teach us ? And,
consequently, what need of the article of the church ? — To which
I answer, that having compared your inference and Dr. Potter's
together, I cannot discover any shadow of resemblance between
them, nor any show of reason, why the perfection of the Apostles'
Creed should exclude a necessity of some body to deliver it. Much
less why the whole creed's containing all things necessary should
make the belief of a part of it unnecessary. As well (for aught 1
understand) you might avouch this inference to be as good as Dr.
Potter's : the Apostles' Creed contains all things necessary, there
fore there is no need to believe in God. Neither doth it follow
so well as Dr. Potter's argument follows, that if the Apostles'
Creed contains all things necessary, that all other creeds and
catechisms, wherein are added divers others particulars, are su
perfluous. For these other particulars may be the duties of

necessary Points of mere Belief. 305
obedience, they may be profitable points of doctrine, they may be
good expositions of the Apostles' Creed, and so not superfluous ; and
yet for all this the creed may still contain all points of belief that
are simply necessary. These therefore are poor consequences, but
no more like Dr. Potter's than an apple is like an oyster.
81. But this consequence after you have sufficiently slighted
and disgraced it, at length you promise us news, and pretend to
grant it. But what is that which you mean to grant ? That the
apostles did put no article in their creed but only that of the
church? Or, that, if they had done so, they had done better than
now they have done ? This is Dr. Potter's inference out of your
doctrine : and truly, if you should grant this, this were news in
deed. Yes, say you, I will grant it, but only thus far, that Christ
hath referred us only to his church. Yea, but this is clean another
thing, and no news at all, that you should grant that which you
would fain have granted to you. So that your dealing with us is
just as if a man should proffer me a courtesy, and pretend that he
would oblige himself, by a note under his hand, to give me twenty
pounds ; and instead of it write, that I owe him forty, and desire
me to subscribe to it, and be thankful. Of such favours as these
it is very safe to be liberal.
82. You tell us afterward (but how it comes in I know not) that
— it were a childish argument, the creed contains not all things
necessary : ergo, it is not profitable. Or, the church alone is suffi
cient to teach us by some convenient means : ergo, she must teach
us without means. — These indeed are childish arguments ; but,
for aught I see, you alone are the father of them : for, in Dr.
Potter's book, I can neither meet with them, nor any like them.
He, indeed, tells you, that if (by any impossible supposition) your
doctrine were true, another and a far shorter creed would have
been more expedient : even this alone — I believe the Roman
church to be infallible. But why you should conclude, he makes
this creed which we have unprofitable ; because he says another,
that might be conceived upon this false supposition, would be
more profitable : or, that he lays a necessity upon the church of
teaching without means : or, of not teaching this very creed which
now is taught ; these things are so subtle that I cannot compre
hend them. To my understanding, by those words, " and sent us
to the church for all the rest," he does rather manifestly imply,
that the rest might be very well not only profitable, but necessary,
and that the church was to teach this by creeds, or catechisms, or
councils, or any other means which she should make choice of : for
being infallible, she could not choose amiss.
83. Whereas therefore, you say, " if the apostles had expressed
no article but that of the catholic church, she must have taught
us the other articles, in particular, by creeds or other means :"
this is very true, but no way repugnant to the truth of this which
follows, that the apostles (if your doctrine be true) had done better
service to the church, though they had never made this creed of
theirs which now we have, if, instead thereof, they had com
manded, in plain terms, that for men's perpetual direction in the
u

306 The Creed contains all necessary Points of mere Belief.
faith, this short creed shall be taught all men — I believe the
Roman church shall be for ever infallible. Yet you must not so
mistake me, as if I meant that they had done better, not to have
taught the church the substance of christian religion ; for then the
church not having learned it of them, could not have taught it us.
This therefore I do not say, but supposing they had written these
scriptures as they have written, wherein all the articles of their
creed are plainly delivered, and preached that doctrine which they
did preach, and done all other things as they have done, besides
the composing their symbol ; I say, if your doctrine were true,
they had done a work infinitely more beneficial to the church of
Christ, if they had never composed this symbol, which is but an
imperfect comprehension of the necessary points of simple belief,
and no distinctive mark (as a symbol should be) between those
that are good christians, and those that are not so ; but instead
thereof, had delivered this one proposition, which would have
been certainly effectual for all the aforesaid good intents and pur
poses — the Roman church shall be for ever infallible in all things
which she proposes as matters of faith.
84. Whereas you say — if we will believe we have all in the
creed when we have not all, it is not the apostles' fault, but
our own. I tell you plainly, if it be a fault, I know not whose it
should be but theirs. For sure it can be no fault in me to follow
such guides whithersoever they lead me : now, I say, they have
led me into this persuasion, because they have given me great
reason to believe it, and none to the contrary. The reason they
have given me to believe it, is, because it is apparent and con
fessed, they did propose to themselves in composing it, some good
end or ends ; as that christians might have a form, by which (for
matter of faith) they might profess themselves catholics ; so Pu-
tean out of Tho. Aquinas. " That the faithful might know what
the christian people is to believe explicitly." So Vincent Filiucius.
" That being separated into divers parts of the world, they might
preach the same thing : and, that they might serve as a mark to
distinguish true christians from infidels." So Cardinal Richelieu.
Now for all these, and for any other good intent, it will be plainly
ineffectual, unless it contain at least all points of simple belief,
which are, in ordinary course, necessary to be explicitly known
by all men. So that if it be a fault in me to believe this, it must
be my fault to believe the apostles wise and good men : which I
cannot do if I believe not this. And, therefore, what Richardus
de sancto Victore says of God himself, I make no scruple at all to
apply to the apostles, and to say, Si error est quod credo, a vobis
deceptus sum ? If it be an error, which I believe, it is you, and
my reverend esteem of you and your actions, that hath led me
into it. For as for your suspicion, that we are led into this per
suasion out of a hope that we may the better maintain by it some
opinions of our own, it is plainly uncharitable. I know no opi
nion I have which I would not as willingly forsake as keep, if I
could see sufficient reason to induce me to believe, that it is the
will of God I should forsake it. Neither do I know any opinion

Charity maintained by Catholics. 307
I hold against the church of Rome, but I have more evident
grounds than this whereupon to build it. For let but these truths
be granted — that the authority of the scriptures is independent
on your church, and dependent only in respect of us upon uni
versal tradition ; that scripture is the only rule of faith ; that all
things necessary to salvation are plainly delivered in scripture :
let, I say, these most certain and divine truths be laid for founda
tions, and let our superstructions be consequent and coherent to
them ; and I am confident peace would be restored, and truth
maintained against you, though the Apostles' Creed were not in the
world.

CHAPTER V.
That Luther, Calvin, their associates, and all who began or con
tinue the separation from the external communion of the Roman
church, are guilty of the proper and formal sin of schism.
" The Searcher of all hearts is witness, with how unwilling mind
catholics are drawn to fasten the denomination of schismatics, or
heretics, on them for whose souls, if they employed their best
blood, they judge that it could not be better spent ! If we rejoice
that they are contristated at such titles, our joy riseth not from
their trouble or grief, but as that of the apostles did, from the
fountain of charity, because they are contristated to repentance ;
that so, after impartial examination, they, finding themselves to
be what we say, may, by God's holy grace, begin to dislike what
themselves are. For our part, we must remember that our obligation
is, to keep within the mean, betwixt uncharitable bitterness and
pernicious flattery, not yielding to worldly respects, nor offending
christian modesty, but uttering the substance of truth in so chari
table manner that not so much we, as truth and charity, may seem
to speak, according to the wholesome advice of St. Gregory Nazian
zen in these divine words : ' We do not affect peace with pre
judice of the true doctrine, that so we may get a name of being
gentle and mild ; and yet we seek to conserve peace, fighting in a
lawful manner, and containing ourselves within our compass, and
the rule of spirit. And of these things my judgment is, and for
my part, I prescribe the same law to all that deal with souls, and
treat of true doctrine, that neither they exasperate men's minds by
harshness, nor make them haughty or insolent by submission ; but
that in the cause of faith they behave themselves prudently and
advisedly, and not in either of these things exceed the mean.'*
With whom agreeth St. Leo, saying : ' It behoveth us in such
causes to be most careful, that, without noise of contentions, both
charity be conserved and truth maintained. 'f
"For better method, we will handle these points in order.
First, we will set down the nature and essence, or, as I may call it,
the quality of schism. In the second place, the greatness and griev-
*Orat. 32. + Epist. 8.
u2

308 Charity maintained by Catholics.
ousness, or (so to term it) the quantity thereof. For the nature, or
quality, will tell us who may without injury be judged schismatics ;
and by the greatness, or quantity, such as find themselves guilty
thereof will remain acquainted with the true state of their soul, and
whether they may conceive any hope of salvation or no. And be
cause schism will be found to be a division from the church, which
could not happen, unless there were always a visible church ; we
will, thirdly, prove, or rather take it as a point to be granted by all
christians, that in all ages there hath been such a visible congrega
tion of faithful people. Fourthly, we will demonstrate that Luther,
Calvin, and the rest, did separate themselves from the communion
of that always visible church of Christ, and therefore were guilty
of schism. And, fifthly, we will make it evident, that the visible
true church of Christ, out of which Luther and his followers departed,
was no other but the Roman church ; and consequently, that both
they, and all others who persist in the same divisions, are schismatics,
by reason of their separation from the church of Rome.
" 3. I. Point. The nature of schism. For the first point, touching
the nature or quality of schism : as the natural perfection of man
consists in his being the image of God, his Creator, by the powers
of his soul ; so his supernatural perfection is placed in similitude
with God as his last end and felicity ; and, by having the said
spiritual faculties, his understanding and will, linked to him.
His understanding is united to God by faith, his will by charity:
the former relies upon his infallible truth ; the latter carrieth us
to his infinite goodness. Faith hath a deadly opposite, heresy.
Contrary to the union or unity of charity, is separation and divi
sion. Charity is twofold. As it respects God, his opposite vice
is hatred against God ; as it uniteth us to our neighbour, his con
trary is separation or division of affections and will, from our
neighbour : our neighbour may be considered, either as one
private person hath a single relation to another, or as all concur
to make one company or congregation, which we call the church;
and this is the most principal reference and union of one man
with another ; because the chiefest unity is that of the whole, to
which the particular unity of parts is subordinate. This unity, or
oneness (if so I may call it) is effected by charity, uniting all the
members of the church in one mystical body ; contrary to which
is schism, from the Greek word signifying scissure, or division.
Wherefore upon the whole matter, we find that schism, as the
angelical Doctor St. Thomas defines it, is ' a voluntary separation
from the unity of that charity whereby all the members of the
church are united.'* From hence he deduceth, that schism is a
special and particular vice, distinct from heresy, because they are
opposite to two different virtues ; heresy to faith ; schism to
charity. To which purpose he fitly alleged St. Jerome upon these
words : (Tit. 3.) ' A man that is a heretic after the first and second
admonition avoid, saying, I conceive that there is this difference
betwixt schism and heresy, that heresy involves some perverse
assertion : schism for episcopal dissension doth separate men from
* 2. 2. q. 39. art. incorp. et ad 3.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 309
the church.' The same doctrine is delivered by St. Augustine
in these words: 'heretics and schismatics call their congrega
tions churches : but heretics corrupt the faith by believing of God
false things; but schismatics by wicked divisions break from fra
ternal charity, although they believe what we believe. Therefore
the heretic belongs not to the church, because she loves God ; nor
the schismatic, because she loves her neighbour.'* And in another
place he saith, ' It is wont to be demanded how schismatics be
distinguished from heretics ; and this difference is found, that not
a diverse faith, but the divided society of communion doth make
schismatics.'f It is then evident that schism is, different from heresy.
Nevertheless (saith St. ThomasJ) as he who is deprived of faith
must needs want charity; so every heretic is a schismatic, but not
conversively every schismatic is a heretic ; though because want of
charity disposes and makes way to the destruction of faith (accord
ing to those words of the apostle, 'which [a good conscience] some
casting off, have suffered shipwreck in their faith') schism speedily
degenerates to heresy. St. Jerome after the rehearsed words
teacheth, saying, ' Though schism in the beginning may in some
sort be understood different from heresy ; yet there is no schism
which doth not feign some heresy to itself, that so it may seem to
have departed from the church upon good reason.' Nevertheless,
when schism proceeds originally from heresy, heresy as being in
that case the predominant quality in these two peccant humours,
giveth the denomination of a heretic ; as, on the other side, we
are wont, especially in the beginning, or for a while, to call schis
matics those men who first began with only schism, though in
process of time they fell into some heresy, and by that means are
indeed both schismatics and heretics.
" 4. The reason why both heresy and schism are repugnant to
the being of a good catholic, is, because the catholic or universal
church signifies one congregation or company of faithful people,
and therefore implies not only faith, to make them faithful be
lievers, but also communion, or common union, to make them one
in charity, which excludes separation and division ; and therefore
in the Apostles' Creed, communion of saints is immediately joined
to the catholic church.
" 5. From this definition of schism may be inferred, that the
guilt thereof is contracted, not only by division from the universal
church, but also by a separation from a particular church or
diocese which agrees with the universal. In this manner Meletius
was a schismatic, but not a heretic, because, as we read in St, Epi-
phanius,§ ' he was of the right faith, for his faith was not altered
at any time from the holy catholic church, &c. He made a sect,
but departed not from faith.' Yet because he made to himself a
particular congregation against St. Peter, archbishop of Alexandria,
his lawful superior, and by that means brought in a division in
that particular church, he was a schismatic. And it is well worth
the noting, that the Meletians building new churches, put this
* Lib. de Fid. et Symbol, cap. 10. X Ubi supra.
f Qu. Evang. ex Matth. q. 11. § Hasres. 68.

310 Charity maintained by Catholics.
title upon them, The Church of Martyrs; and upon the ancient
churches of those who succeeded Peter, was inscribed, The Ca
tholic Church : for so it is. A new sect must have a new name,
which though it be never so gay and specious, as the church of
martyrs, the reformed church, &c. yet the novelty sheweth that
it is not the catholic, nor a true church. And that schism may be
committed by division from a particular church, we read in Optatus
Milevitanus* these remarkable words, (which do well declare
who be schismatics) brought by him to prove that not Caecilianus
but Parmenianus was a schismatic : ' for Caecilianus went not
out from Majorinus thy grandfather (he means his next pre
decessor but one in the bishopric) but Majorinus from Cascilianus ;
neither did Caecilianus depart from the chair of Peter, or of Cyprian
(who was but a particular bishop), but Majorinus, in whose chair
thou sittest, which had no beginning before Majorinus himself:
seeing it is manifestly known that those things were so done, it
evidently appeareth that you are heirs both of traditors (that is,
of those who delivered up the holy bible to be burned) and of
schismatics.' And it seemeth that this kind of schism must prin
cipally be admitted by protestants, who acknowledge no one
visible head of the whole church, but hold that every particular
diocese, church, or country is governed by itself, independently
of any one person, or general council, to which all christians have
obligation to submit their judgments and wills.
"6. II. Point. The grievousness of schism. As for the griev-
ousness or quantity of schism (which was the second point pro
posed) St. Thomas teacheth, that, amongst sins against our neigh
bour, schismf is the most grievous ; because it is against the spirit
ual good of the multitude or community. And therefore as in a
kingdom or commonwealth, there is as great difference between
the crime of rebellion or sedition, and debates among private men,
as there is inequality betwixt one man and a whole kingdom ; so,
in the church, schism is as much more grievous than sedition in a
kingdom, as the spiritual good of souls surpasseth the civil and po
litical weal. And St. Thomas adds farther, that they lose the spi
ritual power of jurisdiction ; and if they go about to absolve from
sin, or to excommunicate, their actions are invalid ; which he proves
out of the canon Novatianus, causa 7, quest. 1, which saith, 'He
that keepeth neither the unity of spirit, nor the peace of agree
ment, and separates himself from the bond of the church, and the
college of priests, can neither have the power nor dignity of a
bishop.' The power also of order (for example, to consecrate the
eucharist, to ordain priests, &c.) they cannot lawfully exercise.
" 7. In the judgment of the holy fathers, schism is a most
grievous offence. St. ChrysostomeJ compares these schismatical
dividers of Christ's mystical body to those who sacrilegiously
pierced his natural body, saying, ' Nothing doth so much incense
God, as that the church should be divided. Although we should
do innumerable good works, if we divide the full ecclesiastical con-
* Lib. i. cont Parmen. t Supra, art. 2. ad 3. X Horn. 11. in ep. ad. Eph.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 31 1
gregation, we shall be punished no less than they who tore his
(natural) body. For that was done to the gain of the whole world,
although not with that intention; but this hath no profit at all,
but there ariseth from it most great harm. These things are
spoken, not only to those who bear office, but also to those who
are governed by them.' Behold how neither a moral good life,
(which conceit deceiveth many) nor authority, of magistrates, nor
any necessity of obeying superiors, can excuse schism from being
a most heinous offence. Optatus Milevitanus* calls schism ingens
flagitium, ' a huge crime.' And speaking to the donatists, saith,
that 'schism is evil in the highest degree, even you are not able
to deny.' No less pathetic is St. Augustine upon this subject.
He reckons schismatics amongst pagans, heretics, and Jews, saying,
' religion is to be sought, neither in the confusion of pagans, nor
in the filth of heretics, nor in the languishing of schismatics, nor
in the age of the Jews, but amongst those alone who are called
christian catholics, or othodox ; that is, lovers of unity in the
whole body, and followers of truth.f Nay, he esteems them worse
than infidels and idolaters, saying, ' Those whom the donatists
heal from the wound of infidelity and idolatry, they hurt more
grievously with the wound of schism. 'J Let here those men who
are pleased untruly to call us idolaters reflect upon themselves,
and consider that this holy father judgeth schismatics (as they are)
to be worse than idolaters, which they absurdly call us. And this
he proveth by the example of Corah, Dathan, and Abiram, and
other rebellious schismatics of the Old Testament, who were con
veyed alive down into hell, and punished more openly than ido
laters. 'No doubt (saith this holy father) but that was com
mitted most wickedly, which was punished most severely. '§ In
another place he yoketh schism with heresy, saying, upon the
eighth beatitude :|J 'Many heretics, under the name of christians,
deceiving men's souls,' do suffer many such things; but therefore
they are excluded from this reward, because it is not only said,
' happy are they who suffer persecution,' but there is added, ' for
justice.' But where there is not sound faith, there cannot be
justice. Neither can schismatics promise to themselves any part
of this reward, because likewise when there is no charity, there
cannot be justice. And, in another place, yet more effectually he
saith, ,1' being out of the church, and divided from the heap of
unity, and the bond of charity, thou shouldst be punished with
eternal death, though thou shouldst be burned alive for the name
of Christ.' And in another place he hath these words : ' If he hear
not the church, let him be to thee as an heathen or publican ;
which is more grievous than if he were smitten with the sword,
consumed with flames, or cast to wild beasts.** And elsewhere,
'Out of the catholic church (saith he) one may have faith, sacra
ments, orders, and, in sum, all things except salvation.'ff With St.

* Lib. i. cont. Parmen. t Lib. de vera Relig. cap. vi.
X Cont. Donatist. 1. 1, cap. viii. § Ibid. 1. 2, cap. vi.
II De serm. Dom. in monte, cap. v. IT Epist. 204.
** Cont. adv. Leg. et Prophet. 1. 2, cap. xvii. tt De gest. cum. Emerit.

312 Charity maintained by Catholics.
Augustine, his countryman and second self in sympathy of spirit,
St. Fulgentius agreeth, saying,* ' believe this steadfastly without
doubting, that every heretic or schismatic baptized in the name of
the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, if before the end of his
life he be not reconciled to the catholic church, what alms soever
he give, yea, though he should shed his blood for the name of
Christ, he cannot obtain salvation.' Mark again, how no moral
honesty of life, no good deeds, no martyrdom, can without repent
ance avail any schismatic for salvation. Let us also add that Dr.
Potter saith : schism is no less damnable than heresy .f
" 8. But O you holy, learned, zealous fathers and doctors of God's
church out of these premises, of the grievousness of schism, and of
the certain damnation which it bringeth (if unrepented) what con
clusion draw you for the instruction of christians? St. Augustine
maketh this wholesome inference : ' there is no just necessity to
divide unity .'J St. Irenaeus concludeth : ' they cannot make any so
important reformation, as the evil of the schism is pernicious.'^
St. Dennis, of Alexandria, saith : ' certainly all things should rather
be endured, than to consent to the division of the church of God :
those martyrs being no less glorious, that exposed themselves to
hinder the dismembering of the church, than those that suffer,
rather than they will offer sacrifice to idols.'|| Would to God, all
those who divided themselves from that visible church of Christ,
which was upon earth when Luther appeared, would rightly con
sider of these things I And thus much of the second point.
" 9. III. Point. Perpetual visibility of the church. We have
just and necessary occasion eternally to bless Almighty God, who
hath vouchsafed to make us members of the catholic Roman
church, from which while men fall, they precipitate themselves
into so vast absurdities, or rather sacrilegious blasphemies, as is
implied in the doctrine of the total deficiency of the visible church,
which yet is maintained by divers chief protestants, as may at
large be seen in Brerely, and others; out of whom I will here
name Jewel, saying,T[ ' the truth was unknown at that time, and
unheard of, when Martin Luther and Ulderick Zuinglius first
came unto the knowledge and preaching of the gospel.' Perkins
saith :** we say, that before the days of Luther, for the space of
many hundred years, an universal apostacy overspread the whole
face of the earth, and that our (protestant) church was not then
visible to the world. Napper upon the Revelations teacheth,ff
that from the year of Christ three hundred and sixteen, the anti-
christian and papistical reign hath begun, reigning universally,
and without any debatable contradiction, one thousand two hundred
sixty years' (that is, till Luther's time) : and that,JJ 'from the year
of Christ three hundred and sixteen, God hath withdrawn his
visible church from open assemblies, to the hearts of particular

* De fide ad Pet. t Page 42. X Cont. Parm. 1. 2, cap. lxii.
§ Cont. hseres. 1. 4, c. lxii. || Apud. Euseb. Hist. Eccles. 1. 6.
IT Apol. part 4, c. iv. divis. 2, and in Defence, printed ann. 1571, p. 426.
** In his Exposition upon the Creed, p. 400. ft Propos. xxxvii. p. 68.
tt Ibid, cap, xii. p. 161, col. 3.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 313
godly men, &c. during the space of one thousand two hundred
threescore years.' And that ' the pope and clergy have possessed
the outward visible church of christians even one thousand two
hundred threescore years.* And that the true church abode la
tent, and invisible.'f And Brocard upon the revelations,J pro
fesseth to join in opinion with Napper. Fulk affirmeth, 'that
in the time of Boniface the Third, which was the year six hun
dred and seven, the church was invisible and fled into the wilder
ness, there to remain a long season. '§ Luther saith Prima solus
eram. ' At the first I was alone.'|| Jacob Hailbronnerus, one of the
disputants for the protestant party in the conference at Ratisbon,
affirmeth,TT that ' the true church was interrupted by apostacy
from the true faith.' Calvin saith:** 'it is absurd in the very
beginning to break one from another, after we have been forced
to make a separation from the whole world.' It were over long to
allege the words of Joannes Regius, Daniel Chamierus, Beza, Ochi-
mus, Castalio, and others, to the same purpose. The reason which
cast them upon this wicked doctrine, was a desperate voluntary ne
cessity : because they being resolved not to acknowledge the Ro
man church to be Christ's true church, and yet being convinced by
all manner of evidence, that for divers ages before Luther there
was no other congregation of christians, which could be the church
of Christ: there was no remedy but to affirm, that upon earth Christ
had no visible church : which they would never have avouched, if
they had known how to avoid the aforesaid inconvenience (as they
apprehended it) of submitting themselves to the Roman church.
" 10. Against these exterminating spirits, Dr. Potter, and
other more moderate protestants, profess, that Christ always had,
and always will have, upon earth a. visible church : otherwise
(saith he) our Lord'sff promise of her stableJJ edification should
be of no value. And, in another place, having affirmed that pro
testants have not left the church of Rome, but her corruptions,
and acknowledging her still to be a member of Christ's body, he
seeketh to clear himself and others from schism, because (saith
he)$ ' the property of schism is (witness the donatists and luci-
ferians) to cut off, from the body of Christ and the hope of sal
vation, the church from which it separates. And if any zealots
amongst us have proceeded to heavier censures, their zeal may be
excused, but their charity and wisdom cannot be justified.' And
elsewhere he acknowledgeth, that the Roman church hath those
main and essential truths, which give her the name and essence of
a church. ||||
"11. It being therefore granted by Dr. Potter, and the chiefest
and best learned English protestants, that Christ's visible church
cannot perish, it will be needless for me on this occasion to prove
it. St. Augustine doubted not to say,f H ' the prophets spake
more obscurely of Christ than of the church : because, as I think,
* Propos. in cap. xi. p. 145. t Ibid. p. 191. X Fol. 110, 123.
§ Answer to a counterfeit catholic, p. 16. || In preefat. operum suorum.
IT In suo Acatholico, vol. a. 15, c. ix. p. 479. ** Epist. 141. tt Page 154.
tt Matt. xvi. 18. §§ Page 76. U||Page83. « In Psal. xxx. Com. 2.

314 Charity maintained by Catholics.
they did foresee in spirit that men were to make parties against
the church, and that they were not to,, have so great strife con
cerning Christ : therefore that was more plainly foretold, and
more openly prophesied, about which greater contentions were to
rise, that it might turn to the condemnation of them who have
seen it, and yet gone forth.' And in another place he saith :*
' how do ye confide to have received manifestly Christ himself
from holy scriptures, if we have not also manifestly received the
church from them?' And, indeed, to what congregation shall a
man have recourse for the affairs of his soul, if upon earth there be
no visible church of Christ ? Besides, to imagine a company of men
believing one thing in their heart, and with their mouth professing
the contrary, (as they must be Supposed to do : for, if they had pro
fessed what they believed, they would have become visible) is to
dream of a damned crew of dissembling sycophants, but not to con
ceive a right notion of the church of Christ our Lord. And there
fore St. Augustine saith,f ' we cannot be saved, unless labouring
also for the salvation of others, we profess with our mouths the same
faith which we bear in our hearts.' And if any man hold it law
ful to dissemble, and deny matters of faith, we cannot be assured,
but that they actually dissemble, and hide anabaptism, arianism,
yea turcism, and even atheism, or any other false belief, under
the outward profession of Calvinism. Do not protestants teach
that preaching of the word, and administration of sacraments
(which cannot but make a church visible) are inseparable notes
of the true church ? And therefore they must either grant a visible
church, or none at all. No wonder, then, if St. Augustine account
this heresy so gross, that he saith against those who in his time
defended the like error : J ' but this church which hath been of
all nations is no more, she hath perished : so say they that are not
in her. O impudent speech !' And afterward : ' this voice so
abominable, so detestable, so full of presumption and falsehood,
which is sustained with no truth, enlightened with no wisdom,
seasoned with no salt, vain, rash, heady, pernicious, the Holy
Ghost foresaw,' &c. And ' peradventure some one may say,
there are other sheep I know not where, with which I am
not acquainted, yet God hath care of them. But he is too
absurd in human sense, that can imagine such things.'^ And
these men do not consider, that while they deny the perpe
tuity of a visible church, they destroy their own present church,
according to the argument, which St. Augustine urged against
the donatists in these words : || 'If the church were lost in
Cyprian's (we may say in Gregory's) time, from whence did
Donatus, (Luther) appear? From what earth did he spring?
From what sea is he come? From what heaven did he drop?'
And in another place :Tf ' how can they vaunt to have any church,
if she hath ceased ever since those times ?' And all divines by
* Epis. 48. § De ovib. c. i.
t St. Aug. de Fide et Symbol, c. 7. || De Bapt. cont Donat.
X In Psal. 101. V Lib. iii. cont. Parm.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 315
defining schism to be a division from the true church, supposed that
there must be a known church, from which it is possible for men to
depart. But enough of this in these few words.
" 12. IV. Point. Luther and all that follow him are schismatics.
Let us now come to the fourth and chiefest point, which was, to
examine whether Luther, Calvin, and the rest, did not depart
from the external communion of Christ's visible church, and by that
separation become guilty of schism. And that they are properly
schismatics clearly followeth from the grounds which we have laid
concerning the nature of schism, which consists in leaving the ex
ternal communion of the visible church of Christ our Lord : and it
is clear, by evidence of fact, that Luther and his followers forsook
the communion of the ancient church.
" For they do not so much as pretend to join with any congrega
tion, which had a being before their time ; for they would needs
conceive that no visible company was free from errors in doctrine,
and corruption in practice ; and therefore, they opposed the doc
trine ; they withdrew their obedience from the prelates ; they
left participation in sacraments ; they changed the liturgy of pub
lic service of whatsoever church then extant. And these things
they pretended to do out of a persuasion, that they were bound
(forsooth) in conscience so to do, unless they would participate
with errors, corruptions, and superstitions. ' We dare not (saith
Dr. Potter)* communicate with Rome, either in her public liturgy,
which is manifestly polluted with gross superstition,' &c. ' or in
those corrupt and ungrounded opinions, which she hath added to
the faith of catholics.' But now let Dr. Potter tell me with what
visible church extant before Luther, he would have adventured
to communicate in her public liturgy and doctrine, since he durst
not communicate with Rome? He will not be able to assign
any, even with any little colour of common sense. If then they
departed from all visible communities professing Christ, it follow
eth that they also left the communion of the true visible church
whichsoever it was, whether that of Rome, or any other; of
which point I do not for the present dispute. Yea, this the lu
therans do not only acknowledge, but prove and brag of. ' If
(saith a learned lutheran)f there had been right believers which
went before Luther in his office, there had then been no need
of a lutheran reformation.' Another affirmed it to be ridiculous,
to think that in the time before Luther, any had the purity of
doctrine ; and that Luther should receive it from them, and not
they from Luther.J Another speaketh roundly and saith: it is
impudency to say, ' that many learned men in Germany, before
Luther, did hold the doctrine of the gospel.'§ And I add: that
far greater impudency were it to affirm, that Germany did not
agree with the rest of Europe, and other christian catholic nations,
and consequently, that it is the greatest impudency to deny, that
* Page 68.
t Georgius Milius in Aug. Confess, art. 7, de Eccles. p. 137.
X Bened.Morgenstern, tract, de Eecles. p. 145.
§ Conrad. S. Husselb. in Theol. Calvin, lib. ii. fol. 130.

316 Charity maintained by Catholics.
he departed from the communion of the visible catholic church,
spread over the whole world. We have heard Calvin saying of
protestants in general,* ' we were even forced to make a separa
tion from the whole world.' And Luther of himself in particular :
' in the beginning I was alone ;'f ergo, (say I, by your good leave)
you were at least a schismatic, divided from the ancient church,
and a member of no new church. For no sole man can consti
tute a church ; and though he could, yet such a church could not
be that glorious company, of whose number, greatness, and am
plitude, so much hath been spoken, both in the Old Testament
and in' the New.
" 13. Dr. Potter endeavours to avoid this evident argument by
divers evasions ; but by the confutation thereof I will (with God's
holy assistance) take occasion, even out of his own answers and
grounds, to bring unanswerable reasons to convince them of
schism. " 14. His chief answer is : that they have not left the church,
but her corruptions.
"15. I reply. This answer may be given either by those furious
people, who teach that those abuses and corruptions in the church
were so enormous, that they could not stand with the nature or
being of a true church of Christ : or else by those other more
calm protestants, who affirm that those errors did not destroy the
being, but only deform the beauty of the church. Against both
these sorts of men, I may fitly use that unanswerable dilemma,
which St. Augustine brings against the donatists in these con
cluding words :J ' tell me whether the church at that time, when
you say she entertained those who were guilty of all crimes, by
the contagion of those sinful persons, perished or perished not ?
Answer, whether the church perished, or perished not. Make
choice of what you think. If then she perished, what church
brought forth Donatus ? (we may say Luther.) But if she could
not perish, because so many were incorporated into her, without
baptism, (that is without a second baptism, or rebaptization, and,
I may say, without Luther's reformation) answer me, I pray you,
what madness did move the sect of Donatus to separate themselves
from her upon the pretence to avoid the communion of bad men V
I beseech the reader to ponder every one of St. Augustine's
words, and to consider, whether any thing could have been spoken
more directly against Luther and his followers, of what sort
soever. "16. And now to answer more in particular; I say to those
who teach that the visible church of Christ perished for many
ages, that I can easily afford them the courtesy to free them from
mere schism ; but all men touched with any spark of zeal, to
vindicate the wisdom and goodness of our Saviour from blas
phemous injury, cannot choose but believe and proclaim them to
be superlative arch-heretics. Nevertheless, if they will needs
* Epis. 141. t In Prasfat. operum suorem.
) Lib. cont. Epist. Guadent. cap. vii.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 317
have the honour of singularity, and desire to be both formal
heretics, and properly schismatics, I will tell them, that while
they dream of an invisible church of men, which agreed with
them in faith, they will upon due reflection find themselves to be
schismatics from those corporeal angels, or invisible men, because
they held external communion with the visible church of those
times, the outward communion of which visible church these
modern Hotspurs forsaking, were thereby divided from the out
ward communion of their hidden brethren, and so are separatists
from the external communion of them, with whom they agree in
faith ; which is schism in the most formal and proper signification
thereof. Moreover, according to Dr. Potter, those boisterous crea
tures are properly schismatics. For, the reason why he thinks
himself, and such as he is, to be cleared from schism, notwith
standing their division from the Roman church, is, (because ac
cording to his divinity) the property of* schism is, (witness the
donatists and luciferians) to cut off from the body of Christ, and
the hope of salvation, the church from which it separates ; but
those protestants of whom we now speak — cut off from the body
of Christ, and the hope of salvation, the church from which they
separated themselves ; and they do it directly as the donatists (in
whom you exemplify) did, by affirming that the true church had
perished ; and therefore they cannot be cleared from schism,
if you may be their judge. Consider, I pray you, how many
prime protestants, both domestical and foreign, you have at one
blow struck off from hope of salvation, and condemned to the
lowest pit for the grievous sin of schism. And withal it imports
you to consider, that you also involve yourself, and other mode
rate protestants, in the self-same crime and punishment, while
you communicate with those, who, according to your own prin
ciples, are properly and formally schismatics. For if you held
yourself obliged, under pain of damnation, to forsake the com
munion of the Roman church, by reason of their errors and cor
ruptions, which yet you confess were not fundamental ; shall it
not be much more damnable for you, to live in communion and
confraternity with those who defend an error of the failing of the
church; which in the donatists you confessf to have been pro
perly heretical against the article of our creed — I believe the
church ? And I desire the reader here to apply an authority of
St. Cyprian, (Epist. 76,) which he shall find alleged in the next
number. And this may suffice for confutation of the aforesaid
answer, as it might have relation to the rigid calvinists.
" 17. For confutation of those protestants, who hold that the
church of Christ had always a being, and cannot err in points
fundamental, and yet teach that she may err in matters of less
moment, wherein, if they forsake her, they would be accounted
not to leave the church, but only her corruptions ; I must say that
they change the state of our present question, not distinguishing
between internal faith and external communion, nor between
schism and heresy. This I demonstrate out of Dr. Potter himself,
* Page 76. t Page 126.

318 Charity maintained by Catholics.
who in express words teacheth, *that ' the promises which our Lord
hath made unto his church for his assistance, are intended not
to any particular persons or churches, but only to the church
catholic. And they are to be extended not to every parcel, or
particularity of truth, but only to points of faith or fundamental.'
And afterwards, speaking of the universal church, he saith : f it
is comfort enough for the church, that the Lord in mercy will
secure her from all capital dangers, and conserve her on earth
against all enemies; but she may not hope to triumph over all
sin and error till she be in heaven.' Out of which words I
observe, that, according to Dr. Potter, the self-same church,
which is the universal church, remaining the universal true church
of Christ, may fall into errors and corruptions ; from whence it
clearly followeth, that it is impossible to leave the external com
munion of the church so corrupted, and retain external commu
nion with the catholic church ; since the church catholic, and the
church so corrupted, is the self-same one church, or company of
men. And the contrary imagination talks in a dream, as if the
errors and infections of the catholic church were not inherent in
her, but were separate from her, like to accidents without any
subject, or rather, indeed, as if they were not accidents but
hypostases of persons subsisting by themselves; for men cannot
be said to live in or out of the communion of any dead creature,
but with persons endued with life and reason ; and much less can
men be said to live in the communion of accidents, as errors and
corruptions are; and therefore it is an absurd thing to affirm,
that protestants divided themselves from the corruptions of the
church, but not from the church herself, seeing the corruptions
of the church were inherent in the church. All this is made more
clear, if we consider that when Luther appeared, there were not
two distinct visible true catholic churches, holding contrary doc
trines, and divided in external communion ; one of the which two
churches did triumph over all error and corruption in doctrine
and practice ; but the other was stained with both. For to feign
this diversity of two churches cannot stand with record of his
tories, which are silent of any such matter. It is against Dr. Potter's
own grounds, that the church may err in points not fundamental,
which were not true, if you will imagine a certain visible catholic
church free from error even in points not fundamental. It con-
tradicteth the words in which he said, the church may not hope
to triumph over all error till she be in heaven. It evacuateth the
brag of protestants, that Luther reformed the whole church ; and,
lastly, it maketh Luther a schismatic, for leaving the communion
of all visible churches, seeing (upon this supposition) there was
a visible church of Christ free from all corruption, which there
fore, could not be forsaken without just imputation of schism.
We must therefore truly affirm, that since there was but one
visible church of Christ, which was truly catholic, and yet was
(according to protestants) stained with corruption ; when Luther
left the external communion of the corrupted church, he could
* Page 151. t Page 155.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 319
not remain in the communion of the catholic church, no more
than it is possible to keep company with Dr. Christopher Potter,
and not to keep company with the provost of Queen's College, in
Oxford, if Dr. Potter and the provost be one and the self-same
man : for so one should, and not be, with him at the same time.
This very argument, drawn from the unity of God's church,
St. Cyprian urgeth to convince, that Novatianus was cut off from
the church, in these words : * ' the church is one, which being one,
cannot be both within and without. If she be with Novatianus,
she was not with Cornelius; but if she were with Cornelius, who
succeeded Fabianus by lawful ordination, Novatianus is not in
the church.' I purposely here speak only of external commu
nion with the catholic church. For in this point there is great
difference between internal acts of our understanding and will and
of external deeds. Our understanding and will are faculties (as
philosophers speak) abstractive, and able to distinguish, and, as it
were, to part things, though in themselves they be really conjoined.
But real external deeds do take things in gross as they find them,
not separating things which in reality are joined together. Thus
one may consider and love a sinner as he is a man, friend, bene
factor, or the like ; and, at the same lime, not consider him, nor
love him as he is a sinner ; because these are acts of our under
standing and will, which may respect their objects under some
one formality or consideration, without reference to other things
contained in the self-same objects. But if one should strike, or
kill a sinful man, he will not be excused by alleging that he killed
him, not as a man, but as a sinner ; because the self-same person
being a man, and the sinner, the external act of murder fell jointly
upon the man and the sinner. And 'for the same reason one can
not avoid the company of a sinner, and at the same time be really
present with that man who is a sinner. And this is our case; and
in this our adversaries are egregiously, and many of them affectedly,
mistaken : for one may in some points believe as the church be-
lieveth, and disagree from her in other. One may love the truth
which she holds, and detest her (pretended) corruptions. But it
is impossible that a man should really separate himself from her
external communion, as she is corrupted, and be really within the
same external communion as she is sound ; because she is the
self-same church, which is supposed to be sound in some things,
and to err in others. Now, our question for the present doth
concern only this point of external communion ; because schism,
as it is distinguished from heresy, is committed when one divides
himself from the external communion of that church with which
he agrees in faith : whereas heresy doth necessarily imply a dif
ference in matter of faith and belief; and therefore to say that
they left not the visible church, but her errors, can only excuse
them from heresy (which shall be tried in the next chapter), but
not from schism, as long as they are really divided from the ex
ternal communion of the self-same visible church ; which, not
withstanding those errors wherein they do in judgment dissent
* Epist. 76. ad Mag.

320 Charity maintained by Catholics.
from her, doth still remain the true catholic church of Christ:
and therefore while they forsake the corrupted church, they for
sake the catholic church. Thus then it remaineth clear, that
their chiefest answer, changeth the very state of the question ;
confoundeth internal acts of the understanding with the external
deeds ; doth not distinguish between schism and heresy, and
leaves this demonstrated against them, that they divided them
selves from the communion of the visible catholic church, because
they conceived that she needed reformation. But whether this
pretence of reformation will acquit them of schism, I refer to the
impartial judges heretofore alleged ; * as to St. Irenaeus, who
plainly saith, ' They cannot make any so important reforma
tion, as the evil of schism is pernicious.' To St. Dennis, of
Alexandria, saying, ' Certainly all things should be endured
rather than to consent to the division of the church of God;
those martyrs being no less glorious that expose themselves to
hinder the dismembering of the church, than those that suffer,
rather than they will offer sacrifice to idols.' To St. Augustine,
who tells us, that ' not to hear the church is a more grievous
thing than if he were stricken with the sword, consumed with
flames, exposed to wild beasts.' And to conclude all in few words,
he giveth this general prescription ; ' there is no just necessity to
divide unity ;' and Dr. Potter may remember his own words :f
' there neither was nor can be any just cause to depart from the
church of Christ, no more than from Christ himself.' But I have
shewed that Luther, and the rest departed from the church of
Christ (if Christ had any church upon earth) : therefore there
could be no just cause (of reformation, or what else soever) to do
as they did; and therefore they must be contented to be held for
schismatics. " 18. Moreover, I demand whether those corruptions which
moved them to forsake the communion of the visible church,
were in manners or doctrine ? Corruption in manners yields no
sufficient cause to leave the church, otherwise men must go not
only out of the church, but out of the world, as the apostle saith.f
Our blessed Saviour foretold that there would be in the church
tares with choice corn, and sinners with just men. If then pro
testants wax zealous with the servants to pluck up the weeds,
let them first hearken to the wisdom of the Master, ' Let both grow
up.' And they ought to imitate them who, as St. Augustine saith,
' tolerate for the good of unity, that which they detest for the
good of equity.'§ And to whom the more frequent and foul such
scandals are, by so much the more is the merit of their perse
verance in the communion of the church, and the martyrdom of
their patience, as the same saint calls it. If they were offended
with the life of some ecclesiastical persons, must they therefore
deny obedience to their pastors, and finally break with God's
church ? The Pastor of pastors teacheth us another lesson.||
' Upon the chair of Moses have sitten the scribes and pharisees.
All things therefore whatsoever they shall say to you, observe ye,
* Numb. 8. t Page 75. t 1 Cor. v. 10. § Ep. 162. j*|| Matt, xxiii. 2, 3.

Charity maintained by Catholics. . 321
and do ye ; but according to their works do ye not.' Must
people except against laws, and revolt from magistrates, because
some are negligent or corrupt in the execution of the same laws
and performance of their office ? If they intended reformation of
manners, they used a strange means for the achieving of such an
end, by denying the necessity of confession, laughing at austerity
of penance, condemning the vows of chastity, poverty, obedience,
breaking fasts, &c. And no less unfit were the men than the
means. I love not recrimination, but it is well known to how
great crimes Luther, Calvin, Zuinglius, Beza, and others of the
prime reformers were notoriously obnoxious ; as might be easily
demonstrated by only the transcribing of what others have deli
vered upon that subject ; whereby it would appear that they
were very far from being any such apostolical men as God is wont
to use in so great a work. And whereas they were wont, espe
cially in the beginning of their revolt, maliciously to exaggerate
the faults of some clergymen, Erasmus said well, (Ep. ad fratres
inferioris Germania) ' Let the riot, lust, ambition, avarice of
priests, and whatsoever other crimes be gathered together, heresy
alone doth exceed all this filthy lake of vices.' Besides, nothing
at all was "omitted by the sacred council of Trent which might
tend to reformation of manners. And, finally, the vices of others
are not hurtful to any but such as imitate and consent to them ;
according to the saying of St. Augustine :* ' we conserve inno-
cency, not by knowing the ill deeds of men, but by not yielding
consent to such as we know, and by not judging rashly of such
faults as we know not.' If you answer, that not corruption in
manners, but the approbation of them, doth yield sufficient cause
to leave the church ; I reply with St. Augustine, that the church
doth (as the pretended reformers ought to have done) tolerate or
bear with scandals and corruptions, but neither doth nor can ap
prove them. ' The church (saith he)f being placed betwixt much
chaff and cockle, doth bear with many things : but doth not ap
prove, nor dissemble, nor act those things which are against faith
and good life.' But because to approve corruption in manners
as lawful, were an error against faith, it belongs to corruption in
doctrine, which was the second part of my demand.
" 19. Now then that corruptions in doctrine (I still speak upon
the untrue supposition of our adversaries) could not afford any
sufficient cause or colourable necessity to depart from that visible
church, which was extant when Luther rose, I demonstrate out
of Dr. Potter's own confession ; that the catholic church neither
hath, nor can, err in points fundamental, as we shewed out of his
own express words, which he also of set purpose delivereth in
divers other places, and all they are obliged to maintain the same,
who teach that Christ had always a visible church upon earth ;
because any one fundamental error overthrows the being of a
true church. Now (as schoolmen speak) it is implicatio in ter-
minis (a contradiction so plain, that one word destroyeth the other,
as if one should say, a living dead man) to affirm that the church
* De unit. Eccles. c. ii. t Ep. 116.

322 Charity maintained by Catholics.
doth not err in points necessary to salvation, and damnably; and
yet that it is damnable to remain in her communion, because she
teacheth errors which are confessed not to be damnable. For if
the error be not damnable, nor against any fundamental article
of faith, the belief thereof cannot be damnable. But Dr. Potter
teacheth that the catholic church cannot, and that the Roman
church hath not, erred against any fundamental article of faith :
therefore it cannot be damnable to remain in her communion;
and so the pretended corruptions in her doctrines could not induce
any obligation to depart from her communion ; nor could excuse
them from schism, who, upon pretence of necessity, in point of
conscience, forsook her. And Dr. Potter will never be able to
salve a manifest contradiction in these his words : * ' To depart
from the church of Rome in some doctrines and practices there
might be necessary cause, though she wanted nothing necessary
to salvation.' For if, notwithstanding these doctrines and prac
tices, she wanted nothing necessary to salvation ; how could it be
necessary to salvation to forsake her ? And therefore we must still
conclude, that to forsake her was properly an act of schism.
" 20. From the self-same ground of the infallibility of the
church in all fundamental points, I argue after this manner — the
visible church cannot be forsaken without damnation, upon pre
tence that it is damnable to remain in her communion, by reason
of corruption in doctrine ; as long as, for the truth of her faith
and belief, she performeth the duty which she oweth to God and
her neighbour ; as long as she performeth what our Saviour exacts
at her hands ; as long as she doth as much as lies in her power
to do. But (even according to Dr. Potter's assertion) the church
performeth all these things as long as she erreth not in points
fundamental, although she were supposed to err in other points
not fundamental : therefore the communion of the visible church
cannot be forsaken without damnation, upon pretence that it is
damnable to remain in her communion, by reason of corruption in
doctrine. The major or first proposition of itself is evident. The
minor or second proposition doth necessarily follow out of Dr.
Potter's own doctrine above rehearsed, that the ' promises of our
Lord made to his church for his assistance, are to be extended
only to points of faith or fundamental ;'f (let me note here by the
way, that by his [or] he seems to exclude from faith all points
which are not fundamental, and so we may deny innumerable
texts of scripture:) thatj 'it is comfort enough for the church
that the Lord in mercy will secure her from all capital dangers,
&c. but she may not hope to triumph over all sin and error, till
she be in heaven.' For it is evident that the church (forasmuch
as concerns the truth of her doctrines and belief) owes no more
duty to God and her neighbour ; neither doth our Saviour exact
more at her hands, nor is it in her power to do more than God
doth assist her to do, which assistance is promised only for points
fundamental; and consequently, as long as she teacheth no fun
damental error, her communion cannot, without damnation, be
* Page 75. t Page 151. t Page 155.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 323
forsaken. And we may fitly apply against Dr. Potter, a concio-
natory declamation which he makes against us, where he saith,
* ' May the church of after-ages make the narrow way to heaven
narrower than our Saviour left it ?'¦ &c. since he himself obligeth
men, under pain of damnation, to forsake the church, by reason
of errors; against which our Saviour thought it needless to pro
mise his assistance, and for which he neither denieth his grace in
this life, nor glory in the next. Will Dr. Potter oblige the church
to do more than she may even hope for, or to perform on earth
that which is proper to heaven alone ?
"21. And as from your own doctrine concerning the infalli
bility of the church in fundamental points, we have proved that it
was a grievous sin to forsake her : so do we take a strong argu
ment from the fallibility of any who dare pretend to reform the
church, which any man in his wits will believe to be endued with
at least as much infallibility as private men can challenge ; and
Dr. Potter expressly affirmeth, that Christ's promises of his as
sistance are not intended to any particular persons or churches :f
and therefore, to leave the church by reason of errors, was at the
best hand but to flit from one erring company to another, with
out any new hope of triumphing over errors, and without neces
sity, or utility, to forsake that communion, of which St. Augustine
saith,J ' There is no just necessity to divide unity.' Which will
appear to be much more evident, if we consider that though the
church hath maintained some false doctrines, yet to leave her com
munion to remedy the old, were but to add a new increase of errors,
arising from the innumerable disagreements of sectaries, which must
needs bring with it a mighty mass of falsehoods, because the truth
is but one, and indivisible. And this reason is yet stronger, if we
still remember, that, even according to Dr. Potter, the visible
church hath a blessing not to err in points fundamental, in which
any private reformer may fail : and therefore, they could not pre
tend any necessity to forsake that church, out of whose communion
they were exposed to danger of falling into many more, and even
into damnable errors. Remember, I pray you, what yourself
affirms (page 69,) where, speaking of our church and yours, you
say : ' All the difference is from the weeds which remain there,
and here are taken away ; yet neither here perfectly nor every
where alike.' Behold a fair confession of corruption still remaining
in your church, which you can only excuse by saying they are not
fundamental, as likewise those in the Roman church are confessed
to be not fundamental. What man of judgment will be a protes
tant, since that church is confessedly a corrupt one ?
"22. I still proceed to impugn you expressly upon your own
grounds. — You say, that 'it is comfort enough for the church,
that the Lord in mercy will secure her from all capital dangers ;
but she may not hope to triumph over all sin and error till she be
in heaven.' Now if it be comfort enough to be secured from all
capital dangers, which can arise only from error in fundamental
* Page 221. t Page 151. X Ep. con. Parmen. lib. 2, 2, cap. xi.
x2

324 Charity maintained by Catholics.
points, why were not your first reformers content with enough, but
would needs dismember the church, out of a pernicious greediness
of more than enough ? for this enough, which according to you is
attained by not erring in points fundamental, was enjoyed before
Luther's reformation, unless you will now against yourself affirm,
that long before Luther there was no church free from error in fun
damental points : moreover, if (as you say) no church may hope to
triumph over all error till she be in heaven ; you must either grant
that errors not fundamental cannot yield sufficient cause to forsake
the church, or else you must affirm that all communities may and
ought to be forsaken, and so there will be no end of schisms : or
rather, indeed, can there be no such thing as schism, because, ac
cording to you, all communities are subject to errors not fundamen
tal ; for which, if they may be lawfully forsaken, it followeth
clearly that it is not schism to forsake them. Lastly, since it is not
lawful to leave the communion of the church for abuses in life and
manners, because such miseries cannot be avoided in this world of
temptation : and since, according to your assertion, no church may
hope to triumph over all sin and error ; you must grant, that as
she ought not to be left by reason of sin, so neither by reason of
errors not fundamental ; because both sin and error are (according
to you) impossible to be avoided till she be in heaven.
" 23. Furthermore, I ask, whether it be the quantity or number,
or quality and greatness, of doctrinal errors that may yield suffi
cient cause to relinquish the church's communion ? I prove that
neither. Not the quality, which is supposed to be beneath the
degree of points fundamental, or necessary to salvation. Nor the
quantity, or number, for the foundation is strong enough to sup
port all such unnecessary additions, as you term them. And if
they once weighed so heavy as to overthrow the foundation, they
should grow to fundamental errors, into which yourself teach the
church cannot fall. ' Hay and stubble (say you)* and such un
profitable stuff, laid on the roof, destroys not the house, while the
main pillars are standing on the foundation.' And tell us, I pray
you, the precise number of errors which cannot be tolerated ? I
know you cannot do it : and therefore being uncertain, whether
or no you have cause to leave the church, you are certainly obliged
not to forsake her. Our blessed Saviour hath declared his will,
that we forgive a private offender seventy-seven times; that is,
without limitation of quantity of time, or quality of trespasses ; and
why then dare you allege his command, that you must not pardon
his church for errors acknowledged to be not fundamental 1 What
excuse can you feign to yourselves, who, for points not necessary
to salvation, have been occasions, causes, and authors of so many
mischiefs, as could not but unavoidably accompany so huge a
breach in kingdoms, in commonwealths, in private persons, in
public magistrates, in body, in soul, in goods, in life, in church,
in the state, by schisms, by rebellions, by war, by famine, by plague,
by bloodshed, by all sorts of imaginable calamities upon the whole
* Page 155.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 325
face of the earth, wherein, as in a map of desolation, the heaviness
of your crime appears, under which the world doth pant.
" 24. To say for your excuse, that you left not the church, but
her errors, doth not extenuate, but aggravate, your sin. For by
this device you sow seeds of endless schisms, and put into the mouth
of all separatists a ready answer how to avoid the note of schism
from your protestant church of England, or from any other church
whatsoever. They will, I say, answer, as you do prompt, that
your church may be forsaken, if she fall into errors, though they
be not fundamental : and, further, that no church must hope to
be free from such errors; which two grounds being once laid,
it will not be hard to infer the consequence that she may be
forsaken. " 25. From some other words of Dr. Potter I likewise prove,
that for errors not fundamental, the church ought not to be for
saken. ' There neither was (saith he)* nor can be any just cause
to depart from the church of Christ, no more than from Christ him
self. To depart from a particular church, and, namely, from the
church of Rome, in some doctrines and practices, there might be
just and necessary cause, though the church of Rome wanted no
thing necessary to salvation.' Mark his doctrine, that there can
be no 'just cause to depart from the church of Christ :' and yet he
teacheth, that the church of Christ may err in points not funda
mental; therefore (say I) we cannot forsake the Roman church
for points not fundamental ; for then we might also forsake the
church of Christ, which yourself deny : and I pray you consider,
whether you do not plainly contradict yourself, while, in the words
above recited, you say there can be no just cause to forsake the
catholic church; and yet that there may be necessary cause to de
part from the church of Rome ; since you grant that the church of
Christ may err in points not fundamental ; and that the Roman
church hath erred only in such points ; as by and by we shall see
more in particular. And thus much be said to disprove their chief
est answer, that they left not the church, but her corruptions.
"26. Another evasion Dr. Potter bringeth, to avoid the im
putation of schism, and it is because they still acknowledge the
church of Rome to be a ' member of the body of Christ, and not
cut off from the hope of salvation. And this (saith he) clears us
from the imputation of schism, whose property it is to cut off from
the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation, the church from
which it separates.'!
"27. This is an answer which, perhaps, you may get some
one to approve, if first you can put him out of his wits. For
what prodigious doctrines are these ? Those protestants who
believe that the church erred in points necessary to salvation, and
for that cause left her, cannot be excused from damnable schism:
but others, who believed that she had no damnable errors, did
very well, yea, were obliged to forsake her : and (which is more
miraculous, or rather monstrous) they did well to forsake her
* Page 75. t Page 76.

326 Charity maintained by Catholics.
formally and precisely — because they judged that she retained all
means necessary to salvation. I say, because they so judged. For
the very reason for which he acquitteth himself, and condemneth
those others as schismatics, is, because he holdeth that the church,
which both of them forsook, is not cut off from the body of Christ,
and the hope of salvation ; whereas those other zealots deny her
to be a member of Christ's body, or capable of salvation, wherein
alone they disagree from Dr. Potter : for in the effect of separation
they agree, only they do it upon a different motive or reason. Were
it not a strange excuse, if a man would think to cloak his rebellion,
by alleging that he held the person against whom he rebelleth to
be his lawful sovereign ? And yet Dr. Potter thinks himself free
from schism, because he forsook the church of Rome ; but yet so,
as that he still held her to be the true church, and to have all ne
cessary means to salvation. But I will no further urge this most
solemn foppery, and do much more willingly put all catholics in
mind what an unspeakable comfort it is that our adversaries are
forced to confess, that they cannot clear themselves from schism,
otherwise than by acknowledging that they do not, nor cannot, cut
off from the hope of salvation our church. Which is as much as if
they should in plain terms say, they must be damned, unless we
may be saved. Moreover, this evasion doth indeed condemn your
zealous brethren of heresy, for denying the church's perpetuity,
but doth not clear yourself from schism, which consists in being
divided from that true church, with which a man agreeth in all
points of faith, as you must profess yourself to agree with the church
of Rome in all fundamental articles. For otherwise you should cut
her off from the hope of salvation ; and so condemn yourself of
schism. And, lastly, even according to this your own definition
of schism, you cannot clear yourself from that crime, unless you
be content to acknowledge a manifest contradiction in your own
assertions. For if you do not cut us off from the body of Christ,
and the hope of salvation, how come you to say, in another place,
that you judge a reconciliation with us to be* damnable? That
to depart from the church of Rome, there might be just and neces-
saryf cause ? That they that have the understanding and means
to discover their error, and neglect to use them, wej dare not
flatter them (say you) with so easy a censure, of hope of salvation ?
— If then it be (as you say) a property of schism, to cut off from
the hope of salvation, the church from which it separates, how
will you clear yourself from schism, who dare not flatter us with
so easy a censure ? and who affirm, that a reconciliation with us
is damnable ? But the truth is, there is no constancy in your as
sertions, by reason of difficulties which press you on all sides.
For you are loath to affirm clearly, that we may be saved, lest
such a grant might be occasion (as in all reason it ought to be) of
the conversion of protestants to the Roman church : and, on the
other side, if you affirm that our church erred in points funda
mental, or necessary to salvation, you know not how, nor where,
* Page 20. t Page 75. t Page 79.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 327
nor among what company of men, to find a perpetual visible church
of Christ before Luther : and therefore your best shift is to say,
and unsay, as your occasions command. I do not examine your
assertion, that it is the property of schism, to cut off from the
body of Christ, and the hOpe of salvation, the church from which it
separates : wherein you are mightily mistaken, as appears by your
own example of the donatists, who were most formal and proper
heretics, and not schismatics, as schism is a vice distinct from
heresy. Besides, although the donatists, and luciferians (whom
you also allege) had been mere schismatics, yet it were against all
good logic, from a particular to infer a general rule, to determine
what is the property of schism.
" 28. A third device I find in Dr. Potter to clear his brethren
from schism. ' There is (saith he)* great difference between a
schism from them, and a reformation of ourselves.'
" 29. This, I confess, is a quaint subtilty, by which all schism
and sin may be as well excused. For what devil incarnate could
merely pretend a separation, and not rather some other motive,
of virtue, truth, profit, or pleasure? But now since their pre
tended reformation consisted, as- they gave out, in forsaking the
corruptions of the church ; the reformation of themselves, and
their division from us, falls out to be one and the self-same thing.
Nay, we see, that although they infinitely disagree in the parti
culars of their reformation, yet they symbolize and consent in the
general point of forsaking our pretended corruptions : an evident
sign that the thing upon which their thoughts first pitched, was
not any particular model, or idea of religion, but a settled reso
lution to forsake the church of Rome. Wherefore this metaphy
sical speculation, that they intended only to reform themselves,
cannot possibly excuse them from schism, unless first they be able
to prove that they were, obliged to depart from us. Yet foras
much as concerns the fact itself; it is clear, that Luther's revolt
did not proceed from any zeal of reformation. The motives
which put him upon so wretched and unfortunate a work, were
covetousness, ambition, lust, pride, envy, and grudging that the
promulgation of indulgences was not committed to himself, or
such as he desired. He himself taketh God to witness, that he
fell into these troubles casually,f and against his will, not upon
any intention of reformation, not so much as dreaming or sus
pecting any change which , might happen. J And he began to
preach (against indulgences) when he knew not what the matter
meant. § 'For (saith he) I scarcely understood then what the
name of indulgences meant.'|| Insomuch as afterwards Luther
did much mislike of his own undertaken course, oftentime
(saith he)H wishing that I had never begun that business. And
Fox saith,** ' It is apparent that Luther promised Cardinal Caje-
tan to keep silence, provided also his adversaries would do the

* Page 75. t Casu, non voluntate, in has turbas incidi, Deum ipsum testor.
t Act. et Mon. p. 404. § Sleid. 5. lib. xvi. fol. 232. || Luth. in colloq. mensaL
H Ibid. ** Act. et Mon. p. 404.

328 Charity maintained by Catholics.
like.' Mr. Cowper reporteth further* that < Luther by his letter
submitted himself to the pope, so that he might not be compelled to
recant,' with much more, which may be seen in Brerely.f But this
is sufficient to show, that Luther was far enough from intending any
reformation. And if he judged a reformation to be necessary, what
a huge wickedness was it in him to promise silence, if his adversa
ries would do the like ! Or to submit ' himself to the pope, so that
he might not be compelled to recant !' Or if the Reformation were
not indeed intended by him, nor judged to be necessary, how can
he be excused from damnable schism ? And this is the true manner
of Luther's revolt, taken from his own acknowledgments, and the
words of the more ancient protestants themselves, whereby Dr.
Potter's faltering and mincing the matter is clearly discovered and
confuted. Upon what motives our country was divided from the
Roman church by King Henry the Eighth, and how the schism was
continued by Queen Elizabeth, I have no heart to rip up. The
world knoweth it was not upon any zeal of reformation.
" 30. But you will prove your former evasion by a couple of
similitudes ;J ' If a monastery should reform itself, and should
reduce into practice ancient good discipline, when others would
not ; in this case could it in reason be charged with schism from
others, or with apostacy from its rule and order ? Or ? as in a
society of men, universally infected with some disease, they that
shall free themselves from the common disease, could not be there
fore said to separate from the society ; so neither can the reformed
churches be truly accused for making a schism from the church,
seeing all they did was to reform themselves.'
"31. I was very glad to find you in a monastery, but sorry
when I perceived that you were inventing ways how to forsake
your vocation, and to maintain the lawfulness of schism from
the church, and apostacy from a religious order. Yet, before
you make your final resolution, hear a word of advice. Put
case, that a monastery did confessedly observe their substantial
vows, and all principal statutes or constitutions of the order,
though with some neglect of lesser monastical observances ; and
that a reformation were undertaken, not by authority of lawful
superiors, but by some one, or very few in comparison of the
rest: and those few known to be led, not by any spirit of re
formation, but by some other sinister intention ; and that the
statutes of the house were even by those busy fellows confessed
to have been, time out of mind, understood and practised as now
they were : and further, that the pretended reformers acknow
ledge that themselves, as soon as they were gone out of their
monastery, must not hope to be free from those, or the like
errors and corruptions, for which they left their brethren; and
(which is more) that they might fall into more enormous crimes
than they did, or could do, in their monastery, which we suppose
to be secured from all substantial corruptions, for the avoiding of
which they have an infallible assistance. Put (I say) together
* Cowp. in his Chronicle. t Tract. 2, c. ii. Sect. 11 subd. 2. } Page 81, 82.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 329
all these my and's, and then come with your if's, ' If a monastery
shall reform, itself,' &c. and tell me if you could excuse such re
formers from schism, sedition, rebellion, apostacy, &c. ? What
would you say of such reformers in your college? or tumultuous per
sons in a kingdom ? Remember now your own tenets, and then re
flect how fit a similitude you have picked out, to prove yourself a
schismatic. You teach that the church may err in points not
fundamental, but that for all fundamental points she is secured
from error. You teach that no particular person, or church, hath
any promise of assistance in points fundamental : you, and the
whole world can witness, that when Luther began, he being but
only one, opposed himself to all, as well subjects as superiors ; and
that even when he himself confessed that he had no intention of re
formation : you cannot be ignorant but that many chief learned
protestants are forced to confess the antiquity of our doctrine and
practice, and do in several and many controversies, acknowledge
that the ancient fathers stood on our side : consider, I say, these
points, and see whether your similitude do not condemn your pro
genitors of schism from God's visible church, yea, and of apostacy
also from their religious orders, if they were vowed regulars, as
Luther and divers of them were.
" 32. From the monastery you are fled into a hospital of per
sons universally affected with some disease, where you find to be
true what I supposed, that after your departure from your bre
thren you might fall into greater inconveniences, and more in
fectious diseases than those for which you left them. But you
are also upon the point to abandon these miserable needy persons,
in whose behalf, for charity's sake, let me set before you these
considerations : If the disease neither were, nor could be, mortal,
because in that company of men God had placed a tree of life ; if
going thence, the sick man might, by curious tasting the tree of
knowledge, eat poison under pretence of bettering his health : if
he could not hope thereby to avoid other diseases like those for
which he had quitted the company of the first infected men : if,
by his departure, innumerable mischiefs were to ensue ; could
such a man, without senselessness, be excused by saying, that
— he thought to free himself from the common disease, but not,
forsooth, to separate from the society ? Now yourself compare the
church to a man deformed with* superfluous fingers and toes, but
yet who hath not lost any vital part : you acknowledge that, out
of her society no man is secured from damnable error, and the
world can bear witness what unspeakable mischiefs and calamities
ensued Luther's revolt from the church. Pronounce then concern
ing them the same sentence which even now I have showed them
to deserve, who, in the manner aforesaid, should separate from per
sons universally infected with some disease.
"33. But, alas! to. what pass hath heresy brought men, who
term themselves christians, and yet blush not to compare the
beloved spouse of our Lord, the one dove, the purchase of our
Saviour's most precious blood, the holy catholic church, I mean
*Page 156.

330 Charity maintained by Catholics.
that visible church of Christ which Luther found spread over the
whole world, to a monastery so disordered that it must be forsaken ;
to the giant in Gath, much deformed with superfluous fingers and
toes ; to a society of men universally infected with some disease ?
And yet all these comparisions, and much worse, are neither inju
rious nor undeserved, if once it be granted, or can be proved, that
the visible church of Christ may err in any one point of faith, al
though not fundamental.
" 34. Before I part from these similitudes, one thing I must ob
serve against the evasion of Dr. Potter, that they left not the
church, but her corruptions. For as those reformers of the mo
nastery, or those other, who left the company of men universally
infected with some disease, would deny themselves to be schisma
tics, or any way blameworthy, but could not deny but that they
left the said communities: so Luther and the rest cannot so much
as pretend not to have left the visible church, which according to
them was infected with many diseases, but can only pretend that
they did not sin in leaving her. And you speak very strangely
when you say, ' in a society of men universally infected with some
disease, that they should free themselves from the common dis
ease, could not be therefore said to separate from the society :' for,
if they do not separate themselves from the society of the infected
persons, how do they free themselves and depart from the common
disease ? Do they at the same time remain in the company, and
yet depart from those infected creatures ? We must then say, that
they separate themselves from the persons, though it be by occa
sion of the disease ? Or if you say they free their own persons
from the common disease, yet so, that they remain still in the
company infected, subject to the superiors. and governors thereof,
eating and drinking, and keeping public assemblies with them,
you cannot but know Luther and your reformers, the first pre
tended free persons from the supposed common infection of the
Roman church, did not so ; for they endeavoured to force the so
ciety whereof they were parts, to be healed and reformed as they
were ; and if it refused, they did, when they had forces, drive them
away, even their superiors, both spiritual and temporal, as is noto
rious. Or, if they had not power to expel that supposed infected
community or church of that place, they departed from them cor
porally, whom mentally they had forsaken before. So that you
cannot deny, but Luther forsook the external communion and com
pany of the catholic church, for which as yourself confess,* there
neither was nor can be any just cause, no more than to depart from
Christ himself. We do therefore infer, that Luther and the rest,
who forsook that visible church, which they found upon earth, were
truly and properly schismatics.
" 35. Moreover, it is evident that there was a division between
Luther and that church which was visible when he arose ; but
that church cannot be said to have divided herself from him, be
fore whose time she was, and in comparison of whom she was a
whole, and he but a part ; therefore we must say, that he divided
* Page 75.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 331
himself and went out of her, which is to be a schismatic, or heretic,
or both. By this argument, Optatus Milevitanus proveth, that
not Caecilianus, but Parmenianus was a schismatic, saying—' For
Caecilianus went not* out from Majorinus, thy grandfather; but
Majorinus from Caecilianus : neither did Caecilianus depart from the
chair of Peter, or Cyprian ; but Majorinus, in whose chair thou
sittest, which had no beginning before Majorinus. Since it mani
festly appeareth, that these things were acted in this manner, it
is clear, that you are heirs both of the deliverers up (of the holy
bible to be burned) and also of schismatics.' The whole argument
of this holy father makes directly both against Luther, and all
those who continue the division which he began : and proves, that
going out convinceth those who go out to be schismatics ; but not
those from whom they depart : that to forsake the chair of Peter is
schism ; yea, that it is schism to erect a chair which had no origin,
or as it were predecessor, before itself: that to continue in a divi
sion begun by others, is to be heirs of schismatics ; and, lastly, that
to depart from the communion of a particular church (as that of
St. Cyprian was) is sufficient to make a man incur the guilt of
schism, and consequently, that although protestants, who deny the
pope to be supreme head of the church, do think by that heresy
to clear Luther from schism, in disobeying the pope ; yet that will
not serve to free him from schism, as it importeth a division from
the obedience or communion of the particular bishop, diocese,
church, and country wherein he lived.
" 36. But it is not the heresy of protestants, or any other sec
taries, that can deprive St. Peter, and his successors, of the
authority which Christ our Lord conferred upon them over his
whole militant church ; which is a point confessed by learned pro
testants to be of great antiquity, and for which the judgment of
divers most ancient holy fathers is reproved by them, as may be
seen at large in Brerely.f exactly citing the places of such chief
protestants. And we must say with St. Cyprian,J ' Heresies have
sprung, and schism been bred from no other cause than for that
the priest of God is not obeyed ; nor one priest and judge is con
sidered to be for the time in the church of God :' which words
do plainly condemn Luther, whether he will understand them as
spoken of the universal, or of every particular church ; for he
withdrew himself both from the obedience of the pope, and of all
particular bishops and churches. And no less clear is the said
Optatus Milevitanus, saying: § 'Thou canst not deny but that
thou knowest, that, in the city of Rome, there was first an epis
copal chair placed for Peter, wherein Peter, the head of all the
apostles, sat ; wherefore, also, he was called Cephas ; in which
one chair, unity was to be kept by all, lest the other apostles
might attribute to themselves each one his particular chair ; and
that he should be a schismatic and a sinner, who against that one
single chair should erect another.' Many other authorities of fa-
*Lib. i. cont. Parmen. X Ep. 55.
t Tract. 1, Sect. 3, subd. 10. § Lib. ii. cont. Parmen.

332 Charity maintained by Catholics.
thers might be alleged to this purpose, which I omit ; my intention
being not to handle particular controversies.
" 37. Now the arguments which hitherto I have brought, prove
that Luther and his followers were schismatics, without examining
(forasmuch as belongs to this point) whether or no the church
can err in any one thing great or small, because it is universally
true, that there can be no just cause to forsake the communion
of the visible church of Christ, according to St. Augustine, say
ing :* ' It is not possible that any men have just cause to separate
their communion, from the communion of the whole world, and
call themselves the church of Christ, as if they had separated
themselves from the communion of all nations upon just cause.'
But since, indeed, the church cannot err in any one point of doc
trine, nor can prove any corruption in manners, they cannot with
any colour avoid the just imputation of eminent schism, according
to the verdict of the same holy father in these words :f ' The most
manifest sacrilege of schism is eminent, when there was no cause
of separation.'
" 38. Lastly, I prove that protestants cannot avoid the note of
schism, at least by reason of their mutual separation from one
another ; for most certain it is, that there is very great difference,
for the outward face of a church, and profession of different faith,
between the lutherans, the rigid calvinists, and the protestants
of England. So that if Luther were in the right, those other
protestants who invented doctrines far different from his, and di
vided themselves from him, must be reputed schismatics : and the
like argument may proportionably be applied to their further di
visions, and subdivisions: which reason I yet urge more strongly
out of Dr. Potter,f who affirms, that to him and to such as are
convicted in conscience of the errors of the Roman church, a re
conciliation is impossible, and damnable. And yet he teacheth,
that their difference from the Roman church is not in fundamen
tal points. Now, since amongst protestants there is such diver
sity of belief, that one denieth what the other affirmeth, they
must be convicted in conscience that one part is in error, (at
least not fundamental) and if Dr. Potter will speak consequently,
that a reconciliation between them is impossible and damnable :
and what greater division, or schism, can there be, than when one
part must judge a reconciliation with the other to be impossible and
damnable ?
" 39. Out of all which premises this conclusion follows : that
Luther and his followers were schismatics ; from the universal
visible church ; from the pope, Christ's vicar on earth and suc
cessor to St. Peter ; from the particular diocese in which they re
ceived baptism ; from the country or nation to which they be
longed ; from the bishop under whom they lived ; many of them
from the religious order in which they were professed ; from one
another; and lastly, from a man's self (as much as is possible)
because the self-same protestant to-day is convicted in conscience,
that his yesterday's opinion was an error (as Dr. Potter knows a
* Ep. 48. t De Bapt. lib. 5, c. i. X Page 20.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 333
man in the world, who from a puritan was turned to a moderate
protestant), with whom therefore a reconciliation, according to Dr.
Potter's grounds, is both impossible and damnable.
" 40. It seems Dr. Potter's last refuge to excuse himself and
his brethren from schism, is because they proceeded according to
their conscience, dictating an obligation, under damnation, to for
sake the errors maintained by the church of Rome. His words are :*
' Although we confess the church of Rome to be (in some sense) a
true church, and her errors to some men not damnable ; yet for us
who are convinced in conscience, that she errs in many things, a
necessity lies upon us, even under pain of damnation, to forsake her
in these errors.'
"41. I answer: it is very strange, that you judge us extremely
uncharitable, in saying protestants cannot be saved ; while your
self avouch the same of all learned catholics, whom ignorance
cannot excuse. If this your pretence of conscience may serve,
what schismatic in the church, what popular seditious brain in a
kingdom, may not allege the dictamen of conscience, to free
themselves from schism or sedition ? No man wishes them to do
any thing against their conscience ; but we say, that they may
and ought to rectify and depose such a conscience, which is easy
for them to do, even according to your own affirmation, that we
catholics want no means necessary to salvation. Easy to do ?
Nay, not to do so, to any man in his right wits must seem impos
sible. For how can these two apprehensions stand together : in
the Roman church, I enjoy all means necessary to salvation, and
yet I cannot hope to be saved in that church ? Or, who can conjoin
in one brain (not cracked) these assertions ? After due examina
tion I adjudge the Roman errors not to be in themselves funda
mental, or damnable ; and yet, I judge that, according to true
reason, it is damnable to hold them : I say, according to true
reason. For, if you grant your conscience to be erroneous, in
judging that you cannot be saved in the Roman church by reason
of her errors, there is no other remedy, but that you must rectify
your erring conscience by your other judgment, that her errors
are not fundamental nor damnable. And this is no more charity
than you daily afford to such other protestants as you term bre
thren, whom you cannot deny to be in some errors, (unless you
will hold, that of contradictory propositions both may be true)
and yet you do not judge it damnable to live in their communion,
because you hold their errors not to be fundamental. You ought
to know that, according to the doctrine of all divines, there is
great difference between a speculative persuasion, and a practical
dictamen of conscience ; and, therefore, although they had in
speculation conceived the visible church to err in some doctrines,
of themselves not damnable ; yet with that speculative judgment
they might, and ought, to have entertained this practical dicta
men, that for points not substantial to faith, they neither were
bound, nor lawfully could break the bond of charity, by breaking
unity in God's church. You say thatf ' hay and stubble, and
* Page 81. t Page 145.

334 Charity maintained by Catholics.
such unprofitable stuff (as are corruptions in points not funda
mental) laid on the roof, destroys not the house, whilst the main
pillars are standing on the foundation.' And you would think
him a madman who to be rid of such stuff, would set his house
on fire, that so he might walk in the light, as you teach that
Luther was obliged to forsake the house of God, for an unneces
sary light, not without a combustion formidable to the whole
christian world, rather than bear with some errors which did not
destroy the foundation of faith. And as for others, who entered
in at the breach first made by Luther, they might, and ought, to
have guided their consciences by that most reasonable rule of
Vincentius Lyrinensis, delivered in these words :* ' Indeed it is a
matter of great moment, and both most profitable to be learned,
and necessary to be remembered, and which we ought again and
again to illustrate and inculcate with weighty heaps of exam
ples, that almost all catholics may know, that they ought to re
ceive the doctors with the church, and not forsake the faith of
the church with the doctors :' and much less should they forsake
the faith of the church to follow Luther, Calvin, and such other
novelists. Moreover, though your first reformers had conceived
their own opinions to be true, yet they might, and ought, to have
doubted whether they were certain : because yourself affirm, that
infallibility was not promised to any particular persons or churches.
And since, in cases of uncertainties, we are not to leave our
superior, nor can cast off his obedience, or publicly oppose his
decrees ; your reformers might easily have found a safe way to
satisfy their zealous conscience, without a public breach ; especially
if, with this their uncertainty, we call to mind the peaceable pos
session and prescription, which, by the confession of your own
brethren, the church and pope of Rome did for many ages enjoy.
I wish you would examine the works of your brethren, by the
words yourself sets down to free St. Cyprian from schism : every
syllable of which words convinceth Luther and his co-partners
to be guilty of that crime, and showeth in what manner they
might, with great ease and quietness, have rectified their con
sciences about the pretended errors of the church. ' St. Cyprian
(say you) f was a peaceable and modest man, dissented from
others in his judgment, but without any breach of charity, con
demned no man (much less any church) for the contrary opinion.
He believed his own opinion to be true, but believed not that it
was necessary, and therefore did not proceed rashly and peremp
torily to censure others, but left them to their liberty.' Did your
reformers imitate this manner of proceeding? Did they censure
no man; much less any church? St. Cyprian believed his own
opinion to be true, but believed not that it was necessary, and
therefore did not proceed rashly and peremptorily to censure
others. You believe the points, wherein Luther differs from us,
not to be fundamental, or necessary ; and why do you not thence
infer the like therefore, he should not have proceeded to censure
others? In a word, since their disagreement from us concerned
* Adv. hreres. c. xxvii. t Page 124

Charity maintained by Catholics. 335
only points which were not fundamental, they should have believed
that they might have been deceived, as well as the whole visible
church, which you say may err in such points ; and therefore their
doctrines, being not certainly true, and certainly not necessary, they
could not give such sufficient cause to depart from the communion
of the church.
" 42. In other places you write so much, as may serve us to
prove, that Luther and his followers ought to have deposed and
rectified their consciences : as, for example, when you say,* ' when
the church hath declared herself in any matter of opinion, or of
rites; her declaration obliges all her children to peace and ex
ternal obedience : nor is it fit, or lawful, for any private man to
oppose his judgment to the public (as Luther and his fellows did).
He may offer his opinion to be considered of, so he do it with
evidence, or great probability of scripture or reason, and very
modestly, still containing himself within the dutiful respect which
he oweth : but if he will factiously advance his own conceits
(what ! do you mean that they are his own conceits, and yet
grounded upon evidence of scripture ?) and despise the church so
far as to cut off her communion ; he may be justly branded and
condemned for a schismatic, yea, a heretic also, in some degree,
and in foro exteriori, though his opinion were true, and much
more if it be false.' Could any man, even for a fee, have spoken
more home to condemn your predecessors of schism, or heresy ?
Could they have stronger motives to oppose the doctrine of the
church, and leave her communion, than evidence of scripture ?
and yet, according to your own words, they should have answered,
and rectified their conscience, by your doctrine, that though their
opinion were true, and grounded upon evidence of scripture or
reason ; yet it was not lawful for any private man to oppose his
judgment to the public, which obligeth all christians to peace
and external obedience : and if they cast off the communion of the
church for maintaining their own conceits, they may be branded
for schismatics and heretics, in some degree, and in foro exteriori,
that is, all other christians ought so esteem of them, (and why
then are we accounted uncharitable for judging so of you ?) and
they also are obliged to behave themselves in the face of all
christian churches, as if indeed they were not reformers, but
schismatics and heretics, or as pagans and publicans. I thank
you for your ingenuous confession : in recompense whereof, I
will do a deed of charity, in putting you in mind, into what
labyrinths you are brought, by teaching that the church may err
in some points of faith, and yet that it is not lawful for any man
to oppose his judgment, or leave her communion, though he have
evidence of scripture against her. Will you have such a man
dissemble against his conscience, or externally deny a truth,
known to be contained in holy scripture ? flow much more
coherently do catholics proceed, who believe the universal infalli
bility of the church, and from thence are assured, that there can
be no evidence of scripture, or reason, against her definitions, nor
* Page 105.

336 Charity maintained by Catholics.
any just cause to forsake her communion. Mr. Hooker, esteemed
by many protestants an incomparable man, yields as much as we
have alleged out of you. ' The will of God is (saith he)* to have
them to do whatsoever the sentence of judicial and final decision
shall determine, yea, though it seem, in their private opinion, to
swerve utterly from that which is right.' Doth not this man tell
Luther, what the will of God was, which he transgressing must
of necessity be guilty of schism ? And must not Mr. Hooker
either acknowledge the universal infallibility of the church, or
else drive men into the perplexities and labyrinths of dissembling
against their conscience, whereof now I speak ? Not unlike to
this, is your doctrine delivered elsewhere : ' Before the Nicene
council (say you)f many good catholic bishops were of the same
opinion with the donatists, that the baptism of heretics was in
effectual : and with the novatians, that the church ought not to
absolve some grievous sinners. These errors therefore (if they
had gone no further) were not in themselves heretical, especially
in the proper, and most heavy, or bitter sense of that word ;
neither was it in the church's intention (nor in her power) to make
them such by her declaration. Her intention was to silence all
disputes, and to settle peace and unity in her government, to
which all wise and peaceable men submitted, whatsoever their
opinion was. And those factious people, for their unreasonable
and uncharitable opposition, were very justly branded for schis
matics. For us, the mistake will never prove that we oppose any
declaration of the catholic church, &c. and therefore he doth
unjustly charge us either with schism or heresy.' These words
manifestly condemn your reformers, who opposed the visible
church in many of her declarations, doctrines, and commands
imposed upon them, for silencing all disputes, and settling peace
and unity in her government ; and therefore they, still remaining
obstinately disobedient, are justly charged with schism and heresy.
And it is to be observed, that you grant the donatists to have
been very justly branded for schismatics, although their opposi
tion against the church did concern (as you hold) a point not
fundamental to the faith, and which, according to St. Augustine,
cannot be proved out of scripture alone ; and therefore, either
doth evidently convince, that the church is universally infallible,
even in points not fundamental ; or else that it is schism to
oppose her declaration in those very things wherein she may err ;
and consequently, that Luther and his fellows were schismatics,
by opposing the visible church for points not fundamental, though
it were (untruly) supposed that she erred in such points. But, by
the way, how come you on the sudden to hold the determination of
a general council (of Nice) to be the declaration of the catholic
church, seeing you teach, that general councils may err even fun
damentally ? And do you now say, with us, that to oppose the de
claration of the church is sufficient that one may be branded with
heresy, which is a point so impugned by you ?
"43. It is therefore most evident, that no pretended scruple
* In his pref. to his Books of Ecclesiastical Polity. Sect. 6, p. 28. + Page 131.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 337
of conscience could excuse Luther ; which he might, and ought,
to have rectified by means enough, if pride, ambition, obstinacy,
&c. had given him leave. I grant he was touched with scruple of
conscience, but it was because he had forsaken the visible church
of Christ ; and I beseech all protestants, for the love they bear to
that sacred ransom of their souls, the blood of our blessed Saviour,
attentively to ponder, and impartially to apply to their own con
science, what this man spoke concerning the feelings and remorse
of his. 'How often (saith he)* did my trembling heart beat
within me, and, reprehending me, object against me that most
strong argument, Art thou only wise ? Do so many worlds err ?
Were so many ages ignorant ? What if thou errest, and drawest
so many into hell to be damned eternally with thee?' And in
another place he saith :f 'Dost thou, who art but one, and of no
account, take upon thee so great matters ? What, if thou, being
but one, offendest? If God permit such, so many, and all to err;
why may he not permit thee to err ? To this belong those argu
ments, the church, the church, the fathers, the fathers, the coun
cils, the customs, the multitudes, and greatness of wise men :
whom do not these mountains of arguments, these clouds, yea
these seas of examples overthrow ?' And these thoughts wrought
so deep in his soul, that he often wished and desired that he had J
never begun this business : wishing yet further that his writings
were burned, and ^buried in eternal oblivion. Behold what re
morse Luther felt, and how he wanted no strength of malice to
cross his own conscience : and therefore it was no scruple, or
conceived obligation of conscience, but some other motives which
induced him to oppose the church. And if yet you doubt of his
courage to encounter, and strength to master, all reluctations of
conscience, hear an example or two for that purpose. Of com
munion, under both kinds, thus he saith :|| ' If the council should
in any way decree this, least of all would we then use both kinds;
yea, rather, in despite of the council and that decree, we would
use either but one kind only, or neither, and in no case both.'
Was not Luther persuaded in conscience, that to use neither kind
was against our Saviour's command? Is this only to offer his
opinion to be considered of, as you said all men ought to do?
And, that you may be sure that he spoke from his heart, and if
occasion had been offered, would have been as good as his word ;
mark what he saith of the elevation of the sacrament: 'I did
know the elevation of the sacrament to be idolatrical ; yet never
theless I did retain it in the church at Wirtemberg, to the end
that I might vex the devil Carolostadius."H Was not this a con
science large and capacious enough, that could swallow idolatry ?
Why would he not tolerate idolatry in the church of Rome (as
these men are wont to blaspheme) if he could retain it in his own

* Tom. ii. Germ. Jen. fol. 9. et tom. ii. Witt, of anno 1562. de abrog. Mis. privat.
fol. 244. t Tom. v. Annot. breviss. X Colloq. mensal. fol. 158.
§ Prafat. in tom. German. Jen. || De formula misste.
' In parva Confess. Vid. Tan. tom. i. disput. 1, q. 2, dub. 4, n. 108.
Y

338 Charity maintained by Catholics.
church at Wirtemberg ? If Carolostadius, Luther's offspring, was
the devil, who but himself must be his dam ? Is Almighty God
wont to send such furies to preach the gospel ? and yet, further
(which makes most directly to the point in hand) Luther, in his
book of abrogating the private mass, exhorts the Augustine friars
of Wirtemberg, who first abrogated the mass, that, even against
their conscience accusing them, they should persist in what they
had begun, acknowledging that in some things he himself had
done the like. And Joannes Mathesius, a lutheran preacher,
saith :* ' Antonius Musa, the parish priest of Rocklitz, recounted
to me, that on a time he heartily moaned himself to the doctor (he
means Luther) that he himself could not believe what he preached
to others : and that Dr. Luther answered — Praise and thanks be
to God, that this happens also to others, for I had thought it
happened only to me/ Are not these conscionable and fit re
formers ? And can they be excused from schism, under pretence
that they held themselves obliged to forsake the Roman church ?
If then it be damnable to proceed against one's conscience, what
will become of Luther, who against his conscience persisted in
his division from the Roman church ?
" 44. Some are said to flatter themselves with another pernicious
conceit, that they, forsooth, are not guilty of sin ; because they
were not the first authors, but only are the continuers, of the
schism which was already begun.
" 45. But it is hard to believe, that any man of judgment, can
think this excuse will subsist, when he shall come to give up his
final account. For according to this reason no schism will be
damnable, but only to the beginners: whereas, contrarily, the
longer it continues the worse it grows to be, and at length de
generates to heresy ; as wine by long keeping grows to be vinegar,
but not by continuance returns again to its former nature of wine.
Thus St. Augustine saith.f that ' heresy is schism inveterate.'
And in another place :J ' We object to you only the crime of
schism ; which you have also made to become heresy, by evil per
severing therein.' And St. Jerome saith,§ ' Though schism in
the beginning may be in some sort understood to be different
from heresy ; yet there is no schism which doth not feign to itself
some heresy, that it may seem to have departed from the church
upon just cause.' And so indeed it falleth out: for men may
begin upon passion, but afterward, by instinct of corrupt nature,
seeking to maintain their schism as lawful, they fall into some
heresy, without which their separation could not be justified with
any colour ; as in our present case, the very affirming that it is
lawful to continue a schism unlawfully begun, is an error against
the main principle of Christianity, that it is not lawful for any
christian to live out of God's church, within which alone salvation
can be had ; or, that it is not damnable to disobey her decrees,
according to the words of our Saviour :|| ' If he shall not hear the

* In orat. Germ. 12, de Luth. t Lib. ii. cont. Cres. c. vii. X Ep. 164.
§ Upon these words ad Tit. 3. Hfflreticum hominem, &c. || Matt, xviii.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 339
church, let him be to thee as a pagan, or publican.' And, ' he
that despiseth you, despiseth me.'* We heard above Optatus
Milevitanus saying to Parmenianus, that both he, and all those
other, who continued in the schism begun by Majorinus, did
inherit their forefathers' schism; and yet Parmenianus was the
third bishop after Majorinus in his see, and did not begin, but
only continue the schism. ' For (saith this holy father)f Caeci
lianus went not out of Majorinus, thy grandfather, but Majorinus
from Caecilianus : neither did Caecilianus depart from the chair of
Peter or Cyprian, but Majorinus, in whose chair thou sittest,
which before Majorinus (Luther) had no beginning.' Seeing it
is evident that these things passed in this manner (that, for ex
ample, Luther departed from the church, and not the church
from Luther), it is clear that you be heirs both of the givers up
of the bible to be burned, and of schismatics. And the regal
power, or example, of Henry the eighth could not excuse his
subjects from schism, according to what we have heard out of
St. Chrysostome, sayingj — ' Nothing doth so much provoke the
wrath of Almighty God, as that the church should be divided.
Although we should do innumerable good deeds, if we divide the
full ecclesiastical congregation, we shall be punished no less than
they who did rend his (natural) body : for that was done to the
gain of the whole world, though not with that intention; but
this hath no good in it at all, but the greatest hurt riseth from it.
These things are spoken not only to those who bear office, but to
such also as are governed by them.' Behold, therefore, how
liable both subjects and superiors are to the sin of schism, if they
break the unity of God's church. The words of St. Paul can in
no occasion be verified more than in this of which we speak.
' They who do such things are worthy of death : and not only
they that do them, but they also that consent with the doers.'§
In these things, which are indifferent of their own nature, custom
may be occasion, that some act, not well begun, may in time
come to be lawfully continued. But no length of time, no quality
of persons, no circumstance of necessity, can legitimate actions
which are of their own nature unlawful : and therefore division
from Christ's mystical body being of the number of those actions,
which divines teach to be intrinsece malas, evil of their own nature
and essence, no difference of persons or time can ever make it
lawful. Dr. Potter saith : ' There neither was, nor can be, any
cause to depart from the church of Christ, no more than from
Christ himself.' And who dares say, that it is not damnable to
continue a separation from Christ? Prescription cannot in con
science run, when the first beginner, and his successors, are con
scious that the thing to be prescribed, for example, goods or
lands, were unjustly possessed at the first. Christians are not
like strays, that, after a certain time of wandering from' their
right home, fall from their owner to the lord of the soil ; but as
long as they retain the indelible character of baptism, and live
upon earth, they are obliged to acknowledge subjection to God's
* Luke x. 16. t Lib. i. cont Parm. X Horn. 11, in ep. ad Eph. § Rom. i. 33.
y2

340 Charity maintained by Catholics.
church. Human laws may come to nothing by discontinuance
of time ; but the law of God, commanding us to conserve unity
in his church, doth still remain. The continued disobedience of
children cannot deprive parents of their paternal right, nor can
the grandchild be undutiful to his grandfather, because his father
was unnatural to his own parent. The longer God's church is
disobeyed ; the profession of her doctrine denied ; her sacraments
neglected ; her liturgy condemned ; her unity violated ; the more
grievous the fault grows to be : as the longer a man withholds
a due debt, or retains his neighbour's goods, the greater injustice
he commits. Constancy in evil doth not extenuate, but aggravate,
the same, which by extension of time receiveth increase of strength,
and addition of greater malice. If these men's conceits were
true, the church might come to be wholly divided by wicked
schisms, and yet after some space of time none could be accused
of schism, nor be obliged to return to the visible church of Christ :
and so there should remain no one true visible church. Let
therefore these men, who pretend to honour, reverence, and believe
the doctrine and practice of the visible church, and to condemn
their forefathers who forsook her, and say, they would not have
done so, if they had lived in the days of their fathers, and yet fol
low their example in remaining divided from her communion ; con
sider how truly these words of our Saviour fall upon them : ' Woe
be to you, because you build the prophets' sepulchres, and garnish
the monuments of just men, and say : if we had been in our
fathers' days, we had not been" their fellows in the blood of the
prophets. Therefore, you are a testimony to your ownselves, that
you are the sons of them that killed the prophets, and fill up the
measure of your fathers.'*
" 46. And thus having demonstrated that Luther, his associates,
and all that continue in the schism by them begun, are guilty of
schism, by departing from the visible true church of Christ; it
remaineth that we examine what in particular was that visible
true church, from which they departed, that so they may know
to what church in particular they ought to return : and then we
shall have performed what was proposed to be handled in the
fifth point.
" 47. V. Point. Luther and the rest departed from the Roman
church. — That the Roman church (I speak not for the present of
the particular diocese of Rome, but of all visible churches dispersed
throughout the whole world, agreeing in faith with the chair of
Peter, whether that see were supposed to be in the city of Rome, or
any other place :) that, I say, the church of Rome, in this sense,
was the visible catholic church, out of which Luther departed, is
proved by your own confession, who assign for notes of the church,
the true preaching of God's word, and due administration of
sacraments; both which for the substance you cannot deny to the
Roman church, since you confess, that she wanted nothing funda
mental, or necessary to salvation, and for that very cause you
ftiink to clear yourself from schism, whose property, as you say,
* Matt, xxiii. 29, &c.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 341
« is to cut off from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation,
the church from which it separates.'* Now that Luther and his
fellows were born and baptized in the Roman church, and that
she was the church, out of which they departed, is notoriously
known : and therefore you cannot cut her off from the body ol
Christ, and hope of salvation, unless you will acknowledge your
self to deserve the just imputation of schism. Neither can you
deny her to be truly catholic by reason of (pretended) corruptions,
not fundamental. For yourself avouch, and endeavour to prove,
that the true catholic church may err in such points. Moreover,
I hope you will not so much as go about to prove, that when
Luther arose there was any other visible church disagreeing from
the Roman, and agreeing with protestants in their particular
doctrines ; and you cannot deny, but that England in those days
agreed with Rome, and other nations with England ; and there
fore, either Christ had no visible church upon earth, or else you
must grant that it was the church of Rome. A truth so manifest,
that those protestants, who affirm the Roman church to have lost
the nature and being of a true church, do by inevitable conse
quence grant, that for divers ages Christ had no visible church
on earth : from which error, because Dr. Potter disclaimeth, he
must of necessity maintain, that the Roman church is free from
fundamental and damnable error, and that she is not cut off from
the body of . Christ, and the hope of salvation. 'And if (saith
he)f any zealots among us have proceeded to heavier censures,
their zeal may be excused, but their charity and wisdom cannot be
justified.' "48. And, to touch particulars, which perhaps some may ob
ject, no man is ignorant that the Grecians, even the schismatical
Grecians, do in most points agree with the Roman catholics, and
disagree from the protestant reformation. They teach transub
stantiation (which point Dr. PotterJ also confesseth) ; invocation
of saints and angels ; veneration of relics and images ; auricular
confession ; enjoined satisfaction ; confirmation with chrism ; ex
treme unction ; all the seven sacraments, prayer, sacrifice, alms
for the dead ; monachism, that priests may not marry after their
ordination. In which points that the Grecians agree with the
Roman church appeareth by a treatise published by the protestant
divines of Wirtemberg, entitled, ' Acta Theologorum Wirtem-
bergensium, et Jeremiae Patriarchal Constantinop. de Augustana
Confessione, &c. Wirtembergae, anno 1584,' by the protestant§
Crispinus, and by Sir Edwin Sands in the relation of the state of
religion of the west. And I wonder with what colour of truth
(to say no worse) Dr. Potter could affirm that the doctrines de
bated between the protestants|| and Rome are only the partial
and particular fancies of the Roman church ; unless happily
the opinion of transubstantiation may be excepted, wherein the
latter Grecians seem to agree with the Romanists. Beside the
protestant authors, already cited, Petrus Arc'udius, a Grecian
* Page 76. t Ibid. X Page 225.
5 De statu Eccles. p. 253. |] Page 225.

342 Charity maintained by Catholics.
and a learned catholic writer, had published a large volume, the
argument and title whereof is : 'Of the agreement of the Roman
and Greek church in the Seven Sacraments.' As for the heresy
of the Grecians, that the Holy Ghost proceeds not from the
Son, I suppose that protestants disavow them in that error, as
we do.
"49. Dr. Potter will not (I think) so much wrong his reputa
tion, as to tell us, that the Waldenses, Wickliffe, Huss, or the
like, were protestants, because in some things they disagreed
from catholics ; for he well knows that the example of such men
is subject to these manifest exceptions. They were not of all ages,
nor in all countries, but confined to certain places, and were in
terrupted in time against the notion and nature of the word
catholic. They had no ecclesiastical hierarchy, nor succession of
bishops, priests and pastors. They differed among themselves, and
from protestants also. They agreed in divers things with us against
protestants. They held doctrines manifestly absurd, and damnable
heresies. "50. The Waldenses began not before the year 1218; so far
were they from universality of all ages. For their doctrine, first,
they denied all judgments which extended to the drawing of
blood, and the sabbath, for which cause they were called in-
sabbatists. Secondly, they taught that laymen and women might
consecrate the sacrament, and preach (no doubt but by this means
to make their master Waldo, a mere layman, capable of such
functions). Thirdly, that clergymen ought to have no posses
sions or properties. Fourthly, that there should be no division
of parishes, nor churches ; for a walled church they reputed as a
barn. Fifthly, that men ought not to take an oath in any case.
Sixthly, that those persons sinned mortally, who accompanied
without hope of issue. Seventhly, they held all things done
above the girdle, by kissing, touching, words, compression of the
breasts, &c. to be done in charity, and not against continency.
Eighthly, that neither priest, nor civil magistrate, being guilty
of mortal sin, did enjoy their dignity, or were to be obeyed.
Ninthly, they condemned princes and judges. Tenthly, they
affirmed singing in the church to be a hellish clamour. Eleventhly,
they taught that men might dissemble their religion, and so
accordingly they went to catholic churches, dissembling their
faith, and made offertories, confessions, and communions, after
a dissembling manner. ' Waldo was so unlearned (saith Fox*)
he gave rewards to certain learned men to translate the holy
scripture for him, and being thus holpen did (as the same
Fox there reporteth) confer the form of religion in his time to
the infallible word of God.' A goodly example, for such as
must needs have the scripture in English, to be read by every
simple body, with such fruit of godly doctrine as we have seen
in the aforesaid gross heresies of Waldo. The followers of Waldo
were like their master, so unlearned, that 'some of them (saith
Fox J) expounded the words, Joan. 1, Sui eum non receperunt;
* Act. Mon. p. 628. f Ibid.

Charily maintained by Catholics. 343
swine did not receive him.' And, to conclude, they agreed in
divers things with catholics against protestants, as may be seen in
Brerely.* " 51. Neither can it be pretended that these are slanders forged
by catholics. For, besides that the same things are testified by
protestant writers, as Illyricus, Cowper, and others, our authors
cannot be suspected of partiality in disfavour of protestants, unless
you would say, perhaps, that they were prophets, and some
hundred years ago, did both foresee that there were to be protes
tants in the world, and that such protestants were to be like the
Waldenses. Besides, from whence, but from our historians, are
protestants come to know, that there were any such men as the
Waldenses? and that in some points they agreed with the pro
testants, and disagreed from them in others ? And upon what
ground can they believe our author, for that part wherein the
Waldenses were like to protestants, and imagine they lied in the
rest? " 52. Neither could Wickliffe continue a church never inter
rupted from Jhe time of the Waldenses, after whom he lived more
than 150 years ; to wit, in the year 1371. He agreed with
catholics about the worshipping of relics and images ; and about
the intercession of our blessed lady, the ever-immaculate mother
of God : he went so far as to say,f ' It seems to me impossible,
that we should be rewarded without the intercession of the Virgin
Mary.' He held seven sacraments, purgatory, and other points.
And against both catholics and protestants he maintained sundry
damnable doctrines, as divers protestant writers relate. As,
first, if a bishop, or priest, be in deadly sin, he doth not indeed
either give orders, consecrate or baptize. Secondly, that ecclesi
astical ministers ought not to have any temporal possessions, nor
property in any thing, but should beg ; and yet he himself brake
into heresy, because he had been deprived by the Archbishop of
Canterbury of a certain benefice, as all schisms and heresies begin
upon passion, which they seek to cover with the cloak of refor
mation. Thirdly, he condemned lawful oaths, like the anabaptists.
Fourthly, he taught that all things came to pass by absolute neces
sity. Fifthly, he defended human merits as the wicked pelagians
did ; namely, as proceeding from natural forces, without the neces
sary help of God's grace. Sixthly, that no man is a civil magistrate
while he is in mortal sin, and that people may at their pleasure
correct princes when they offend ; by which doctrine he proves him
self both a heretic and a traitor.
" 53. As for Huss, his chiefest doctrines were, that lay-people
must receive in both kinds ; and that civil lords, prelates, and
bishops, lose all right and authority while they are in mortal sin.
For other things he wholly agreed with catholics against protes
tants ; and the Bohemians, his followers, being demanded in what
points they disagreed from the church of Rome, propounded only
these : — The necessity of communion under both kinds — that all
* Tract. 2, cap. ii. sect. sub. 3. t In serm. de assump. Mariaa.

344 Charity maintained by Catholics.
civil dominion was forbidden to the clergy — that preaching of
the word was free for all men, and in all places — that open crimes
were in no wise to be permitted, for avoiding of greater evil. By
these particulars, it is apparent that Huss agreed with protestants
against us, in one only point of both kinds, which, according to
Luther, is a thing indifferent ; because he teacheth, that ' Christ
in this matter commanded nothing as necessary.'* And he saith
further : ' If thou come to a place where one only kind is adminis
tered, use one kind only as others do.'f Melancthon, likewise, holds
it a thing indifferent ;J and the same is the opinion of some other
protestants. All which considered, it is clear, that protestants can
not challenge the Waldenses, Wickliffe, and Huss, for members of
their church ; and although they could, yet that would advantage
them little towards the finding out a perpetual visible church of
theirs, for the reasons above specified.^
" 54. If Dr. Potter would go so far off, as to fetch the Muscovites,
Armenians, Georgians, ^Ethiopians, or Abyssines into his church,
they would prove over dear bought ; for they either hold the dam
nable heresy of Eutyches, or use circumcision, or agree with the
Greek or Roman church. And it is most certain that they have
nothing to do with the doctrine of protestants.
" 55. It being, therefore, granted that Christ had a visible
church in all ages, and that there can be none assigned but the
church of Rome ; it follows, that she is the true catholic church,
and that those pretended corruptions for which they forsook her,
are indeed divine truths, delivered by the visible catholic church
of Christ. And that Luther and his followers departed from her,
and consequently are guilty of schism, by dividing themselves
from the communion of the Roman church. Which is clearly
convinced out of Dr. Potter himself, although the Roman church
were but a particular church. For he saith, || ' whosoever professes
himself to forsake the communion of any one .member of the body
of Christ, must confess himself consequently to forsake the whole.'
Since, therefore, in the same place, he expressly acknowledges
the church of Rome to be a member of the body of Christ, and
that it is clear they have forsaken her ; it evidently follows, that
they have forsaken the whole, and therefore are most properly
schismatics. " 56. And, lastly, since the crime of schism is so grievous, that,
according to the doctrine of holy fathers rehearsed above, no mul
titude of good works, no moral honesty of life, no cruel death en
dured even for the profession of some article of faith, can excuse
any one who is guilty of that sin from damnation ; I leave it to be
considered, whether it be not true charity to speak as we believe,
and to believe as all antiquity hath taught us, that whosoever
either begins, or continues a division from the Roman church,
which we have proved to be Christ's true militant church on
earth, cannot without effectual repentance hope to be a member
of his triumphant church in heaven. And so I conclude with
* In Epist. ad Bohemos. X In cent. Epist. Theol. p. 225.
t De utraque specie Sacram. § Num. 49. fl Page 76.

Protestants not guilty of Schism. 345
these words of blessed St. Augustine ;* ' it is common to all heretics
to be unable to see that thing which in the world is most manifest,
and placed in the light of all nations ; out of whose unity what
soever they work, though they seem to do it with great care and
diligence, can no more avail them against the wrath of God, than
the spider's web against the extremity of cold.' But now it is high
time that we treat of the other sort of division from the church,
which is by heresy."

THE ANSWER TO THE FIFTH CHAPTER.
The separation of protestants from the Roman church, being upon
just and necessary causes, is not any way guilty of schism.
1. Ad. §. 1 — 7. In the seven first sections of this chapter there be
many things said, and many things supposed by you which are un
true, and deserve a censure. As,
2. First, — That schism could not be a division from the church,
or that a division from the church could not happen, unless there
always had been, and should be, a visible church. — Which asser
tion is a manifest falsehood ; for although there never had been any
church visible or invisible before this age, nor should be ever after,
yet this could not hinder but that a schism might now be, and be a
division from the present visible church. As though in France
there never had been until now a lawful monarch, nor after
him ever should be ; yet this hinders not, but that now there might
be a rebellion, and that rebellion might be an insurrection against
sovereign authority.
3. That it is a point to be granted by all christians, that in all
ages there hath been a visible congregation of faithful people. —
Which proposition, howsoever you understand it, is not absolutely
certain. But if you mean by faithful, (as it is plain you do) free
from all error in faith, then you know all protestants with one
consent affirm it to be false ; and therefore without proof to take
it for granted, is to beg the question.
4. That supposing Luther, and they which did first separate
from the Roman church, were guilty of schism, it is certainly con
sequent, that all who persist in this division, must be so like
wise. — Which is not so certain as you pretend. For they, which
alter, without necessary cause, the present government of any
state, civil or ecclesiastical, do commit a great fault; whereof,
notwithstanding, they may be innocent who continue this alter
ation, and to the utmost of their power oppose a change, though to
the former state, when continuance of time hath once settled the
present. Thus have I known some of your own church condemn
the Low Countrymen, who first revolted from the king of Spain, of
the sin of rebellion ; yet absolve them from it, who now being of
your religion there, are yet faithful maintainers of the common
liberty against the pretences of the king of Spain.
* Cont. Parm. lib. ii. u. iii.

346 Separation of Protestants from the
5. Fourthly — That all those which a christian is to esteem neigh
bours do concur to make one company, which is the church. —
Which is false ; for a christian is to esteem those his neighbours,
who are not members of the true church.
6. Fifthly — That all the members of the visible church are by
charity united into one mystical body. — Which is manifestly untrue ;
for many of them have no charity.
7. Sixthly — That the catholic church signifies one company of
faithful people. — Which is repugnant to your own grounds : for
you require, not true faith, but only the profession of it, to make
men members of the visible church.
8. Seventhly — That every heretic is a schismatic. — Which you
must acknowledge false in those, who though they deny, or doubt of
some point professed by your church, and so are heretics ; yet con
tinue still in the communion of the church.
9. Eighthly — That all the members of the catholic church,
must of necessity be united in external communion. — Which,
though it were much to be desired it were so, yet certainly cannot
be perpetually true. For a man unjustly excommunicated, is not
in the church's communion, yet he is still a member of the church.
And divers times it hath happened, as in the case of Chrysostome
and Epiphanius, that particular men and particular churches have
upon an overvalued difference, either renounced communion mu
tually, or one of them separated from the other, and yet both have
continued members of the catholic church. These things are in
those seven sections, either said or supposed by you untruly,
without all show, or pretence of proof. The rest is impertinent
common place, wherein protestants, and the cause in hand, are
absolutely unconcerned. And therefore I pass to the eighth
section. 10. Ad. §. 8. Wherein you obtrude upon us a double fallacy;
one, in supposing and taking for granted that whatsoever is affirmed
by three fathers, must be true : whereas yourselves make no
scruple of condemning many things of falsehood, which yet are
maintained by more than thrice three fathers. Another, in pre
tending their words to be spoken absolutely, which by them are
limited and restrained to some particular cases. For whereas you
say St. Augustine, c. 62, 1. 2, cont. Parm. infers out of the former
premises, that there is no necessity to divide unity : to let pass
your want of diligence, in quoting the sixty-second chapter of that
book, which hath but twenty-three in it; to pass by also, that
these words, which are indeed in the eleventh chapter, are not
inferred out of any such premises as you pretend : this, I say, is
evident, that he says not absolutely, that there never is or can be
any necessity to divide unity, (which only were for your purpose,)
but only in a such a special case as he there sets down ; that is,
" when good men tolerate bad men, which can do them no spiri
tual hurt, to the intent they may not be separated from those
who are spiritually good ; then (saith he) there is no necessity to
divide unity." Which very words do clearly give us to under
stand, that it may fall out (as it doth in our case,) that we cannot

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 347
keep unity with bad men without spiritual hurt ; i. e. without
partaking with them in their impieties, and that then there is a
necessity to divide unity from them ; I mean to break off conjunc
tion with them in their impieties. Which, that it was St. Augus
tine's mind, it is most evident out of the twenty-first chapter of
the same book ; whereto Parmenian demanding, " How can a man
remain pure, being joined with those that are corrupted?" he an
swers, " Very true, this is not possible, if he be joined with them ;
that* is if he commit any evil with them, or favour them which do
commit it. But if he do neither of these he is not joined with
them." And, presently after, " These two things retained, will
keep such men pure and uncorrupted ; that is, neither doing ill,
nor approving it." And therefore, seeing you impose upon all men
of your communion a necessity of doing, or at least approving many
things unlawful, certainly there lies upon us an unavoidable neces
sity of dividing unity, either with you or with God ; and whether of
these is rather to be done, be ye judges.
11. Irenaeus, also, says not simply (which only would do you
service), " There cannot possibly be any so important reformation,
as to justify a separation from them who will not reform ; but
only, they cannot make any corruption so great, as is the perni-
ciousness of a schism." Now, they, here, is a relative, and hath
an antecedent expressed in Irenaeus, which, if you had been
pleased to take notice of, you would easily have seen, that what
Irenaeus says, falls heavily upon the church of Rome, but toucheth
protestants nothing at all. For the men he speaks of, are such as
propter modicas et quaslibet causas, for trifling or small causes
divide the body of Christ; such as speak of peace, and make
war ; such as strain at gnats, and swallow camels. " And these
(saith he) can make no reformation of any such importance, as to
countervail the danger of a division." Now, seeing the causes of
our separation from the church of Rome are (as we pretend, and
are ready to justify) because we will not be partakers with her in
superstition, idolatry, impiety, and most cruel tyranny, both upon
the bodies and souls of men : who can say, that the cause of our
separation may be justly esteemed, modica et qualibet causa ? On
the other side, seeing the bishop of Rome, who was contemporary
to Irenaeus, did (as much as in him lay) cut off from the church's
unity many great churches, for not conforming to him in an in
different matter upon a difference, non de catholico dogmate, sed de
ritu, vel ritus potius tempore ; " not about any catholic doctrine,
but only a ceremony, or rather about the time of observing it :"
so Petavius values it : which was just all one, as if the church of
France should excommunicate those of their own religion in
England for not keeping Christmas upon the same day with them.
And seeing he was reprehended sharply and bitterly for it, by
most of the bishops of the world, as Eusebius* testifies, and (as
Cardinal Perron,f though mincing the matter, yet confesseth) by
this very Irenaeus himself in particular admonished, that for so
small a cause (propter tam modicam causam) he should not have
* Euseb. Hist. 1. 5, c. xxiv. t Perron Replic. 1. 3, c. ii.

348 Separation of Protestants from the
cut off so many provinces from the body of the church: and,
lastly, seeing the ecclesiastical story of those times mentions no
other notable example of any such schismatical presumption, but
this of Victor, certainly we have great inducement to imagine, that
Irenaeus, in this place by you quoted, had a special aim at the
bishop and church of Rome. Once, this I am sure of, that the
place fits him, and many of his successors, as well as if it had been
made purposely for them. And this also, that he which finds fault
with them who separate upon small causes, implies clearly that he
conceived there might be such causes as were great and sufficient;
and that then a reformation was to be made, notwithstanding any
danger of division that might ensue upon it.
12. Lastly — St. Dennis of Alexandria, says indeed, and very
well, that " all things should rather be endured, than we should
consent to the division of the church :" — I would add, rather than
consent to the continuation of the division, if it might be remedied.
But then I am to tell you, that he says not — all things should
rather be done — but only, "all things should rather be endured
or suffered :" wherein he speaks not of the evil of sin, but of pain
and misery ; not of tolerating either error or sin in others, (though
that may be lawful) much less of joining with others for quietness'
sake, (which only were to your purpose) in the profession of error
and practice of sin, but of suffering any affliction, nay, even mar
tyrdom in our own persons, rather than consent to the division of
the church. Omnia incommoda, so your own Christopherson, en
forced by the circumstances of the place, translates Dionysius's
words : — " All miseries should rather be endured than we should
consent to the church's division."
13. Ad. §. 9. In the next paragraph you affirm two things, but
prove neither, unless a vehement asseveration may pass for a weak
proof. You tell us, first, that " the doctrine of the total deficiency
of the visible church, which is maintained by divers chief pro
testants, implies in it vast absurdity, or rather sacrilegious blas
phemy." But neither do the protestants alleged by you maintain
the deficiency of the visible church, but only of the church's visi
bility, or of the church as it is visible, which so acute a man as
you, now that you are minded of it, I hope, will easily distinguish :
neither do they hold, that the visible church hath failed totally,
and from its essence, but only from its purity : and that it fell into
many corruptions, but yet not to nothing. And yet, if they had
held, that there was not only no pure visible church, but none at
all ; surely they had said more than they could justify ; but yet
you do not shew, neither can I discover, any such vast absurdity
or sacrilegious blasphemy in this assertion. You say, secondly,
that the reason which cast them upon this wicked doctrine, was
a desperate voluntary necessity, because they were resolved not to
acknowledge the Roman to be the true church, and were con
vinced, by all manner of evidence, that for divers ages before
Luther there was no other. But this is not to dispute, but to
divine, and take upon you the property of God, which is to know
the hearts of man. For why, I pray, might not the reason hereof

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 349
rather be, because they were convinced by all manner of evidence,
as scripture, reason, antiquity, that all the visible churches in the
world, but above all the Roman, had degenerated from the purity
of the gospel of Christ, and thereupon did conclude there was no
visible church, meaning by no church, none free from corruption,
and conformable in all things to the doctrine of Christ.
14. Ad. §. 10. Neither is there any repugnance (but in words
only) between these, as you are pleased to style them, exterminat
ing spirits, and those other, whom out of courtesy you entitle in your
10th \. more moderate protestants. For these, affirming the per
petual visibility of the church, yet neither deny nor doubt of her
being subject to manifold and grievous corruptions, and those, of
such a nature, as, were they not mitigated by invincible, or at least
a very probable, ignorance, none subject to them could be saved.
And they, on the other side, denying the church's visibility, yet
plainly affirm, that they conceive very good hope of the salvation
of many of their ignorant and honest forefathers. Thus declaring
plainly, though in words they denied the visibility of the true church,
yet their meaning was not to deny the perpetuity, but the perpetual
purity and incorruption of the visible church.
15. Ad. §. 11. Let us proceed therefore to your 11th §. where
though Dr. Potter and other protestants granting the church's per
petual visibility, make it needless for you to prove it, yet you will
needs be doing that which is needless. But you do it so coldly and
negligently, that it is very happy for you that Dr. Potter did grant
it. 16. For — What if the prophets speak more obscurely of Christ,
than of the church ? What if they had foreseen that greater con
tentions would arise about the church than Christ ? Which yet,
.he that is not a mere stranger in the story of the church must needs
know to be untrue, and therefore not to be foreseen by the prophets.
What if we have manifestly received the church from the scrip
tures : does it follow from any, or all these things, that the church
of Christ must always be visible ?
17. Besides, what protestant ever granted (that which you
presume upon so confidently,) that " every man for all the affairs
of his soul must have recourse to some congregation ?" If some
one christian lived alone among pagans in some country, remote
from Christendom, shall we conceive it impossible for this man to
be saved, because he cannot have recourse to any congregation for
the affairs of his soul ? Will it not be sufficient for such an one's
salvation, to know the doctrine of Christ, and live according to it ?
Such fancies as these, you do very wise to take for granted, because
you know well it is hard to prove them.
18. Let it be as unlawful as you please, to deny and dissemble
matters of faith. Let them that do so, not be a church, but
a damned crew of sycophants : what is this to the visibility of the
church ? May not the church be invisible, and yet these that are
of it profess their faith ? No, say you : their profession will make
them visible. Very true, visible in the places where, and in the
times when, they live, and to those persons unto whom they have

350 Separation of Protestants from the
necessary occasion to make their profession: but not visible to all,
or any great or considerable part of the world while they live,
much less conspicuous to all ages after them. Now it is a church
thus illustriously and conspicuously visible that you require ; by
whose splendour all men may be directed and drawn to repair to
her, for the affairs of their souls: neither is it the visibility of
the church absolutely, but this degree of it, which the most rigid
protestants deny : which is plain enough, out of the places of
Napper, cited by you in- the ninth part of this chapter. Where
his words are, " God hath withdrawn his visible church from
open assemblies to the hearts of particular godly men." And
this church which hath not open assemblies, he calls the latent
and invisible church. Now, I hope, papists in England will be
very apt to grant men may be so far latent and invisible, as not
to profess their faith in open assemblies, nor to proclaim it to all the
world, and yet not deny, nor dissemble it ? Nor deserve to be es
teemed a " damned crew of dissembling sycophants."
19. But, preaching of the word, and administration of the
sacraments, cannot but make a church visible : and these are in
separable notes of the church. — I answer, they are so far insepar
able, that wheresoever they are, there a church is : but not so, but
that in some cases there may be a church, where these notes are
not. Again, these notes will make the church visible : but to
whom ? Certainly not to all men, nor to most men ; but to them
only to whom the word is preached, and the sacraments adminis
tered. They make the church visible, to whom themselves are
visible, but not to others. As where your sacraments are ad
ministered, and your doctrine preached, it is visible that there is a
popish church. But this may, perhaps, be visible to them only who
are present at these performances, and to others as secret as if they
had never been performed.
20. But St. Augustine saith, it is an impudent, abominable, de
testable speech, &c. to say, the church hath perished. — I answer,
1. All that St. Augustine says is not true. 2. Though this were
true, it were nothing to your purpose, unless you will conceive it
all one, not to be, and not to be conspicuously visible. 3. This
very speech, that the church perished, might be false and im
pudent in the donatists, and yet not so in the protestants. For
there is no incongruity, that what hath lived five hundred years,
may perish in sixteen hundred. But St. Augustine denieth not
only the actual perishing, but the possibility of it : and not only
of its falling to nothing, but of its falling into corruptions. I an
swer, though no such thing appears out of those places, yet, I
believe, heat of disputation against the donatists, and a desire to
over-confute them, transported him so far, as to urge against them
more than was necessary, and perhaps more than was true. But
were he now revived, and did but confront the doctrine of after-
ages with that, his own experience would enforce him to change
his opinion. As concerning the last speech of St. Augustine, I
cannot but wonder very much, why he should think it absurd for
any man to say, there are sheep which he knows not, but God

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 351
knows ; and no less at you, for obtruding this sentence upon us, as
pertinent proof of the church's visibility.
21. Neither do I see, how the truth of any present church de
pends upon the perpetual visibility, nay, nor upon the perpetuity
of that which is past or future : for what sense is there, that it
should not be in the power of God Almighty, to restore to a flou
rishing estate, a church which oppression had made invisible ? to
repair that which is ruined, to reform that which was corrupted,
or to revive that which was dead ? Nay, what reason is there,
but that by ordinary means this may be done, so long as the
scriptures, by Divine Providence, are preserved in their integrity
and authority ? As a commonwealth, though never so far col
lapsed and over-run with disorders, is yet in possibility of being
reduced into its original state, so long as the ancient laws and fun
damental constitutions are extant, and remain inviolate, from whence
men may be directed how to make such a reformation. But St.
Augustine urges this very argument against the donatists, and there
fore it is good. I answer, that I doubt much of the consequence ;
and my reason is, because you yourselves acknowledge, that even
general councils (and therefore much more particular doctors),
though infallible in their determinations, are yet in their reasons
and arguments, whereupon they ground them, subject to like pas
sions and errors with other men.
22. Lastly, Whereas you say that all divines define a schism, a
division from the true church, and from thence collect that there
must be a known church from which it is possible for men to
depart : I might very justly question your antecedent, and desire
you to consider, whether schism be not rather, or at least be not
as well, a division of the church as from it ? A separation, not of
a part from the whole, but of some parts from the other. And if
you liked not this definition, I might desire you to inform me in
those many schisms which have happened in the church of Rome,
which of the parts was the church, and which was divided from
it: but, to let this pass, certainly your consequence is most un
reasonable. For though whensoever there is a schism, it must
necessarily suppose a church existent there ; yet sure we may de
fine a schism, that is, declare what the word signifies (for defining
is no more) though at this present there was neither schism nor
church in the world. Unless you will say, that we cannot tell
what a rose is, or what the word rose signifies, but only in the
summer when we have roses : or that in the world to come when
men shall not marry, it is impossible to know what it is to marry :
or that the plague is not a disease, but only when somebody is
infected : or that adultery is not a sin, unless there be adulterers :
or that before Adam had a child, he knew not, and God could
not have told him, what it was to be a father. Certainly, Sir, you
have forgot your metaphysics, which you so much glory in, if you
know not that the connexions of essential predicates with their
subjects are eternal, and depend not at all upon the actual ex
istence of the thing defined. This definition therefore of schism,
concludes not the existence of a church, even when it is defined :

352 Separation of Protestants from the
much less the perpetual continuance of it, and least of all the
continuance of it in perpetual visibility and purity, which is the
only thing that we deny, and you are to prove. By this time you
perceive, I hope, that I had reason to say that it was well for you,
that Dr. Potter granted the church's perpetual visibility : for, for
aught I can perceive, this concession of his is the best stake in your
hedge, the best pillar upon which this conclusion stands ; which yet
is the only groundwork of your whole accusation.
23. Ad. §. 12, 47 — 55. The remainder of this chapter, to con
vince Luther, and all that follow him, to be schismatics, affords
us arguments of two sorts ; the first, drawn from the nature of the
thing ; the second, from Dr. Potter's words and acknowledgment.
So that the former, if they be good, must be good against all pro
testants ; the latter only against Dr. Potter. I will examine them
all, and do not doubt to make it appear even to yourself, if you
have any indifference, that there is not any sound and concluding
reason amongst them, but that they are all poor and miserable
sophisms. 24. First, then, to prove us schismatics, you urge from the nature
of schism this only argument :
Whosoever leave the external communion of the visible church,
are schismatics: but Luther and his followers left the exter
nal communion of the visible church of Christ ; therefore they
are schismatics.
The major of this syllogism you leave naked without proof; and
conceive it, as it should seem, able enough to shift for itself. The
minor, or second proposition of this argument, you prove by two
other. The first is this :
They which forsook the external communion of all visible
churches, must needs forsake the external communion of the
true visible church of Christ: but Luther and his followers
forsook the external communion of all visible churches ;
therefore they forsook the external communion of the true
visible church.
The major of this syllogism you take for granted, as you have
reason : the minor you prosecute with great pomp of words, and
prove with plenty of reasons, built upon the confessions of Dr.
Potter, Luther, Calvin, and other protestants; and this you do in
the 12th §. of this chapter.
The second argument, to prove the assumption of your first syl
logism, stands thus :
The Roman church, when Luther and his followers made the
separation, was the true visible church of Christ : but Luther
and his followers forsook the external communion of the Ro
man church ; therefore they forsook the external communion
of the true visible church of Christ.
The assumption of this syllogism needs no proof: the proposi
tion which needs it very much, you endeavour to confirm by these
reasons :
1. The Roman church had the notes of the church assigned by
protestants, i. e. the true preaching of the word, and due ad-

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 353
ministration of the sacraments; therefore she was the true
church.
The antecedent is proved; because Dr. Potter confesses she
wanted nothing fundamental or necessary to salvation ; therefore,
for the substance of the matter, she had these notes.
2. Either the Roman church was the true visible church, or pro
testants can name and prove some other, disagreeing from the
Roman, and agreeing with protestants in their particular doc
trines ; or else they must say — there was no visible church ;
but they will not say, there was no church. They cannot
name and prove any other disagreeing from the Roman, and
agreeing with protestants, in their particular doctrines; be
cause this cannot be the Greek church, nor that of the Wal
denses, Wickliffites, Hussites, nor that of the Muscovites, Ar
menians, Georgians, ^Ethiopians, which you confirm by several
arguments ; therefore they must grant, that the Roman church
was the true visible church.
And this is the business of your 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, and
55th sections of this chapter.
25. Now to all this I answer very briefly thus : That you have
played the unwise builder and erected a stately structure upon a
false foundation. For whereas you take for granted as an un
doubted truth, that whosoever leave the external communion of
the visible church, are schismatical ; I tell you, Sir, you presume
too much upon us, and would have us grant that which is the
main point in question : for, either you suppose the external
communion of the church corrupted, and that there was a neces
sity for them that would communicate with this church to com
municate in her corruptions; or, you suppose her communion
uncorrupted. If the former, and yet will take for granted, that
all are schismatics that leave her communion though it be cor
rupted, you beg the question in your proposition. If the latter,
you beg ihe question in your supposition ; for protestants, you
know, are peremptory and unanimous in the denial of both these
things; both that the communion of the visible church was then
uncorrupted, and that they are truly schismatics who leave the
communion of the visible church if corrupted ; especially if the
case be so (and Luther's was so) that they must either leave her
communion, or of necessity communicate with her in her corrup
tions. You will say, perhaps, that you have already proved it
impossible, that the church or her communion should be cor
rupted: and, therefore, that they are schismatics who leave the
external communion of the visible church because she cannot be
corrupted. And that hereafter you will prove, that corruptions
in the church's communion, though the belief and profession of
them be made the condition of her communion, cannot justify a
separation from it; and, therefore, that they are schismatics
who leave the church's communion though corrupted. I answer,
that I have examined your proofs of the former, and found that a
vein of sophistry runs clean through them ; and, for the latter, it
is so plain and palpable a falsehood, that I cannot but be con-
z

354 Separation of Protestants from the
fident, whatsoever you bring in proof of it, will, like the apples of
Sodom, fall to ashes upon the first touch. And this is my first and
main exception against your former discourse ; that, accusing pro
testants of a very great and horrible crime, you have proved your
accusation only with a fallacy.
26. Another is, that, although it were granted schism, to leave
the external communion of the visible church in what state or
case soever it be, and that Luther and his followers were schisma
tics, for leaving the external communion of the visible churches;
yet you fail exceedingly of clearing the other necessary point
undertaken by you, that the Roman church was then the visible
church. For, neither do protestants (as you mistake) make the
true preaching of the word, and due administration of the sacra
ments, the notes of the visible church, but only of a visible
church : now these you know are very different things ; the for
mer signifying the church catholic, or the whole church ; the lat
ter, a particular church or a part of the catholic. And, therefore,
suppose out of courtesy we should grant, what by argument you
can never evince, that your church has these notes, yet would it
by no means follow that your church were the visible church, but
only a visible church ; not the whole catholic, but only a part of
it. But then, besides, where doth Dr. Potter acknowledge any
such matter as you pretend ? Where doth he say that you had
for the substance — the true preaching of the word, or due admi
nistration of the sacraments ? Or where does he say, that (from
which you collect this) — you wanted nothing fundamental or ne
cessary to salvation ? He says, indeed, that though your errors
were in themselves damnable, and full of great impiety, yet he
hopes, that those amongst you, that were invincibly ignorant of
the truth, might, by God's great mercy, have their errors par
doned, and their souls saved. And this is all he says, and this you
confess to be all he says in* divers places of your book ; which is
no more than yourself do and must affirm of protestants; and yet
I believe, you will not suffer us to infer from hence, that you
grant protestants to have, for the substance, the true preaching
of the word and due administration of the sacraments, and want
nothing fundamental or necessary to salvation. And if we should
draw this consequence from your concession, certainly we should
do you injury, in regard many things may, in themselves and in
ordinary course be necessary to salvation, to those that have
means to attain them, as your church generally hath ; which yet,
by accident, to these which were, by some impregnable impedi
ment, debarred in those means, may by God's mercy be made
unnecessary. 27. Lastly, Whereas you say, that protestants must either grant
that your church then was the visible church, or name some other
disagreeing from yours, and agreeing with protestants in their
particular doctrine, or acknowledge there was no visible church;
it is all one, as if (to use St. Paul's similitude) the head should
*Soec. i. §. 3.

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 355
say to the foot, Either you must grant that I am the whole body,
or name some other member that is so, or confess that there is no
body. To which the foot may answer, I acknowledge there is a
body : and yet, that no member beside you is this body, nor yet
that you are it, but only a part of it. And in like manner say
we, we acknowledge a church there was, corrupted indeed univer
sally ; but yet such a one as we hope, by God's gracious accept
ance, was still a church. We pretend not to name any one so
ciety that was this church; and yet we see no reason that can
enforce us to confess that yours was the church, but only a part
of it, and that one of the worst then extant in the world. In
vain, therefore, have you troubled yourself, in proving that we
cannot pretend, that either the Greeks, Waldenses, Wickliffites,
Hussites, Muscovites, Armenians, Georgians, Abyssines, were then
the visible church. For all this discourse proceeds upon a false
and vain supposition, and begs another point in question be
tween us, which is, that some church of one denomination and
one communion (as the Roman, the Greek, &c.) must be always
exclusively to all other communions the whole visible church.
And though, perhaps, some weak protestant, having the false
principle settled in him, that there was to be always some visible
church of one denomination, pure from all error in doctrine,
might be wrought upon and prevailed with by it, to forsake the
church of protestants ; yet why it should induce him to go to
yours, rather than the Greek church, or any other pretenders to
perpetual succession as well as yours, that I do not understand ;
unless it be for the reason which ^Eneas Sylvius gave, why more
held the pope above a council, than a council above the pope ;
which was, because popes did give bishopricks and archbishop-
ricks, but councils gave none ; and, therefore, suing in forma
pauperis, were not like to have their cause very well maintained.
For put the case, I should grant of mere favour, that there must
be always some church of one denomination or communion free
from all errors in doctrine, and that protestants had not always
such a church : it would follow, indeed, from hence, that I must
not be a protestant ; but that I must be a papist, certainly it
would follow by no better consequence than this — if you will leave
England, you must of necessity go to Rome. And yet with this
wretched fallacy have I been sometimes abused myself, and known
many other poor souls seduced, not only from their own church and
religion, but unto yours : I beseech God to open the eyes of all that
love the truth, that they may not always be held captive, under
such miserable delusions.
28. We see, then, how successful you have been in making good
your accusation, with reasons drawn from the nature of the thing,
and which may be urged in common against all protestants. Let
us come now to the arguments of the other kind, which you build
upon Dr. Potter's own words, out of which you promise unanswer
able reasons to convince protestants of schism.
29. But let the understanding reader take with him three or
four short- remembrances, and I dare say he will find them, upoa
z2

356 Separation of Protestants from the
examination, not only answerable, but already answered. The
memorandums I would commend to him are these :
30. 1. That not every separation, but only a causeless separa
tion, from the external communion of any church, is the sin of
schism. 31. 2. That imposing upon men, under pain of excommunication,
a necessity of professing known errors, and practising known cor
ruptions, is a sufficient and necessary cause of separation ; and that
this is the cause which protestants allege to justify their separation
from the church of Rome.
32. 3. That to leave the church, and to leave the external com
munion of a church, at least as Dr. Potter understands the word,
is not the same thing : that being done by ceasing to be a mem
ber of it, by ceasing to have those requisites which constitute
a man a member of it, as faith and obedience : this, by refusing
to communicate with any church in her liturgies and public wor
ship of God. This little armour, if it be rightly placed, I am
persuaded will repel all those batteries which you threaten shall
be so furious.
33. Ad. §. 13 — 15. The first is a sentence of St. Augustine
against Donatus, applied to Luther thus: "if the church perished,
what church brought forth Donatus? (you say, Luther?) If she
could not perish, what madness moved the sect of Donatus to
separate, upon pretence to avoid the communion of bad men ?"
Whereunto, one fair answer (to let pass many others) is obvious
put of the second observation : that this sentence, though it were
gospel, as it is not, is impertinently applied to Luther and lutherans,
whose pretence of separation (be it true or be it false) was not (as
that of the Donatists) only to avoid the communion of bad men ;
but to free themselves from a necessity (which but by separating
was unavoidable) of joining with bad men in their impieties. And
your not substituting Luther, instead of Donatus, in the latter part
of the dilemma, as well as in the former, would make a suspicious
man conjecture that you yourself took notice of this exception of
disparity between Donatus and Luther.
34. Ad. §. 16. Your second onset drives only at those protest
ants who hold the true church was invisible for many ages. Which
doctrine (if by the true church be understood the pure church,
as you do understand it) is a certain truth ; and it is easier for you
to declaim (as you do) than to dispute against it. But " these men
(you say) must be heretics, because they separate from the commu
nion of the visible church : and therefore also from the communion
of that which they say was invisible, inasmuch as the invisible
church communicated with the visible."
35. Ans. I might very justly desire some proof of that which
so confidently you take for granted : that there were no perse
cuted and oppressed maintainors of the truth in the days of our
forefathers, but only such as dissembled their opinions, and lived
in your communion. And truly, if I should say there were many
of this condition, I suppose I could make my affirmative much
more probable, than you can make your negative. We read in

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 357
scripture, that Elias conceived there was none left beside himself in
the whole kingdom of Israel who had not revolted from God ;
and yet God himself assures us that he was deceived. And if
such a man, a prophet, and one of the greatest, erred in his judg
ment touching his own time, and his own country, why may not
you, who are certainly but a man, and subject to the same passions
as Elias was, mistake in thinking, that in former ages, in some
country or other, there were not always some good christians,
which did not so much as externally bow their knees to your
Baal? But this answer I am content you shall take no notice
of, and think it sufficient to tell you, that if it be true, that this
supposed invisible church did hypocritically communicate with
the visible church in her corruptions, then protestants had cause,
nay necessity, to forsake their communion also ; for otherwise they
must have joined with them in the practice of impieties : and see
ing they had such cause to separate, they presume their separation
cannot be schismatical.
36. Yes, you reply, to forsake the external communion of them
with whom they agree in faith, is the most formal and proper sin
of schism. Ans. Very true, but I would fain know wherein. I
would gladly be informed, whether I be bound, for fear of schism,
to communicate with those that believe as I do, only in lawful
things, or absolutely in every thing ; whether I am to join with
them in superstition and idolatry, and not only in a common pro
fession of the faith wherein we agree, but in a common dissimula
tion or abjuration of it. This is that which you would have them
to do, or else, forsooth, they must be schismatics. But hereafter, I
pray you remember, that there is no necessity of communicating
even with true believers in wicked actions : nay, that there is a ne
cessity herein to separate from them. And then I dare say, even
you being their judge, the reasonableness of their cause to separate
shall, according to my first observation, justify their separation from
being schismatical.
37. Arg. But the property of schism, according to Dr. Potter,
is to cut off from the hope of salvation, the church from which it
separates : and these protestants have this property ; therefore
they are schismatics.
3S. Ans. I deny the syllogism ; it is no better than this :
One symptom of the plague is a fever ;
But such a man hath a fever;
Therefore he hath the plague.
The true conclusion which issues out of these premises, should
be this — therefore he hath one symptom of the plague. And so
likewise in the former — therefore they have one property or one
quality of schismatics. And as, in the former instance, the man
that hath one sign of the plague may, by reason of the absence of
other requisites, not have the plague: so these protestants may
have something of schismatics, and yet be not schismatics. A
tyrant sentencing a man to death for his pleasure, and a just judge
that condemns a malefactor, do both sentence a man to death,
and so for the matter do both the same thing ; yet the one does

358 Separation of Protestants from the.
wickedly, the other justly. What is the reason ? Because the
one hath cause, the other hath not. In like manner, schismatics
either always or generally denounce damnation to them from
whom they separate. The same do these protestants, and yet are
not schismatics. The reason — because schismatics do it, and do
it without a cause, and protestants have cause for what they do.
The impieties of your church being, generally speaking, damna
ble ; unless where they are excused by ignorance, and expiated,
at least, by a general repentance. In fine, though perhaps it may
be true, that all schismatics do so ; yet universal affirmatives are
not converted, and therefore it follows not by any good logic
that all that do so, when there is just cause for it, must be schis
matics. The cause in this matter of separation is all in all, and
that, for aught I see, you never think of. But if these rigid pro
testants have just cause to cut off your church from the hope of
salvation ; how can the milder sort allow hope of salvation to the
members of this church? Ans. Distinguish the quality of the
persons censured, and this seeming repugnance of their censures
will vanish into nothing. For your church may be considered
either in regard of those in whom either negligence, or pride, or
worldly fear, or hopes, or some other voluntary sin, is the cause
of their ignorance ; which I fear is the case of the generality of
men amongst you: or in regard of those who owe their errors
from truth to want of capacity, or default of instruction : either
in respect of those that might know the truth, and will not ; or of
those who would know the truth, but (all things considered)
cannot : in respect of those that have eyes to see, and will not ; or
those, that would gladly see, but want eyes, or light. Consider
the former sort of men, (which your more rigid censures seem
especially to reflect upon) and the heaviest sentence will not be
too heavy. Consider the latter, and the mildest will not be too
mild. So that here is no difference but in words only ; neither
are you flattered by the one, nor uncharitably censured by the
other. 39. Your next blow is directed against the milder sort of pro
testants, who (you say) involve themselves in the sin of schism, by
communicating with those (as you call them) exterminating spirits,
whom you conceive yourself to have proved schismatics ; and now
load them farther with the crime of heresy. For, say you, if you
held yourselves obliged, under pain of damnation, to forsake the
communion of the Roman church, by reason of her errors, which
yet you confess were not fundamental ; shall it not be much more
damnable to live in confraternity with these, who defend an error
of the failing of the church, which in the donatists you confess to
have been properly heretical ?
40. Ans. You mistake, in thinking that protestants hold them
selves obliged not to communicate with you, only or principally
by reason of your errors and corruption. For the true reason, ac
cording to my third observation, is not so much because you
maintain errors and corruptions, as because you impose them, and
will allow your communion to none but to those that will hold

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 359
them with you ; and have so ordered your communion, that either
we must communicate with you in these things, or nothing. And
for this very reason, though it were granted that these protestants
held this doctrine which you impute to them ; and though this error
were as damnable, and as much against the creed as you pretend :
yet, after all this, this parity between you and them might make it
more lawful for us to communicate with them than you, because
what they hold they hold to themselves, and refuse not (as you do)
to communicate with them that hold the contrary.
41. Thus we may answer your argument, though both your
former suppositions were granted. But then, for a second an
swer, I am to tell you, that there is no necessity of granting
either of them. For neither do these protestants hold the failing
of the church from its being, but only from its visibility ; which,
if you conceive all one, then must you conceive that the stars fail
every day, and the sun every night. Neither is it certain that the
doctrine of the church's failing is repugnant to the creed : for, as
the truth of the article of the remission of sins, depends not upon
the actual remission of any man's sins, but upon God's readiness
and" resolution to forgive the sins of all that believe and repent;
so that, although unbelief or impenitence should be universal, and
the faithful should absolutely fail from the children of men, and
the Son of man should find no faith in the earth ; yet should the
article still continue true, that God would forgive the sins of all
that repent. In like manner, it is not certain that the truth of the
article of the catholic church depends upon the actual existence
of the catholic church ; but rather upon the right that the church
of Christ, or rather (to speak properly) the gospel of Christ, hath
to be universally believed. And therefore the article may be true,
though there were no church in the world. In regard, this not
withstanding, it remains still true, that there ought to be a church,
and this church ought to be catholic. For as, of these two proposi
tions, there is a church in America ; and there should be a church
in America : the truth of the latter depends not upon the truth of
the former ; so neither does it in these two : there is a church dif
fused all the world over ; and there should be a church diffused all
the world over.
42. Thirdly, If you understand by errors not fundamental, such
as are not damnable, it is not true, as I have often told you, that we
confess your errors not fundamental.
43. Lastly, For your desire that I should here apply an authority
of St. Cyprian, alleged in your next number, I would have done so
very willingly, but indeed I know not how to do it ; for, in my ap
prehension, it hath no more to do with your present business of
proving it unlawful to communicate with these men, who hold the
church was not always visible, than in novafert animus. Besides,
1 am here again to remember you, that St. Cyprian's words, were
they never so pertinent, yet are by neither of the parties litigant
esteemed any rule of faith. And, therefore, the urging of them,
and such-like authorities, serves only to make books great, and con
troversies endless.

360 Separation of Protestants from the
44. Ad. §. 17. The next section, in three long leaves, delivers
us this short sense : That those protestants which say they have
not left the church's external communion, but only her corruptions,
pretend to do that which is impossible ; because these corruptions
were inherent in the church's external communion ; and, therefore,
he that forsakes them, cannot but forsake this.
45. Ans. But, who are they that pretend they forsook the
church's corruptions, and not her external communion? Some
there be that say, they have not left the church, that is, not
ceased to be members of the church, but only left her corruptions :
some, that they have not left the communion, but the corruptions
of it; meaning the internal communion of it, and conjunction
with it, by faith and obedience : which disagree from the former
only in the manner of speaking ; for he that is in the church, is
in this kind of communion with it ; and he that is not in this in
ternal communion, is not in the church. Some, perhaps, that
they left not your external communion in all things ; meaning,
that they left it not voluntarily, being not* fugitivi, but fugati, as
being willing to join with you in any act of piety ; but were by
you necessitated and constrained to do so, because you would not
suffer them to do well with you, unless they would do ill with
you. Now to do ill that you may do well, is against the will of
God, which to every good man is a high degree of necessity. But
for such protestants as pretend, that de facto, they forsook your
corruptions only, and not your external communion, that is, such
as pretend to communicate with you in your confessions and li
turgies, and participation of sacraments ; I cannot but doubt very
much, that neither you, nor I, have ever met with any of this
condition. And if perhaps you were led into error, by thinking
that to leave the church, and to leave the external communion of
it, was all one in sense and signification, I hope by this time you
are disabused, and begin to understand, that as a man may leave
any fashion or custom of a college, and yet remain still a member
of the college ; so a man may possibly leave some opinion or prac
tice of a church, formerly common to himself and others, and con
tinue still a member of that church : provided that what he forsakes
be not one of those things wherein the essence of the church con
sists. Whereas peradventure this practice may be so involved with
the external communion of this church, that it may be simply im
possible for him to leave this practice, and not to leave the church's
external communion.
46. You will reply, perhaps, that the difficulty lies as well
against those who pretend to forsake the church's corruptions, and
not the church, as against those who say, they forsook the church's
corruptions, and not her external communion. And that the reason
is still the same ; because they supposed corruptions were inhe
rent in the whole church : and, therefore, by like reason with the
former, could not be forsaken, but if the whole church were for
saken. 47. Ans. A pretty sophism, and very fit to persuade men that
* Casaubon. in Ev. ad Card. Perron.

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 361
it is impossible for them, to forsake any error they hold, or any
vice they are subject to, either peculiar to themselves, or in com
mon with others ; because, forsooth, they cannot forsake them
selves; and vices and errors are things inherent in themselves.
The deceit lies, in not distinguishing between a local and a moral
forsaking of any thing. For as it were an absurdity, fit for the
maintainers of transubstantiation to defend, that a man may lo
cally and properly depart from the accidents of a subject, and not
from the subject itself; so it is also against reason to deny, that a
man may (by an usual phrase of speech) forsake any custom or
quality, good or bad, either proper to himself, or common to him
self with any company, and yet never truly or properly forsake
either his company or himself. Thus if all the Jesuits in the so
ciety were given to write sophistically, yet you might leave this
ill custom, and yet not leave your society. If all the citizens of
a city were addicted to any vanity, they might, either all, or some
of them, forsake it, and yet not forsake the city. If all the parts
of a man's body were dirty or filthy, nothing hinders but that all,
or some of them might cleanse themselves, and yet continue parts
of the body. And what reason then in the world is there, if the
whole visible church were overrun with tares and weeds of su
perstitions and corruptions, but that some members of it might
reform themselves, and yet remain still true members of the body
of the church, and not be made no members, but the better by
their reformation ? Certainly it is so obvious and sensible a
truth, that this thing is possible, that no man in his wits will be
persuaded out of it, with all the quirks and metaphysics in the
world. Neither is this to say, that a man may keep company
with Christopher Potter, and not keep company with the Provost
of Queen's College : nor that a man can avoid the company of a
sinner, and at the same time be really present with the man who
is the sinner: which we leave to those protestants of your in
vention, who are so foolish as to pretend, that a man may really
separate himself from the church's external communion, as she is
corrupted, and yet continue in that church's external communion,
which in this external communion is corrupted. But we, that say
only the whole church being corrupted, some parts of it might and
did reform themselves, and yet might and did continue parts of
the church, though separated from the external communion of
the other parts, which would not reform, need not trouble our
selves to reconcile any such repugnance. For the case put by
you, of keeping Dr. Potter's company, and leaving the company
of the Provost of Queen's College ; and of leaving a sinner's com
pany, and not the man's; are nothing at all like ours. But, if
you would speak to the point, you must show, that Dr. Potter
cannot leave being Provost of Queen's College, without ceasing
to be himself; or, that a sinner cannot leave his sin, without
ceasing to be a man ; or, that he that is part of any society, can
not renounce any vice of that society, but he must relinquish the
society. If you would show any of these things, then indeed (I
dare promise) you shall find us apt enough to believe, that the

362 Separation of Protestants from the
particular parts of the visible church could not reform themselves,
but they must of necessity become no parts of it. But until we see
this done, you must pardon us if we choose to believe sense rather
than sophistry.
48. In this paragraph you bring in the sentence of St. Cyprian,
whereto you referred us in the former : but why, in a controversy
of faith, do you cite any thing, which is confessed on all hands
not to be a rule of faith ? Besides, in my apprehension, this
sentence of St. Cyprian's is, in this place, and to this purpose,
merely impertinent. St. Cyprian's words are, " The church (he
speaks of the particular church or diocese of Rome) being one, can
not be within and without : if she be with Novatianus, she was not
with Cornelius : but if she were with Cornelius, who succeeded Fa-
bianus by lawful ordination, Novatianus is not in the church." And
now, having related the words, I am only to remember the reader,
that your business was to prove it impossible for a man to forsake
the church's corruptions, and not the church ; and to request him
to tell me, whether, as I said, in nova fert animus had not been as
much to the purpose ?
49. Toward the conclusion of this section, you number up your
victories, and tell us — that out of your discourse it remaineth
clear, that this our chiefest answer changeth the very state of the
question ; confoundeth internal acts of the understanding with
external deeds ; doth not distinguish between schism and heresy,
and leaves this demonstrated against us, that they (protestants)
divided themselves from the communion of the visible catholic
church, because they conceived that she needed reformation. To
which triumphs, if any reply be needful, then briefly thus : We
do not change the state of the question, but you mistake it. For
the question was not, whether they might forsake the corruption
of the church, and continue in her external communion, which we
confess impossible, because the corruptions were in her communion :
but the question was, whether they might forsake the corruptions
of the church, and not the church, but continue still the members
of it. And to this question there is not in your whole discourse one
pertinent syllable.
50. We do not confound internal acts of understanding with ex
ternal deeds, but acknowledge (as you would have us) that we can
not (as matters now stand) separate from your corruptions, but we
must depart from your external communion. For you have so
ordered things, that whosoever will communicate with you at all,
must communicate with you in your corruptions. But it is you that
will not perceive the difference between being a part of the church,
and being in external communion of all the other parts of it ; taking
for granted, that which is certainly false, that no two men or
churches, divided in external communion, can be both true parts
of the catholic church.
51. We are not to learn the difference between schism and
heresy, for heresy we conceive an obstinate defence of any error
against any necessary article of the christian faith ; and schism, a
causeless separation of one part of the church from another. But

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 363
this we say, that if we convince you of errors and corruptions,
professed and practised in your communion, then we cannot be
schismatics, for refusing to join with you in the profession of
these errors, and the practice of these corruptions. And there
fore you must free either us from schism or yourselves from error ;
at least from requiring the profession of it as a condition of your
communion. 52. Lastly, Whereas you say — that you have demonstrated
against us, that protestants divided themselves from the external
communion of the visible church ; add — which external commu
nion was corrupted — and we shall confess the accusation, and
glory in it. But this is not that quod erat demonstrandum, but
that we divided ourselves from the church, that is, made ourselves
outlaws from it, and no members of it. And, moreover, in the rea
son of our separation from the external communion of your church
you are mistaken ; for it was not so much because she, your church,
as because your church's external communion, was corrupted, and
needed reformation.
53. That a pretence of reformation will acquit no man from
schism, we grant very willingly, and therefore say, that it con
cerns every man, who separates from any church's communion,
even as much as his salvation is worth, to look most carefully to
it, that the cause of his separation be just and necessary; for,
unless it be necessary, it can very hardly be sufficient. But
whether a true reformation of ourselves from errors, superstitions,
and impieties, will not justify our separation in these things ; our
separation, I say, from them who will not reform themselves, and
as much as in them lies, hinder others from doing so : this is the
point you should have spoken to, but have not. As for the sen
tences of the fathers, to which you refer us, for the determination
of this question, I suppose by what I have said above, the reader
understands, by alleging them you have gained little credit to
your cause or person. And that, if they were competent judges
of this controversy, their sentence is against you much rather than
for you.
54. Lastly, whereas you desire Dr. Potter to remember his own
words : — " There neither was, nor can be, any just cause to depart
from the church of Christ, no more than from Christ himself,"
and pretend that you have shewed that Luther did so. — The Doctor
remembers his words very well, and hath no reason to be ashamed
of them. Only he desires you to remember, that hereafter you
do not confound, as hitherto you have done, departing from the
church (i. e. ceasing to be a member of it) with departing from the
church's external communion ; and then he is persuaded it will ap
pear to you, that against Luther and his followers you have said
many things, but shewed nothing.
55. But the church universal remaining the church universal,
according to Dr. Potter, may fall into error: and from hence it
clearly follows, that it is impossible to leave the external com
munion of the church so corrupted, and retain external commu
nion with the catholic church. — Ans. The reason of this conse-

364 Separation of Protestants from the
quence, which you say is so clear, truly I cannot possibly discern ;
but the conclusion inferred, methinks, is evident of itself, and
therefore without proof I grant it. I mean, that it is impossible to
leave the external communion of the catholic church corrupted,
and to retain external communion with the catholic church. But
what use you can make of it, I do not understand; unless you
will pretend, that to say, a man may forsake the church's corrup
tion, and not the church, is all one as to say he may forsake the
church's external communion, and not forsake it. If you mean
so, sure you mistake the meaning of protestants when they say —
they forsook not the church, but her corruptions. For in saying
so, they neither affirm, nor deny, that they forsook the external
communion of the church, nor speak at all of it ; but they mean
only, that they ceased not to be still members of the church,
though they ceased to believe and practise some things which the
whole church formerly did believe and practise. And as for the
external communion of the visible church, we have without scruple
formerly granted, that protestants did forsake it ; that is, renounce
the practice of some observance, in which the whole visible church
before them did communicate. But this we say they did without
schism, because they had cause to do so, and no man can have
cause to be a schismatic.
56. But your argument, you conceive, will be more convincing
— if we consider, that when Luther appeared, there were not two
distinct visible true churches; one pure, the other corrupted,
but one church only. — Ans. The ground of this is no way certain,
nor here sufficiently proved. For, whereas you say, histories are
silent of any such matter ; I answer, there is no necessity, that
you or I should have read all histories, that may be extant of
these matters; nor that all should be extant that were written,
much less extant uncorrupted ; especially, considering your church,
which had lately all the power in her hands, hath been so per
niciously industrious, in corrupting the monuments of antiquity
that made against her ; nor that all records should remain, which
were written ; nor that all should be recorded which was done.
Neither, secondly, to suppose a visible church before Luther,
which did not err, is to contradict this ground of Dr. Potter's
that the church may err : unless you will have us believe, that
may be and must be is all one, and that all which may be true,
is true : which rule, if it were true, then sure all men would be
honest, because all men may be so ; and you would not make
so bad arguments, unless you will pretend you cannot make
better. Nor, thirdly, is it to contradict these words, " the church
may not hope to triumph over all error, till she be in heaven ;"
for to triumph over error, it is to be secure from it, to be out of
danger of it, not to be obnoxious to it. Now a church may be
free from error, and yet not secure from it, and consequently, in
this sense, not triumph over it. Fourthly, Whereas you say, it
evacuateth the brag of protestants, that Luther reformed the
whole church : perhaps (though I know not who they be that say
so) by a frequent synecdoche, they may mean by the whole the

' Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 365
greatest and most illustrious part of it, the lustre whereof did
much obscure the other, though it were not wholly invisible.
Besides, if their brag be evacuated, (as you call it) let it be so, I see
no harm will come of it. Lastly, whereas you say, that, supposing
a visible pure church, Luther must be a schismatic who separated
from all visible churches. — I tell you, if you will suppose, a visible
church extant before, and when Luther arose, conformable to him
in all points of doctrine, necessary and profitable, then Luther
separated not from this church, but adjoined himself to it: not
indeed in place, which was not necessary ; not in external com
munion, which was impossible ; but by the union of faith and
charity. Upon these grounds, I say, that the ground of this ar
gument is no way made certain ; yet because it is not manifestly
false, I am content to let it pass. And, for aught I see, it is very
safe for me to do so : for you build nothing upon it, which I may
not fairly grant. For what do you conclude from hence, but that,
seeing there was no visible church but corrupted, Luther forsaking
the external communion of the corrupted church, could not but
forsake the external communion of the catholic church ? Well,
let this also be granted, what will come of it ? Wbat, that Luther
must be a schismatic ? By no means : for not every separation,
but only a causeless separation, from the communion of the church,
we maintain to be schismatical. Hereunto may be added, that
though the whole church was corrupted, yet, properly speaking,
it is not true, that Luther and his followers forsook the whole
corrupted church, or the external communion of it : but only that
he forsook that part of it which was corrupted, and still would be
so : and forsook not, but only reformed another part, which part
they themselves were, and I suppose you will not go about to
persuade us that they forsook themselves or their communion.
And if you urge, that they joined themselves to no other part,
therefore they separated from the whole ; I say, it follows not,
inasmuch as themselves were a part of it, and still continued so;
and therefore could no more separate from the whole than from
themselves. Thus though there were no part of the people of Rome,
to whom the plebeians joined themselves, when they made their se
cession into the Aventine hill ; yet they divided themselves from
the patricians only, and not from the whole people; because
themselves were a part of this people, and they divided not from
themselves. 57. Ad. §. 18. In the 18th section, you prove that which no
jnan denies, that "corruption in manners yields no sufficient
cause to leave the church :" yet sure, it yields sufficient cause to
cast them out of the church, that are, after the church's public
admonition, obstinate in notorious impieties. Neither doth the
cutting off such men from the church, lay any necessity upon us,
either to go out of the world, or out of the church, but rather
puts these men out of the church into the world, where we may
converse with them freely, without scandal to the church. Our
blessed Saviour foretold, you say, that there should be in the
church tares with choice corn. Look again, I pray, and you shall

366 Separation of Protestants from the *
see, that the field, he speaks of, is not the church, but the world ;
and therefore neither do you obey our Saviour's command, " let
both grow up till the harvest," who teach it to be lawful to root
these tares (such are heretics) out of the world ; neither do protest
ants disobey it, if they eject manifest heretics and notorious sinners
out of the church.
58. Ad. §. 19. In the 19th you are so courteous as to suppose
corruptions in your doctrine; and yet undertake to prove, that
neither could they afford us any sufficient cause, or colourable
necessity to depart from them. Your reason is, because damnable
errors there were none in your church by Dr. Potter's confession ;
neither can it be damnable in respect of error, to remain in any
church's communion, whose errors are not damnable; for if the
error be not damnable, the belief thereof cannot. — Ans. Dr. Potter
confesseth no such matter ; but only that — he hopes that your er
rors, though in themselves sufficiently damnable, yet by accident
did not damn all that held them : such, he means and says, as
were excusably ignorant of the truth, and amongst the number of
their unknown sins, repented daily of their unknown errors. The
truth is, he thinks as ill of your errors and their desert, as you do
of ours ; only he is not so peremptory and presumptuous in judging
your persons, as you are in judging ours, but leaves them to stand
or fall to their own master, who is infinitely merciful, and therefore
will not damn them for mere errors, who desire to find the truth,
and cannot ; and withal infinitely just, and therefore (it is to be
feared) will not pardon them, who might easily have come to the
knowledge of the truth, and either through pride or obstinacy, or
negligence, would not.
59. To your minor also, I answer almost in your own words,
§. 42 of this chapter. — I thank you for your courteous supposal,
that your church may err, and, in recompense thereof, will do
you a charity, by putting you in mind, into what labyrinths you
cast yourself, by supposing that the church may err in some of
her proposals, and yet denying it lawful for any man, though he
know this, which you suppose, to oppose her judgment, or leave
her communion. — Will you have such a man dissemble against
his conscience, or externally deny that which he knows true ? No,
that you will not; for them that do so, you yourself have pro
nounced " a damned crew of dissembling sycophants." Or, would
you have him continue in your communion, and yet profess your
church to err ? This you yourselves have made to him impossible.
Or, would you have him believe those things true, which together
with him you have supposed to be errors ? This is such an one
as is assured or persuaded of that, which you here suppose, that
your church doth err, (and such only, we say, are obliged to for
sake your communion) is, as schoolmen speak, implicatio in ter-
minis, which is " a contradiction so plain that one word destroy-
eth another : as if one should say, a living man dead." For it
is to require that they which believe some part of your doctrine
false, should withal believe it all true. Seeing, therefore, for any
man to believe your church in error, and profess the contrary, is

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 367
damnable hypocrisy ; to believe it, and not believe it, a manifest re
pugnancy ; and, thirdly, to profess it, and to continue in your
communion (as matters now stand) a plain impossibility ; what
remains, but that whosoever is supposed to have just reason to
disbelieve any doctrine of your church, must of necessity forsake
her communion ; unless you would remit so far from your present
rigour, as to allow them your church's communion, who publicly
profess that they do not believe every article of her established
doctrine. Indeed if you would do so, you might with some co
herence suppose your church in error, and yet find fault with men
for abandoning her communion, because they might continue in
it, and suppose her in error. But to suppose your church in
error, and to" excommunicate all those that believe your own
supposition, and then to complain that they continue not in your
communion, is the most ridiculous incongruity that can be ima
gined. And, therefore, though your corruptions in doctrine, in
themselves (which yet is false) did not, yet your obliging us to
profess your doctrine uncorrupted against knowledge and con
science, may induce an obligation to depart from your commu
nion. As, if there were any society of christians, that held there
were no antipodes ; notwithstanding this error, I might commu
nicate with them : but if I could not do so without professing
myself of their belief in this matter, then I suppose I should be
excused from schism, if I should forsake their communion, rather
than profess myself to believe that which I do not believe.
Neither is there any contradiction, or shadow of contradiction,
that it may be necessary for my salvation to depart from the
church's communion : and that this church (though erring in this
matter) wants nothing necessary to salvation. And yet this is
that manifest contradiction, which Dr. Potter (you say) will never
be able to solve, viz. " that there might be necessary cause to de
part from the church of Rome in some doctrines and practices,
though she wanted nothing necessary to salvation."
60. And your reason, wherewith you prove that there is in these
words such a plain contradiction, is very notable. " For (say you) if
she wanted nothing necessary to salvation, how could it be necessary
to salvation to forsake her ?" Truly, sir, if this be a good manner
of proving, it is a very ready way to prove any thing ; for what is
there that may not be proved, if it be proof enough to ask, how
can it be otherwise ? Methinks, if you would convince Dr. Potter's
words of manifest contradiction, you should shew, that he affirms
and denies the same of the same. From which fault methinks he
should be very innocent, who says only, that that may be damnable
to one, which is not so to another ; and that may be necessary for
one, which is not necessary for another. And this is all that Dr.
I °tter fys here, viz. that the profession of a falsehood to him
that believes it, may be not damnable ; and yet damnable to him
that believes the contrary : or that not to prpfess a falsehood, in
him that knows it to be so, is necessary to salvation ; and yet not so
in him that by error conceives it to be a truth. The words by you
cited, and charged with unsalvable contradiction, are in the 75th
page ; but, in the progress of the same particular discourse, in the

368 Separation of Protestants from the
next page but one, he gives such evident reason of them, (which
can hardly be done to prove implicancy true) that whereas you say,
he will never be able to salve them from contradiction, I believe any
indifferent reader, having considered the place, will be very apt to
think, that you (whatsoever you pretend) were very able to have
done this courtesy for him, if your will had been answerable to
your ability. I will set down the words, and leave the reader to
condemn or absolve them. " To forsake the errors of that church,
and not to join with her in those practices which we account erro
neous, we are enforced by necessity. For though in the issue they
are not damnable to them which believe as they profess, yet for us to
profess and avow by oath (as the church of Rome enjoins) what we
believe not, were, without question, damnable. And they, with
their errors, by the grace of God, might go to heaven, when we for
our hypocrisy and dissimulation, (he might have added, and perjury)
should certainly be condemned to hell."
61. Ad. §. 20. But a church not erring in fundamentals, though
erring in other matters, doth what our Saviour exacts at her hands,
doth as much as lies in her power to do : therefore, the communion
of such a church is not upon pretence of error to be forsaken. —
The consequence is manifest. The antecedent is proved ; because
God, by Dr. Potter's* confession, hath promised his assistance no
further, nor is it in her power to do more than God doth assist
her to do. — Ans. The promise of divine assistance is twofold, ab
solute or conditional. That there shall be by divine providence
preserved in the world, to the world's end, such a company of
christians, who hold all things precisely and indispensably neces
sary to salvation, and nothing inevitably destructive of it. This
and no more, the doctor affirms that God hath promised absolutely.
Yet he neither doubts nor denies, but that a farther assistance is
conditionally promised us, even such an assistance as shall lead us,
if we be not wanting to it and ourselves, into all not only neces
sary, but very profitable truth, and guard us from all, not only
destructive, but also hurtful errors. This, I say, he neither denies
nor questions. And should he have done so, he might have been
confuted by evident and express texts of scripture. When therefore
you say, that a church, not erring in fundamentals, doth as much
as by God's assistance lies in her power to do, this is manifestly
untrue ; for God's assistance is always ready to promote her farther.
It is ready, I say, but on condition the church does implore it;
on condition, that when it is offered in the divine directions of
scripture and reason, the church be not negligent to follow it. If
therefore there be any church, which, retaining the foundation,
builds hay and stubble upon it ; which, believing what is precisely
necessary, errs shamefully and dangerously in other things very
profitable ; this by no means argues defect of divine assistance in
God, but neglect of this assistance in the church. Neither is
there any reason, why such a church should please herself too
much for retaining fundamental truths, while she remains so re
gardless of others. For though the simple defect of some truths
* Page 151, 155.

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 369
profitable only, and not simply necessary, may consist with salva
tion ; yet who is there that can give her sufficient assurances, that
the neglect of such truths is not damnable? Besides, who is there
that can put her in sufficient caution, that these errors about pro
fitable matters may not, according to the usual fecundity of error,
bring forth others of a higher quality, such as are pernicious and
pestilent, and undermine by secret consequences the very founda
tions of religion and piety ? Lastly, who can say that she hath
sufficiently discharged her duty to God and man, by avoiding only
fundamental heresies, if in the mean time she be negligent of
others, which though they do not plainly destroy salvation, yet
obscure and hinder, and only not block up the way to it? Which
though of themselves and immediately they damn no man, yet are
causes and occasions that many men run the race of christian piety
more remissly than they should, many defer their repentance, many
go on securely in their sins, and so at length are damned by means
and occasion of these errors, though not for them. Such errors as
these, (though those of the Roman church be much worse, even
in themselves damnable, and by accident only pardonable) yet, I
say, such errors as these, if any church should tolerate, dissemble,
and suffer them to reign, and neglect to reform them, and not
permit them to be freely, yet peaceably, opposed and impugned ;
will any. wise man say, that she hath sufficiently discharged her
duty to God and man 1 That she hath with due fidelity dispensed
the gospel of Christ ? That she hath done what she could, and
what she ought? What shall we say, then, if these errors be
taught by her, and commanded to be taught ? What if she thunder
out her curses against those that will not believe them? What if
she rave and rage against them, and persecute them with fire and
sword, and all kinds of most exquisite torments? Truly, I do
much fear that from such a church (though it hold no error 'ab
solutely inconsistent with salvation) the candlestick of God either
is already removed, or will be very shortly ; and because she is
negligent of profitable truths, that she will lose those that are
necessary ; and because she will not be led into all truths, that in
short time she shall be led into none. And although this should
not happen, yet what mortal man can secure us, that not only a
probable unaffected ignorance, not only a mere neglect of profit
able truths, but also a reckless, supine negligence, manifest
contempt, dissimulation, opposition, oppression of them, may con
sist with salvation ? I truly, for my part, though I hope very well
of all such as, seeking all truth, find that which is necessary ; who
endeavouring to free themselves from all errors, any way contrary
to the purity of Christianity, yet fail of performance, and remain in
some: yet if 1 did not find in myself a love and desire of all profit
able truth ; if I did not put away idleness, and prejudice, and
worldly affections, and so examine to the bottom all my opinions of
divine matters, being prepared in mind to follow God, and God only,
which way soever he shall lead me ; if I did not hope, that I either
do or endeavour to do, these things, certainly I should have little
hope of obtaining salvation.
AA

370 Separation of Protestants from the
62. But to oblige any man, under pain of damnation, to forsake
a church by reason of such errors, against which Christ thought
it superfluous to promise his assistance; and for which he neither
denies his grace here, nor his glory hereafter ; what is it but to
make the narrow way to heaven, narrower than Christ left it? —
Ans. It is not ; for Christ himself hath obliged us hereunto. He
hath forbid us, under pain of damnation, to profess what we believe
not, and consequently, under the same penalty, to leave that com
munion in which we cannot remain without this hypocritical pro
fession of those things which we are convinced to be erroneous.
But then, besides, it is here falsely supposed (as hath been shewed
already), that Christ hath not promised assistance to those that
seek it, but only in matters simply necessary. Neither is there
any reason, why any church, even in this world, should despair
of victory over all errors, pernicious or noxious, provided she
humbly and earnestly implore divine assistance, depend wholly
upon it, and be not wanting to it. Though a triumph over all sin
and error, that is, security that she neither doth nor can err, be
rather to be desired than hoped for on earth, being a felicity reserved
for heaven.
63. Ad. §. 21. But at least the Roman church is as infallible as
protestants, and protestants as fallible as the Roman church ;
therefore to forsake the Roman church for errors, what is it but
to flit from one erring society to another ? — Ans. The incon
sequence of this argument is too apparent : protestants may err,
as well as the church of Rome, therefore they did so ! Boys in
the schools know, that a posse ad esse, the argument follows not.
He is equally fallible who believes twice two to be four, as he that
believes them to be twenty ; yet in this he is not equally deceived,
and he may be certain that he is not so. One architect is no more
infallible than another, and yet he is more secure that his work
is right and straight, who hath made it by the level, than he
which hath made it by guess and by chance. So he that forsakes
the errors of the church of Rome, and therefore renounceth her
communion, that he may renounce the profession of her errors,
though he knows himself fallible, as well as those whom he hath
forsaken, yet he may be certain (as certain as the nature of the
thing will bear) that he is not herein deceived ; because he may
see the doctrine forsaken by him repugnant to scripture, and the
doctrine embraced by him consonant to it. At least, this he may
know, that the doctrine which he hath chosen to him seems true,
and the contrary which he hath forsaken seems false; and, there
fore, without remorse of conscience, he may profess that, but this he
cannot. 64. But we are to remember, that, according to Dr. Potter,
the visible church hath a blessing not to err in fundamentals, in
which any private reformer may fail ; therefore, there was no ne
cessity of forsaking the church, out of whose communion they
were exposed to danger of falling into many more, and even into
damnable errors. — Ans. The visible church is free indeed from
all errors absolutely destructive and unpardonable ; but not from

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 371
all error which in itself is damnable; nor from all which will
actually bring damnation upon them that keep themselves in
them, by their own voluntary and avoidable fault. From such
errors, which are thus damnable, Dr. Potter doth no where say,
that the visible church hath any privilege or exemption. Nay,
you yourself teach, that he plainly teacheth the contrary, and
thereupon will allow him to be no more charitable to the papists,
than papists are to protestants : and yet upon this affected mis
take your discourse is founded in almost forty places of your book.
Besides, any private man, who truly believes the scripture, and
seriously endeavours to know the will of God, and to do it, is as
secure as the visible church, more secure than your church, from
the danger of erring in fundamentals; for it is impossible, that
any man so qualified should fall into any error which to him will
prove damnable : for God requires no more of any man to his sal
vation, but his true endeavour to be saved. Lastly, abiding in
your church's communion is so far from securing me or any man
from damnable error, that if I should abide in it, I am certain I
could not be saved : for abide in it I cannot, without professing to
believe your entire doctrine true : profess this I cannot, but I must
lie perpetually and exulcerate my conscience. And though your
errors were not in themselves damnable, yet to resist the known
truth, and to continue in the profession of known errors and false
hoods, is certainly a capital sin, and of great affinity with the sin
which never will be forgiven.
65. But neither is the church of protestants perfectly free from
errors and corruptions : so the Doctor confesses, (n. 69,) which he
can only excuse by saying, they are not fundamental ; as like
wise those in the Roman Church are confessed not to be funda
mental. And what man of judgment will be a protestant, since
that church is confessedly a corrupted one? — Ans. And yet you
yourself make large discourses in this very chapter, to persuade
protestants to continue in the church of Rome, though supposed to
have some corruptions. And why, I pray, may not a man of judg
ment continue in the communion of a church confessedly corrupted,
as well as a church supposed to be corrupted, especially when this
church, supposed to be corrupted, requires the belief and profes
sion of her supposed corruptions, as the condition of her com
munion ; which this church, confessedly corrupted, doth not.
What man of judgment will think it any disparagement to his
judgment to prefer the better, though not simply the best, before
that which is stark naught ? to prefer indifferent good health, be
fore a diseased and corrupted state of body ? to prefer a field, not
perfectly weeded, before a field that is quite over-run with weeds
and thorns? And, therefore, though protestants have some errors,
yet seeing they are neither so great as yours, nor imposed with
such tyranny, nor maintained with such obstinacy ; he that con
ceives it any disparagement to his judgment, to change your
communion for theirs, though confessed to have some corrup
tions, it may well be presumed that he hath but little judgment.
For as for your pretence that yours are confessed not to be
a a 2

372 Separation of Protestants from the
fundamental, it is an affected mistake, as already I have often told
you. 66. Ad. §. 22. But Dr. Potter says, "It is comfort enough for
the church, that the Lord in mercy will secure her from all her
capital dangers; but she may not hope to triumph over all sin
and error till she be in heaven. Now, if it be comfort enough to
be secured from all capital dangers, which can arise only from
error in fundamental points, why were not your first reformers
content with enough, but would needs dismember the church, out
of a pernicious greediness of more than enough ?" — Ans. I have
already shewed you sufficiently, how capital danger may arise
from errors, though not fundamental. I add now, that what may
be enough to men in ignorance, may be to knowing men not
enough ; according to that of the gospel, " To whom much is
given, of him much shall be required :" that the same error may
be not capital to those who want means of finding the truth, and
capital to others who have means, and neglect to use them : that
to continue in the profession of error, discovered to be so, may be
damnable, though the error be not so. These, I presume, are
reasons enough, and enough why the first reformers might think,
and justly, that not enough for themselves, which yet to some of
their predecessors they hope might be enough. This very argu
ment was objected to St. Cyprian upon another occasion,* and
also by the British quartodecimans to the maintainers of the doc
trine of your church ; f and by both this very answer was re
turned ;J and therefore I cannot but hope, that for their sakes you
will approve it.
67. But if (as the Doctor says) no church may hope to triumph
over all error till she be in heaven, then we must either grant,
that errors not fundamental cannot yield sufficient cause to forsake
the church, or you must affirm, that all communities may and
ought to be forsaken. — Ans. The Doctor does not say, that no
church may hope to be free from all error, either pernicious, or
any way noxious; but that no church may hope to be secure from
all error simply, for this were indeed truly to triumph over all.
*St. Cypri3n, Ep. 63, in these words: "Siquis de antecessoribus nostris, vel ignoran-
ter vel simpliciter non hoc observavit, et tenuit quod nos Dominus facere exemplo et
magisterio suo docuit, potest simplicitati ejus, de indulgentia Domini, venia concedi :
nobis vero non potest ignosci, qui nunc a Domino admoniti et instructi sumus.
t Wilfridus, to Abbot Coleman, alleging Uiat he followed the example of his prede
cessors, famous for holiness, and famous for miracles, in these words : " De patre vestro
Columba et scquacibus ejus, quorum sanctitatem vos imitari et regulam ac pracepta,
ccelestibus signis confirmata, sequi perhibetis, possum respondere : quia multis in judicio
dicentibus Domino quod in nomine ejui prophetaverint et dssmonia ejecerint,et virtutes
multas fecerint, responsurus sit Dominus, quia nunquam eos noverit. Sed absit ut de
patribus vestris hoc dicam, quia justius multo est de incognitus bonum credere quam
malum. Unde et illos Dei famulos et Deo dilectos esse non nego, qui simplicitate rus-
tica, sed inlentione pia Deum dilcxerunt : neque illis multum obesse Paschre talem reor
observantiam, quamdiu nullus advenerat qui cis instituti perfectioris decrela qua? se-
querentur ostenderet. Quos utique credo, siquis tunc ad eos catholicus circulator ad-
veniret, sic ejus monita fuisse seculuros, quomodo ea qua? noverant ac didicerunt Dei
mandata, probantur fuisse secuti. Tu autem et socii tui, si audita decreta scdis aposto-
Ucre, imo universalis ecclesia?, et hfflc Uteris sacris confirmata contemnitis, absque ulla
dubictate peccatis."
X Beda. 1. 5, Eccl. Hist. c. xxv.

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 373
But then we say not, that the communion of any church is to be
forsaken for errors unfundamental, unless it exact withal either a
dissimulation of them being noxious, or a profession of them against
the dictates of conscience, if they be mere errors. This, if the
church does (as certainly yours doth), then her communion is to be
forsaken, rather than the sin of hypocrisy to be committed. Where
as, to forsake the churches of protestants for such errors, there is no
necessity, because they err to themselves, and do not under pain of
excommunication exact the profession of their errors.
68. But the church may not be left by reason of sin, therefore
neither by reason of errors not fundamental, inasmuch as both
sin and error are impossible to be avoided till she be in heaven. —
Ans. The reason of the consequence does not appear to me ; but
I answer to the antecedent : neither for sin nor errors ought a church
to be forsaken, if she does not impose and enjoin them ; but if
she do (as the Roman does), then we must forsake men rather
than God ; leave the church's communion rather than commit sin,
or profess known errors to be divine truths. For the prophet
Ezekiel hath assured us, that to say, "The Lord hath said so, when
the Lord hath not said so," is a great sin, and a high presumption, be
a matter never so small.
69. Ad. §. 23. But neither the quality nor the number of your
church's errors could warrant our forsaking it. Not the quality,
because we suppose them not fundamental : not the number, be
cause the foundation is strong enough to support them. — Ans.
Here again you vainly suppose, that we conceive your errors in
themselves not damnable: though we hope they are not absolutely
unpardonable : but to say they are pardonable, is indeed to suppose
them damnable. Secondly, though the errors of your church did
not warrant our departure, yet your tyrannous imposition of them
would be our sufficient justification. For this lays a necessity on
us, either to forsake your company, or to profess what we know to
be false.
70. Our blessed Saviour hath declared his will, that we forgive
a private offender seventy-seven times ; that is, without limitation
of quantity or time, or quality of trespasses; and then, how dare we
allege his command, that we must not pardon his church for errors
acknowledged to be not fundamental ? — Ans. He that commands
us to pardon our brother, sinning against us so often, will not
allow us for his sake to sin with him so much as once ; he will have
us to do any thing, but sin, rather than offend any man. But his
will is also, that we offend all the world, rather than sin in the
least matter. And, therefore, though his will were, and it were
in our power (which is yet false) to pardon the errors of an erring
church ; yet certainly it is not his will, that we should err with
the church, or, if we do not, that we should against conscience pro
fess the errors of it.
71. Ad. §. 24. But schismatics from the church of England, or
any other church, with this very answer, that they forsake not
the church, but the errors of it, may cast off from themselves the
imputation of schism. — Ans. True, they may make the same an-

374 Separation of Protestants from the
swer, and the same defence as we do ; as a murderer can ay not
guilty, as well as an innocent person; but not so truly, nor so
justly. The question is not what may be pretended, but What
can be proved, by schismatics. They may object errors to other
churches, as well as we do to yours ; but that they prove their
accusation so strongly as we can, that appears not. To the priests
and elders of the Jews, imposing that sacred silence mentioned
in the Acts of the Apostles, St. Peter and St. John answered,
they " must obey God rather than men." The three children to
the King of Babylon, gave in effect the same answer. Give me
now any factious hypocrite, who makes religion the pretence and
cloak of his rebellion, and who sees not that such an one may
answer for himself, in those very formal words which the holy
apostles and martyrs made use of? And yet, I presume, no
christian will deny, but this answer was good in the mouth of the
apostles and martyrs, though it were obnoxious to be abused by
traitors and rebels. Certainly, therefore, it is no good consequence
to say, schismatics may make use of this answer : therefore all
that do make use of it are schismatics. But, moreover, it is to
be observed, that the chief part of our defence, that you deny
your communion to all that deny or doubt of any part of your
doctrine, cannot with any colour be employed against protestants ;
who grant their communion to all who hold with them, not all
things, but things necessary ; that is, such as are in scripture
plainly delivered.
72. But the forsaking the Roman church opens a way to in
numerable sects and schisms, and therefore it must not be for
saken. — Ans. We must not do evil to avoid evil ; neither are all
courses presently lawful, by which inconveniences may be avoided.
If all men would submit themselves to the chief Mufti of the
Turks, it is apparent there would be no divisions ; yet unity is not
to be purchased at so dear a rate. It were a thing much to be
desired, that there were no divisions ; yet difference of opinions,
touching points controverted, is rather to be chosen than unani
mous concord in damned errors : as it is better for men to go to
heaven by diverse ways, or rather by diverse paths of the same
way, than in the same path to go on peaceably to hell — Arnica pax,
magis arnica Veritas !
73. But there can be no just cause to forsake the church, so
the doctor grants ; who, notwithstanding, teacheth that the church
may err in points not fundamental; therefore, neither is the
Roman church to be forsaken for such errors. — Ans. There can
be no just cause to forsake the church absolutely and simply in all
things, that is, to cease being a member of the church ; this I grant,
if it will do you any service. But that there can be no just cause
to forsake the church in some things, or (to speak more properly)
to forsake some opinions and practices, which some true church
retains and defends ; this I deny, and you mistake the doctor, if you
think he affirms it.
"74. Ad. §. 26, 27. What prodigious doctrines (say you) are
these ? Those protestants who believe that your church erred in

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 375
points necessary to salvation, and for that cause left her, cannot
be excused from damnable schism. But others," &c. Prodigious
doctrines indeed ! but who, I pray, are they that teach them ?
— Where does Dr. Potter accuse those protestants of damnable
schism who left your church because they hold it erroneous in
necessary points? What protestant is there that holds not that
you taught things contrary to the plain precepts of Christ; both
ceremonial, in mutilating the communion, and moral, in points of
superstition and idolatry, and most bloody tyranny; which is
without question to err in necessary matters ? Neither does Dr.
Potter accuse any man of schism for holding so, if he should call
himself a schismatic : only he says, such (if there be any such) as
affirm, that ignorant souls among you, who had no means to
know the truth, cannot possibly be saved, that their wisdom and
charity cannot be justified. Now you yourself have plainly af
firmed, that ignorant protestants, dying with contrition, may be
saved; and yet would be unwilling to be thought to say, that
protestants err in no points necessary to salvation : for that may
be in itself, and in ordinary course, where there are means of
knowledge, necessary, which to a man invincibly ignorant, will
prove not necessary. Again, where doth Dr. Potter suppose (as
you make him) that there were other protestants who believed
that your church had no errors? Or, where does he say, they
did well to forsake her, upon this ridiculous reason, because they
judged that she retained all means necessary to salvation ? Do
you think us so stupid, as that we cannot distinguish between
that which Dr. Potter says, and that which you make him say ?
He vindicates protestants from schism two ways; the one is, be
cause they had just, and great, and necessary cause to separate,
which schismatics never have ; because they that have it are no
schismatics: for schism is always a causeless separation. The
other is, because they did not join with their separation, an un
charitable damning of all those from whom they did divide them
selves, as the manner of schismatics is. Now, that which he in
tends for a circumstance of our separation, you make him make
the cause of it, and the motive to it. And whereas he says,
" Though we separate from you in some things, yet we acknow
ledge your church a member of the body of Christ, and therefore
are not schismatics;" you make him say, most absurdly, we did
well to forsake you, because we judged you a member of the body
of Christ. Just as if a brother should leave his brother's com
pany in some ill courses, and should say to him — herein I forsake
you, yet I leave you not absolutely, for I acknowledge you still
to be my brother, and shall use you as a brother ; and you per
verting his speech, should pretend that he had said, I leave your
company in all these ill courses, and I do well to do so, because
you are my brother: so making that the cause of leaving him,
which indeed is the cause that he left him no farther.
75. But you say, " The very reason for which he acquitteth
himself from schism, is, because he holds that the church which
they forsook is not cut off from the body of Christ." — Ans. This

376 Separation of Protestants from the
is true ; but can you not perceive a difference between justifying
his separation from schism by this reason, and making this th
reason of his separation ? If a man denying obedience in some
unlawful matter to his lawful sovereign, should say to him —
herein I disobey you, but yet I am no rebel, because I acknow
ledge you my sovereign lord, and am ready to obey you in all things
lawful'; should he not be an egregious sycophant, that should ac
cuse him as if he had said — I do well to disobey you, because I ac
knowledge you my lawful sovereign ? Certainly, he that joins this
acknowledgment with his necessitated obedience, does well ; but
he that makes this consideration the reason of disobedience, doth ill.
Urge, therefore, this (as you call it) most solemn foppery as far as
you please ; for every understanding reader will easily perceive
that this is no foppery of Dr. Potter's, but a calumny of yours,
from which he is as far, as he is from holding yours to be the true
church ; whereas it is a sign of a great deal of charity in him, that
he allows you to be a part of it.
76. And whereas you pretend to find such unspeakable comfort
herein, that we cannot clear ourselves from schism, otherwise
than by acknowledging that they do not, nor cannot, cut off your
church from the hope of salvation ; I beseech you to take care
that this false comfort cost you not too dear : for why this good
opinion of God Almighty, that he will not damn men for error,
who were without their own fault ignorant of the truth, should
be any consolation to them, who, having the key of knowledge,
will neither use it themselves, nor permit others to use it ; who
have eyes to see, and will not see ; who have ears to hear, and
will not hear ; this, I assure you, passeth my capacity to appre
hend. Neither is this to make our salvation depend on yours, but
only ours and yours not desperately inconsistent ; nor to say, we
must be damned, unless you may be saved ; but that we assure our
selves, if our lives be answerable, we shall be saved by our know
ledge. And that we hope (and I tell you again, Spes est rei incerta
nomen) that some of you may possibly be saved by occasion of their
unaffected ignorance.
77. For our brethren, whom, you say, we condemn of heresy
for denying the church's perpetuity, we know none that do so :
unless you conceive a corrupted church to be none at all ; and if
you do, then, for aught I know, in your account we must be all
heretics : for all of us acknowledge that the church might be cor
rupted even with errors in themselves damnable, and not only
might, but hath been.
78. But schism consists in being divided from that true church,
with which a man agreeth in all points of faith : now we must
profess, you say, that we agree with the church of Rome in all
fundamental articles ; therefore we are schismatics. — Ans. Either
in your major, by all points of faith, you mean all fundamental
points only, or all simply and absolutely. If the former, I deny
your major; for I may, without all schism, divide from that
church which errs in any point of faith fundamental, or other
wise, if she require the profession of this error among the conditions

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 377
of her communion. Now this is our case. If the latter, I deny
the syllogism, as having manifestly four terms, and being cousin-
german to this :
He that obeys God in all things is innocent ;
Titius obeys God in some things,
Therefore he is innocent.
79. But they who judge a reconciliation with the church of
Rome to be damnable; they that say, there might be just and
necessary cause to depart from it, and that they of that church
which have understanding and means to discover their errors, and
neglect to use them, are not to be flattered with hope of salva
tion ; they do cut off that church from the body of Christ, and the
hope of salvation, and so are schismatics; but Dr. Potter doth
the former, therefore he is a schismatic. — Ans. No, he doth not ;
nor cut off that whole church from the hope of salvation, not those
members of it who were invincibly or excusably ignorant of the
truth ; but those only, who, having understanding and means to
discover their error, neglect to use them. Now these are not the
whole church ; and therefore he that, supposing their impenitence,
cuts these off from hopes of salvation, cannot be justly said to cut
off that whole church from the body of Christ, and the hope of sal
vation. 80. Ad. §. 28, 29. Whereas Dr. Potter says, " There is a great
difference between a schism from them, and a reformation of our
selves :" this, you say, " is a quaint subtilty, by which all schism
and sin may be as well excused." It seems then, in your judg
ment, that thieves, and adulterers, and murderers, and traitors,
may say, with as much probability as protestants, that they did no
hurt to others, but only reform themselves. But then, methinks,
it is very strange that all protestants should agree with one con
sent in this defence of themselves from the imputation of schism;
and that to' this day, never any thief or murderer should have
been heard of, to make use of this apology ! And then for schis
matics, I would know whether Victor, Bishop of Rome, who ex
communicated the churches of Asia, for not conforming to his
church in keeping Easter : whether Novatian, that divided from
Cornelius, upon pretence that himself was elected Bishop of
Rome, when indeed he was not ; whether Felicissimus and his
crew, that went out of the church of Carthage, and set up altar
against altar, because having fallen in persecution, they might
not be restored to the peace of the church presently, upon the
intercession of the confessors; whether the donatists, who di
vided from, and damned all the world, because all the world
would not excommunicate them who were accused only, and not
convicted, to have been traditors of the sacred books ; whether
they, which for the slips and infirmities of others, which they
might and ought to tolerate, or upon some differences in matters
of order and ceremony, or for some error in doctrine, neither
pernicious nor hurtful to faith or piety, separate themselves from
others, or others from themselves; or lastly whether they that
put themselves out of the church's unity and obedience, because

378 Separation of Protestants from the
their opinions are not approved there, but reprehended and con
futed, or because being of impious conversation, they are impa
tient of their church's censure ; I would know, I say, whether all,
or any of these, may, with any face, or without extreme impu
dence, put in this plea of protestants, and pretend, with as much
likelihood as they, that they did not separate from others, but
only reformed themselves ? But suppose they were so impudent
as to say so in their own defence falsely, doth it follow by any good
logic, that therefore this apology is not to be employed by pro
testants, who may say so truly ? We make, say they, no schism
from you, but only a reformation of ourselves : this, you reply,
is no good justification, because it may be pretended by any schis
matic. Very true, any schismatic that can speak may say the
same words, (as any rebel that makes conscience the cloak of his
impious disobedience, may say with St. Peter and St. John, " We
must obey God rather than men ;") but then the question is, whe
ther any schismatic may say so truly ? And to this question you
say just nothing ; but conclude, because this defence may be abused
by some, it must be used by none. As if you should have said, St.
Peter and St. John did ill to make such an answer as they made,
because impious hypocrites might make use of the same to palliate
their disobedience and rebellion against the lawful commands of
lawful authority.
81. But seeing their pretended reformation consisted in for
saking the church's corruptions, their reformation of themselves,
and their division from you, falls out to be one and the same
thing. — Just as if two men having been a long while companions
in drunkenness, one of them should turn sober ; this reformation of
himself, and desertion of his companion in this ill custom, would
be one and the same thing, and yet there is no necessity that he
should leave his love to him at all, or his society in other things.
So protestants, forsaking their own former corruptions, which were
common to them with you, could not choose, but withal forsake
you in the practice of these corruptions ; yet this they might and
would have done without breach of charity towards you ; and
without a renunciation of your company in any act of piety and
devotion, confessedly lawful. And, therefore, though both these
by accident joined together, yet this hinders not but that the end
they aimed at was not a separation from you, but a reformation of
themselves. 82. Neither doth their disagreement, in the particulars of the
reformation, (which yet when you measure it without partiality,
you will find to be far short of infinite) nor their symbolizing in
the general of forsaking your corruptions, prove any thing to the
contrary, or any way advantage your design, or make for your
purpose. For it is not any sign at all, much less an evident sign,
that they had no evident design, but only to forsake the church of
Rome; for nothing but malice can deny, that their intent at least
was, to reduce religion to that original purity from which it was
fallen. The declination from which, some conceiving to have
begun (though secretly) in the apostles' times (the mystery of

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 379
iniquity being then in work), and after their departure, to have
showed itself more openly ; others again believing, that the church
continued pure for some ages after the apostles, and then declined:
and consequently some aiming at an exact conformity with the
apostolic times; others thinking they should do God and men
good service, could they reduce the church to the condition of the
fourth and fifth ages : some taking their direction in this work of
reformation only from scripture ; others, from the writings of
fathers, and the decrees of councils of the first five ages ; certainly
it is no great marvel, that there was, as you say, disagreement
between them, in the particulars of their reformation ; nay, morally
speaking, it was impossible it should be otherwise. Yet let me
tell you, the difference between them (especially in comparison of
your church and religion) is not the difference between good and
bad, but between good and better ; and they did best that followed
scripture interpreted by catholic written tradition ; which rule the
reformers of the church of England proposed to themselves to
follow. 83. Ad. §. 30—32. To this effect Dr. Potter, p. 81, 82, of his
book spe'aks thus : " If a monastery should reform itself, and
should reduce into practice ancient good discipline, when others
would not ; in this case could it be charged with schism from
others, or with apostacy from its rule and order ? So in a society
of men universally infected with the same disease, they that should
free themselves from it, could they be therefore said to separate
from the society ?" He presumes they could not, and from hence
concludes, that "neither can the reformed churches be truly
accused for making a schism, (that is, separating from the church
and making themselves no members of it) if all they did was (as
indeed it was) to reform themselves." Which cases, I believe,
any understanding man will plainly see to have in them an exact
parity of reason, and that therefore the argument drawn from
them is pressing and unanswerable. And it may well be sus
pected, that you were partly of this mind, otherwise you would
not have so presumed upon the simplicity of your reader, as, pre
tending to answer it, to put another of your own making in place
of it, and then to answer that.
84. This you do, §. 31, 32, of this chapter, in these words, "I
was very glad to find you in a monastery," &c. Wliere I beseech
the reader to observe these things, to detect the cunning of your
tergiversation ; first, that you have no reason to say, that you
found Dr. Potter in a monastery ; and as little, that you find him
" inventing ways how to forsake his vocation, and to maintain the
lawfulness of schism from the church, and apostacy from a reli
gious order." Certainly the innocent case put by the doctor, of
a monastery reforming itself, hath not deserved such grievous
accusations: unless reformation with you be all one with apos
tacy ; and to forsake sin and disorder, be to forsake one's voca
tions : and surely, if it be so, your vocations are not very lawful,
and your religious orders not very religious. Secondly, that you
quite pervert and change Dr. Potter's cases, and instead of the

380 Separation of Protestants from the
case of a whole monastery reforming itself, when other monasteries
of their order would not; and of some men freeing themselves
from the common disease of their society, when others would not ;
you substitute two others, which you think you can better deal
with, of some particular monks, upon pretence of the neglect
of lesser monastical observances, going out of their monastery,
which monastery yet did confessedly observe their substantial
vows, and all principal statutes: and of a diseased person, quitting
the company of those that were infected with the same disease,
though in their company there was no danger from his disease, it
being impossible that should be mortal, and out of it no hope of
escaping others like that for which he forsook the first infected
company. — I appeal now to any indifferent judge, whether these
cases be the same, or near the same, with Dr. Potter's ? Whether
this be fair and ingenuous dealing — instead of his two instances,
which plainly shewed it possible in other societies, and conse
quently in that of the church, to leave the faults of a society, and
not leave being of it, to foist in two others clean cross to the
doctor's purpose, of men, under colour of faults, abandoning the
society wherein they lived ? I know not what others may think
of this dealing, but, to me, this declining Dr. Potter's cases, and
conveying others into their place, is a great assurance, that, as
they were put by him, you could say nothing to them.
85. But, that no suspicion of tergiversation may be fastened
upon me, I am content to deal with you a little at your own
weapons. Put the case then, though not just as you would have
it, yet with as much favour to you as in reason you can expect —
that a monastery did observe her substantial vows, and all prin
cipal statutes, but yet did generally, practise, and also enjoin the
violation of some lesser, yet obliging observances, and had done
so time out of mind; and that some inferior monks, more con
scientious than the rest, discovering this abuse, should first, with
all earnestness, solicit their superiors for a general and orderly
reformation of these, though small and venial corruptions, yet
corruptions ; but, finding they hoped and laboured in vain to ef
fect this, should reform these faults in themselves, and refuse to
join in the practice of them, with the rest of their confraternity,
and persisting resolutely in such a refusal, should, by their su
periors, be cast out of their monastery, and being not to be re
admitted without a promise of remitting from their stiffness in
these things, and of condescending to others in the practice of
these small faults, should choose rather to continue exiles, than
to re-enter upon such conditions ; I would know whether you
would condemn such men of apostacy from the order ? Without
doubt, if you should, you would find the stream of your casuists
against you ; and besides, involve St. Paul in the same condem
nation, who plainly tells us, that " we may not do the least evil,
that we may do the greatest good." Put case again, you should
be part of a society universally infected with some disease, and
discovering a certain remedy for this disease, should persuade the
whole company to make use of it, but find the greatest part of

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 381
them so far in love with their disease, they were resolved to keep
it ; nay, so fond of it, that they should make a decree, that who
soever would leave it, should leave their company. Suppose now
that you yourself, and some few others, should, notwithstanding
their injunction to the contrary, free yourselves from this disease,
and thereupon they should absolutely forsake and reject you : I
would know in this case who deserves to be condemned — whether
you of uncharitable desertion of your company, or they of a ty
rannical peevishness ? And if in these cases you will (as I verily
believe you will) acquit the inferiors, and condemn the superiors,
absolve the minor part, and condemn the major, then can you
with no reason condemn protestants, for choosing rather to be
ejected from the communion of the Roman church, than with her
to persist (as of necessity they were to do, if they would continue
in her communion) in the profession of errors, though not de
structive of salvation, yet hindering edification ; and in the prac
tice, or at least approbation, of many (suppose not mortal but)
venial corruptions.
86. Thirdly, the reader may be pleased to be advertised that
you censure too partially the corrupt estate of your church in
comparing it to a monastery, which did confessedly observe their
substantial vows, and all principal statutes of their order, and
moreover was secured by an infallible assistance, for the avoiding
of all substantial corruptions : for of your church we confess no
such matter, but say plainly, that she not only might fall into
substantial corruptions, but did so ; that she did not only gene
rally violate, but of all the members of her communion, either in
act or approbation, require and exact the violation of many sub-
.stantial laws of Christ, both ceremonial and moral, which, though
we hope it was pardonable in them who had not means to know
their error, yet, of its own nature, and to them who did or might
have known their error, was certainly damnable. And that it
was not the tything "of mint, and anise, and cummin," the neglect
whereof we impute unto you, but the neglect of judgment, justice,
and the weightier matters of the law.
87. Fourthly, I am to represent unto you that you use pro
testants very strangely, in' comparing them to a company, who
all were known to be led to their pretended reformation, not
with an intent of reformation, but with some other sinister inten
tion ; which is impossible to be known of you, and therefore to
judge so, is against christian charity, and 'common equity; and to
such a company as acknowledge that themselves, as soon as they
were gone out from the monastery that refused to reform, " must
not hope to be free from those, or the like errors and corruptions,
for which they left their brethren ;" seeing this very hope and no
thing else moved them to leave your communion ; and this speech
of yours, so far as it concerns the same errors, plainly destroys
itself. For how can they possibly fall into the same errors, by
forsaking your communion, which that they may forsake, they do
forsake your communion ? And then for other errors of the like
nature and quality, or more enormous than yours, though they

382 Separation of Protestants from the
deny it not possible, but by their negligence and wickedness they
may fall into them, yet they are so far from acknowledging that
they have no hope to avoid this mischief, that they proclaim to
all the world, that it is most prone and easy to do so, to all
those that fear God and love the truth ; and hardly possible for
them to do otherwise, without supine negligence and extreme
impiety. 88. To fit the reddition of your perverted simile to the propo
sition of it, you tell us, that we teach, that for all fundamental
points, the church is secured from error. I answer, fundamental
errors may signify, either such as are repugnant to God's com
mand, and so in their own nature damnable, though to those
which out of invincible ignorance practise them, not unpardon
able : or such as are not only meritoriously, but remedilessly per
nicious and destructive of salvation. We hope that yours, and
the Greek, and other churches before the Reformation, had not
so far apostated from Christ, as to be guilty of errors of the latter
sort. We say, that not only the catholic church, but every par
ticular true church, so long as it continues a church, is secured
from fundamental errors of this kind, but secured not absolutely
by any promise of divine assistance, which being not ordinarily
irresistible, but tempered to the nature of the receivers, may be
neglected, and therefore withdrawn ; but by the repugnance of
any error in this sense fundamental to the essence and nature of a
church. So that, to speak properly, not any set known company
of men is secured, that, though they neglect the means of avoiding
error, yet certainly they shall not err in fundamentals, which
were necessary for the constitution of an infallible guide of faith :
but rather they which know what is meant by a church, are se
cured, or rather certain, that a church remaining a church cannot
fall into fundamental errors; because, when it does so, it is no
longer a church. As they are certain men cannot become unrea
sonable creatures, because when they do so, they are no longer
men. But for fundamental errors of the former sort, which yet,
I hope, will warrant our departure from any communion infected
with them, and requiring the profession of them ; from such
fundamental errors we do not teach so much as the church catho
lic, much less (which only were for your purpose) that your
church had any protection or security, but know for a certain,
that many errors of this nature had prevailed against you ; and
that a vain presumption of an absolute divine assistance (which
yet is promised but upon conditions) made both your present
errors incurable, and exposed you to the imminent danger of
more and greater. This therefore is either to abuse what we say,
or to impose falsely upon us what we say not. And to this you
presently add another manifest falsehood, viz. that we say — that
no particular person, or church, hath any promise of assistance
in points fundamental. Whereas, cross to this in diameter, there
is no protestant but holds, and must hold, that there is no parti
cular church, no, nor person, but hath promise of divine as
sistance to lead them into all necessary truth, if they seek it as

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 383
they should, by the means which God hath appointed. And should
we say otherwise, we should contradict plain scripture, which as
sures us plainly, that — Every one that seeketh findeth, and every
one that asketh receiveth: and that — If we being evil, can give
good gifts to our children, much more shall our heavenly Father
give his Spirit to them that ask it : and that — If any man want
wisdom (especially spiritual wisdom) he is to ask of God, who
giveth to all men, and upbraideth not.
89. You obtrude upon us, thirdly — that when Luther began,
he being but one, opposed himself to all, as well subjects as su
periors. — Ans. If he did so in the cause of God, it was heroically
done of him. This had been without hyperbolizing, Mundus
contra Athanasium, and Athanasius contra mundum ; neither is it
impossible that the whole world should so far lie in wickedness,
(as St. John speaks) that it may be lawful and noble for one man
to oppose the world. But yet were we put to our oaths, we should
surely not testify any such thing for you; for how can we say
properly, and without straining, that — he opposed himself to all,
unless we could say, also, that all opposed themselves to him ?
And how can we say so, seeing the world can witness, that so
many thousands, nay, millions, followed his standard as soon as it
was advanced ?
90. But none that lived immediately before him thought or
spake as he did. This is, first, nothing to the purpose. The
church was then corrupted, and sure it was no dishonour to him
to begin the reformation. In the christian warfare, every man
ought to strive to be foremost. Secondly, it is more than you
can justify : for though no man before him lifted up his voice like
a trumpet, as Luther did ; yet who can assure us, but that many
before him both thought and spake in the lower voice of petitions
and remonstrances, in many points, as he did ?
91. Fourthly, and lastly, whereas you say, that many chief
learned protestants are forced to confess the antiquity of your doc
trine and practice ; I answer, of many doctrines and practices of
yours this is not true, nor pretended to be true by those that have
dealt in this argument. Search your storehouse, Mr. Brerely, who
hath travelled as far in this north-west discovery, as it was pos
sible for human industry ; and, when you have done so, I pray
inform me, what confessions of protestants have you, for the an
tiquity of the doctrine of the communion in one kind : the law
fulness and expedience of the Latin service: for the present use of
indulgences : for the pope's power in temporalities over princes :
for the picturing of the Trinity : for the lawfulness of the worship
of pictures : for your beads, and rosary, and ladies' psalter ; and,
in a word, for your whole worship of the blessed Virgin : for your
oblations by way of consumption, and therefore in the quality
of sacrifices to the Virgin Mary, and other saints : for your
saying of paternosters and creeds to the honour of saints, and
of ave-maries to the honour of other saints besides the blessed
Virgin : for the infallibility of the bishop or church of Rome :
for your prohibiting the scripture to be read publicly in the

384 Separation of Protestants from the
church, in such languages as all may understand : for your
doctrine of the blessed Virgin's immunity from actual sin ; and
for your doctrine and worship of her immaculate conception :
for the necessity of auricular confession : for the necessity of the
priests' intention to obtain benefit by any of your sacraments : and,
lastly, (not to trouble myself with finding out more) for this very
doctrine of licentiousness, that though a man live and die without
the practice of Christian virtues, and with the habits of many
damnable sins unmortified ; yet if he in the last moment of life
have any sorrow for his sins, and join confession with it, certainly
he shall be saved. Secondly, they that confess some of your doc
trines to have been the doctrine of the fathers may be mistaken,
being abused by many words and phrases of the fathers, which
have the Roman sound, when they are far from the sense. Some
of them I am sure are so, I will name Goulartius, who in his
Commentaries on St. Cyprian's 35th Ep. grants that the sentence
(" heresies have sprung," &c.) quoted by you, §. 36 of this
chapter, was meant of Cornelius : whereas it will be very plain to
any attentive reader, that St. Cyprian speaks there of himself.
Thirdly, though some protestants confess some of your doctrine
to be ancient, yet this is nothing, so long as it is evident, even by
the confession of all sides, that many errors, I instance in that of
the millenaries, and the communicating of infants, were more
ancient. Not any antiquity, therefore, unless it be absolute and
primitive, is a certain sign of true doctrine. For if the church
were obnoxious to corruption (as we pretend it was) who can pos
sibly warrant us, that part of this corruption might not get in and
prevail in the fifth, or fourth, or third, or second age ? Especially
seeing the apostles assure us, that the mystery of iniquity was
working, though more secretly, even in their times. If any man
ask, how could it become universal in so short a time? let him
tell me how the error of the millenaries, and the communicating
of infants, became so soon universal ; and then he shall acknow
ledge, what was done in some, was possible in others. Lastly, to
cry quittance with you, as there are protestants who confess the an
tiquity, but always post-nate to apostolic, of some points of your
doctrine : so there want not papists who acknowledge as freely
the novelty of many of them, and the antiquity of ours. A col
lection of whose testimonies we have (without thanks to you) in
your Indices expurgatorii ; the divine providence blessedly abusing
for the readier manifestation of the truth this engine intended by
you for the subversion and suppression of it. Here is no place
to stand upon particulars : only one general ingenuous confession
of that great Erasmus* may not be passed over in silence. Non
desunt magni theologi qui non verentur affinnare, nihil esse in Lu-
thero quin per probates authores defendi possit : there want not great
divines, which stick not to affirm that there is nothing in Luther
which may not be defended by good and allowed authors.
Whereas therefore you close up this simile with — "Consider
these points, and see whether your similitude do not con-
* Erasm. Ep. lib. xv. Ep. ad Godeschalcum Ros.

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 385
demn your progenitors of schism from God's visible church ;" I assure
you, I have well considered them, and do plainly see that this is not
Dr. Potter's similitude, but your own : and besides, that it is wholly
made up of mistakes and falsehood, and is at no hand a sufficient
proof of this great accusation.
92. Let us come now to the second similitude of your making ;
in the entrance whereunto you tell us — that from the monastery
Dr. Potter is fled to a hospital of persons universally infected
with some disease, where he finds to be true what you supposed,
that after his departure from his brethren, he might fall into
greater inconveniences, and more infectious diseases than those
for which he left them. — Thus yoxi. But, to deal truly with you,
I find nothing of all this, nor how it is consequent from any thing
said by you, or done by Dr. Potter. But this I find, that you
have composed this your similitude as you did the former, of a
heap of vain suspicions, pretended to be grounded on our confessions.
As, first, that your diseases, which we forsook, neither were nor
could be mortal: whereas we assure ourselves, and are ready to
justify, that they are and were mortal in themselves, and would
have been so to us, if. when light came to us, we had loved dark
ness more than light. And Dr. Potter, though he hoped your
church wanted no necessary vital part, that is, that some in your
church by ignorance might be saved ; yet he nothing doubts but
that it is full of ulcers without, and diseases within, and is far
from so extenuating your errors as to make them only like the
superfluous fingers of the giant of Gath. Secondly, that we had
no hope to avoid other diseases like those for which we forsook
your company, nor to be secure out of it from damnable errors : —
whereas the hope hereof was the only motive of our departure;
and we assure ourselves that the means to be secured from
damnable error, is not to be secure as you are, but carefully to use
those means of avoiding it, to which God hath promised, and will
never fail to give, a blessing. Thirdly, that those innumerable
mischiefs which follow upon the departure of protestants, were
caused by it as by a proper cause : — whereas their doctrine was
no otherwise the occasion of them, than the gospel of Christ of the
division of the world. The only fountain of all these mischiefs
being indeed no other than your pouring out a flood of persecutions
against protestants, only because they would not sin and be damned
with you for company. Unless we may add, the impatience of some
protestants, who not enduring to be torn in pieces like sheep by a
company of wolves without resistance, chose rather to die like sol
diers than martyrs.
93. But you proceed, and, falling into a fit of admiration, cry
out and say thus, " To what pass hath heresy brought men, who
blush not to compare the blessed spouse of the Lord, the only
dove," &c. to a monastery that must be forsaken, to the giant in
Gath with superfluous fingers ! — But this spouse of Christ, this
only dove, this purchase of our Saviour's blood, this catholic
church which you thus almost deify, what is it but a society of
men, whereof every particular, and by consequence the whole
BB

386 Separation of Protestants from the
company, is, or may be, guilty of many sins daily committed
against knowledge and conscience ? Now I would fain under
stand why one error in faith, especially if not fundamental, should
not consist with the holiness of this spouse, this dove, this church,
as well as many and great sins committed against knowledge and
conscience ? If this be not to strain at gnats and swallow camels,
I would fain understand what it is ? And here, by the way, I
desire you to consider whether, as it were with one stroke of a
sponge, you do not wipe out all that you have said, to prove
protestants schismatics for separating from your church, though
supposed to be in some errors not fundamental. For if any such
error may make her deserve to be compared to " a monastery so
disordered that it must be forsaken ;" then if you suppose (as here
you do) your church in such errors, your church is so disordered
that it must, and therefore without question may be, forsaken ; I
mean in those her disorders and corruptions, and no farther.
94. And yet you have not done with those similitudes — but
must observe (you say) one thing, and that is, that as these re
formers of the monastery, and others who left the diseased com
pany, could not deny but that they left the. said communities : so
Luther and the rest cannot pretend not to have left the visible
church. And that Dr. Potter speaks very strangely when he
says, " In a society of men universally infected with some disease,
they that should free themselves from the common disease, could
not be therefore said to separate from the society." For if they
do not separate themselves from the society of the infected per
sons, how do they free themselves from the common disease? To
which I answer : that indeed if you speak of the refornfers of a
monastery, and of the deserters of the diseased company, as you
put the cases, that is, of those which left these communities, then
it is as true as gospel, that they cannot deny but that they left the
said communities. But it appears not to me, how it will ensue
hereupon, that Luther and the rest cannot pretend not to have
left the visible church. For, to my apprehension, this argument is
very weak.
They which left some communities cannot truly deny but that
they left them ; therefore Luther and his followers cannot deny
but that they left the visible church.
Where, methinks, you prove little, but take for granted that
which is one of the greatest questions amongst us, that is, that the
company which Luther left was the whole visible church : whereas
you know we say, it was but a part of it, and that corrupted, and
obstinate in her corruptions. Indeed, that Luther and his fol
lowers left off the practice of those corruptions wherein the whole
visible church did communicate formerly, (which I meant when
I acknowledged above that they forsook the external communion
of the visible church) or that they left that part of the visible
church in her corruptions which would not be reformed : these
things, if you desire, 1 shall be willing to grant; and that by a
synecdoche of the whole for the part, he might be said to forsake
the visible church, that is, a part of it, and the greater part. But

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 387
that, properly speaking, he forsook the whole visible church, I
hope you will excuse me if I grant not this, until you bring better
proof of it than your former similitude. And my reason is this,
because he and his followers were a part of this church, and
ceased not to be so by their reformation. Now he and his fol
lowers certainly forsook not themselves; therefore not every part
of the church, therefore not the whole church. But then, if you
speak of Dr. Potter's cases, according as he put them, and answer
not your own arguments, when you make show of answering his;
methinks it should not be so unreasonable as you make it, for the
persons he speaks of to deny that they left the communities
whereof they were members. For example, that the monks of
St. Bennet's order make one body, whereof their several monas
teries are several members, I presume it will be easily granted.
Suppose now, that all these monasteries, being quite out of order,
some twenty or thirty of them should reform themselves, the rest
persisting still in their irregular courses ; were it such a mon
strous impudence as you make it, for these monasteries, which
we suppose reformed, to deny that they forsook their order, or
the community whereof they were parts ? In my opinion it is no
such matter. Let the world judge. Again, whereas the doctor
says, that " in a society of men universally infected with some
disease, they that should free themselves from the common dis
ease, could not therefore be said to separate from the society :"
it is very strange to me that you should say, he speaks very
strangely. Truly, sir, I am extremely deceived if his words be
not plain English, and plain sense, and contain such a manifest
truth as cannot be denied with modesty, nor gone about to be
proved without vanity. For whatsoever is proved must be proved
by something more evident. Now what can be more evident than
this: that if some whole family were taken with agues, if the
father of this family should free himself from his, that he should
not therefore deservedly be thought to abandon and desert his
family? But (say you) if they do not separate themselves from
the society of the wicked persons, how do they free themselves
from the common disease ? Do they at the same time remain in
the company, and yet depart from those infected creatures?
Methinks a writer of controversies should not be ignorant how
this may be done without any such difficulty ! But if you do not
know, I will tell you, there is no necessity they should leave the
company of these infected persons at all, much less that they
should at once depart from it and remain with it, which I confess
were very difficult. But if they will free themselves from their
disease, let them stay where they are, and take physic. Or, if
you would be better informed how this strange thing may be
done, learn from yourself — they may free their own persons from
the common disease, yet so that they remain still in the company
infected, eating and drinking with them, &c. Which are your
own words within four or five lines after this: plainly showing,
that your mistaking Dr. Potter's meaning, and your wondering
at his words as at some strange monsters, was all this while
bb2

388 Separation of Protestants from the
affected, and that you are conscious to yourself of perverting his
argument, that you may seem to say something, when indeed you
say nothing. Whereas therefore you add, we must then say that
they separate themselves from the persons, though it be by occa
sion of the disease; I assure you, good sir, you must not do so at
any hand ; for then you alter and spoil Dr. Potter's case quite,
and fight not with his reason, but your own shadow. For the
instance of a man freeing himself from the disease of his company,
and not leaving his company, is very fit to prove, by the parity of
reason, that it is very possible a man may leave the corruptions of
a church, and not leave the church, that is, not cease to be a mem
ber of it : but yours, of a man leaving his company, by occasion of
their disease, hath no analogy at all with this business.
95. But Luther and his followers did not continue in the com
pany of those from whose diseases they pretended to free them
selves. — Very true, neither was it said they did so. There is no
necessity that that which is compared to another thing should
agree with it in all things ; it is sufficient if it agree in that wherein
it is compared. A man freeing himself from the common disease
of a society, and yet continuing a part of it, is here compared to
Luther and his followers, freeing themselves from the corruptions
of the visible church, and continuing a part of the church. As
for accompanying the other parts of it in all things, it was neither
necessary, nor without destroying our supposition of their for
saking the corruptions of the church possible : not necessary, for
they may be parts of the church which do not join with other
parts of it in all observances : nor possible, for had he accom
panied them in all things, he had not freed himself from the
common corruptions.
96. But they endeavoured to force the society, whereof they
were parts, to be healed and reformed as they were ; and, if it
refused, they did, when they had power, drive them away, even
their superiors, both spiritual and temporal, as is notorious. The
proofs hereof are wanting, and therefore I might defer my answer
until they were produced ; yet take this beforehand : if they did
so, then herein, in my opinion, they did amiss; for I have learned
from the ancient fathers of the church, that nothing is more
against religion than to force religion ; and of St. Paul, the
weapons of the christian warfare are not carnal. And great rea
son : for human violence may make men counterfeit, but cannot
make them believe, and is therefore fit for nothing, but to breed
form without, and atheism within. Besides, if this means of
bringing men to embrace any religion were generally used, (as if
it may be justly used in any place by those that have power, and
think they have truth, certainly they cannot with reason deny but
that it may be used in every place, by those that have power as
well as they, and think they have truth as well as they) what
could follow but the maintenance perhaps of truth, but perhaps
only of the profession of it in one place, and the oppression of it
in a hundred? What will follow from it, but the preservation
peradventure of unity, but peradventure only of uniformity, in

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 389
particular states and churches ; but the immortalizing the greater
and more lamentable divisions of Christendom and the world?
And, therefore, what can follow from it, but perhaps in the judg
ment of carnal policy, the temporal benefit and tranquillity of
temporal states and kingdoms, but the infinite prejudice, if not
the desolation, of the kingdom of Christ? And therefore it well
becomes them, who have their portions in this life, who serve no
higher state than that of England, or Spain, or France, nor
this neither, any further than they may serve themselves by it ;
who think of no other happiness but the preservation of their own
fortunes and tranquillity in this world; who think of no other
means to preserve states, but human power and Machiavellian
policy, and believe no other creed but this, Regi aut civitati im-
perium habenti nihil injustumquod utile: such men as these it may
become to maintain by worldly power and violence their state
instrument, religion. For if all be vain and false (as in their
judgment it is), the present whatsoever is better than any, be
cause it is already settled : and alteration of it may draw with it
change of states, and the change of state the subversion of their
fortune. But they that are indeed servants and lovers of Christ,
of truth, of the church, and of mankind, ought with all courage
to oppose themselves against it, as a common enemy of all these.
They that know there is a King of kings, and Lord of lords, by
whose will and pleasure kings and kingdoms stand and fall ; they
know that to no king or state any thing can be profitable which
is unjust; and that nothing can be more evidently unjust, than
to force weak men, by the profession of a religion which they be
lieve not, to lose their own eternal happiness, out of a vain and
needless fear, lest they may possibly disturb their temporal quiet
ness. There is no danger to any state from any man's opinion ;
unless it be such an opinion, by which disobedience to authority,
or impiety, is taught or licensed; which sort, I confess, may justly
be punished as well as other faults ; or, unless this sanguinary
doctrine be joined with it, that it is lawful for him by human
violence to enforce others to it. Therefore, if protestants did
offer violence to other men's consciences, and compel them to
embrace their Reformation, I excuse them not ; much less if they
did so to the sacred persons of kings, and those that were in
authority over them, who ought to be so secured from violence,
that even their unjust and tyrannous violence, though it may be
avoided, (according to that of our Saviour, " when they persecute
you in one city, flee unto another") yet may it not be resisted by
opposing violence against it. Protestants, therefore, that were
guilty of this crime, are not to be excused ; and blessed had they
been, had they chosen rather to be martyrs than murderers, and
to die for their religion rather than to fight for it. But of all the
men in the world, you are the most unfit to accuse them hereof,
against whom the souls of the martyrs from under the altar cry
much louder than against all their other persecutors together :
who for these many ages together have daily sacrificed hecatombs
of innocent christians, under the name of heretics, to your blind

390 Separation of Protestants from the
zeal, and furious superstition : who teach plainly, that you may
propagate your religion, whensoever you have power, by depo
sing of kings, and invasion of kingdoms ; and think, when you
kill the adversaries of it, you do God good service. But for their
departing corporally from them, whom mentally they had for
saken ; for their forsaking the external communion and company
of the unreformed part of the church, in their superstitions and
impieties: thus much of your accusation we embrace, and glory
in it ; and say, though some protestants might offend in the manner
or degree of their separation, yet certainly their separation itself
was not schismatical, but innocent; and not only so, but just and
necessary. And as for your obtruding upon Dr. Potter, that he
should say, there neither was nor could be just cause to do so, no
more than to depart from Christ himself, I have showed divers
times already, that you deal very injuriously with him, confound
ing together departing from the church, and departing from some
general opinions and practices, which did not constitute, but vitiate,
not make the church, but mar it. For though he says that which
is most true, that there can be no just cause to depart from the
church, that is, to cease being a member of the church, no more
than to depart from Christ himself, inasmuch as these are not
divers, but the same thing ; yet he no where denies, but there
might be just and necessary cause to depart from some opinions and
practices of your church, nay, of the catholic church. And there
fore you do vainly infer that, Luther and his followers for so doing
were schismatics.
97. Ad. §. 35. I answer in a word, that neither are Optatus's
sayings rules of faith, and therefore not fit to determine contro
versies of faith : and then, that Majorinus might well be a schis
matic for departing from Caecilianus, and the chair of Cyprian
and Peter without cause ; and yet Luther and his followers, who
departed from the communion of the bishop of Rome, and the
bishop of their own diocese, be none, because they had just and
necessary cause of their departure. For otherwise they must have
continued in the profession of known errors, and the practice of
manifest corruptions.
98. Ad. §. 36. In the next section you tell us, that Christ our
Lord gave St. Peter and his successors authority over his whole
militant church. And, for proof hereof, you first refer us to
Brerely, citing exactly the places of such chief protestants as have
confessed the antiquity of this point. Where first you fall into
the fallacy which is called ignoratio elenchi, or mistaking the
question ; for being to prove this point true, you only prove it
ancient : which, to what purpose is it, when both the parties liti
gant are agreed, that many errors were held by many of the
ancient doctors, much more ancient than any of those who are
pretended to be confessed by protestants to have held with you in
this matter : and when those, whom you have to do with, and
whom it is vain to dispute against, but "out of principles received
by them, are all peremptory, that though novelty be a certain
note of falsehood, yet no antiquity, less than apostolical, is a cer-

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 391
tain note of truth? Yet this I say not as if I did acknowledge
what you pretend, that protestants did confess the fathers against
them in this point. For the point here issuable is not, whether
St. Peter were head of the church ? Nor, whether the bishop of
Rome had any priority in the church ? Nor, whether he had
authority over it given him by the church? But, whether by
divine right, and by Christ's appointment, he were head of the
catholic church? Now, having perused Brerely, I cannot find
any one protestant confessing any one father to have concurred
in opinion with you in this point. And the reader hath reason to
suspect, that you also out of all the fathers could not find any one
authority pertinent to this purpose; for otherwise you were much
to blame, citing so few, to make choice of such as are imperti
nent. For let the understanding reader peruse the 55th epist.
of St. Cyprian, with an ordinary attention, out of which you take
your first place ; and I am confident, that he shall find, that he
means nothing else by the words quoted by you, but that in one
particular church, at one time, there ought to be but one bishop,
and that he should be obeyed in all things lawful; the non-per
formance whereof was one of the most ordinary causes of heresies
against the faith, and schism from the communion of the church
universal. He shall find, secondly, and that by many convincing
arguments, that though he write to Cornelius, Bishop of Rome,
yet he speaks not of him, but of himself then bishop of Carthage,
against whom a faction of schismatics had then set up another.
And therefore here your ingenuity is to be commended above
many of your side : for whereas they ordinarily abuse this place
to prove, that in the whole church there ought to be but one
priest, and one judge ; you seem somewhat diffident hereof, and
thereupon say, that the words plainly condemn Luther, whether
he will understand them as spoken of the universal, or of every
particular church : but whether they condemn Luther is another
question. The question here is, whether they plainly prove the
pope's supremacy over all other bishops ? Which certainly they
are as far from proving as from proving the supremacy of any
other bishop ; seeing it is evident they were intended not of one
bishop over the whole catholic church, but of one bishop in one
particular church.
99. And no less impertinent is your saying out of Optatus, if it
be well looked into, though at the first sight it may seem other
wise ; because Optatus's scene happened to be Rome, whereas St.
Cyprian's was Carthage. The truth is, the donatists had set up
at Rome a bishop of their faction ; not with intent to make him
bishop of the whole church, but of that church in particular.
Now Optatus, going upon St. Cyprian's above-mentioned ground
of one bishop in one church, proves them schismatics for so doing,
and he proves it by this argument : St. Peter was first bishop of
Rome, neither did the apostles attribute to themselves each one
his particular chair (understand, in that city ; for in other places
others, I hope, had chairs beside St. Peter) ; and therefore he is
a schismatic, who against that one single, chair erects another,

392 Separation of Protestants from the
(understand, as before, in that place) making another bishop in
that diocese besides him who was lawfully elected to it.
100. But yet by the way he styles St. Peter head of the apostles,
and says, that from thence he was called Cephas. — Ans. Perhaps
he was abused in this opinion, by thinking Cephas derived from
the Greek word xetpuh-rj, a head : whereas it is a Syriac word,
and signifies a stone. Besides, St. Peter might be head of the
apostles, that is, first in order and honour among them, and not
have supreme authority over them. And indeed that St. Peter
should have authority over all the apostles, and yet exercise no one
act of authority over any one of them, and that they should show
to him no sign of subjection, methinks is as strange as that a king
of England for twenty-five years together should do no act of re
gality, nor receive any one acknowledgment of it. As strange
methinks it is, that you, so many ages after, should know this so
certainly, as you pretend to do, and that the apostles (after that
those words were spoken in their hearing, by virtue whereof
St. Peter is pretended to have been made their head) should still
be so ignorant of it, as to question which of them should be the
greatest? Yet more strange, that our Saviour should not bring
them out of their error, by telling them St. Peter was the man,
but rather confirm it by saying — the kings of the gentiles exercise
authority over them, but it should not be so among them. No
less a wonder was it, that St. Paul should so far forget St. Peter
and himself, as that, first, mentioning of him so often, he should
do it without any title of honour: secondly, speaking of the
several degrees of men in the church, he should not give St. Peter
the highest, but place him in equipage with the rest of the apostles,
and say, " God hath appointed (not first Peter, then the rest of
the apostles, but) first apostles, secondly prophets." Certainly,
if the apostles were all first, to me it is very probable, that no one
of them was before the rest. For by first, all men understand
either that which is before all, or that before which is nothing.
Now, in the former sense, the apostles could not be all first, for
then every one of them must have been before every one of the
rest ; and therefore they must be first in the other sense. And
therefore no man, and therefore not St. Peter, must be before any
of them. Thirdly and lastly, that speaking of himself in particu
lar, and perhaps comparing himself with St. Peter in particular,
rather than any other, he should say, in plain term's, I am nothing
inferior to the very chiefest apostles. But, besides all this, though
we should grant against all those probabilities, and many more,
that Optatus meant, that St. Peter was head of the apostles, not
in our, but in your sense, and that St. Peter indeed was so; yet
still you are very far from showing, that in the judgment of
Optatus, the bishop of Rome was to be at all, much less by divine
right, successor to St. Peter in this his headship and authority.
For what incongruity is there if we say, that he might succeed
St. Peter in that part of his care, the government of that par
ticular church, (as sure he did even while St. Peter was living)
and yet that neither he nor any man was to succeed him in his

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 393
apostleship, nor in his government of the church universal? —
Especially, seeing St. Peter and the rest of the apostles, by laying
the foundations of the church, were to be the foundations of it, and
accordingly are so called in scripture. And therefore as in a build
ing it is incongruous, that foundations should succeed foundations ;
so it may be in the church, that any other apostles should succeed
the first.
101. Ad. §. 37. The next paragraph I might well pass over,
as having no argument in it. For there is nothing in it but two
sayings of St. Augustine, which. I have great reason to esteem no
argument, until you will promise me to grant whatsoever I shall
prove by two sayings of St. Augustine. But, moreover, the second
of these sentences seems to me to imply the contradiction of the
first. For to say, that the sacrilege of schism is eminent, when
there is no cause of separation, implies to my understanding, that
there may be a cause of separation. Now in the first he says
plainly, that this is impossible. Neither doth any reconciliation
of his words occur to me, but only this, that in the former he
speaks upon supposition, that the public service of God, wherein
men are to communicate, is unpolluted, and no unlawful thing
practised in their communion ; which was so true of their com
munion, that the donatists who separated, did not deny it. And
to make this answer no improbable evasion, it is observable out
of St. Augustine and Optatus, that though the donatists, at the
beginning of their separation, pretended no cause for it, but only
that the men from whom they separated, were defiled with the
contagion of traditors ; yet afterwards, to make the continuance
of it more justifiable, they did invent and spread abroad this ca
lumny against catholics, that they set pictures upon their altars ;
which, when St. Augustine comes to answer, he does not deny
the possibility of the thing, for that had been to deny the catholic
church to be made up of men, all which had free will to do evil,
and therefore might possibly agree in doing it ; and, had he de
nied this, the action of after ages had been his refutation : neither
does he say (as you would have done), that it was true, they placed
pictures there, and moreover worshipped them, but yet not for
their own sakes, but for theirs who were represented by them: nei
ther does he say (as you do in this chapter), that though this were
granted a corruption, yet were they not to separate for it. What
then does he? Certainly nothing else but abhor the thing and
deny the imputation. Which way of answering does not, I con
fess, plainly shew, but yet it somewhat intimates, that he had no
thing else to answer ; and that if he could not have denied this,
he could not have denied the donatist's separation from them to
have been just. If this answer to this little argument seem not
sufficient, I add, moreover, that if it be applied to Luther's sepa
ration, it hath the common fault of all your allegations out of
fathers, impertinence. For it is one thing to separate from the
communion of the whole world, another to separate from all the
communions in the world : one thing to divide from them who are
united among themselves, another to divide from them who are

394 Separation of Protestants from the
divided among themselves. Now the donatists separated from the
whole world of Christians, united in one communion, professing the
same faith, serving God after the same manner, which was a very
great argument, that they could not have just cause to leave them :
according to that of Tertullian — Variasse debuerat error ecclesia
rum ; quod autem apud multos unum est, non est erratum, sed tra-
ditum. But Luther and his followers did not so. The world, I
mean of christians and catholics, was divided and subdivided long
before he divided from it ; and by their divisions had much weak
ened their own authority, and taken away from you this plea of St.
Augustine, which stands upon no other foundation, but the unity
of the whole world's communion.
102. Ad. §. 38. If Luther were in the right, most certain those
protestants that differed from him were in the wrong : — but that
either he or they were schismatics, it follows not. Or, if it does,
then either the Jesuits are schismatics from the dominicans, or they
from the Jesuits : the canonists from the Jesuits, or the Jesuits
from the canonists; the scotists from the thomists, or they from
the scotists; the franciscans from the dominicans, or the domini
cans from the franciscans : for between all these the world knows,
that, in point of doctrine, there is a plain and irreconcilable con
tradiction ; and therefore one part must be in error, at least not
fundamental. Thus your argument returns upon yourself, and, if
it be good, proves the Roman church in a manner to be made up
of schismatics. But the answer to it is, that it begs this very false
and vain supposition — that whosoever errs in any point of doctrine
is a schismatic.
103. Ad. §. 39. In the next place you number up your victories,
and tell us — that out of those premises, this conclusion follows ;
that Luther and his followers were schismatics from the visible
church ; the pope ; the diocese wherein they were baptized ; from
the bishop under whom they lived ; from the country to which
they belonged ; from their religious order, wherein they were pro
fessed ; from one another; and, lastly, from a man's self; because
the self-same protestant is convicted to-day, that his yesterday's
opinion was an error. — To which I answer, that Luther and his
followers separated from many of these, in some opinions and
practices ; but that they did it without cause, which only can
make them schismatics, that was the only thing you should have
proved : and to that you have not urged one reason of any moment.
All of them for weight and strength were cousin-germans to this
pretty device, wherewith you will prove them schismatics from
themselves, because the self-same protestant to-day is convicted in
conscience, that his yesterday's opinion was an error. It seems,
then, that they that hold errors, must hold them fast, and take
special care of being convicted in conscience, that they are in er
ror, for fear of being schismatics! protestants must continue protest
ants, and puritans puritans, and papists papists; nay, Jews, and
Turks, and pagans, must remain Jews, and Turks, and pagans,
and go on constantly to the devil ; or else, forsooth, they must be
schismatics, and that from themselves. And this, perhaps, is the

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 395
cause that makes papists so obstinate, not only in their common
superstition, but also in adhering to the proper fancies of their
several sects ; so that it is a miracle to hear of any Jesuit that hath
forsaken the opinion of the Jesuits, or any dominican that hath
changed his for the Jesuits'. Without question, this gentleman,
my adversary, knows none such, or else, methinks, he should
not have objected it to Dr. Potter, that he knew a man in the
world, who, from a puritan, was turned to a moderate protestant,
which is likely to be true. But sure, if this be all his fault, he
hath no reason to be ashamed of his acquaintance : for, possibly
it may be a fault to be in error, because many times it proceeds
from a fault ; but sure the forsaking of error cannot be a sin,
unless -to be in error be a virtue. And, therefore, to do as you
do, to damn men for false opinions, to call them schismatics for
leaving them ; to make pertinacy in error, that is, an unwilling
ness to be convicted, or a resolution not to be convicted, the form
of heresy, and to find fault with mgn for being convicted in con
science, that they are in error, is the most incoherent and contra
dictious injustice that ever was heard of. But, sir, if this be a strange
matter to you, that which I shall tell you will be much stranger; I
know a man that of a moderate protestant turned a papist ; and the
day that he did so (as all things that are done, are perfected some day
or other) was convicted in conscience, that his yesterday's opinion
was an error, and yet thinks he was no schismatic for doing so, and
desires to be informed by you, whether or no he was mistaken ? The
same man, afterwards, upon better consideration, became a doubt
ing papist; and of a doubting papist a confirmed protestant. And
yet this man thinks himself no more to blame for all these changes,
than a traveller, who, using all diligence to find the right way to some
remote city, where he had never been (as the party I speak of had
never been in heaven), did yet mistake it, and after find his error,
and amend it. Nay, fie stands upon his justification so far, as to
maintain, that his alterations, not only to you, but also from you,
by God's mercy, were the most satisfactory actions to himself that
ever he did, and the greatest victories that ever he obtained over
himself, and his affections to those things which in this world are
most precious ; as wherein for God's sake, and (as he was verily
persuaded) out of love to the truth, he went, upon a certain expec
tation of those inconveniences, which to ingenuous natures are of
all most terrible : so that, though there were much weakness in
some of these alterations, yet certainly there was no wickedness.
Neither does he yield his weakness altogether without apology, see
ing his deductions were rational, and out of some principles com
monly received by protestants as well as papists, and which by his
education had got possession of his understanding.
104. Ad. §. 40, 41. Dr. Potter, p. 81 of his book, to prove
our separation from you not only lawful, but necessary, hath these
words : " Although we confess the church of Rome (in some sense)
to be a true church, and her errors (to some men) not damnable ;
yet for us who are convinced in conscience that she errs in many
things, a necessity lies upon us, even under pain of damnation, to

396 Separation of Protestants from the
forsake her in those errors." He means not, in the belief of those
errors, for that is presupposed to be done already ; for whosoever
is convinced in conscience, that she errs, hath for matter of belief
forsaken, that is, ceased to believe, those errors. This, therefore,
he meant not, nor could not mean ; but, that whosoever is con
vinced in conscience, that the church of Rome errs, cannot, with
a good conscience, but forsake her in the profession and practice
of these errors : arid the reason hereof is manifest, because other
wise he must profess what he believes not, and practise what he
approves not. Which is no more than yourself in these have
divers times affirmed : for in one place you say, " it is unlawful
to speak any the least untruth." Now he that professeth your
religion, and believes it not, what else doth he but live in a per
petual lie ? Again, in another, you have called them that profess
one thing, and believe another, " a damned crew of dissembling
sycophants :" and, therefore, in inveighing against protestants for
forsaking the profession of these errors, the belief whereof they
had already forsaken, what do you but rail at them for not being
"a damned crew of dissembling sycophants?" And, lastly, §. 42
of this chapter, within three leaves after this, whereas Dr. Potter
grants but only a necessity of peaceable external obedience to the
declaration of the church, though perhaps erroneous, (provided it
be in matter not of faith, but of opinions or rites) condemning
those men, who, by occasion of errors of this quality, disturb the
church's peace, and cast off her communion : upon this occasion
you come upon him with this bitter sarcasm, " I thank you for
your ingenuous confession, in recompense whereof I will do a
deed of charity, by putting you in mind into what labyrinths you
are brought, by teaching that the church may err in some points
of faith, and yet that it is not lawful for any man to oppose his
judgment, or leave her communion, though he have evidence of
scripture against her ! Will you have such a man dissemble
against his conscience, or externally deny truth known to be con
tained in holy scripture ?" I answer for him, No, it is not he, but
you, that would have men do so ; not he, who says plainly, that
" whosoever is convinced in conscience, that any church errs, is
bound, under pain of damnation, to forsake her in her profession
and practice of these errors ;" but you, who find fault with him,
and make long discourses against him for thus affirming : not he,
who can easily wind himself out of your imaginary labyrinth, by
telling you, that he no where denies it lawful for any man to
oppose any church erring in matter of faith ; for that he speaks
not of matters of faith at all, but only of rites and opinions.
And in such matters, he says indeed at first, "It is not lawful
for any man to oppose his judgment to the public :" but he pre
sently explains himself by saying, not only that he may hold an
opinion contrary to the public resolution, but besides that he may
offer it to be considered of, (so far is he from requiring any sinful
dissimulation) provided he do it with great probability of reason,
very modestly and respectfully, and without separation from the
church's communion. It is not, therefore, in this case, opposing

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 397
a man's private judgment to the public simply, which the doctor
finds fault with ; but the degree only and malice of this opposi
tion, opposing it factiously ; and not holding a man's own con
ceit different from the church absolutely, which here he censures ;
but a factious advancing it, and despising the church, so far as to
cast off her communion ; because, forsooth, she errs in some
opinion, or useth some inconvenient, though not impious, rites
and ceremonies. Little reason, therefore, have you to accuse him
there, as if he required that men should dissemble their con
science, or externally deny a truth " known to be contained in
holy scripture." But certainly a great deal less to quarrel with
him for saying, (which is all that here he says) — that men, under
pain of damnation, are not to dissemble ; but if they be convinced
in conscience, that your, or any other church, (for the reason is alike
for all) errs in many things, are of necessity to forsake that church,
in the profession and practice of those errors.
105. But to consider your exception to this speech of the doctor's
somewhat more particularly, I say, your whole discourse against
it is compounded of falsehoods and impertinences. The first false
hood is, that he in these words avoucheth, that no learned catholics
can be saved. Unless you will suppose, that all learned catholics
are convinced in conscience, that your church errs in many things.
It may well be feared, that many are so convinced, and yet pro
fess what they believe not. Many more have been, and have
stifled their consciences, by thinking it an act of humility to do
so. Many more would have been, had they, with liberty and in
difference of judgment, examined the grounds of the religion
which they profess. But to think, that all the learned of your
side are actually convinced of errors in your church, and yet will
not forsake the profession of them, this is so great an uncharitable
ness, that I verily believe that Dr. Potter abhors it. Your next
falsehood is, that the doctor affirms, that you catholics want no
means of salvation; and that he judges the Roman errors not to
be in themselves fundamental or damnable. Which calumny I
have very often confuted : and in this very place it is confuted by
Dr. Potter, and confessed by yourself. For, in the beginning of
this answer, you tell us, that the doctor avouches of all catholics,
whom ignorance cannot excuse, that they cannot be saved. Cer
tainly, then, he must needs esteem them to want something neces
sary to salvation. And then in the doctor's saying, it is remark
able, that he confesses your errors to some men not damnable ;
which clearly imports, that, according to his judgment, they were
damnable in themselves, though by accident, to them who lived
and died in invincible ignorance, and with repentance, they might
prove not damnable. A third is, that these assertions " the
Roman errors are in themselves not damnable, and yet it is damn
able for me (who know them to be errors) to hold and confess
them, are absolutely inconsistent :" which is false ; for, be the
matter what it will, yet for a man to tell a lie, especially in mat
ters of religion, cannot but be damnable. How much more, then,
to go on in a course of lying, by professing to believe these things

398 Separation of Protestants from the
divine truths, which he verily believes to be falsehoods and fables ?
A fourth is, that — if we erred in thinking, that your church holds
error, this error, or erroneous conscience, might be rectified and
deposed by judging those errors not damnable. For what repug
nance is there between these two suppositions, that you do hold
some errors, and that they are not damnable? And if there be no
repugnance between them, how can the belief of the latter remove,
or destroy, or, if it be erroneous, rectify the belief of the former ?
Nay, seeing there is a manifest consent between them, how can
it be avoided, but the belief of the latter will maintain and pre
serve the belief of the former ? For who can conjoin in one brain,
not cracked, (pardon me if I speak to you in your own words)
these assertions — in the Roman church there are errors not damn
able ; and, in the Roman- church there are no errors at all ? Or,
what sober understanding would ever think this a good collection
— 1 esteem the errors of the Roman church not damnable ; there
fore I do amiss to think that she errs at all ? If, therefore, you
would have us alter our judgment, that your church is erroneous,
your only way is to shew your doctrine consonant, at least not
evidently repugnant, to scripture and reason. For, as for this
device, this short cut of persuading ourselves, that you hold no
errors, because we believe your errors not damnable, assure yourself
it will never hold.
106. A fifth falsehood is — that we daily do this favour for pro
testants, you must mean (if you speak consequently) to judge they
have no errors, because we judge they have none damnable.
Which the world knows to be most untrue. And for our con
tinuing in their communion, notwithstanding their errors, the
justification hereof is not so much, that their errors are not damn
able, as that they required not the belief and profession of these
errors among the conditions of their communion. Which puts a
main difference between them and you : because we may con
tinue in their communion without professing to believe their opin
ions, but in yours we cannot. A sixth is — that according to the
doctrines of all divines, there is not any difference between a spe
culative persuasion of conscience, of the unlawfulness of any thing,
and a practical dictamen, that the same thing is unlawful. — For
these are but divers words signifying the same thing ; neither is
such persuasion wholly speculative, but tending to practice ; nor
such a dictamen wholly practical, but grounded upon speculation.
A seventh is — that protestants did only conceive in speculation,
that the church of Rome erred in some doctrines, and had not
also a practical dictamen, that it was damnable for them to con
tinue in the profession of these errors. An eighth is — that it is
not lawful to separate from any church's communion, for errors
not appertaining to the substance of faith : — which is not univer
sally true, but with this exception, unless that church requires
the belief and profession of them. The ninth is — that Dr. Potter
teacheth, that Luther was bound to forsake the house of God, for
an unnecessary light, confuted manifestly by Dr. Potter in this
very place ; for, by the house of God, you mean the Roman

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 399
church, and of her the doctor says, that a necessity did lie upon
him, even under pain of damnation, to forsake the church of
Rome in her errors. This sure is not to say, that he was obliged
to forsake her, for an unnecessary light. The tenth is covertly
vented in your intimation — that Luther and his followers were
the proper cause of the christian world's combustion : whereas,
indeed, the true cause of this lamentable effect, was your violent
persecution of them, for serving God according to their con
science, which, if it be done to you, you condemn of horrible im
piety ; and, therefore, may not hope to be excused if you do it to
others. 107. The eleventh is — that our first reformers ought to have
doubted whether their opinions were certain. Which is to say,
that they ought to have doubted of the certainty of scripture ;
which, in formal and express terms, contains many of these opi
nions. And the reason of this assertion is very vain : for, though
they had not an absolute infallibility promised unto them, yet may
they be of some things infallibly certain. As Euclid sure was not
infallible ; yet was he certain enough, that twice two were four,
and that every whole was greater than a part of that whole. And
so, though Calvin and Melancthon were not infallible in all things,
yet they might and did know well enough, that your Latin service
was condemned by St. Paul, and that the communion in both
kinds was taught by our Saviour. The twelfth and last is this —
that your church was in peaceable possession, (you must mean of
her doctrine, and the professors of it) and enjoyed prescription for
many ages. For, besides that doctrine is not a thing that may be
possessed; and the professors of it were the church itself, and in
nature of possessors (if we speak improperly), rather than the
thing possessed, with whom no man hath reason to be offended,
if they think fit to. quit their own possession : I sav, that the pos
session, which the governors of your church held for some ages
of the party governed, was not peaceable, but got by fraud, and
held by violence.
108. These are the falsehoods which in this answer offered
themselves to any attentive reader, and that which remains is
mere impertinence. As, first, that a pretence of conscience will
not serve to justify separation from being schismatical. Which is
true, but little to the purpose, seeing it was not an erroneous
persuasion, much less an hypocritical pretence, but a true and
well-grounded conviction of conscience, which Dr. Potter alleged
to justify protestants from being schismatical. And, therefore,
though seditious men in church and state may pretend conscience
for a cloak of their rebellion ; yet this, I hope, hinders not, but
that an honest man ought to obey his rightly-informed conscience,
rather than the unjust commands of his tyrannous superiors:
otherwise, with what colour can you defend either your own re
fusing the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, or the ancient mar
tyrs, and apostles, and prophets, who oftentimes disobeyed the
commands of men in authority, and for their disobedience made
no other but this apology, " We must obey God rather than men ?"

400 Separation of Protestants from the
It is, therefore, most apparent, that this answer must be merely
impertinent; seeing it will serveagainst the martyrs, and apostles,
and prophets, and even against yourselves, as well as against
protestants. To as little purpose is your rule out of Lyrinensis
against them that followed Luther, seeing they pretend and are
ready to justify, that they forsook not, with the doctor, the faith,
but only the corruption of the church. As vain altogether is
that which follows: that in cases of uncertainty we are not to
leave our superior, nor cast off his obedience, nor publicly oppose
his decrees. From whence it will follow very evidently, that
seeing it is not a matter of faith, but a disputed question amongst
you, whether the oath of allegiance be lawful, that either you ac
knowledge not the king your superior, or do against conscience,
in opposing his and the kingdom's decree, requiring the taking of
this oath. This good use, I say, may very fairly be made of it,
and is by men of your religion. But, then, it is so far from being
a confutation, that it is rather a confirmation, of Dr. Potter's as
sertion. For he that useth these words, doth he not plainly im
port, (and such was the case of protestants) that we are to leave
our superiors, cast off obedience to them, and publicly to oppose
their decrees, when we are certain (as protestants were) that what
they command, God doth countermand ? Lastly, St. Cyprian's
example is against protestants impertinently, and even ridiculously,
alleged. For what if St. Cyprian, holding his opinion true, but not
necessary, condemned no man (much less any church) for holding
the contrary ? Yet, methinks, this should lay no obligation upon
Luther to do likewise ; seeing he held his own opinions not only
true, but also necessary; and the doctrine of the Roman church
not only false, but damnable. And, therefore, seeing the condition
and state of the parties censured by St. Cyprian and Luther was
so different, no marvel though their censures also were different
according to the supposed merit of the parties delinquent. For, as
for your obtruding again upon us, that we believe the points of
difference not fundamental or necessary, you have been often told,
that it is a calumny. We hold your errors as damnable in them
selves as you do ours ; only by accident, through invincible igno
rance, we hope they are not unpardonable : and you also profess
to think the same of ours.
109. Ad. §. 42. The former part of this discourse, grounded on
Dr. Potter's words, p. 105, I have already in passing examined
and confuted: I add in this place, 1. That though the doctor
says, " It is not fit for any private man to oppose his judgment
to the public ;" that is, his own judgment, and bare authority :
yet he denies not, but occasions may happen, wherein it may be
warrantable to oppose his reason, or the authority of scripture,
against it ; and is not then to be esteemed to oppose his own
judgment to the public, but the judgment of God to the judgment
of men. Which his following words seem to import : " he may
offer his opinion to be considered of, so he do it with evidence, or
great probability of scripture or reason." Secondly, I am to tell
you, that you have no ground from him, to interline his words

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 401
with that interrogatory — "his own conceits, and yet grounded
upon evidence of scripture ?" For these things are in his words
opposed, and not confounded; and the latter not intended for a
repetition, (as you mistake it) but for an antithesis of the former.
" He may offer (saith he) his opinion to be considered of, so he do
it with evidence of scripture. But if he will factiously advance his
own conceits, (that is, say I, clear contrary to your gloss) such as
have not evident nor very probable ground in scripture, (for these
conceits are properly his own) he may justly be branded," &c.
Now that this of the two is the better gloss, it is proved by your
own interrogation. For that imputes absurdity to Dr. Potter,
for calling them a man's own conceits, which were grounded
upon evidence of scripture. And, therefore, you have shewed
little candour or equity, in fastening upon them this absurd con
struction ; they not only bearing, but even requiring, another,
more fair and more sensible. Every man ought to be presumed
to speak sense, rather than nonsense; coherently, rather than
contradictiously, if his words be fairly capable of a better con
struction. For Mr. Hooker, if, writing against puritans, he had
said something unawares, that might give advantage to papists,
it were not inexcusable ; seeing it is a matter of such extreme
difficulty, to hold such a temper in opposing one extreme opinion,
as not to seem to favour the other. Yet if his words be rightly
considered, there is nothing in them that will do you any service.
For though he says, that men are bound to do whatsoever the
sentence of final decision shall determine, as it is plain men are
bound to yield such an obedience to all courts of civil judicature ;
yet he says not, they are bound to think that determination law
ful, and that sentence just. Nay, it is plain, he says, that they
must do according to the judges' sentences, though in their pri
vate opinion it seem unjust. As if I be cast wrongfully in a suit
at law, and sentenced to pay a hundred pounds, I am bound to
pay the money; yet I know no law of God or man, that binds me
in conscience to acquit the judge of error in his sentence. The
question therefore being only what men ought to think, it is vain
for you to tell us what Mr. Hooker says at all; for Mr. Hooker,
though an excellent man, was but a man : and much more vain,
to tell us out of him, what men ought to do, for point of external
obedience; when, in the very same place, he supposeth and al-
loweth, that in their private opinion they may think this sentence,
to which they yield a passive obedience, to swerve utterly from
that which is right. If you will draw his words to such a con
struction, as if he had said — They must think the sentence of
judicial and final decision just and right, though it seem in their
private opinion to swerve utterly from what is right — it is mani
fest you make him contradict himself, and make him say, in
effect, they must think thus, though, at the same time, they
think the contrary. Neither is there any necessity, that he must
either acknowledge the universal infallibility of the church, or
drive men into dissembling against their conscience, seeing no
thing hinders, but I may obey the sentence of a judge, paying the
oo

402 Separation of Protestants from the
money he awards me to pay, or foregoing the house or land which
he hath judged from me, and yet withal plainly profess, that in
my conscience I conceive his judgment erroneous. To which pur
pose, they have a saying in France, that "Whosoever is cast in
any cause, hath liberty, for ten days after, to rail at his judges."
110. This answer to this place, the words themselves offered
me, even as they are alleged by you : but upon perusal of the
place in the author himself, I find that here, as elsewhere, you and
Mr. Brerely wrong him extremely. For, mutilating his words,
you make him say that absolutely, which he there expressly limits
to some certain cases. " In litigious and controverted causes of
such a quality (saith he) the will of God is, to have them do what
soever the sentence of judicial and final decision shall determine."
Observe, I pray, he says not absolutely, and in all causes, this is
the will of God; but only in litigious causes, of the quality of
those whereof he there entreats. In such matters, as have plain
scripture or reason neither for them nor against them, and
wherein men are persuaded this or that way, upon their own only
probable collection ; in such cases, " this persuasion (saith he)
ought to be fully settled in men's hearts, that the will of God is,
that they should not disobey the certain commands of their lawful
superiors, upon uncertain grounds; but do that which the sentence
of judicial and final decision shall determine." For the purpose,
a question there is, whether a surplice may be worn in divine ser
vice ? The authority of superiors enjoins this ceremony, and nei
ther scripture nor reason plainly forbids it. Sempronius, notwith
standing, is, by some inducements, which he confesses to be only
probable, led to this persuasion, that the thing is unlawful. ¦ The
query is, whether he ought for matter of practice to follow the
injunction of authority, or his own private and only probable
persuasion? Mr. Hooker resolves for the former, upon this
ground, that the certain commands of the church we live in, are
to be obeyed in all things, not certainly unlawful. Which rule is
your own, and by you extended to the commands of all superiors,
in the very next section before this, in these words : " In cases of
uncertainty we are not to leave our superior, nor cast off his obe
dience, or publicly oppose his decrees." And yet, if a man should
conclude upon you, that either you make all superiors universally
infallible, or else drive men into perplexities and labyrinths of
doing against conscience, I presume you would not think yourself
fairly dealt with ; but allege, that your words are not extended
to all cases, but limited to cases of uncertainty. As little there
fore ought you to make this deduction from Mr. Hooker's words,
which are apparently also restrained to cases of uncertainty. For
as for requiring a blind and unlimited obedience to ecclesiastical
decisions universally and in all cases, even when plain texts or
reason seems to control them, Mr. Hooker is as far from making
such an idol of ecclesiastical authority, as the puritans, whom he
writes against: "I grant (saith he) that proof derived from the
authority of man's judgment, is not able to work that assurance
which doth grow by a stronger proof. And therefore although

Church of Rome, not guilty of Schism. 403
ten thousand general councils would set down one and the same
definitive sentence, concerning any point of religion whatsoever ;
yet one demonstrative reason alleged, or one manifest testimony
cited from the word of God himself to the contrary, could not
choose but overweigh them all : inasmuch as for them to be de
ceived, it is not impossible ; it is, that demonstrative reason, or
divine testimony, should deceive." And again, " Whereas it is
thought, that, especially with the church, and those that are
called, man's authority ought not to prevail ; it must and doth
prevail even with them, yea, with them especially, as far as equity
requireth, and farther we maintain it not. For men to be tied
and led by authority, as it were with a kind of captivity of judg
ment: and, though there be reason to the contrary, not to listen
to it, but to follow like beasts the first in the herd, this were
brutish." Again, " That authority of men should prevail with
men either against or above reason, is no part of our belief.
Companies of learned men, be they never so great and reverend,
are to yield unto reason, the weight whereof is no whit prejudiced
by the simplicity of his person which doth allege it ; but, being
found to be sound and good, the bare opinion of men to the con
trary must of necessity stoop, and give place." Thus Mr. Hooker
in his 7th §. book ii. which place, because it is far distant from that
which is alleged by you, the oversight of it might be excusable,
did you not impute it to Dr. Potter as a fault, that he cites some
clauses of some books, without reading the whole. But besides,
in that very section, out of which you take this corrupted sentence,
he hath very pregnant words to the same effect : " As for the
orders established, sith equity and reason favour that which is in
being, till orderly judgment of decision be given against it, it is
but justice to exact of you, and perverseness in you it would be
to deny thereunto your willing obedience. Not that I judge it a
thing allowable, for men to observe those laws, which in their
hearts they are steadfastly persuaded to be against the law of
God: but your persuasion in this case ye are all bound for the
time to suspend ; and, in otherwise doing, ye offend against God,
by troubling his church without just and necessary cause. Be it
that there are some reasons inducing you to think hardly of our
laws : are those reasons demonstrative, are they necessary, or but
mere probabilities only? An argument necessary and demon
strative is such, as, being proposed to any man, and understood,
the mind cannot choose but inwardly assent. Any one such
reason dischargeth, I grant, the conscience, and setteth it at full
liberty. For the public approbation given by the body of this
whole church, unto those things which are established, doth make
it but probable, that they are good. And therefore unto a neces
sary proof, that they are not good, it must give place." This
plain declaration of his judgment in this matter, this express
limitation of his former resolution, he makes in the very same
section, which affords your former quotation ; and therefore what
apology can be made for you, and your store-house, Mr. Brerely,
for dissembling of it, I cannot possibly imagine.
cc2

404 Protestants not guilty of Schism.
111. Dr. Potter, p. 131, says, that the errors of the donatists
and novatians were not in themselves heresies, nor could be made
so by the church's determination : but that the church's intention
was only to silence disputes, and to settle peace and unity in her
government: which because they factiously opposed, they were
justly esteemed schismatic. From hence you conclude, that the
same condemnation must pass against the first reformers, seeing
they also opposed the commands of the church, imposed on them,
for silencing all disputes, and settling peace and unity in govern
ment. But this collection is deceitful, and the reason is, because,
though the first reformers, as well as the donatists and novatians,
opposed herein the commands of the visible church, that is, of a
great part of it ; yet jthe reformers had reason, nay necessity, to
do so, the church being then corrupted with damnable errors;
which was not true of the church, when it was opposed by the
novatians and donatists. And therefore, though they, and the
reformers, did the same action, yet doing it upon different
grounds, it might in these merit applause, and in them con
demnation. 112. Ad. §. 43. The next section hath in it some objections
against Luther's person, and none against his cause, which alone
I have undertaken to justify, and therefore I pass it over. Yet
this I promise, that when you, or any of your side, shall publish
a good defence of all that your popes have said and done, espe
cially of them whom Bellarmine believes, in such a long train, to
have gone to the devil, then you shall receive an ample apology
for all the actions and words of Luther. In the mean time, I
hope, all reasonable and equitable judges will esteem it not un
pardonable in the great and heroical spirit of Luther, if, being
opposed and perpetually baited with a world of furies, he was
transported sometimes, and made somewhat furious. As for you,
I desire you to be quiet, and to demand no more, whether God be
wont to send such furies to preach the gospel? Unless you desire
to hear of your killing of kings, massacring of people, blowing up
of parliaments ; and have a mind to be asked, whether it be pro
bable, that that should be God's cause, which needs to be main
tained by such devilish means.
113. Ad. §. 44, 45. In the two next particles, which are all of
this chapter that remain unspoken to, you spend. a great deal of
reading, and wit, and reason against some men, who, pretending
to honour and believe the doctrine and practice of the visible
church, (you mean your own) and condemning their forefathers,
who forsook her, say they would not have done so, yet remain
divided from her communion. Which men, in my judgment,
cannot be defended: for if they believe the 'doctrine of your
church, then must they believe this doctrine, that they are to
return to your communion. And therefore, if they do not so, it
cannot be avoided but they must be auroxaraxpiToi, and so I leave
them ; only I am to remember you, that these men cannot pre
tend to be protestants, because they pretend to believe your doc
trine, which is opposite in diameter unto the doctrine of protes-

Charity maintained by Catholics. 405
tants ; and therefore, in a work which you profess to have written
merely against protestants, all this might have been spared.

CHAPTER VI.
That Luther and the rest of protestants have added heresy
unto schism.
" 1. Because vice is best known by the contrary virtue, we
cannot well determine what heresy is, nor who be heretics, but by
the opposite virtue of faith, whose nature being once understood,
as far as belongs to our present purpose, we shall pass on with ease
to the definition of heresy, and so be able to discern who be here
tics. And this I intend to do, not by entering into such particular
questions, as are controverted between catholics and protestants,
but only by applying some general grounds, either already proved,
or else yielded to on all sides.
" 2. Almighty God having ordained man to a supernatural end
of beatitude by supernatural means, it was requisite that his un
derstanding should be enabled to apprehend that end and means
by a supernatural knowledge: and because if such a knowledge
were no more than probable, it could not be able sufficiently to
overbear our will, and encounter with human probabilities, being
backed with the strength of flesh and blood ; it was further ne
cessary, that this supernatural knowledge should be most certain
and infallible; and that faith should believe nothing more cer
tainly than that itself is a most certain belief, and so be able to
beat down all gay probabilities of human opinion. And because
the aforesaid means and end of beatifical vision do far exceed the
reach of natural wit, the certainty of faith could not always be
joined with such evidence of reason, as is wont to be found in the
principles or conclusions of human natural sciences, that so all
flesh might not glory in the arm of flesh, but he ' who glories,
should glory in our Lord.'* Moreover, it was expedient, that
our belief or assent to divine truths, should not only be unknown
or inevident by any human discourse, but that absolutely also it
should be obscure in itself, and (ordinarily speaking) be void even
of supernatural evidence, that so we might have occasion to
actuate and testify the obedience which we owe to our God, not
only by submitting our will to his will and commands, but by
subjecting also our understanding to his wisdom and words, cap
tivating (as the apostle speaks) the same understandingf to the
obedience of faith ; which occasion had been wanting, if Almighty
God had made clear to us the truths which now are certainly, but
not evidently, presented to our minds : for where truth doth mani
festly open itself, not obedience, but necessity, commands our
assent. For this reason, divines teach, that the objects of faith
being not evident to human reason, it is in man's power, not only
to abstain from believing, by suspending our judgment, or exer-
*2Cor. *. 17. t2Cor. x. 5.

406 Charity maintained by Catholics.
cising no act one way or the other ; but also to disbelieve, that is, to
believe the contrary of that which faith proposeth ; as the exam
ples of innumerable arch-heretics can bear witness. This obscurity
of faith we learn from holy scripture, according to those words of
the apostle,* ' faith is the substance of things to be hoped for,
the argument of things not appearing.' And, ' we see now by a
glass in a dark manner : but then face to face.'f And accordingly
St. Peter saith.J ' which you do well attending unto, as to a candle
shining in a dark place.'
" 3. Faith being then obscure, (whereby it differeth from natural
sciences) and yet being most certain and infallible (wherein it
surpasseth human opinion), it must rely upon some motive and
ground, which may be able to give it certainty, and yet not release
it from obscurity. For if this motive, ground, or formal object of
faith, were any thing evidently presented to our understanding;
and if, also, we did evidently know, that it had a necessary con
nexion with the articles which we believe, our assent to such
articles could not be obscure, but evident ; which, as we said, is
against the nature of our faith. If, likewise, the motive or
ground of our faith were obscurely propounded to us, but were
not in itself infallible, it would leave our assent in obscurity, but
could not endue it with certainty. We must, therefore, for the
ground of our faith, find out a motive obscure to us, but most
certain in itself, that the act of faith may remain both obscure
and certain. Such a motive as this can be no other but the divine
authority of Almighty God, revealing or speaking those truths
which our faith believes: for it is manifest, that God's infallible
testimony may transfuse certainty to our faith, and yet not draw it
out of obscurity ; because no human discourse or demonstration can
evince, that God revealeth any supernatural truth, since God had
been no less perfect than he is, although he had never revealed any
of those objects which we now believe.
" 4. Nevertheless, because Almighty God, out of his infinite wis
dom and sweetness, doth concur with his creatures in such sort as
may befit the temper and exigence of their natures ; and because
man is a creature endued with reason, God doth not exact of his
will or understanding any other than, as the apostle saith, ra-
tionabile obsequium, \ an obedience sweetened with good reason —
which could not so appear, if our understandings were summoned
to believe with certainty things no way represented as infallible
and certain. And, therefore, Almighty God, obliging us, under
pain of eternal damnation, to believe with greatest certainty divers
verities not known by the light of natural reason, cannot fail to
furnish our understanding with such inducements, motives, and
arguments, as may sufficiently persuade any mind, which is not
partial or passionate, that the objects which we believe proceed
from an authority so wise, that it cannot be deceived, and so good,
that it cannot deceive ; according to the words of David, ' Thy
testimonies are made credible exceedingly. '|| These inducements
* Heb. xi. 1. 1 1 Cor. xiii, 12. X 2 Pet. i. 19.
§ Rom. xii. 1. || Psal. xcii.

Charily maintained by Catholics. 407
are by divines called argumenta credibilitatis, ' arguments of cre
dibility,' which, though they cannot make us evidently see what
we believe, yet they evidently convince, that in true wisdom and
prudence the objects of faith deserve credit, and ought to be ac
cepted as things revealed by God : for without such reasons and
inducements, our judgment of faith could not be conceived pru
dent, holy scripture telling us,* that ' he who soon believes, is
light of heart.' By these arguments and inducements our under
standing is both satisfied with evidence of credibility, and the
objects of faith retain their obscurity; because it is a different
thing to be evidently credible, and evidently true ; as those, who
were present at the miracles wrought by our blessed Saviour, and
his apostles, did not evidently see their doctrine to be true (for
then it had not been faith, but science, and all had been necessi
tated to believe, which we see fell out otherwise), but they were
evidently convinced, that the things, confirmed by such miracles,
were most credible, and worthy to be embraced as truths revealed
by God.
" 5. These evident arguments of credibility are in great abun
dance found in the visible church of Christ, perpetually existing
on earth : for that there hath been a company of men, professing
such and such doctrines, we have from our next predecessors,
and these from theirs upwards, till we come to the apostles, and
our blessed Saviour ; which gradation is known by evidence of
sense, by reading books, or hearing what one man delivers to
another. And, it is evident, that there was neither cause nor
possibility that men, so distant in place, so different in temper,
so repugnant in private ends, did or could agree to tell one and
the self-same thing, if it had been but a fiction invented by them
selves, as ancient Tertullian well saith : ' How is it likely, that so
manyf and so great churches should err in one faith? Among
many events there is not one issue ; the error of the churches
must needs have varied. But that which among many is found
to be one, is not mistaken, but delivered. Dare then any body
say, that they erred who delivered it ?' With this never-inter
rupted existence of the church are joined the many and great
miracles wrought by men of that congregation or church ; the
sanctity of the persons ; the renowned victories over so many, per
secutions, both of all sorts of men, and of the infernal spirits ;
and, lastly, the perpetual existence of so holy a chureh. Being
brought up to the apostles themselves, she comes to partake of
the same assurance of truth, which they, by so many powerful
ways, did communicate to their doctrine, and to the church of
their times, together with the divine certainty which they re
ceived from our blessed Saviour himself, revealing to mankind
what he heard from his Father; and so we conclude with Tertul
lian, ' We receive it from the churches, the churches from the
apostles, the apostles from Christ, Christ from his father :'J and if
we once interrupt this line of succession, most certainly made
known by means of holy tradition, we cannot conjoin the present
* Ecclus. xix. 4. t Prescript, c. xxviii. X Ibid. c. xxi. xxxvii.

408 Charity maintained by Catholics.
church and doctrine with the church and doctrine of the apostles,
but must invent some new means and arguments, sufficient of them
selves to find out and prove a true church and faith independently
of the preaching and writing of the apostles ; neither of which can
be known but by tradition; as is truly observed by Tertullian,
saying,* ' I will prescribe, that there is no means to prove what
the apostles preached, but by the same Churches which they
founded.' " 6. Thus then we are to proceed : — By evidence of manifest
and incorrupt tradition, I know that there hath always been a
never-interrupted succession of men from the apostles' time, be
lieving, professing, and practising such and such doctrines : by
evident arguments of credibility, as miracles, sanctity, unity, &c
and by all those ways, whereby the apostles, and our blessed Sa
viour himself, confirmed their doctrine, we are assured, that what
the said never-interrupted church proposeth, doth deserve to be
accepted and acknowledged as a divine truth : by evidence of
sense, we see that the same church proposeth such and such doc
trines as divine truths ; that is, as revealed and testified by Almighty
God. By this divine testimony we are infallibly assured of what
we believe : and so the last period, ground, motive, and formal ob
ject of our faith, is the infallible testimony of that supreme verily,
which neither can deceive, nor be deceived.
" 7. By this orderly deduction our faith cometh to be endued
with those qualities, which we said were requisite thereto, namely
— certainty, obscurity, and prudence. Certainty proceeds from
the infallible testimony of God, propounded and conveyed to our
understanding by such a mean as is infallible in itself, and to us
is evidently known, that it proposeth this point or that, and
which can manifestly declare in what sense it proposeth them :
which means we have proved to be the only visible church of
Christ. Obscurity, from the manner in which God speaks to
mankind, which ordinarily is such, that it doth not manifestly show
the person who speaks, nor the truth of the thing spoken. Prudence
is not wanting, because our faith is accompanied with so many ar
guments of credibility, that every well-disposed person may and
ought to judge, that the doctrines so confirmed deserve to be be
lieved, as proceeding from divine authority.
"8. And thus, from what hath been said, we may easily
gather the particular nature or definition of faith. For — it is a
voluntary, or free, infallible, obscure assent to some truth, be
cause it is testified by God, and is sufficiently propounded to us
; for such ; which proposal is ordinarily made by the visible church
of Christ. I say, sufficiently proposed by the church; not that I
purpose to dispute, whether the proposal of the church enter into
the formal object, or motive of faith; or whether an error be a
heresy, formally and precisely, because it is against the proposi
tion of the church, as if such proposal were the formal object of
faith, which Dr. Potter to no purpose at all labours so very hard
to disprove : but I only affirm that when the church propounds
* Prescript, c. xxi.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 409
any truth, as revealed by God, we are assured, that it is such in
deed ; and so it instantly grows to be a fit object for christian
faith, which inclines and enables us to believe whatsoever is duly
presented, as a thing revealed by Almighty God. And in the
same manner we are sure, that whosoever opposeth any doctrine
proposed by the church, doth thereby contradict a truth, which
is testified by God : as when any lawful superior notifies his will,
by the means, and, as it were, proposal, of some faithful messen
ger, the subject of such a superior, in performing or neglecting
what is delivered by the messenger, is said to obey or disobey his
own lawful superior. And, therefore, because the testimony of
God is notified by the church, we may, and we do, most truly
say, that not to believe what the church proposeth, is to deny
God's holy word or testimony signified to us by the church, ac
cording to that saying of St. Irenaeus : * ' We need not go to any
other to seek the truth, which we may easily receive from the
church.' " 9. Fom this definition of faith we may also know what
heresy is, by taking the contrary terms, as heresy is contrary to
faith, and saying — heresy is a voluntary error against that which
God hath revealed, and the church hath proposed for such. Neither
doth it import, whether the error concern points in themselves
great or small, fundamental or not fundamental : for more being
required to an act of virtue than of vice, if any truth, though never
so small, must be believed by faith, as soon as we know it to be
testified by divine revelation ; much more will it be a formal heresy
to deny any the least point sufficiently propounded as a thing wit
nessed by God.
" 10. This divine faith is divided into actual and habitual.
Actual faith, or faith actuated, is when we are in act of considera
tion, and belief of some mystery of faith : for example, that our
Saviour Christ is true God and man, &c. Habitual faith is that
from which we are denominated faithful, or believers, as by actual
faith they are styled believing. This habit of faith is a quality
enabling us most firmly to believe objects above human discourse,
and it remaineth permanently in our soul, even when we are
sleeping, or not thinking of any mystery of faith. This is the
first among the three theological virtues. For charity unites us
to God, as he is infinitely good in himself: hope ties us to him,
as he is unspeakably good to us : faith joins us to him, as he is
the supreme immovable verity. Charity relies on his goodness ;
hope on his power ; faith on his divine wisdom. From hence it
followeth, that faith, being one of the virtues which divines term
infused (that is, which cannot be acquired by human wit, or in
dustry, but are in their nature and essence supernatural), it hath
this property ; that it is not destroyed by little and little, (contrarily
to the habits called acquisiti, that is, gotten by human endeavour;
which as they are successively produced, so also are they lost
successively, or by little and little) but it must either be conserved
entire, or wholly destroyed : and, since it cannot stand entire
* Lib. iii. cont. Hasrcs. c. iv.

410 Charity maintained by Catholics.
with any one act, which is directly contrary, it must be totally
overthrown, and, as it were, demolished and razed by every such
act. Wherefore, as charity, or the love of God, is expelled from
our soul, by any one act of hatred, or any other mortal sin against
his divine majesty : and as hope is destroyed by any one act of
voluntary desperation ; so faith must perish by any one act of
heresy, because every such act is directly and formally opposite
thereunto. I know that some sins, which (as divines speak) are
ex genere suo, in their kind, grievous and mortal, may be much
lessened, and fall to be venial, ob levitatem materia, because they
may happen to be exercised in a matter of small consideration :
as, for example, to steal a penny is venial, although theft in its
kind be a deadly sin. But it is likewise true, that this rule is not
general for all sorts of sins: there being some so inexcusably
wicked of their own nature, that no smallness of matter, nor
paucity in number, can defend them from being deadly sins. For,
to give an instance, what blasphemy against God, or voluntary
false oath, is not a deadly sin ? Certainly none at all, although
the salvation of the whole world should depend upon swearing
such a falsehood. The like happeneth in our present case of
heresy, the iniquity whereof, redounding to the injury of God's
supreme wisdom and goodness, is always great and enormous.
They were no precious stones which David* picked out of the
water to encounter Goliah ; and yet if a man take from the num
ber but one, and say there were but four, against the scriptures
affirming them to have been five, he is instantly guilty of a
damnable sin. Why? Because by this subtraction of one, he
doth deprive God's word and testimony of all credit and infalli
bility ; for if ever he could deceive, or be deceived, in any one
thing, it were but wisdom to suspect him in all. And seeing every
heresy opposeth some truth revealed by God, it is no wonder that
no man can be excused from deadly and damnable sin : for, if volun
tary blasphemy and perjury, which are opposite only to the infused
moral virtue of religion, can never be excused from mortal sin :
much less can heresy be excused, which opposeth the theological
virtue of faith.
"11. If any object, that schism may seem to be a greater sin
than heresy, because the virtue of charity (to which schism is op
posite) is greater than faith ; according to the apostle, saying,
' Now there remain faith, hope, charity ; but the greater of
these is charity ;'f St. Thomas answers in these words : ' Charity
hath two objects ; one principal, to wit, the divine goodness ; and
another secondary, namely, the good of our neighbour : but schism,
and other sins, which are committed against our neighbour, are
opposite to charity in respect of this secondary good, which is less
than the object of faith, which is God, as he is the prime verity, on
which faith doth rely ; and therefore these sins are less than intidel-
ity.'J He takes infidelity after a general manner, as it compre
hends heresy, and other vices against faith.
" 12. Having therefore sufficiently declared wherein heresy
« Reg. i. 17. 1 1 Cor. xiii. 13. \ 2, 2, q. 39, ar. 2, in corp. et ad 3.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 411
consists, let us come to prove that which we proposed in this chap
ter : where I desire it to be still remembered, that the visible ca
tholic church cannot err damnably, as Dr. Potter confesseth ; and
that, when Luther appeared, there' was no other visible true church
of Christ, disagreeing from the Roman, as we have demonstrated in
the next precedent chapter.
" 13. Now, that Luther and his followers cannot be excused
from formal heresy, I prove by these reasons : — To oppose any
truth propounded by the visible true church, as revealed by God,
is formal heresy, as we have shewed out of the definition of
heresy ; but Luther, Calvin, and the rest, did oppose divers truths
propounded by the visible church, as revealed by God ; yea, they
did therefore oppose her, because she propounded, as divine revealed
truths, things which they judged either to be false, or human inven
tions: therefore they committed formal heresy.
" 14. Moreover, every error, against any doctrine revealed by
God, is damnable heresy, whether the matter in itself be great
or small, as 1 proved before ; and, therefore, either the protes
tants, or the Roman church, must be guilty of formal heresy, be
cause one of them must err against the word and testimony of
God : but you grant (perforce) that the Roman church doth
not err damnably ; and I add, that she cannot err damnably,
because she is the true catholic church, which you confess cannot
err damnably : therefore protestants must be guilty of formal
heresy. " 15. Besides, we have shewed, that the visible church is judge
of controversies, and therefore must be infallible in all her pro
posals; which, being once supposed, it manifestly followeth,. that
to oppose what she delivereth, as revealed by God, is not so much
to oppose her, as God himself; and therefore cannot be excused
from grievous heresy.
" 16. Again, if Luther were a heretic, for those points wherein
he disagreed from the Roman church, all they who agree with
him in those very points must likewise be heretics. Now, that
Luther was a formal heretic, I demonstrate in this manner : — To
say that God's visible true church is not universal, but confined
to one only place or corner of the world, is, according to your own
express words, * ' properly heresy against that article of the creed,
wherein we profess to believe the holy catholic church :' and you
brand Donatus with heresy, because he limited the universal
church to Africa. But it is manifest, and acknowledged by
Luther himself, and other chief protestants, that Luther's Refor
mation, when it first began, (and much more for divers ages be
fore) was not universal, nor spread over the world, but was con
fined to that compass of ground which did contain Luther's body.
Therefore his Reformation cannot be excused from formal heresy.
If St. Augustine in those times said to the donatists,f ' There
are innumerable testimonies of holy scripture, in which it ap
peareth, that the church of Christ is not only in Africa, as these
men with most impudent vanity do rave, but that she is spread
* Page 126. f Epist. 50.

412 Charity maintained by Catholics.
over the whole earth ;' much more may it be said, — It appeareth,
by innumerable testimonies of holy scripture, that the church of
Christ cannot be confined to the city of Wirtemberg, or to the
place where Luther's feet stood, but must be spread over the
whole world. It is therefore most impudent vanity and dotage
to limit her to Luther's Reformation. In another place, also,
this holy father writes no less effectually against Luther than
against the Donatists. For having out of those words, ' in thy
seed all nations shall be blessed,' proved that God's church must
be universal, he saith, * ' Why do you superadd, by saying that
Christ remains heir in no part of the earth, except where he may
have Donatus for his co-heir ? Give me this (universal) church,
if it be among you; shew yourselves to be all nations, which we
already shew to be blessed in this seed. Give us this (church), or
else, laying aside all fury, receive her from us.' But it is evident,
that Luther could not, when he said, ' at the beginning I was alone,'
give us an universal church : therefore happy had he been, if he
had then, and his followers would now, ' receive her from us.'
And, therefore, we must conclude with the same holy father,
saying in another place of the universal church,f ' she hath this
most certain mark, that she cannot be hidden : she is then
known unto all nations. The sect of Donatus is unknown to
many nations ; therefore that cannot be she.' The sect of Lu
ther (at least when he began, and much more before his begin
ning) was unknown to many nations ; therefore that cannot be
she. " 17. And that it may yet further appear, how perfectly Luther
agreed with the donatists, it is to be noted, that they never taught
that the catholic church ought not to extend itself further than
that part of Africa where their faction reigned, but only that in
fact it was so confined, because all the rest of the church was pro
faned by communicating with Caecilianus, whom they falsely
affirmed to have been ordained bishop by those who were traditors,
or givers up of the Bible to the persecutors to be burned ; yea,
at that very time they had some of their sect residing in Rome,
and sent thither one Victor, a bishop, under colour to take care
of their brethren in that city ; but, indeed, as Baronius observeth,J
that the world might account them catholics, by communicating
with the Bishop of Rome, to communicate with whom was ever
taken by the ancient fathers, as an assured sign of being a true
catholic. They had also, as St. Augustine witnesseth,§ a pretended
church in the house and territory of a Spanish lady, called Lucilla,
who went flying out of the catholic church, because she had been
justly checked by Caecilianus. And the same saint, speaking of
the conference he had with Fortunius, the donatist, saith, || ' Here
did he first attempt to affirm, that his communion was spread
over the whole earth, &.c, but, because the thing was evidently
false, they got out of this discourse by confusion of language,
whereby, nevertheless, they sufficiently declared, that they did
* De Unit. Ecclcs. c. vi. t Cont. lit. Petil. 1. i. c. civ. X Anno 321, nu. 5, spond.
$ De Unit, Eccles. c. iii. II Ep- 163.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 413
not hold that the true church ought necessarily to be confined to
one place ; but only by mere necessity were forced to yield, that it
was so in fact, because their sect, which they held to be the only true
church, was not spread over the world ; in which point Fortunius,
and the rest, were more modest, than he who should affirm, that
Luther's Reformation, in the very beginning, was ' spread over
the whole earth ;' being, at that time, by many degrees not so far
diffused as the sect of the donatists. I have no desire to prose
cute the similitude of protestants with donatists, by remembering
that the sect of these men were begun and promoted by the pas
sion of Lucilla ; and who is ignorant what influence two women,
the mother and daughter, ministered to protestancy in England ?
Nor will I stand to observe their very likeness of phrase with the
donatists, who call the chair of Rome the chair of pestilence,
and the Roman church a harlot, which is Dr. Potter's own phrase ;
wherein he is less excusable than they, because he maintaineth her
to be a true church of Christ ; and, therefore, let him duly
ponder these words of St. Augustine against the donatists :* -' If I
persecute him justly, who detracts from his neighbour, why should
not I persecute him who detracts from the church of Christ, and
saith, This is not she, but this is a harlot?' and least of all will I
consider, whether you may not be well compared to one Ticonius,
a donatist, who wrote against Parmenianus ; likewise a donatist,
who blasphemed that the church of Christ had perished, (as you
do even in this your book write against some of your protestant
brethren, or, as you call them, zealots among you, who hold the
very same, or rather a worse heresy) and yet remained among
them, even after Parmenianus had excommunicated him (as those
your zealous brethren would proceed against you, if it were in
their power) ; and yet, like Ticonius, you remain in their com
munion, and come not into that church, which is, hath been, and
ever shall be, universal : for which very cause St. Augustine
complains of Ticonius, that although he wrote against the do
natists, yet he was of ' a heart so extremely absurd,'f as not to
forsake them altogether. And, speaking of the same thing in
another place, he observes, that although Ticonius did manifestly
confute them who affirmed that the church had perished ; yet ' he
saw not (saith this holy father) that which, in good consequence,
he should have seen, that those christians of Africa belonged to
the church spread over the whole world, who remained united,
not with them, who are divided from the communion and unity
of the same world, but with such as did communicate with the
whole world. But Parmenianus, and the rest of the donatists,
saw that consequence, and resolved rather to settle their mind in
obstinacy agains't the most manifest truth, which Ticonius main
tained, than by yielding thereto, to be overcome by those churches
in Africa, which enjoyed the communion of that unity, which
Ticonius defended, from which they had divided themselves.'J
How fitly these words agree to catholics in England, in respect of
* Cone. 7, super gest. cum Emer. t De doct. Christ, lib. iii. c. xxx.
t Cont. Farm. 1. i. c. i.

414 Charity maintained by Catholics.
the protestants, I desire the reader to consider. But these and
the like resemblances of the protestants to the donatists, I will
ingly let pass, and only urge the main point — that since Luther's
reformed church was not in being for divers centuries before
Luther, and yet was (because so forsooth they will needs have it)
in the apostles' time, they must of necessity affirm heretically with
the donatists, that the true and unspotted church of Christ
perished : and that she which remained on earth was (O blas
phemy !) a harlot. Moreover the same heresy follows out of the
doctrine of Dr. Potter and other protestants, that the church may
err in points not fundamental, because we have shewed, that every
error against any one revealed truth is heresy, and damnable,
whether the matter be otherwise of itself great or small. And
how can the church more truly be said to perish, than when she
is permitted to maintain a damnable heresy ? Besides, we will
hereafter prove, that by an act of heresy all divine faith is lost;
and to imagine a true church of faithful persons without any
faith, is as much as to fancy a living man without life. It is
therefore clear, that donatist-like, they hold that the church of
Christ perished ; yea, they are worse than the donatists, who
said, that the church remained at least in Africa ; whereas protes
tants must of necessity be forced to grant, that for a long space
before Luther she was no where at all. But let us go forward to
other reasons.
" 18. The holy scripture, and ancient fathers, do assign separa
tion from the visible church as a mark of heresy ; according to
that of St. John, ' They went out from us.'* And, ' Some who
went out from us.'f And, ' Out of you shall arise men speaking
perverse things. 'J And, accordingly, Vincentius Lyrinensis saith,
' Whoever began heresies, who did not first separate himself
from the universality, antiquity, and consent of the catholic
church ?'§ But it is manifest, that when Luther appeared, there
was no visible church distinct from the Roman, out of which she
could depart, as it is likewise well known, that Luther and his
followers departed out of her : therefore she is no way liable to
this mark of heresy ; but protestants cannot possibly avoid it. To
this purpose St. Prosper hath these pithy words : a christian,
communicating with the universal church, ' is a catholic ; and
he who is divided from her, is a heretic, and antichrist.'|| But
Luther in his first reformation could not communicate with the
visible catholic church of those times, because he began his re
formation by opposing the supposed errors of the then visible
church : we must therefore say with St. Prosper, that he was a
heretic, &c. Which likewise is no less clearly proved out of St.
Cyprian, saying,TT ' Not we departed from them, but they from
us ; and since heresies and schisms are bred afterwards, while they
make to themselves divers conventicles, they have forsaken the
head and origin of truth.'
" 19. And that we might not remain doubtful what separation
* 1 John ii. 19. t Acts xv. 24. t Acts xx. 30.
v Lib. adversus haw. c. xxxiv. || Dimid. temp. u. v. H Lib. de Unitat Eccles.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 415
it is, which is the mark of heresy, the ancient fathers tell us more
in particular, that it is from the church of Rome, as it is the see
of Peter. And, therefore, Dr. Potter need not to be so hot with
us, because we say and write, that the church of Rome, in that
sense as she is the mother church of all others, and with which all
the rest agree, is truly called the catholic church. St. Jerome,
writing to Pope Damasus, saith,* ' I am in the communion of the
chair of Peter ; I know that the church is built upon that rock.
Whosoever shall eat the lamb out of this house, he -is profane. If
any shall not be in the ark of Noah, he shall perish In the time of
the deluge. Whosoever doth not gather with thee doth scatter
that is, he that is not of Christ, is of antichrist.' And elsewhere,f
« Which doth he call his faith ? That of the Roman church, or
that which is contained in the books of Origen? If he answer,
the Roman ; then we are catholics, who have translated nothing
of the error of Origen.' And yet farther.J ' Know thou, that the
Roman faith, commended by the voice of the apostle, doth not
receive these delusions, though an angel should denounce other
wise than it hath once been preached.' St. Ambrose, recounting
how his brother Satyrus inquired for a church, wherein to give
thanks for his delivery from shipwreck, saith,§ ' He called unto
him the bishop, neither did he esteem any favour to be true, ex
cept that of the true faith; and he asked of him, whether he agreed
with the catholic bishops?' That is, with the Roman church. —
And having understood that he was a schismatic, that is, separated
from the Roman church, he abstained from communicating with
him. Where we see the privilege of the Roman church con
firmed both by word and deed, by doctrine and practice. And
the same saint saith of the Roman church,|| 'From thence the rites
of venerable communion do flow to all.'IT St. Cyprian saith, ' They
are bold to sail to the chair of Peter, and to the principal church,
from whence priestly unity hath sprung. Neither do they con
sider that they are Romans, whose faith was commended by the
preaching of the apostle, to whom falsehood cannot have access.'
Where we see this holy father joins together the principal church
and the chair of Peter ; and affirmeth, that falsehood not only hath
not had, but cannot have, access to that see. And elsewhere,**
' Thou wrotest that I should send a copy of the same letters to
Cornelius, our colleague, that, laying aside all solicitude, he
might now be assured that thou didst communicate with him, that
is, with the catholic church.' What think you, Mr. Doctor, of
these words? Is it so strange a thing to take for one and the
same thing, to communicate with the church and pope of Rome,
and to communicate with the catholic church? St. Irenaeus saith,ff
'Because it were long to number the successions of all churches,
we declaring the tradition (and faith preached to men, and coming
to us by tradition) of the most great, most ancient, and most
known church, founded by the two most glorious apostles Peter
* Ep. 57. ad Damas. t Lib. i. Apolog. X Ibid. lib. iii.
§ De obitu Satyri fratris. || Lib. i. Ep. 4. ad Imperatores. V Epist. 55. ad Cornel.
** Epist. 52. ft Lib. iii. cont. hrar. c. iii.

416 Charity maintained by Catholics.
and Paul, which tradition it hath from the apostles, coming to us
by succession of bishops : we confound all those who any way,
either by evil compliance of themselves, or vain glory, or by
blindness, or ill opinion, do gather otherwise than they ought. —
For to this church, for a more powerful principality, it is neces
sary that all churches resort, that is, all faithful people of what
place soever ; in which (Roman church) the tradition, which is
from the apostles, hath always been conserved from those who
are every where.' St. Augustine saith,* ' It grieves us to see you
so to lie cut off Number the priests even from the see of Peter,
and consider in that order of fathers who succeeded, to whom she
is the rock, which the proud gates of hell do not overcome.' —
And, in another place, speaking of Caecilianus, he saith,f ' He
might condemn the conspiring multitude of his enemies, because
he knew himself to be united by communicatory letters, both to
the Roman church, in which the principality of the see apostolic
did always flourish ; and to other countries, from whence the
gospel came first into Africa.' Ancient Tertullian saith,J " If thou
be near Italy, thou hast Rome, whose authority is near at hand
to us; a happy church, into which the apostles have poured all
doctrine, together with their blood.' St. Basil, in a letter to the
bishop of Rome, saith,§ ' In very deed that which was given by
our Lord to thy piety, is worthy of that most excellent voice which
proclaimed thee blessed ; to wit, that thou mayest discern betwixt
that which is counterfeit, and that which is lawful and pure, and
without any diminution mayest preach the faith of our ancestors.'
Maximinianus, bishop of Constantinople, about twelve hundred
years ago, said, ' All the bounds of the earth, who have sincerely
acknowledged our Lord, and catholics through the whole world,
professing the true faith, look upon the power of the bishop of
Rome, as upon the sun, &.c. For the creator of the world
amongst all men of the world elected him, (he speaks of St. Peter)
to whom he granted the chair of doctor, to he principally pos
sessed by a perpetual right of privilege-* that whosoever is desirous
to know any divine and profound thing, may have recourse to the
oracle and doctrine of this instruction.' John, patriarch of Con
stantinople, more than eleven hundred years ago, in an epistle to
Pope Hormisda, writeth thus :|| ' Because the beginning of salva-
vation is to conserve the rule of faith, and in no wise to swerve
from the tradition of our forefathers; because the words of our
Lord cannot fail, saying, Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will
I build my church : the proofs of deeds have made good those
words; because in the see apostolical the catholic religion is al
ways conserved inviolable.' And again, ' We promise hereafter
not to recite in the sacred mysteries the names of them who are
excluded from the communion of the catholic church ; that is to
say, who consent not fully with the see apostolic' Many other
authorities of the ancient fathers might be produced to this pur
pose ; but these may serve to shew, that both the Latin and Greek
* In Psal. cont. patrem Donati. t Ep. 1 62. X PrBescr. c. xxxvi.
§ Epist ad. Pont. Rom. || Epist. ad Hormis. P. P.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 417
fathers held for a note of being a catholic, or a heretic, to have
been united or divided from the see of Rome. And 1 have pur
posely 'alleged only such authorities of fathers, as speak of the
privileges of the see of Rome, as of things permanent, and de
pending on our Saviour's promise to St. Peter, from which a gene
ral rule and ground ought to be taken for all ages, because ' Heaven
and earth shall pass; but the word of our Lord shall remain for
ever.'* So that I here conclude, that, seeing it is manifest that
Luther and his followers divided themselves from the see of Rome,
they bear the inseparable mark of heresy.
" 20. And though my meaning be not to treat the point of or
dination or succession in the protestant church, yet because the
fathers alleged in the last reason, assign succession as one mark
of the true church ; I must not omit to say, that, according to the
grounds of protestants themselves, they can neither pretend per
sonal succession of bishops, nor succession of doctrine. For
whereas succession of bishops signifies a never-interrupted line of
persons endued with an indelible quality, which divines call a
character, which cannot be taken away by deposition, degradation,
or other means whatsoever, and endued also with jurisdiction and
authority to teach, to preach, to govern the church by laws, pre
cepts, censures, &c. protestants cannot pretend succession in
either of these : for (besides that there was never protestant bishop
before Luther, and that there can be no continuance of succession,
where there was no beginning to succeed) they commonly acknow
ledge no character, and consequently must affirm, that when their
pretended bishops or priests are deprived of jurisdiction, or de
graded, they remain mere lay persons, as before their ordination ;
fulfilling what Tertullian objects as a mark of heresy, ' To-day a
priest, to-morrow a layman.'f For if there be no immovable
character, their power of order must consist only in jurisdiction
and authority, or in a kind of moral deputation to some function,
which therefore may be taken away by the same power by which
it was given. Neither can they pretend succession in authority
or jurisdiction : for all the authority or jurisdiction which they
had, was conferred by the church of Rome, that is, by the pope :
because the whole church collectively doth not meet to ordain
bishops or priests, or to give them authority : but, according to
their own doctrine, they believe that the pope neither hath, nor
ought to have, any jurisdiction, power, superiority, pre-eminence,
or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm, which
they swear even when they are ordained bishops, priests, and dea
cons. How then can the pope give jurisdiction, where they swear
he neither hath, nor ought to have, any ? Or, if yet he had, how
could they, without schism, withdraw themselves from his obedience ?
Beside, the Roman church never gave them authority to oppose her,
by whom it was given. But grant, their first bishops had such au
thority from the church of Rome ; after the decease of those men,
who gave authority to their pretended successors ? The primate
of England ? But from whom had he such authority ? And, after
* Matt. xxiv. 35. t Prsesc. c. xli.
DD

418 Charity maintained by Catholics.
his decease, who shall confer authority upon his successors ? The
temporal magistrate ? King Henry, neither a catholic nor a pro
testant ? King Edward, a child ? Queen Elizabeth, a woman ?
An infant of one hour's age is true king in case of his predecessor's
decease : but shall your church lie fallow, till that infant king and
green head of the church, come to years of discretion ? Do your
bishops, your hierarchy, your succession, your sacraments, your be
ing or not being heretics, for want of succession, depend upon this
new-found supremacy-doctrine, brought in by such a man, merely
upon base occasions, and for shameful ends; impugned by Calvin,
and his followers; derided by the christian world; and even by
chief protestants, as Dr. Andrews, Wotton, &c. not held for any
necessary point of faith ? And from whom, I pray you, had bishops
their authority, when there were no christian kings ? Must the
Greek patriarchs receive spiritual jurisdiction from the great Turk ?
Did the pope, by the baptism of princes, lose the spiritual power he
formerly had of conferring spiritual jurisdiction upon bishops ? Hath
the temporal magistrate authority to preach, to assoil from sins, to
inflict excommunications, and other censures ? Why hath he not
power to excommunicate, as well as to dispense in irregularity, as
our late sovereign lord King James either dispensed with the late
Archbishop of Canterbury, or else gave commission to some bishops
to do it ? And, since they were subject to their primate, and not
he to them, it is clear, that they had no power to dispense with him,
but that power must proceed from the prince, as superior to them
all, and head of the protestant church in England. If be have no
such authority, how can he give to others what himself hath not ?
Your ordination or consecration of bishops and priests, imprinting
no character, can only consist in giving a power, authority, juris
diction, or (as I said before) some kind of deputation to exercise
episcopal or priestly functions. If then the temporal magistrate
confers this power, &c. he can, nay, he cannot choose but, ordain
and consecrate bishops and priests, as often as he confers authority
or jurisdiction; and your bishops, as soon as they are designed and
confirmed by the king, must ipso facto be ordained and consecrated
by him without intervention of bishops, or matter and form of or
dination : which absurdities you will be more unwilling to grant,
than well able to avoid, if you will be true to your own doctrines.
The pope, from whom originally you must beg your succession of
bishops, never received, nor will nor can acknowledge to receive,
any spiritual jurisdiction from any temporal prince ; and, therefore,
if jurisdiction must be derived from princes, he hath none at all :
and yet, either you must acknowledge that he hath true spiritual
jurisdiction, or that yourselves can receive none from him.
"21. Moreover, this new reformation, or reformed church of
protestants, will by them be pretended to be catholic or univer
sal, and not confined to England alone, as the sect of the donatists
was to Africa; and, therefore, it must comprehend all the re
formed churches in Germany, Holland, Scotland, France, &c.
In which number they of Germany, Holland, and France, are not
governed by bishops, nor regard any personal succession, unless

Charity maintained by Catholics. 419
of such fat-beneficed bishops as Nicolas Amsfordius, who was con
secrated by Luther, (though Luther himself was never bishop) as
witnesseth Dresserus.* And, though Scotland hath of late admit
ted some bishops, I much doubt whether they hold them to be ne
cessary, or of divine institution ; and so their enforced admitting of
them, doth not so much furnish that kingdom with personal succes
sion of bishops, as it doth convince them to want succession of doc
trine, since, in this their neglect of bishops, they disagree both from
the milder protestants of England, and the true catholic church :
and by this want of a continued personal succession of bishops,
they retain the note of schism and heresy. So that the church of
protestants must either not be universal, as being confined to En
gland : or, if you will needs comprehend all those churches which
want succession, you must confess, that your church doth not only
communicate with schismatical and heretical churches, but it is
also compounded of such churches, and yourselves cannot avoid
the note of schismatics or heretics, if it were but for participating
with such heretical churches : for it is impossible to retain commu
nion with the true catholic church, and yet agree with them who
are divided from her by schism or heresy ; because that were to
affirm, that for the self-same time they could be within and without
the catholic church, as proportionably I discoursed in the next pre
cedent chapter, concerning the communicating of moderate pro
testants with those who maintain that heresy of the latency and
invisibility of God's church, where I brought a place of St. Cyprian
to this purpose, which the reader may be pleased to review in the
5th chapter, and 17th number.
" 22. But, besides this defect in the personal succession of pro
testant bishops, there is another of great moment; which is, that
they want the right form of ordaining bishops and priests, because
the manner which they use is so much different from that of the
Roman church (at least according to the common opinion of
divines,) that it cannot be sufficient for the essence of ordination ;
as I could demonstrate, if this were the proper place of such a
treatise ; and will not fail to do, if Dr. Potter give me occasion.
In the mean time the reader may be pleased to read the authorf
cited here in the margent, and then compare the form of our
ordination with that of protestants ; and to remember, that if the
form which they use, either in consecrating bishops, or in ordain
ing priests, be at least doubtful, they can neither have undoubted
priests nor bishops: for priests cannot be ordained but by true
bishops, nor can any be a true bishop, unless he first be priest.
I say, their ordination is at least doubtful ; because that sufficeth
for my present purpose. For bishops and priests, whose ordina
tion is notoriously known to be doubtful, are not to be esteemed
bishops or priests; and no man without sacrilege can receive
sacraments from them ; all which they administer unlawfully :
and (if we except baptism) with manifest danger of invalidity, and
* In Millcnario sexto, p. 187.
t See Adamum Tannerum, tom. iv. disp. 5, queest. 2, dub. 3, 4.
dd2

420 Charity maintained by Catholics.
with obligation to be at least conditionally repeated ; and so pro
testants must remain doubtful of remission of sins of their eccle
siastical hierarchy, and may not pretend to be a true church;
which cannot subsist without undoubted true bishops and priests,
nor without due administration of sacraments, which (according
to protestants) is an essential note of the true church. And it is
a world to observe the proceeding of the English protestants in
this point of their ordinations. For, first, An. 3. Edw. 6, cap. 2,
when he was a child about twelve years of age, it was enacted,*
' that such form of making and consecrating of bishops and priests,
as by six prelates, and six other to be appointed by the king, should
be devised, (mark this word, devised) and set forth under the great
seal, should be used, and none other.' But after this act was re
pealed, 1 Mar. Sess. 2, insomuch as that when afterward, anno 6,
7, Reg. Elizabeth, Bishop Bonner being indicted upon a certificate
made by Dr. Home, a protestant bishop of Winchester, for his re
fusal of the oath of supremacy ; and he excepting against the
indictment, because Dr. Home was no bishop ; all the judges re
solved, that his exception was good, if, indeed, Dr. Home was not
bishop; and they were all at a stand, till anno 8, Eliz. cap. 1, the
act of Edw. 6 was renewed and confirmed, with a particular pro
viso, that no man should be impeached or molested, by means of
any certificate by any bishop or archbishop made before this last
act. Whereby it is clear, that they made some doubt of their own
ordination, and that there is nothing but uncertainty in the whole
business of their ordination, which (forsooth) must depend upon six
prelates, the great seal, acts of parliament being contrary one to
another, and the like.
" 23. But though they want personal succession, yet at least
they have succession of doctrine, as they say, and pretend to prove,
because they believe as the apostles believed. This is to beg the
question, and to take what they may be sure will never be granted.
For if they want personal succession and slight ecclesiastical tra
dition, how will they persuade any man, that they agree with the
doctrine of the apostles? We have heard Tertullianf Saying, 'I
will prescribe (against all heretics) that there is ho means to
prove what the apostles preached, but by the same churches which
they founded.' And St. Irenaeus tells us,J ' that we may behold
the tradition of the apostles in every church, if men be desirous
to bear the truth, and we can number them who were made
bishops by the apostles in churches, and their successors even to
us.' And the same father in another place saith,§ ' We ought to
obey those priests who are in the church, who have succession
from the apostles, and who, together with succession in their
bishoprics, have received the certain gift of truth.' St. Augus
tine saith,|| ' I am kept In the church by the succession of priests
from the Very see of Peter the apostle, to whom our Saviour,
after his resurrection, committed his sheep to be fed, even to the
present bishop.' Origen to this purpose giveth us a good and
« Dyer, fol. 234, Term. Mich. 6 & 7 Eliz. t Sup. c. v. X Lib. iii. c. v.
§ Lib. iv. c. xliii. II Cont. epist. Fundam. c. iv.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 421
wholesome rule, (happy, if himself had followed the same !) in
these excellent words :* ' Since there be many who think they
believe the things which are of Christ, and some are of different
opinion from those who went before them ; let the preaching ef
the -church be kept, which is delivered by the apostles by order
of succession, and remains in the church to this very day ; that
only is, to be believed for truth, which in nothing disagrees from
the tradition of the church.' In vain, then, do these men brag of
the doctrine of the apostles, unless first they can demonstrate,
that they enjoy a continued succession of bishops from the apostles,
and can shew us a church, which, according to St. Augustine, is
deduced by undoubted succession from the see of the apostles,f
even to the present bishops.
" 24. But yet, nevertheless, suppose it were granted, that they
agreed with the doctrine of the apostles, this were not sufficient
to prove a succession in doctrine. For succession, besides agree
ment or similitude, doth also require a never-interrupted convey
ing of such doctrine, from the time of the apostles, till the days
©f those persons who challenge such a succession. And so St.
Augustine saith ;J we are to believe that gospel, which from the
time of the apostles the church hath brought down to our days,
' by a never-interrupted course of times, and by undoubted suc
cession of connexion.' Now that the reformation begun by
Luther, was interrupted for divers ages before him, is manifest
out of history, and by his endeavouring a reformation, which must
presuppose abuses. He cannot, therefore, pretend a continued
succession of that doctrine which he -sought to revive and reduce
to the knowledge and practice of men. And they ought not to
prove, that they have succession of doctrine, because they agree
with the doctrine of the apostles ; but contrarily we must infer,
that they agree not with the apostles ; because they cannot pre
tend a never-interrupted succession of doctrine from the times of
the apostles till Luther. And here it is not amiss to note, that
although the Waldenses, Wickliff, &c. had agreed with protestants
in all points of doctrine; yet they could not brag of succession
from them, because their doctrine hath not been free from inter
ruption, which necessarily crosseth succession.
" 25. And as want of succession of persons and doctrine cannot
stand with that universality *>f time, which is -inseparable from
the catholic church ; so likewise the disagreeing sects, which are
dispersed through divers countries and nations, cannot help
towards that universality of place, wherewith the true church
must be endued ; but rather such local multiplication doth more
and more lay open their division, and want of succession in doc
trine. For the excellent observation of St. Augustine doth punc
tually agree with all modern heretics; wherein this holy father,
having cited these words out of the prophet Ezekiel§, ' My flocks
are dispersed upon the whole face of the earth ;' he adds this re
markable sentence :|| 'Not all heretics are spread over the face
* Prcef. ad lib. Peri Archon. t Cont. Eaust. c. ii.
1 Lib. xxviii. Cont. Faust, c. ii. § Cap. xxiv. |1 Lib. de Pastori, o. viii

E

422 Charity maintained by Catholics.
of the earth, and yet there are heretics spread over the whole face
of the earth, some here, some there ; yet they are wanting in no
place, they know not one another. One sect, for example, in
Africa, another heresy in the East, another in Egypt, another in
Mesopotamia. In divers places they are diverse; one mother
ride hath begot them all, as our own mother the catholic church
ath brought forth all faithful people dispersed throughout the
whole world. No wonder, then, if pride breed dissension, and
charity union.' And, in another place, applying to heretics those
words of the Canticles,* ' if thou know not thyself, go forth, and
follow after the steps of the flocks, and feed thy kids ;' he saith,f
' if thou know not thyself, go thou forth : I do not cast thee out,
but go thou out, that it may be said of thee, they went from us,
but they were not of us. Go thou out in the steps of the flocks ;
not in my steps, but in the steps of the flocks ; nor of one flock,
but of divers and wandering flocks; and feed thy kids, not as
Peter, to whom it is said, feed my sheep ; but feed thy kids in the
tabernacles of the pastors, not in the tabernacle of the pastor,
where there is one flock, and one pastor.' In which words this
holy father doth set down the marks of heresy, to wit, going out
from the church, and want of unity among themselves, which
proceed from not acknowledging one supreme and visible pastor
and head under Christ. And so it being proved, that protestants
have neither succession of persons, nor doctrine, nor universality
of time or place, they calinot avoid the just note of heresy.
" 26. Hitherto we have brought arguments to prove, that
Luther and all protestants are guilty of heresy against the nega
tive precept of faith, which obligeth us, under pain of damnation,
not to embrace any one error, contrary to any truth sufficiently pro
pounded as testified or revealed by Almighty God. Which were
enough to make good, that among persons, who disagree in any
one point of faith, one part only can be saved ; yet we will now
prove, that whosoever erreth in any one point, doth also break the
affirmative precept of faith, whereby we are obliged positively to
believe some revealed truth, with an infallible and supernatural
faith, which is necessary to salvation, even necessitate finis, or medii,
as divines speak, that is, so necessary, that not any, after he is come
to the use of reason, was or can be saved without it, according to
the words of the apostle :J ' Without faith it is impossible to
please God.'
"27. In the beginning of this chapter I shewed, that to chris
tian catholic faith are required certainty, obscurity, prudence, and
supernaturality : all which conditions we will prove to be want
ing in the belief of protestants, even in those points which are
true in themselves, and to which they yield assent, as happeneth
in all particulars wherein they agree with us; from whence it will
follow, that they, wanting true divine faith, want means abso
lutely necessary to salvation.
"28. And, first, that their belief wanteth certainty, I prove
» Cant. 1. t Ep. 48. X Heb. xi. 6.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 423
because they, denying the universal infallibility of the church, can
have no certain ground to know what objects are revealed and tes
tified by God. Holy scripture is in itself most true and infallible :
but without the direction and declaration of the church, we can
neither have. certain means to know what scripture is canonical,
nor what translations be faithful, nor what is the true meaning of
scripture. Every protestant, as I suppose, is persuaded that his
own opinions be true, and that he hath used such means as are
wont to be prescribed for understanding the scripture ; as prayer,
conferring of divers texts, &c. and yet their disagreements show,
that some of them are deceived : and therefore it is clear, that
they have no one certain ground whereon to rely for understand
ing of scripture And seeing they hold all the articles of faith-,
even concerning fundamental points, upon the self-same ground
of scripture, interpreted, not by the church's authority, but ac
cording to some other rules, which, as experience of their contra
dictions teach, do sometimes fail ; it is clear, that the ground of
their faith is infallible in no point. at all. And albeit sometime it
chance to hit on the truth, yet it is likewise apt to lead them to
error: as all arch-heretics, believing some truths, and withal
divers errors, upon the same ground and motive, have indeed no
true divine infallible faith, but only a fallible human opinion and
persuasion ; for if the ground upon which they rely were certain,
it could never produce any error.
" 29. Another cause of uncertainty, in the faith of protestants,
must rise from their distinction of points fundamental and not
fundamental : for since they acknowledge, that every error in
fundamental points destroyeth the substance of faith, and yet can
not determine what points be fundamental, it followeth, that they
must remain uncertain, whether or no they be not in some funda
mental error, and so want the substance of faith, without which
there can be no hope of salvation.
"30. And that he who erreth against one revealed truth, (as
certainly some protestants must do, because contradictory pro
positions cannot both be true) doth lose all divine faith, is a very
true doctrine delivered by catholic divines with so general a con
sent, that the contrary is wont to be censured as temerarious.
The angelical doctor St. Thomas proposeth this question,*
' Whether he who denieth one article of faith may retain faith of
other articles ?' And resolves that he cannot ; which he proveth,
(argumento sed contra) because, 'as deadly sin is opposite to charity,
so to deny one article of faith is opposite to faith. But charity
doth not remain with any one deadly sin ; therefore faith doth not
remain after the denial of any one article of faith.' Whereof he
gives this farther reason; 'because (saith he) the nature of every
habit doth depend upon the formal motive and object thereof,
which motive being taken away, the nature of the habit cannot
remain. But the formal object of faith is the supreme truth, as
it is manifested in scriptures, and in the doctrine of the church,
which proceeds from the same supreme verity. Whosoever there-
* 2, 2, q. 5, art. 3, in corp.

424 Charity maintained by Catholics.
fore doth not rely upon the doctrine of the church, (which pro
ceeds from the supreme verity manifested in scriptures) as upon
an infallible rule, he hath not the habit of faith, but believes those
things which belong to faith by some other means than by faith ;
as, if one should remember some conclusion, and not know the
reason of that demonstration, it is clear, that he hath not certain
knowledge, but only opinion; now it is manifest, that he who
relies upon the doctrine of the church, as upon an infallible rule,
will yield his assent to all that the church teacheth : for, if among
those things which she teacheth, he hold what he will, and doth not
hold what he will not, he doth not rely upon the doctrine of the
church, as upon an infallible rule, but only upon his own will.
And so it is clear, that a heretic, who with pertinacity denieth
one article of faith, is not ready to follow the doctrine of the
church in all things : and therefore, it is manifest, that whosoever
is a heretic in any one article of« faith, concerning other articles
hath not faith, but a kind of opinion, or his own will.' Thus far
St. Thomas. And afterward,* ' A man doth believe all the articles
of faith, for one and the self-same reason, to wit, for the prime
Verity proposed to us in the scripture, understood aright according
to the doctrine of the church ; and therefore, whosoever falls from
this reason or motive, is totally deprived of faith.' From this true
doctrine we are to infer, that to retain or want the substance of
faith, doth not consist in the matter or multitude of the articles, but
in the opposition against God's divine testimony, which is involved
in every least error against faith. And since some protestants must
needs err, and that they have no certain rule to know why rather
one than another, it manifestly follows, that none of them have any
certainty for the substance of their faith in any one point. More
over Dr. Potter being forced to confess that the Roman church
wants not the substance of faith, it follows that she doth not err in
any one point against faith, because, as we have seen out of St.
Thomas, every such error destroys the substance of faith. Now
if the Roman church did not err in any one point of faith, it is man
ifest, that protestants err in all those points wherein they are con
trary to her. And this may suffice to prove, that the faith of pro
testants wants infallibility.
"31. And now for the second condition of faith, I say, if pro
testants have certainty, they want obscurity, and so have not that
faith, which, as the apostle saith, is of things not appearing, or
not necessitating our understanding to an assent; for the whole
edifice of the faith of protestants is settled on these two prin
ciples : — These particular books are canonical scripture ; and the
sense and meaning of these canonical scriptures is clear and evi
dent, at least in all points necessary to salvation. Now these
principles being once supposed, it clearly followeth, that what
protestants believe as necessary to salvation is evidently known
by them to be true, by this argument : — It is certain and evident,
that whatsoever is contained in the word of God is true : but it is
* Ad. 2.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 425
certain and evident, that these books in particular are the word
of God : therefore it is certain and evident, that whatsoever is
contained in these books is true. Which conclusion I take for a
major in a certain argument, and say thus : it is certain and evi
dent, that whatsoever is contained in these books is true ; but it
is certain and evident, that such particular articles (for example,
the trinity, incarnation, original sin, &c.) are contained in these
books : therefore it is certain and evident, that these particular
objects are true. Neither will it avail you to say, that the said
principles are not evident by natural discourse, but only to the eye
of reason, cleared by grace, as you speak. For supernatural evi
dence, no less (yea, rather more) drowns and excludes obscurity,
than natural evidence doth ; neither can the party so enlightened
be said voluntarily to captivate his understanding to that light, but
rather his understanding is by a necessity made captive, and forced
not to disbelieve what is presented by so clear a light : and there
fore your imaginary faith is not the true faith, defined by the apostle,
but an invention of your own.
" 32. That the faith of protestants wanted the third condition,
which was prudence, is deduced from all that hitherto hath been
said. What wisdom was it, to forsake a church confessedly very
ancient, and besides which there could be demonstrated no other
visible church of Christ upon earth ? A church acknowledged
to want nothing necessary to salvation ; endued with succession
of bishops, with visibility and universality of time and plaee : a
church, which, if it be not the true church, her enemies cannot
pretend to have any church, ordination, scripture, succession, &c.
and are forced, for their own sake, to maintain her perpetual ex
istence and being. To leave, I say, such a church, and frame a
community, without either unity, or means to procure it : a church,
which, at Luther's first revolt, had no larger extent than where
his body was : a church without universality of time or place : a
church, which can pretend no visibility or being, except only in that
former church, which it opposeth : a church void of succession of
persons or doctrine. What wisdom was it to follow such men as
Luther, in an opposition against the visible church of Christ, begun
upon mere passion ? What wisdom is it to receive from us a
church, ordination, scriptures, personal succession, and not suc
cession of doctrine ? Is not this to verify the name of heresy,
which signifieth election or choice ? Whereby they cannot avoid
that note of imprudency, or (as St. Augustine calls it) foolishness,
set down, by him against the manichees, and by me recited before.
' I would not (saith he*) believe the gospel, unless the authority
of the church did move me. Those therefore whom I obeyed,
saying believe the gospel, why should I not obey the same men
saying unto me, do not believe Manichaeus (Luther, Calvin, &c.) ?
Choose what thou pleasest : if thou say, believe the catholics, they
warn me not to believe thee : wherefore if I believe them I cannot
believe thee. If thou say, do not believe the catholics, thou shalt
not do well, in forcing me to the faith of Manichaeus, because, by
* Cont. ep.Fund. c. v.

426 Charity maintained by Catholics.
the preaching of catholics I believed the gospel itself. If thou say,
you did well to believe them (catholics) commending the gospel ;
but you did not well to believe them, discommending Manichaeus ;
dost thou think me so very foolish, that, without any reason at
all, I should believe what thou wilt, and not believe what thou
wilt not?' Nay, this holy father is not content to call it foolish
ness, but mere madness, in these words : * ' why should I not most
diligently inquire what Christ commanded, of those before all
others, by whose authority I was moved to believe, that Christ
commanded any good thing ? Canst thou better declare to me
what he said, whom I would not have thought to have been, or
to be, if the belief thereof had been recommended by thee to me ?
This, therefore, I believed by fame, strengthened with celebrity,
consent, antiquity. But every one may see, that you, so few, so
turbulent, so new, can produce nothing which deserves authority.
What madness is this? Believe them (catholics) that we ought
to believe Christ ; but learn of us what Christ said. Why, I be
seech thee ? Surely if they (cathplics) were not at all, and could
not teach me any thing, I would more easily persuade myself,
that I were not to believe Christ, than I should learn any thing
concerning him from any other than those by whom I believed
him.' .Lastly, I ask, what wisdom it could be to leave all visible
churches, and consequently the true catholic church of Christ,
which you confess cannot err in points necessary to salvation, and
the Roman church, which you grant doth not err in fundamentals,
and follow private men, who may err even in points necessary to
salvation? Especially, if we add, that when Luther rose, there
was no visible true catholic church besides that of Rome, and
them who agreed with her ; in which sense she was and is the
only true church of Christ, and not capable of any error in faith.
Nay, even Luther, who first opposed the Roman Church, yet,
coming to dispute against other heretics, he is forced to give the
lie both to his own words and deeds, in saying.f ' we freely con
fess, that in the papacy there are many good things worthy the
name of christian, which have come from them to us: namely, we
confess that in the papacy there is true scripture, true baptism,
the true sacrament of the altar, the true keys for the remission of
sins, the true office of preaching, true catechism, as our Lord's
Prayer, Ten Commandments, Articles of Faith,' &c. And after
ward, ' I avouch, that under the papacy there is true Christianity,
yea, the kernel and marrow of Christianity, and many pious and
great saints.' And again he affirmeth, that ' the church of Rome
hath the true Spirit, gospels, faith, baptism, sacraments, the keys,
the office of preaching, prayer, holy scripture, and whatsoever
Christianity ought to have.' And a little before, ' I hear and see,
that they bring in anabaptism only to this end, that they might
spite the pope, as men that will receive nothing from antichrist,
no otherwise than the sacra men taries do, who therefore believe
only bread and wine to be in the sacrament, merely in hatred
* Lib. de util. Cred. c. xiv.
+ In epist. cont. Anab. ad duos Parodies, to 2 Germ. Wit. fol. 229, 230.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 427
against the bishop of Rome ; and they think, that by this means
they shall overcome the papacy. Verily these men rely upon a
weak ground : for by this means they must deny the whole scrip
ture, and the office of preaching : for we have all these things
from the pope, otherwise we must go make a new scripture.' ' O
truth, more forcible (as St. Augustine says*) to wring out confes
sion, than is any rack or torment !' And so we may truly say with
Moses, inimici nostri sunt judices, 'our very enemies give sentence
for us.'f
" 33. Lastly, since your faith wanteth certainty and prudence,
it is easy to infer, that it wants the fourth condition, supernatu'-
rality : for being but a human persuasion or opinion, it is not in
nature or essence supernatural. And, being imprudent and rash,
it cannot proceed from divine motion and grace ; and, therefore,
it is neither supernatural in itself, nor in the cause from which it
proceedeth. "34. Since, therefore, we have proved, that whosoever errs
against any one point of faith, loseth all divine faith, even con
cerning those other articles wherein he doth not err ; and that,
although he could still retain true faith for some points, yet any
one error in whatsoever other matter concerning faith is a grievous
sin ; it clearly follows, that when two or more hold different doc
trines concerning faith and religion, there can be but one part
saved. For declaring of which truth, if catholics be charged with
want of charity and modesty, and be accused of rashness, ambi
tion, and fury, as Dr. Potter is very free in this kind ; I desire
every one to ponder the words of St. Chrysostome, who teacheth,
that every least error overthrows all faith, and whosoever is guilty
thereof, is, in the church, like one who in the commonwealth
forgeth false coin. ' Let them hear (saith the holy father) what
St. Paul saith ; namely, that they who brought in some small
errorj had overthrown the gospel : for, to show how a small
thing ill mingled doth corrupt the whole, he said, that the gospel
was subverted. For as he who clips a little of the stamp from the
king's money, makes the whole piece of no value ; so, whosoever
takes away the least particle of sound faith, is wholly corrupted,
always going from that beginning to worse things. Where then
are they who condemn us as contentious persons, because we can
not agree with heretics; and do often say, that there is no differ
ence betwixt us and them, but that our disagreement proceeds
from ambition to domineer ?' And thus having shewed, that pro
testants want true faith, it remaineth that, according to my first
design, I examine whether they do not also want charity, as it re
spects a man's self."
* Cont. Donat. post, collat. c. xxiv. t Deut. xxxii. 31. X Gal. i. 7.

428 The Nature of Faith.
THE ANSWER TO THE SIXTH CHAPTER.
That protestants are not heretics.
Ad. §. 1. He that will accuse any one man, much more any
great multitude of men, of any great and horrible crime, should
in all reason and justice take care, that the greatness of his evi
dence do equal, if not exceed, the quality of the crime. And such
an accusation you would here make shew of, by pretending first, to
Jay such grounds of it, as are " either already proved, or else yield
ed on all sides ;" and after to raise a firm and stable structure of
convincing arguments upon them. Both these I find to be mere
and vain pretences ; and, having considered this chapter also with
out prejudice or passion, as I did the former, I am enforced, by the
light of truth, to pronounce your whole discourse a painted and
ruinous building, upon a weak and sandy foundation.
2. Ad. ^.2, 3. First, for your grounds; a great part of them
is falsely said to be either proved or granted. It is true, indeed,
that man, by his natural wit or industry, could never have attained
to the knowledge of God's will to give him. a supernatural and
eternal happiness ; nor of the means, by which his pleasure was to
bestow this happiness upon him. And, therefore, your first ground
is good, that "it was requisite his understanding should be enabled
to apprehend that end and means, by a knowledge supernatural."
I say, this is good, if you mean by knowledge an apprehension or
belief. But if you take the word properly and exactly, it is both
false ; for faith is not knowledge, no more than three is four, but
eminently contained in it, so that he that knows believes, and
something more ; but he that believes, many times does not know,
nay, if he doth barely and merely believe, he doth never know ;
and, besides, it is retracted by yourself presently, where you re
quire, that the object of faith must be both naturally and super-
naturally unknown. And, again, in the next page, where you say
— faith differs from science in regard of the object's obscurity. For
that science and knowledge, properly taken, are synonymous terms,
and that a knowledge of the thing absolutely unknown is a plain
impligancy, I think are things so plain, that you will not require any
proof of them.
3. But then, whereas you add, that " if such a knowledge were
no more than probable, it could not be able sufficiently to over
bear our will and encounter with human probabilities, being
backed with the strength of flesh and blood ;" and, therefore, con
clude, that " it was farther necessary, that this supernatural
knowledge should be most certain and infallible:" — to this I
answer, that I do heartily acknowledge and believe the articles of
our faith to be in themselves truths, as certain and infallible as
the very common principles of geometry and metaphysics. But
that there is required of us a knowledge of them, and adherence
to them, as certain as that of sense or science ; that such a cer
tainty is required of us under pain of damnation, so that no man
can hope to be in a state of salvation, but he that finds in himself

The Nature of Faith. 429
such a degree of faith, such a strength of adherence ; this I have
already demonstrated to be a great error, and of dangerous and
pernicious consequence. And because I am more and more con
firmed in my persuasion, that the truth which I there delivered, is
of great and singular use, I will here confirm it with more reasons.
And to satisfy you, that this is no singularity of my own, my margent
presents you with a protestant divine* of great authority, and no
way singular in his opinions, who hath long since preached and
justified the same doctrine.
4. I say, that every text of scripture which rnakes mention of any
that were weak, or any that were strong, in faith ; of any that were
of little, or any that were of great faith; of any that abounded, or any
that were rich in faith ; of increasing, growing, rooting, grounding,
establishing, confirming in faith ; every such text is a demonstra
tive refutation of this vain fancy, proving that faith, even true and
saving faith, is not a thing consisting in such an indivisible point
of perfection as you make it, but capable of augmentation and
diminution. Every prayer you make to God to increase your
faith, or (if you conceive such a prayer derogatory from the per
fection of your faith) the apostles' praying to Christ to increase
their faith, is a convincing argument of the same conclusion.
Moreover, if this doctrine of yours were true, then, seeing not any
the least doubting can consist with a most infallible certainty, it
will follow, that every least doubting in any matter of faith,
though resisted and involuntary, is a damnable sin, absolutely
destructive, so long as it lasts, of all true and saving faith ; which
you are so far from granting, that you make it no sin at all, but
only an occasion of merit : and if you should esteem it a sin, then
must you acknowledge, contrary to your own principles, that there
are actual sins merely involuntary. The same is furthermore in
vincibly confirmed by every deliberate sin that any christian com
mits* by any progress in charity that he makes. For seeing, as
St. John assures us, our faith is " the victory which overcomes the
world," certainly if the faith of all true believers were perfect
(and, if true faith be capable of no imperfection, if all faith be a
knowledge most certain and infallible, all faith must be perfect ;
for the most imperfect that is, according to your doctrine, if it be
true, must be most certain ; and sure the most perfect that is,
cannot be more than most certain), then certainly their victory
over the world, and therefore over the flesh, and therefore over
* Mr. Hooker, in his answer to Travers's Supplication : — I have taught, that the as
surance of things which we believe by the word, is not so certain as of that we perceive
by sense. And is it as certain ? Yea I taught, that the things which God doth pro
mise in his word, are surer unto us than any thing we touch, handle, or see. But are
we so sure and certain of them ? If we be, why doth God so often prove his promises
unto us, as he doth, by arguments taken from our sensible experience ? We must be
surer of the proof than the thing proved, otherwise it is no proof. How is it, that if
ten men do all look upon the moon, every one of them knows it as certainly to be the
moon as another ; but many believing one and the same promises, all have not one and
the same fulness of persuasion ? How falleth it out, that men being assured of any
thing by sense, can be no surer of it than they are 1 Whereas, the strongest in faith
that liveth upon the earth, hath always need to labour, and strive, and pray, that his
assurance concerning heavenly and spiritual things may grow, increase, and be aug
mented.

430 The Nature of Faith.
sin, must of necessity be perfect, and so it should be impossible
for any true believer to commit any deliberate sin ; and therefore
he that commits any sin must not think himself a true believer.
Besides, seeing faith worketh by charity, and charity is the effect
of faith ; certainly, if the cause were perfect, the effect would be
perfect ; and, consequently, as you make no degrees in faith, so
there would be none in charity, and so no man could possibly
make any progress in it, but all true believers should be equal in
charity, as in faith you make them equal ; and from thence it
would follow unavoidably, that whosoever finds in himself any
true faith, must presently persuade himself, that he is perfect in
charity ; and whosoever, on the other side, discovers in his charity
any imperfection, must not believe that he hath any true faith.
These, you see, are strange and portentous consequences; and yet
the deduction of them from your doctrine is clear and apparent ;
which shews this doctrine of yours, which you would fain have
true, that there might be some necessity of your church's infalli
bility, to be indeed plainly repugnant not only to truth, but even
to all religion and piety, and fit for nothing, but to make men
negligent of making any progress in faith or charity. And, there
fore, I must entreat and adjure you either to discover unto me
(which I take God to witness I cannot perceive) some fallacy in
my reasons against it, or never hereafter to open your mouth in
defence of it.
5. As for that one single reason which you produce to confirm
it, it will appear upon examination to be resolved finally into a
groundless assertion of your own, contrary to all truth and expe
rience, and that is, that no degree of faith, less than a most cer
tain and infallible knowledge, can be " able sufficiently to over-
. bear our will, and encounter with human, probabilities, being
backed with the strength of flesh and blood." For who sees not
that many millions in the world forego many times their present
ease and pleasure, undergo great and toilsome labours, encounter
great difficulties, adventure upon great dangers, and all this not
upon any certain expectation, but upon a probable hope of some
future gain and commodity, and that not infinite and eternal, but
finite and temporal? Who sees not that many men abstain from
many things they exceedingly desire, not upon any certain assur
ance, but a probable fear, of danger that may come after ? What
man ever was there so madly in love with a present penny, but
that he would willingly spend it upon any little hope, that by
doing so he might gain a hundred thousand pounds? And I
would fain know, what gay probabilities you could devise to
dissuade him from this resolution. And if you can devise none,
what reason then or sense is there, but that a probable hope of
infinite and eternal happiness, provided for all those that obey
Christ Jesus, and much more a firm faith, though not so certain,
in some sort, as sense or science, may be able to sway our will to
obedience, and encounter with all those temptations which flesh
and blood can suggest to avert us from it ? Men may talk their
pleasure of an absolute and most infallible certainty, but did they

The Nature of Faith. 431
generally believe that obedience to Christ were the only way to
present and eternal felicity, but as firmly and undoubtedly as
that there is such a city as Constantinople, nay, but as much as
Caesar's Commentaries, or the History of Sallust ; I believe the
lives of most men, both papists and protestants, would be better
than they are. Thus, therefore, out of your own words I argue
against you: — he that requires to true faith an absolute and infalli
ble certainty, for this only reason — because any less degree could
not be able to overbear our will, &c. — imports, that if a less degree
of faith were able to do this, then a less degree of faith may be
true, and divine, and saving faith : but experience shews, and rea
son confirms, that a firm faith, though not so certain as sense or
science, may be able to encounter and overcome our will and affec
tions; and therefore it follows, from your own reason, that faith,
which is not a most certain and infallible knowledge, may be true,
and divine, and saving faith.
6. All these reasons I have employed to shew, that such a
most certain and infallible faith, as here you talk of, is not so
necessary, but that, without such a high degree of it, it is possible
to please God. And, therefore, the doctrines delivered by you,
§. 25, are most presumptuous and uncharitable, viz. that such a
most certain and infallible faith is necessary to salvation, necessi
tate finis or medii ; so necessary, that after a man is come to the
use of reason, no man ever was or can be saved without it. —
Wherein you boldly intrude into the judgment-seat of God, and
damn men for breaking laws, not of God's but your own making.
But withal you clearly contradict yourself, not only* where you
affirm, that your faith finally depends upon the tradition of age
to age, of father to son, which cannot be a fit ground, but only
for a moral assurance; nor only where you pretend,f that not
alone hearing and seeing, but also histories, letters, relations of
many (which certainly are things not certain and infallible), are
yet foundations good enough to support your faith : which doc
trine, if it were good and allowable, protestants might then
hope, that their histories, and letters, and relations, might also
pass for means sufficient of a sufficient certainty, and that they
should not be excluded from salvation for want of such a cer
tainty. But indeed the pressure of the present difficulty com
pelled you to speak here, what I believe you will not justify,
and with a pretty tergiversation to shew Dr. Potter your means
of moral certainty ; whereas, the objection was, that you had no
means or possibility of infallible certainty, for which you are
plainly at as great a loss, and as far to seek as any of your ad
versaries. And, therefore, it concerns you highly not to damn
others for want of it, lest you involve yourselves in the same
condemnation ; according to those terrible words of St. Paul,
"thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest:
for, wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for
thou that judgest dost the same things," &c. In this, therefore,
you plainly contradict yourself. And lastly, most plainly, in
«P.l,cii.§.14. t P. 2, c. v. §. 32.

432 The Nature of Faith.
saying as you do here, you contradict and retract your pretence of
charity to protestants in the beginning of your book : for there you
make professions, that you have no assurance, but that " protest
ants, dying protestants, may possibly die with contrition, and be
saved :" and here you are very peremptory, that " they cannot but
want a means absolutely necessary to salvation, and, wanting that,
cannot but be damned."
7. The third condition you require to faith is, that our assent
to divine truths " should not only be unknown and unevident by
any human discourse," but that "absolutely also it should be
obscure in itself, and, ordinarily speaking, be void even of super
natural evidence." Which words must have a very favourable
construction, or else they will not be sense. For who can make
any thing of these words taken properly, that " faith must be an
unknown unevident assent, or an assent absolutely obscure?" I
had always thought, that known and unknown, obscure and evi
dent, had been affections not of our assent, but the object of it,
not of our belief, but the thing believed. For well may we as
sent to a thing unknown, obscure, or unevident ; but that our as
sent itself should be called therefore unknown or obscure, seems
to me as great an impropriety, as if I should say, your sight were
green or blue, because you see something that is so. In other
places, therefore, I answer your words, but here I must answer
your meaning : which I conceive to be, that it is necessary to
faith, that the objects of it, the points which we believe, should
not be so evidently certain, as to necessitate our understanding to
an assent, so that there might be some merit in faith, as you love
to speak (who will not receive, no, not from God himself, but a
pennyworth for a penny), but as we, some obedience in it, which
can hardly have place where there is no possibility of disobedi
ence ; as there is not, where the understanding does all, and the
will nothing. Now seeing the religion of protestants, though it
be much more credible than yours, yet is not pretended to have
the absolute evidence of sense or demonstration ; therefore I
might let this doctrine pass without exception, for any prejudice
that can redound to us by it. But yet I must not forbear to
tell you, that your discourse proves, indeed, this condition re
quisite to the merit, but yet not to the essence of faith : with
out it faith were not an act of obedience, but yet faith may be
faith without it ; and this you must confess, unless you will say
either the apostles believed not the whole gospel which they
preached, or that they were not eye-witnesses of a great part of it ;
unless you will question St. John for saying, " that which we have
seen with our eyes, and with our hands have handled, &c. declare
we unto you ;" nay, our Saviour himself for saying, " Thomas,
because thou seest thou believest; blessed are they which have
not seen, and yet have believed." Yet if you will say, that in
respect of the things which they saw, the apostles' assent was not
pure, and proper, and mere faith, but somewhat more, an assent
containing faith, but superadding to it, I will not contend with
you; for it will be a contention about words. But then, again,

The Nature of Faith. 433
I must crave leave to tell you, that the requiring this condition is,
in my judgment, a plain revocation of the former : for had you
made the matter of faith either naturally or supernaturally evi
dent, it might have been a fitly attempered and duly proportioned
object for an absolute certainty natural or supernatural ; but re
quiring as you do — that faith should be an absolute knowledge of
a thing not absolutely known, an infallible certainty of a thing,
which though it is in itself, yet is it not made appear to us to be,
infallibly certain — to my understanding you speak impossibilities.
And truly for one of your religion to do so, is but a good decorum :
for the matter and object of your faith being so full of contra
dictions, a contradictious faith may very well become a contradic
tious religion. Your faith, therefore, if you please to have it so,
let it be a free necessitated, certain uncertain, evident obscure,
prudent and foolish, natural and supernatural unnatural assent.
But they which are unwilling to believe nonsense themselves, or
persuade others to do so, it is but reason they should make the
faith, wherewith they believe, an intelligible, compossible, con
sistent thing, and not define it by repugnancies. Now nothing is
more repugnant, than that a man should be required to give most
certain credit unto that which cannot be made appear most cer
tainly credible; and if it appear to him to be so, then is it not
obscure that it is so. For if you speak of an acquired, rational,
discursive faith, certainly these reasons, which make the object
seem credible, must be the cause of it ; and consequently, the
strength and infirmity of my assent must rise and fall, together
with the apparent credibility of the object. If you speak of a su
pernatural infused faith, then you either suppose it infused by
the former means, and then that which was said before must be
said again ; for whatsoever effect is wrought merely by means, must
bear proportion to, and cannot exceed, the virtue of the means by
which it is wrought. As nothing by water can be made more
cold than water, nor by fire more hot than fire, nor by honey
more sweet than honey, nor by gall more bitter than gall : or if
you will suppose it infused without means, then that power which
infuseth into the understanding assent, which bears analogy to
sight in the eye, must also infuse evidence, that is, visibility into
the object : and look what degree of assent is infused into the un
derstanding, at least the same degree of evidence must be infused
into the object. And for you to require a strength of credit, be
yond the appearance of the object's credibility, is all one as if you
should require me to go ten miles an hour upon a horse, that
will go but five ; to discern a man certainly through a mist or
cloud, that makes him not certainly discernible ; to hear a sound
more clearly than it is audible ; to understand a thing more fully
than it is intelligible: and he that doth so, I may well expect
that his next injunction will be, that I must see something that is
invisible, hear something inaudible, understand something that is
wholly unintelligible. For he that demands ten of me, knowing
I have but five, does in effect as if he demanded five, knowing that
I have none: and, by like reason, you requiring that I should
E E

434 The Nature of Faith.
see things farther than they are visible, require I should see some
thing invisible ; and in requiring that I believe something more
firmly than it is made to me evidently credible, you require, in ef
fect, that I believe something which appears to me incredible, and
while it does so. I deny not but that I am bound to believe the
truth of many texts of scripture, the sense whereof is to me obscure;
and the truth of many articles of faith, the manner whereof is ob
scure, and to human understandings incomprehensible : but then it
is to be observed, that not the sense of such texts, nor the manner
of these things, is that which I am bound to believe, but the truth
of them. But that I should believe the truth of any thing, the
truth whereof cannot be made evident with an evidence propor
tionable to the degree of faith required of me ; this, I say, for any
man to be bound to, is unjust and unreasonable, because to do it is
impossible. 8. Ad. §. 4 — 12. Yet though I deny that it is required of us
to be certain in the highest degree, infallibly certain of the truth
of the things which we believe, for this were to know, and not
believe, neither is it possible, unless our evidence of it, be it na
tural or supernatural, were of the highest degree ; yet I deny not,
but we ought to be, and may be, infallibly certain that we are to
believe the religion of Christ. For, first, this is most certain, that
we are in all things to do according to wisdom and reason, rather
than against it. Secondly, this is as certain, that wisdom and rea
son require, that we should believe these things which are by many
degrees more credible and probable than the contrary. Thirdly,
this is as certain, that to every man who considers impartially what
great things may be said for the truth of Christianity, and what
poor things they are which may be said against it, either for any
other religion, or for none at all, it cannot but appear by many de
grees more credible, that the christian religion is true, than the con
trary. And, from all these premises, this conclusion evidently fol
lows, that it is infallibly certain, that we are firmly to believe the
truth of the christian religion.
9. Your discourse therefore touching the fourth requisite to
faith, which is prudence, I admit, so far as to grant, 1. That if
we were required to believe with certainty (I mean a moral cer
tainty) things no way represented as infallible and certain, (I mean
morally) an unreasonable obedience were required of us. And so
likewise were it, were we required to believe as absolutely certain,
that which is no way represented to us as absolutely certain. 2.
That whom God obligeth to believe any thing, he will not fail to
furnish their understandings with such inducements, as are suf
ficient (if they be not negligent and perverse) to persuade them to
believe. 3. That there is an abundance of arguments exceedingly
credible, inducing men to believe the truth of Christianity ; I say
so credible, that though they cannot make us evidently see what
we believe ; yet they evidently convince, that in true wisdom and
prudence the articles of it deserve credit, and ought to be ac
cepted as things revealed by God. 4. That without such reasons
and inducements, our choice even of the true faith is not to be

Protestants not Heretics. 435
commended as prudent, but to be condemned of rashness and
levity. 10. But then for your making prudence not only a commenda
tion of a believer, and a justification of his faith, but also essential
to it, and part of the definition of.it, in that questionless you were
mistaken, and have done as if being to say what a man is, you
should define him, a reasonable creature that hath skill in astro
nomy. For as all astronomers are men, but all men are not
astronomers, and therefore astronomy ought not to be put into
the definition of man, where nothing should have place, but what
agrees to all men : so though all that are truly wise, (that is, wise
for eternity) will believe aright, yet many may believe aright,
which are not wise. I could wish with all my heart, as Moses did
— that all the Lord's people could prophesy — that all that believe
the true religion were "able (according to St. Peter's injunction)
to give a reason of the hope that is in them," a reason why they
hope for eternal happiness by this way rather than any other !
Neither do I think it any great difficulty, that men of ordinary
capacities, if they would give their mind to it, might quickly be
enabled to do it. But should I affirm, that all true believers can
do so, I suppose it would be as much against experience and mo
desty, as it is against truth and charity to say as you do — that
they which cannot do so, either are not at all, or to no purpose,
true believers. And thus we see, that the foundations you build
upon are ruinous and deceitful, and so unfit to support your fabric,
that they destroy one another. I come now to shew that your
arguments to prove protestants heretics are all of the same quality
with your former grounds ; which I will do, by opposing clear and
satisfying answers in order to them.
11. Ad. §. 13. To the first, then, delivered by you §. 13,
that protestants must be heretics, because they opposed divers
truths propounded for divine by the visible church ; I answer, it
is not heresy to oppose any truth propounded by the church, but
only such a truth as is an essential part of the gospel of Christ.
2. The doctrines which protestants opposed were not truths, but
plain and impious falsehoods. Neither, thirdly, were they propounded
as truths by the visible church, but only by a part of it, and that a
corrupted part.
12. Ad. §. 14. The next argument, in the next particle, tells
us, that every error against any doctrine revealed by God is damn
able heresy : now either protestants or the Roman church must
err against the word of God: but the Roman church we grant
(perforce) doth not err damnably, neither can she, because she is
the catholic church, which we (you say) confess cannot err damn
ably : therefore protestants must err against God's word, and
consequently are guilty of formal heresy. Whereunto I answer,
plainly, that there be in this argument almost as many falsehoods
as assertions. For neither is every error against any doctrine
revealed by God a damnable heresy, unless it be revealed pub
licly and plainly, with a command that all should believe it. 2.
Dr. Potter nowhere grants, that the errors of the Roman church
ee2

436 Protestants not Heretics.
are not in themselves damnable, though he hopes by accident
they may not actually damn some men amongst you ; and this you
yourself confess in divers places of your book, where you tell us,
that he allows no hope of salvation to those amongst you, whom
ignorance cannot excuse.* 3. You beg the question twice in
taking for granted, first, that the Roman church is the truly
catholic church ; which without much favour can hardly pass for
a part of it : and again, that the catholic church cannot fall into
any error of itself damnable ; for it may do so, and still be the
catholic church, if it retain those truths which may be an antidote
against the malignity of this error, to those that held it out of a
simple unaffected ignorance. Lastly, though the thing be true,
yet I might well require some proof of it from you, that either
protestants or the Roman church must err against God's word. For
if their contradiction be your only reason, then also you or the do
minicans must be heretics, because you contradict one another as
much as protestants and papists.
13. Ad. §. 15. The third argument pretends, that you have
shewed already, that the visible church is judge of controversies,
and therefore infallible ; from whence you suppose it follows, that
to oppose her is to oppose God. To which I answer, that you
have said only, and not shewed, that the visible church is judge
of controversies. And, indeed, how can she be judge of them, if
she cannot decide them ? And how can she decide them, if it be
a question, whether she be judge of them? That which is ques
tioned itself, cannot with any sense be pretended to be fit to
decide other questions ; and much less this question, whether it
have authority to judge and decide all questions ? 2. If she were
judge, it would not follow that she were infallible ; for we have
many judges in our courts of judicature, yet none infallible.
Nay, you cannot with any modesty deny, that every man in the
world ought to judge for himself what religion is truest ; and yet
you will not say that every man is infallible. 3. If the church were
supposed infallible, yet it would not follow at all, much less mani
festly, that to oppose her declaration is to oppose God ; unless you
suppose also, that as she is infallible, so by her opposers she is known
or believed to be so. Lastly, if all this were true (as it is all most
false),' yet were it to little purpose, seeing you have omitted to prove
that the visible church is the Roman.
14. Ad. §. 16. Instead of a fourth argument, this is presented
to us — that if Luther were a heretic, then they that agreed with
him must be so. And that Luther was a formal heretic, you
endeavour to prove by this most formal syllogism — To say the
visible church is not universal, is properly a heresy : but Luther's
reformation was not universal ; therefore it cannot be excused
from formal heresy. Whereunto I answer, first, to the first
part, that it is no way impossible that Luther, had he been the
inventor and first broacher of a false doctrine, (as he was not)
might have been a formal heretic, and yet that those who follow
him may be only so materially and improperly, and indeed no
* Ch. v. §. 41.

Protestants not Heretics. 437
heretics. Your own men out of St. Augustine distinguish between
haretici, et hareticorum sequaces : and you yourself, though you
pronounce the leaders among the arians formal heretics, yet con
fess, that Salvian was at least doubtful, whether these arians,
who in simplicity followed their teachers, might not be excused
by ignorance. And about this suspension of his you also seem
suspended ; for you neither approve nor condemn it. Secondly,
to the second part, I say, that had you not presumed upon your
ignorance in logic, as well as metaphysic and school divinity, you
would never have obtruded upon us this rope of sand for a formal
syllogism. It is even cousin-german to this : — To deny the
resurrection, is properly a heresy : but Luther's reformation was
not universal ; therefore it cannot be excused from formal heresy.
Or to this— To say the visible church is not universal, is properly
a heresy : but the preaching of the gospel at the beginning was
not universal ; therefore it cannot be excused from formal heresy.
For as he, whose reformation is but particular, may yet not deny
the resurrection, so may he also not deny the church's universal
ity. And as the apostles, who preached the gospel in the begin
ning, did believe the church universal, though their preaching at
the beginning was not so : so Luther also might and did believe
the church universal, though his reformation were but particular.
I say, he did believe it universal, even in your own sense, that is,
universal de jure, though not de facto. And as for universality
in fact, he believed the church much more universal than his re
formation : for he did conceive (as appears by your own allega
tions out of him), that not only the part reformed was the true
church, but also that they were part of it, who needed reforma
tion. Neither did he ever pretend to make a new church, but to
reform the old one. Thirdly, and lastly, to the first proposition
of this unsyllogistical syllogism, I answer, that to say the true
church is not always de facto universal, is so far from being a
heresy, that it fs a certain truth known to all those that know the
world, and what religions possess far the greater part of it. Do
natus therefore was not to blame for saying, that the church might
possibly be confined to Afric; but for saying, without ground, that
then it was so. And St. Augustine, as he was in the right in think
ing that the church was then extended farther than Afric : so was
he in the wrong, if he thought of necessity it always must be so ; but
most palpably mistaken in conceiving that it was then spread over
the whole earth, and known to all nations, which, if passion did not
trouble you, and make you forget how lately almost half the world
was discovered, and in what estate it was then found, you would
very easily see and confess.
15. Ad. §. 17. In the next section you pretend, that you have
no desire to prosecute the similitude of protestants with the do
natists; and yet you do it with as much spite and malice as could
well be devised, but in vain : for Lucilla might do ill in promot
ing the sect of the donatists, and yet the mother and the daughter,
whom you glance at, might do well in ministering influence (as
you phrase it) to protestants in England. Unless you will con-

438 Protestants not Heretics.
elude, because one woman did one thing ill, therefore no woman
can do any thing well ; or because it was ill done to promote one
sect, therefore it must be ill done to maintain any.
16. The donatists might do ill in calling the chair of Rome the
chair of pestilence, and the Roman church a harlot ; and yet the
state of the church being altered, protestants might do well to do
so : and therefore, though St. Augustine might perhaps have
reason to persecute the donatists for detracting from the church,
and calling her harlot, when she was not so ; yet you may have
none to threaten Dr. Potter that you would persecute him (as the
application of this place intimates you would), if it were in your
power ; plainly showing that you are a cursed cow, though your
horns be short, seeing the Roman church is not now what it was
in St. Augustine's time. And hereof the conclusion of your own
book affords us a very pregnant testimony ; where you tell us out
of St. Augustine, that one grand impediment, which among many
kept the seduced followers of the faction of Donatus from the
church's communion, was a calumny raised against the catholics,
that they did set some strange thing upon their altar. " To how
many (saith St. Augustine) did report of ill tongues shut up the way
to enter, who said, that we put I know not what upon the altar ?"
Out of detestation of the calumny, and just indignation against
it, he would not so much as name the impiety wherewith they
were charged ; and therefore, by a rhetorical figure, calls it I know
not what. But compare with him Optatus, writing of the same
matter, and you shall plainly perceive that this (I know not what)
pretended to be set upon the altar, was indeed a picture, which
the donatists (knowing how detestable a thing it was to all chris
tians at that time, to set up any pictures in a church to worship
them, as your new fashion is), bruited abroad to be done in the
churches of the catholic church. But what answer do St. Au
gustine and Optatus make to this accusation ? Do they confess
and maintain it ? Do they say, as you would now, It is true, we
do set pictures upon our altar, and that not only for ornament or
memory, but for worship also ; but we do well to do so, and this
ought not to trouble you, or affright you from our communion ?
What other answer your church could now make to such an objec
tion, is very hard to imagine : and therefore were your doctrine the
same with the doctrine of the fathers in this point; they must have
answered so likewise. But they to the contrary not only deny the
crime, but also abhor and detest it. To little purpose, therefore,
do you hunt after these poor shadows of resemblances between us
and the donatists, unless you could show an exact resemblance be
tween the present church of Rome and the ancient : which seeing,
by this and many other particulars, it is demonstrated to be impos
sible, that church, which was then a virgin, may be now a harlot,
and that which was detraction in the donatists, may be in protest
ants a just accusation.
17. As ill success have you in comparing Dr. Porter with Ty-
conius, whom as St. Augustine finds fault with for continuing in
the donatists' separation, having forsaken the ground of it, the

Protestants not Heretics. 439
doctrine of the church's perishing ; so you condemn the doctor for
continuing in their communion, who hold (as you say) the very
same heresy. But if this were indeed the doctrine of the dona
tists, how is it that you say presently after, that the protestants,
who hold the church of Christ perished, were worse than the do
natists, who said that the church remained at least in Africa?
These things, methinks, hang not well together. But to let this
pass : the truth is, this difference, for which you would fain raise
such a horrible dissension between Dr. Potter and his brethren, if
it be well considered, is only in words and the manner of expres
sion ; they affirming only, that the church perished from its integ
rity, and fell into many corruptions, which he denies not ; and the
doctor denying only that it fell from its essence, and became no
church at all, which they affirm not.
18. These, therefore, are but velitations, and you would seem
to make but small account of them. But the main point, you say,
is — that " since Luther's reformed church was not in being for
divers centuries before Luther, and yet was in the apostle's time,
they must of necessity affirm heretically with the donatists, that
the true unspotted church of Christ perished, and that she, which
remained on earth, was (0 blasphemy !) a harlot." By which words
it seems you are resolute perpetually to confound true and un
spotted ; and to put no difference between a corrupted church, and
none at all. But what is this, but to make no difference between
a diseased and a dead man ? Nay, what is it but to contradict
yourselves, who cannot deny but that sins are as great stains, and
spots, and deformities, in the sight of God, as errors ; and confess
your church to be a congregation of men, whereof every particular,
not one excepted (and consequently the generality, which is nothing
but a collection of them), is polluted and defiled with sin ? You
proceed, 19. But say, " The same heresy follows out of Dr. Potter and
other protestants, that the church may err in points not funda
mental; because we have shewed that every error against any
revealed truth is heresy and damnable, whether the matter be
great or small : and how can the church more truly be said to
perish, than when she is permitted to maintain damnable heresy ?
Besides, we will hereafter prove, that by every act of heresy all
divine faith is lost, and to maintain a true church without any
faith, is to fancy a living man without life." Ans. What you
have said before, hath been answered before ; and what you shall
say hereafter, shall be confuted hereafter. But if it be such a
certain ground, that every error against any one revealed truth
is a damnable heresy, then, I hope, I shall have your leave to
subsume that the dominicans in your account must hold a damna
ble heresy, who hold an error against the immaculate concep
tion : which vou must needs esteem a revealed truth, or otherwise
why are you so urgent and importunate to have it defined, seeing
your rule is, Nothing may be defined unless it be first revealed ?
But, without your leave, I will make bold to conclude, that, if
either that or the contrary assertion be a revealed truth, you or

440 Protestants not Heretics.
they, choose you whether, must without contradiction hold a
damnable heresy; if this ground be true, that every contradic
tion of a revealed truth is such. And now I dare say, for fear of
inconvenience, you will begin to temper the crudeness of your
former assertion, and tell us, that neither of you are heretics, be
cause the truth, against which you err, though revealed, is not
sufficiently propounded. And so say I, neither is your doctrine,
which protestants contradict, sufficiently propounded. For though
it be plain enough, that your church proposeth it, yet still, me
thinks, it is as plain, that your church's proposition is not suffi
cient; and I desire you would not say, but prove the contrary.
Lastly, to your question — How can the church more truly be said
to perish, than when she is permitted to maintain a damnable
heresy ? — I answer, she may be more truly said to perish, when
she is not only permitted to do so, but de facto doth maintain a
damnable heresy. Again, she may be more truly said to perish,
when she falls into a heresy, which is not only damnable in itself
and ex natura rei, as you speak, but such a heresy, the belief of
whose contrary truth is necessary, not only necessitate prmcepti,
but medii, and therefore the heresy so absolutely and indispen
sably destructive of salvation, that no ignorance can excuse it,
nor any general repentance, without a dereliction of it, can beg a
pardon for it. Such a heresy, if the church should fall into, it
might be more truly said to perish, than if it fell only into some
heresy of its own nature damnable. For, in that state, all the mem
bers of it without exception, all without mercy must needs perish
for ever: in this, although those that might see the truth, and
would not, cannot upon any good ground hope for salvation, yet
without question it might send many souls to heaven, who would
gladly have embraced the truth, but that they wanted means to
discover it. Thirdly and lastly, she may yet be more truly said
to perish, when she apostates from Christ absolutely, or rejects
even those truths, out of which her heresies may be reformed; as
if she should directly deny Jesus to be the Christ, or the scripture
to be the word of God. Towards which state of perdition it may
well be feared, that the church of Rome doth somewhat incline,
by her superinducing upon the rest of her errors the doctrine
of" her own infallibility, whereby her errors are made incurable :
and by her pretending the scripture is to be interpreted according
to her doctrine, and not her doctrine to be judged of by scrip
ture, whereby she makes the scripture ineffectual for her re
formation. 20. Ad. §.18. I was very glad when I heard you say — The
holy scripture and ancient fathers, do assign separation from the
visible church as a mark of heresy : — for I was in good hope,
that no christian would so belie the scripture, as to say so of it,
unless he could have produced some one text, at least, wherein
this was plainly affirmed, or from whence it might be undoubtedly
and undeniably collected. For assure yourself, good sir, it is a
very heinous crime to say, thus saith the Lord, when the Lord
doth not say so. I expected therefore some scripture should have

Protestants not Heretics. 441
been alleged, wherein it should have been said, whosoever se
parates from the Roman church is an heretic ; or, the Roman
church is infallible, or the guide of faith : or, at least, there shall
be always some visible church infallible in matters of faith. Some
such direction as this I hoped for : and I pray consider, whether
I had not reason. The evangelists and apostles, who wrote the
New Testament, we all suppose were good men, and very desirous
to direct us the surest and plainest way to heaven ; we suppose
them likewise very sufficiently instructed by the spirit of God
in all the necessary points of the christian faith, and therefore
certainly not ignorant of this unum necessarium, this most neces
sary point of all other, without which, as you pretend and teach,
all faith is no faith ; that is, that the church of Rome was designed
by God the guide of faith. We suppose them, lastly, wise men,
especially being assisted by the Spirit of wisdom, and such as
knew, that a doubtful and questionable guide was for men's di
rection as good as none at all. And, after all these propositions,
which I presume no good christian will call into question, is it
possible that any christian heart can believe, that not one amongst
them all should, ad rei memoriam, write this necessary doctrine
plainly so much as once ? Certainly, in all reason they had pro
vided much better for the good of christians, if they had wrote
this, though they had written nothing else. Methinks the evan
gelists, undertaking to write the gospel of Christ, could not pos
sibly have omitted, any one of them, this most necessary point of
faith, had they known it necessary (St. Luke, especially, who
plainly professes, that his intent was to write all things necessary).
Methinks St. Paul writing to the Romans, could not but have con
gratulated this their privilege to them ! Methinks, instead of
saying, " Your faith is spoken of all the world over," (which you
have no reason to be very proud of; for he says the very same
thing to the Thessalonians) he could not have failed to have told
them, once, at least, in plain terms, that their faith was the rule
for all the world for ever. But then sure he would have forborne
to put them in fear of an impossibility, as he doth in his eleventh
chapter, that they also, nay, the whole church of the gentiles, if
they did not look to their standing, might fall away to infidelity,
as the Jews had done. Methinks, in all his other epistles, at
least in some, at least in one of them, he could not have failed
to have given the world this direction, had he known it to be a
true one — that all men were to be guided by the church of Rome,
and none to separate from it under pain of damnation. Methinks,
writing so often of heretics and antichrist, he should have given
the world this (as you pretend) only sure preservative from them.
How was it possible, that St. Peter, writing two catholic epistles,
mentioning his own departure, writing to preserve christians in
the faith, should in neither of them commend them to the guid
ance of his pretended successors, the bishops of Rome? How
was it possible, that St. James and St. Jude, in their catholic
epistles, should not give this catholic direction? Methinks, St.
John, instead of saying, "He that believeth that Jesus is the

442 Protestants not Heretics.
Christ, is born of God," (the force of which direction your glosses
do quite enervate, and make unavailable to discern who are the
sons of God) should have said — he that adheres to the doctrine of
the Roman church, and lives according to it, he is a good chris
tian, and by this mark ye shall know him ! What man, not quite
out of his wits, if he consider, as he should, the pretended neces
sity of this doctrine, that without the belief hereof no man ordi
narily can be saved, can possibly force himself to conceive, that
all these good and holy men, so desirous of men's salvation, and
so well assured of it (as it is pretended), should be so deeply and
affectedly silent in it, and not one of them say it plainly so much
as once, but leave it to be collected from uncertain principles,
by many more uncertain consequences? Certainly, he that can
judge so uncharitably of them, it is no marvel if he censure other
inferior servants of Christ as atheists and hypocrites, and what
he pleases. Plain places therefore I did and had reason to look
for, when I heard you say — the holy scripture assigns separation
from the visible church as a mark of heresy. But, instead here
of, what have you brought us but mere impertinence ? St. John
said of some who pretended to be christians, and were not so,
and therefore, when it was for their advantage, forsook their pro
fession, " They went out from us, but they were not of us ; for
if they had been of us, they would no doubt have continued with
us." Of some, who, before the decree of the council to the con
trary, were persuaded, and accordingly taught, that the convert
gentiles were to keep the law of Moses, it is said in the Acts,
" Some who went out from us." And, again St. Paul in the same
book forewarns the Ephesians, that " out of them should arise
men speaking perverse things." And from these places, which it
seems are the plainest you have, you collect — that separation from
the visible church is assigned by scripture as a mark of heresy.
Which is certainly a strange and unheard-of strain of logic : un
less you will say, that every text, wherein it is said, that some
body goes out from somebody, affords an argument for this pur
pose ; for the first place, there is no certainty that it speaks of
heretics, but no christians, of antichrists, of such as denied Jesus
to be the Christ. See the place, and you shall confess as much.
The second place, it is certain, you must not say it speaks of
heretics ; for it speaks only of some who believed and taught an
error, while it was yet a question, and not evident ; and therefore,
according to your doctrine, no formal heresy. The third says,
indeed, that, of the professors of Christianity, some shall arise that
shall teach heresy; but not one of them all, that says or inti
mates, that whosoever separates from the visible church, in what
state soever, is certainly a heretic. Heretics, I confess, do always
do so ; but they that do so are not always heretics; for, perhaps,
the state of the church may make it necessary for them to do
so ; as rebels always disobey the command of their king, yet they
which disobey a king's command (which perhaps may be unjust)
are not presently rebels.
21. Your allegations out of Vincentius, Prosper, and Cyprian,

Protestants not Heretics. 443
are liable to these exceptions: 1. That they are the sayings of
men not assisted by the Spirit of God, and whose authority your
selves will nbt submit to in all things. 2. That the first and last
are merely impertinent, neither of them affirming or intimating,
that separation from the present visible church is a mark of
heresy ; and the former, speaking plainly of separation from uni
versality, consent, and antiquity, which if you will presume with
out proof that we did, and you did not, you beg the question : for
you know we pretend, that we separated only from that present
church, which had separated from the doctrine of the ancients, and
because she had done so, and so far forth as she had done so, and
no farther. And, lastly, the latter part of Prosper's words cannot
be generally true, according to your own grounds ; for you say a
man may be divided from the church upon mere schism, without
any mixture of heresy ; and a man may be justly excommunicated
for many other sufficient causes besides heresy. Lastly, a man may
be divided by any unjust excommunication, and be both before and
after a very good catholic ; and therefore, you cannot maintain it
universally true — that he who is divided from the church is a here
tic, and antichrist.
22. In the 19th section we have the authority of eight fathers
urged to prove — that the separation from the church of Rome, as
it is the see of St. Peter, (I conceive you mean, as it is that par
ticular church) is the mark of heresy. — Which kind of argument
I might well refuse to answer, unless you would first promise me,
that whensoever I should produce as plain sentences of as great a
number of fathers, as ancient, for any doctrine whatsoever, that
you will subscribe to it, though it fall out to be contrary to the
doctrine of the Roman church. For I conceive nothing in the
world more unequal or unreasonable, than that you should press
us with such authorities as these, and think yourselves at liberty
from them ; and that you should account them fathers when they
are for you, and children when they are against you. Yet I would
not you should interpret this, as if I had not great assurance, that
it is not possible for you ever to gain this cause at the tribunal of
the fathers ; nay, not of the fathers, whose sentences are here al
leged. Let us consider them in order, and I doubt not to make it
appear, that far the greater part of them, nay, all of them that are
any way considerable, fall short of your purpose.
23. St. Jerome, (you say) writing to Pope Damasus, saith, " I
am in the communion of the chair of Peter," &c. But then, I
pray, consider he saith it to Pope Damasus ; and this will much
weaken the authority, with them who know how great overtruths
men usually write to one another in letters. Consider, again, that
he says only, that he was then in communion with the chair of
Peter ; not that he always would, or of necessity must be so ; for
his resolution to the contrary is too evident out of that which he
saith elsewhere, which shall be produced hereafter. He says, that
the church at that present was built upon that rock ; but not that
only, nor that always. Nay, his judgment, as shall appear, is
express to the contrary. And so likewise the rest of his expres-

444 Protestants not Heretics.
sions (if we mean to reconcile Jerome with Jerome) must be con
ceived, as intended by him of that bishop and see of Rome, at that
present time, and in the present state, and in respect of that doc
trine which he there treats of. For otherwise, had he conceived
it necessary for him and all men to conform their judgment, in
matters of faith, to the judgment of the bishop and church of
Rome, how came it to pass, that he chose rather to believe the
epistle to the Hebrews canonical, upon the authority of the
eastern church, than to reject it from the canon, upon the au
thority of the Roman ? How comes it to pass, that he dissented
from the authority of that church, touching the canon of the Old
Testament? For if you say, that the church then consented with
St. Jerome, I fear you will lose your fort by maintaining your
outworks ; and, by avoiding this, run into a greater danger of
being forced to confess the present Roman church opposite herein
to the ancient. How was it possible, that he should ever believe,
that Liberius, bishop of Rome, either was or could have been
wrought over by* the solicitation of Fortunatianus, bishop of
Aquileia, and brought after two years' banishment to subscribe
heresy ? Which act of Liberius though some fondly question,
being so vam as to expect we should rather believe them that
lived but yesterday, thirteen hundred years almost after the thing
is said to be done, and speaking for themselves in their own
cause, rather than the disinterested time-fellows or immediate
successors of Liberius himself; yet, I hope, they will not proceed
to such a degree of immodesty, as once to question, whether St.
Jerome thought so. And if this cannot be denied, I demand then,
if he had lived in Liberius's time, could he, or would he, have
written so to Liberius as he does to Damasus? Would he have
said to him — I am in the communion of the chair of Peter : I
know that the church is built upon this rock ; whosoever gathereth
not with thee, scattereth ? — Would he then have said, the Roman
faith and the catholic were the same ? Or, that the Roman faith
received no delusions, no, not from an angel ? I suppose he could not
have said so with any coherence to his own belief; and therefore
conceive it undeniable, that what he said then to Damasus, he said
it (though perhaps he strained too high) only of Damasus, and never
conceived that his words would have been extended to all his pre
decessors and successors.
24. The same answer I make to the first place of St. Ambrose,
viz. that no more can be certainly concluded from it, but that the
catholic bishops and the Roman church were then at unity ; so
that whosoever agreed with the latter, could not then but agree
with the former. But that this rule was perpetual, and that no
man could ever agree with the catholic bishops, but he must agree
with the Roman church ; this he says not, nor gives you any
ground to conclude from him. Athanasius, when he was excom
municated by Liberius, agreed very ill with the Roman church ;
and yet you will not gainsay but he agreed well enough with the
catholic bishops. The second I am uncertain what the sense of it
* Hieronym. de Script. Eccles. tit. Fortunatianus.

Protestants not Heretics. 445
is, and what truth is in it ; but most certain, that it makes no
thing to your present purpose : for it neither affirms nor imports,
that separation from the Roman church is a certain mark of heresy.
For the rights of communion (whatsoever it signifies) might be said
to flow from it, if that church were, by ecclesiastical law, the head
of all other churches : but unless it were made so by divine author
ity, and that absolutely, separation from it could not be a mark of
heresy. 25. For St. Cyprian, all the world knows, that he* resolutely
opposed a decree of the Roman bishop, and all that adhered to
him in the point of rebaptizing, which that church at that time
delivered as a necessary tradition ; so necessary, that by the bishop
of Rome, Firmilianus, and other bishops of Cappadocia, Cilicia,
and Galatia, and generally all who persisted in the contrary
opinionf were therefore deprived of the church's communion,
(which excommunication could not but involve St. Cyprian, who
defended the same opinion as resolutely as Firmilianus, though
cardinal Perron magisterially, and without all colour of proof,
affirms the contrary) and Cyprian in particular so far cast off, as
for it to be pronounced by Stephen, " a false Christ." Again, so
necessary, that the bishops which were sent by Cyprian from
Afric to Rome, were not admitted to the communion of ordinary
conference : but all men, who were subject to the bishop of
Rome's authority, were commanded by him not only to deny
them the church's peace, and communion, but even lodging and
entertainment ; manifestly declaring, that they reckoned them
among those whom St. John forbids to receive to house, or to say
God speed to them. All these terrors notwithstanding, St. Cy
prian holds still his former opinion. And though, out of respect
to the church's peace,J he judged no man, nor cut off any man
from the right of communion, for thinking otherwise than he
held ; yet he conceived Stephen and his adherents§ to hold a per
nicious error. And St. Augustine, though, disputing with the
donatists, he uses some tergiversation in the point, yet confesses
elsewhere, that " it is not found, that Cyprian did ever change his
opinion." And so far was he from conceiving any necessity of
doing so, by submitting to the judgment of the bishop and church
of Rome, that he plainly professes, that no other bishop — but our
Lord Jesus only, had power to judge (with authority) of his judg
ment ; — and as plainly intimates, that Stephen, for usurping such
a power, and making himself — a judge over bishops, was little
better than a tyrant — and as heavily almost he censures him, and
peremptorily opposes him as obstinate in error, in that very place
where he delivers that famous saying, " how can he have God for
his father, who hath not the church for his mother !" Little

* It is confessed by Baronius, Ann. 238, N. 41. By Bellarm. 1. iv. de R. Pont. c. vii.
Sect. Tertia ratio.
t Confessed by Baronius, Ann. 258, N. 14, 15. By Card. Perron's Rep. 1. 1. c. xxv.
Ibid.

t Vide Cone. Carth. apud Sur. to 1.
§ Bell. 1. ii. de Cone. c. v. Aug. ep. 48, et 1. 1, de Bap. c. xviii.

446 Protestants not Heretics.
doubting, it seems, but a man might have the church for his
mother, who stood in opposition to the church of Rome, and being
far from thinking, what you fondly obtrude upon him, that to be
united to the Roman church, and to the church, was all one ; and
that separation from St. Peter's chair was a mark, I mean a cer
tain mark, either of schism or heresy. If, after all this, you will
catch at a phrase or a compliment of St. Cyprian's, and with that
hope to persuade protestants, who know this story as well as their
own name, that St. Cyprian did believe — that falsehood could not
have access to the Roman church — and that opposition to it was
the brand of a heretic ; may we not well expect, that you will, the
next time you write, vouch Luther and Calvin also for abettors of
this fancy, and make us poor men believe, not only (as you say)
that we have no metaphysics, but that we have no sense ? And,
when you have done so it will be no great difficulty for you to
assure us, that we read no such thing in Bellarmine* as that
Cyprian was always accounted in the number of catholics ; nor in
Canisius, that he was a most excellent doctor, and a glorious
martyr ; nor in your calendar, that he is a saint and a martyr ;
but that all these are deceptions of our sight, and that you ever
esteemed him a very schismatic and a heretic, as having on him
the mark of the beast — opposition to the chair of St. Peter : nay,
that he (whatever he pretended) knew and believed himself to be
so, inasmuch as he knew (as you pretend) and esteemed this opposi
tion to be the mark of heresy, and knew himself to stand, and stand
out in such an opposition.
26. But we need not seek so far for matter to refute the vanity
of this pretence. Let the reader but peruse this very epistle, out
of which this sentence is alleged, and he shall need no further
satisfaction against it : for he shall find, first, that you have
helped the dice a little with a false, or, at least, with a very bold
and strained translation ; for St. Cyprian saith not, " to whom
falsehood cannot have access," by which many of your favourable
readers, I doubt, understood that Cyprian had exempted that
church from a possibility of error, but, " to whom perfidiousness
cannot have access," meaning by perfidiousness in the abstract,
according to a common figure of speech, those perfidious schis
matics, whom he there complains of ; and of these, by a rhetorical
insinuation, he says, that " with such good christians as the Ro
mans were, it was not possible they should find favourable enter
tainment." Not that he conceived it any way impossible they
should do so ; for the very writing this epistle, and many passages
in it, plainly shew the contrary ; but because he was confident,
or, at least, would seem to be confident, they never would, and
so by his good opinion and confidence in the Romans, lay an
obligation upon them to do as he presumed they would do ; as
also in the end of his epistle he says, even of the people of the
church of Rome, that " being defended by the providence of
their bishop, nay, by their own vigilance sufficiently guarded, they
could not be taken nor deceived with the poison of heretics." Not
* Bell. 1. ii. de Con. <;. v. sect. 1. Canisius in Initio Catech. Sept. die 14.

Protestants not Heretics. 447
that, indeed, he thought either this or the former any way impos
sible :. for to what purpose, but for prevention hereof, did he write
this long, and accurate, and vehement epistle to Cornelius?
Which sure had been most vainly done, to prevent that which he
knew or believed impossible ! Or how can this consist with his
taking notice in the beginning of it, that Cornelius "was some
what moved and wrought upon by the attempts of his adversaries,"
with his reprehending him for being so, and with his vehement
exhorting him to courage and constancy, or with his request to
him in the conclusion of his epistle, that it should " be read
publicly to the whole clergy and laity of Rome, to the intent that
if any contagion of their poisoned speech, and pestiferous semi-
nation had crept in amongst them, it might be wholly taken away
from the ears and the hearts of the brethren ; and that the entire
and sincere charity of good men might be purged from all dross of
heretical detraction ?" Or, lastly, with his vehement persuasions
to them to decline, " for the time to come, and resolutely avoid
their word and conference, because their speech crept as a canker,
as the apostle saith ; because ' evil communication would corrupt
good manners,' because wicked men carry perdition in their
¦mouths, and hide fire in their lips?" All which had been but
vain and ridiculous pageantry, had he verily believed the Romans
such inaccessible forts, such immovable rocks, as the former sen
tences would seem to import, if we will expound them rigidly and
strictly, according to the exigence of the words, and not allow him,
who was a professed master of the art, to have used here a little
rhetoric, and to say — that could not be, whereof he had no abso
lute certainty but that it might be, but only had, or would seem
to have, a great confidence, that it never would be, Ut fides habita
fidem obligaret; that he professing to be confident of the Romans,
might lay an obligation upon them to do as he promised himself
they would do. For as for joining the principal church and the
chair of Peter, how that will serve for your present purpose of
proving separation from the Roman church a mark of heresy, I
suppose it is hard to understand ! Nor, indeed, how will it advan
tage you in any other design against us, who do not altogether
deny but that the church of Rome might be called the chair of
Peter, in regard he is said to have preached the gospel there ; and
the principal church, because the city was the principal and imper
rial city : which perogative of the city, if we believe the fathers of
the council of Chalcedon, was the ground and occasion why the fa;
thers of former time (I pray observe) conferred upon this church
this perogative above other churches.
27. And as far am I from understanding how you can collect
from the other sentence, that to communicate with the church and
pope of Rome, and to communicate with the catholic church, is
always (for that is your assumpt) one and the same thing. St.
Cyprian speaks not of the church of Rome at all, but of the bishop
only, who, when he doth communicate with the catholic church,
as Cornelius at that time did, then whosoever communicates with
him, cannot but communicate with the catholic church ; and then

448 Protestants not Heretics.
by accident one might truly say, such an one communicates with
you, that is, with the catholic church ; and that to communicate
with him, is to communicate with the catholic church. As if
Titius and Sempronius be together, he that is in company with
Titius, cannot but be at that time in company with Sempronius.
As if a general be marching to some place with an army, he that
then is with the general, must at that time be with the army:
and a man may say, without absurdity, such a time I was with
the general, that is, with the army ; and that to be with the
general, is to be with the army. Or, as if a man's hand be joined
to his body, the finger, which is joined to the hand, is joined to
the body ; and a man may truly say of it, this finger is joined to
the hand, that is, to the body ; and to be joined to the hand, is to
be joined to the body ; because all these things are by accident
true. And yet I hope you will not deny, but the finger might pos
sibly be joined to the hand, and yet not to the body, the hand being
cut off from the body ; and a man might another time be with his
general, and not with his army, he being absent from the army.
And therefore, by like reason, your collection is sophistical, being
in effect but this : to communicate with such a bishop of Rome,
who did communicate with the catholic church, was to communi
cate with the catholic church ; therefore absolutely and always
it must be true, that to communicate with him, is by consequence
to communicate with the catholic church ; and to be divided from
his communion, is to be a heretic.
28. In urging the place of Irenaeus, you have shewed much
more ingenuousness than many of your fellows. For as they usually
begin at " declaring the tradition of the," &c. and conceal what
goes before ; you have set it down, though not so completely as
you should have done, yet sufficiently to shew, that what autho
rity in the matter he attributed to the Roman church in parti
cular, the same, for the kind (though perhaps not in the same
degree), he attributed to all other apostolic churches. Either,
therefore, you must say, that he conceived the testimony of other
apostolic churches divine and infallible (which certainly he did
not, neither do you pretend he did ; and if he had, the confessed
errors and heresies, which, after they fell into, would demonstrate
plainly, that he had erred), or else that he conceived the testi
mony of the Roman church only human and credible, though
perhaps more credible than any one church beside (as one man's
testimony is more credible than another's), but certainly much
more credible, which was enough for his purpose, than that secret
tradition, to which those heretics pretended, against whom he
wrote, overbearing them with an argument of their own kind,
far stronger than their own. Now, if Irenaeus thought the testi
mony of the Roman church in this point only human and falli
ble, then surely he could never think either adhering to it a
certain mark of a catholic, or separation from it a certain mark
of a heretic.
29. Again, whereas your great Achilles, Cardinal Perron, (in
French, as also his noble translatress, misled by him, in English)

Protestants not Heretics. 449
knowing that men's resorting to Rome would do his cause little
service, hath made bold with the Latin tongue, as he does very
often with the Greek, and rendered ad hanc ecclesiam necesse est
omnem convenire ecclesiam, " to this church it is necessary that
every church should agree," you have translated it as it should
be, " to this church it is necessary that all churches resort ;"
wherein you have showed more sincerity, and have had more re
gard to make the author speak sense. For if he had said — by
showing the tradition of the Roman church, we confound all
heretics ; for to this church all churches must agree ; — what had
this been, but to give for a reason that which was more question
able than the thing in question? As being neither evident in
itself, and plainly denied by his adversaries, and not at all
proved, nor offered to be proved, here or elsewhere, by Irenaeus.
To speak thus therefore had been weak and ridiculous. But on
the other side, if we conceive him to say thus : — You heretics
decline a trial of your doctrine by scripture, as being corrupted and
imperfect, and not fit to determine controversies without recourse
to tradition : and, instead hereof, you fly for a refuge to a secret
tradition, which you pretend that you received from your ances
tors, and they from the ' apostles, certainly your calumnies against
scripture are most unjust and unreasonable : but yet moreover
assure yourselves, that if you will be tried by tradition, even by
that also you will be overthrown. For our tradition is far more
famous, more constant, and in all respects more credible, than
that which you pretend to. For it were easy for me to muster up
against you the uninterrupted succession of all the churches
founded by the apostles, all conspiring in their testimonies against
you : but because it were too long to number up the successions
of all churches, I will content myself with the tradition of the
most ancient and most glorious church of Rome, which alone is
sufficient for the confutation and confusion of your doctrine, as
being in credit and authority, as far beyond the tradition you build
upon, as the light of the sun is beyond the light of a glowworm.
For to this church, by reason it is placed in the imperial city,
whither all men's affairs do necessarily draw them, or by reason
of the powerful principality it hath over all the adjacent churches,
there is, and always hath been, a necessity of a perpetual recourse
of all the faithful round about ; who, if there had been any alter
ation in the- church of Rome, could not, in all probability, but
have observed it. But they, to the contrary, have always observed
in this church the very tradition which came from the apostles,
and no other. — I say, if we conceive his meaning thus, his words
will be intelligible and rational; which, if instead of resort, we
put in agree, will be quite lost. Herein therefore we have been
beholden to your honesty, which makes me think you did not
wittingly falsify, but only twice in this sentence mistake undique
for ubique, and translated it " every where," and " of what place
soever," instead of round about. For that it was necessary for
all the faithful of what place soever, to resort to Rome, is not
true. That the apostolic tradition hath always been conserved
FF

450 Protestants not Heretics.
there from those who are every where, is not sense. Now in
stead of conservata read observata, as in all probability it should
be, and translate undique truly "round about," and then the
sense will be both plain and good ; for then it must be rendered
thus: — For to this church, by reason of a more powerful prin
cipality, there is a necessity that all the churches, that is, all
the faithful round about, should resort, in which the apostolic
tradition hath been always observed by those who were round
about. If any man say, I have been too bold a critic in sub
stituting observata instead of conservata ; I desire him to know,
that the conjecture is not mine; and therefore, as I expect no
praise for it, so I hope I shall be far from censure. But I would
entreat him to consider, whether it be not likely, that the same
Greek word, signifying observo and conservo, the translator of Ire
naeus, who could hardly speak Latin, might not easily mistake, and
translated Smrijoyirm, conservata est, instead of observata est: or
whether it be not likely, that those men, which anciently wrote
books, and understood them not, might not easily commit such an
error : or whether the sense of the place can be salved any other
way ; if it can, in God's name let it ; if not, I hope he is not to be
condemned, who with such a little alteration hath made that sense,
which he found nonsense.
30. But whether you will have it observata or conservata, the
new sumpsimus or the old mumpsimus, possibly it may be some
thing to Irenaeus ; but to us, or our cause, it is no way material.
For if the rest be rightly translated, neither will conservata afford
you any argument against us, nor observata help us to any evasion.
For though at the first hearing the glorious attributes here given
(and that justly) to the church of Rome — the confounding heretics
with her tradition, and saying it is necessary for all churches to
resort to her — may sound like arguments for you ; yet he that is
attentive, I hope, will easily discover, that it might be good and
rational in Irenaeus, having to do with heretics, who, somewhat like
those who would be the only catholics, declined a trial by scrip
ture, as not containing the truth of Christ perfectly, and not fit
to decide controversies, without recourse to tradition : I say, he
will easily perceive, that it might be rational in Irenaeus to urge
them with any tradition of more credit than their own, especially
a tradition consonant to scripture, and even contained in it: and
yet that it may be irrational in you to urge us, who do not de
cline scripture, but appeal to it as a perfect rule of faith, with a
tradition which we pretend is many ways repugnant to scripture,
and repugnant to a tradition far more general than itself, which
gives testimony to scripture ; and lastly, repugnant to itself, as giv
ing attestation both to scripture, and to doctrines plainly contrary
to scripture. Secondly, that the authority of the Roman church
was then a far greater argument of the truth of her tradition,
when it was united with all other apostolic churches, than now,
when it is divided from them, according to that of Tertullian:
"had the churches erred, they would have varied; but that
which is the same in all, cannot be error, but tradition." And

Protestants not Heretics. 451
therefore Irenaeus's argument may be very probable, yet yours
may be worth nothing. Thirdly, that fourteen hundred years
may have made a great deal of alteration in the Roman church ;
as rivers, though near the fountain they may retain their native
and unmixed sincerity, yet in long progress cannot but take in
much mixture that came not from the fountain. And, therefore,
the Roman tradition, though then pure, may now be corrupted and
impure: and so this argument (being one of those things which
are the worse for wearing) might in Irenaeus's time be strong and
vigorous, and after declining and decaying, may long since have
fallen to nothing : especially, considering that Irenaeus plays the his
torian only, and not the prophet, and says only, that the " apostolic
tradition had been always there, as in other apostolic churches,"
conserved or observed, choose you whether; but that — it should
be always so, he says not, neither had he any warrant. He knew
well enough, that there was foretold a great " falling away" of the
churches of Christ to antichrist ; that the Roman church, in par
ticular, was forewarned, that she also— nay,* the whole church
of the gentiles might fall, if they looked not to their standing :
and, therefore, to secure her, that she should stand for ever, he
had no reason nor authority. Fourthly, that it appears manifestly,
out of this book of Irenaeus, quoted by you, that the doctrine of
the chiliasts was in his judgment apostolic tradition, as also it was
esteemed (for aught appears to the contrary) by all the doctors,
and saints, and martyrs, of or about his time; for all that speak
of it, or whose judgments in the point are any way recorded, are
for it: and Justin Martyrf professeth, that all good and orthodox
christians of his time believed it; and those that did not, he
reckons amongst heretics. Now I demand, was this tradition one
of those that was conserved and observed in the church of Rome,
or was it not? If not, had Irenaeus known so much, he must
have retracted this commendation of that church. If it was,
then the tradition of the present church of Rome contradicts
the ancient, and accounts- it heretical ; and then sure it can be no
certain note of heresy, to depart from them, who have departed
from themselves, and prove themselves subject unto error, by
holding contradictions. Fifthly, and lastly, that out of the story
of the church, it is as manifest as the light at noon, that though
Irenaeus did esteem the Roman tradition a great argument of the
doctrine which he there delivers and defends against the heretics
of his time, viz. that there is one God ; yet he was very far from
thinking that church was, and ever should be, a safe keeper, and
an infallible witness, of tradition in general ; inasmuch as, in his
own life, his actions proclaimed the contrary. For when Victor,
bishop of Rome, obtruded the Roman tradition, touching the
time of Easter, upon the Asian bishops, under the pain of excom
munication and damnation ; Irenaeus, and all the other western
bishops, though agreeing with him in his observation, yet sharply
reprehended him for excommunicating the Asian bishops for their
disagreeing; plainly shewing, that they esteemed that not a
* Rom. xi. t In Dial, cum Tryphon.
FF2

452 Protestants not Heretics.
necessary doctrine, and a sufficient ground of excommunication,
which the bishop of Rome and his adherents did so account of:
for otherwise, how could they have reprehended him for excom
municating them, had they conceived the cause of this excommu
nication just and sufficient? and, besides, evidently declaring, that
they esteemed not separation from the Roman church a certain
mark of heresy, seeing they esteemed not them heretics, though
separated and cut off from the Roman church.
Cardinal Perron,* to avoid the stroke of this convincing argu
ment, raiseth a cloud of eloquent words, which, because you bor
row them of him in your second part, I will here insert, and with
short censures dispel ; and let his idolaters see, that truth is not
afraid of giants. His words are these :
" The first instance, then, that Calvinf allegeth against the
pope's censures, is taken from Eusebius, (a) an arian author, and
from Ruffinus, (b) enemy to the Roman church, his translator,
who writ (c) that St. Irenaeus reprehended Pope Victor, for
having excommunicated the churches of Asia, for the question of
the day of pasche, which they observed according to a particular
tradition that St. John had introduced (d) for a time in their pro
vinces, because of the neighbourhood of the Jews, and to bury
the synagogue with honour, and not according to the universal
tradition of the apostles. ' Irenaeus (saith Calvin) reprehended
Pope Victor bitterly, because for a light cause he had moved a
great and perilous contention in the church.' There is this in
the text that Calvin produceth — ' He reprehended him, that
he had not done well, to cut off from the body of unity so many
and so great churches.' But against whom maketh he this,
but (e) against those that object it ? For who sees not thatj St.
Irenaeus doth not there reprehend the pope for the (f) want of
power, but for the ill use of his power; and doth not reproach
the pope that he could not excommunicate the Asians, but ad-
monisheth him, that for (g) so small a cause he should not have
cut off so many provinces from the body of the church ? ' Irenaeus
(saith Eusebius)^ did fitly exhort Pope Victor, that he should not
cut off all the churches of God which held this ancient tradition.'
And Ruffinus, translating and envenoming Eusebius, saith, || ' He
questioned Victor, that he had not done well, in cutting off from
the body of unity so many and so great churches of God.' And
in truth how could St. Irenaeus have reprehended the pope for
want of power? He that cries — To the Roman church, because
of a more powerful principality; that is to say, as above appeareth,
(li) because of a principality more powerful than the temporal ; or,
(as we have expounded other-where) because of a more powerful
original, (i) it is necessary that every church should agree : and
(k) therefore also St. Irenaeus allegeth not to Pope Victor the ex
ample of him and of the other bishops of the Gaulslf assembled in a
* Lib. iii. c. ii. of his Reply to K. James, c. ii. sect 32. t Calv. ubi supra.
X Ruffin. in Vers. Hist. Eccl. Eus. 1. v. c. xxiv. § Eus. Hist Eccl. 1. v. c. xxiv.
|| Ruffin. ib. c. xxiv. Iren. 1. iii. c. iii. 1 book, ch. xxv.
IT Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. v. u. xxii.

Protestants not Heretics. 453
council holden expressly for this effect, who had not excommuni
cated the Asians : nor the example of Narcissus, bishop of Jerusa
lem, and of the bishops of Palestina, assembled in another council,
holden expressly for the same effect, who had not excommunicated
them; nor the example of Palmas, and of the other bishops of
Pontus, assembled in the same manner, and for the same cause,
in the region of Pontus, who had not excommunicated them;
but only alleges to him the example of the popes, his prede
cessors :* ' The prelates (saith he) who have presided before
Soter, in the church where thou presidest, Anisius, Pius, Hyginus,
Telesphorus, and Sixtus, have not observed this custom, &c. and,
nevertheless, none of those that observed it have been excommu
nicated.' And yet, 0 admirable providence of God ! the (I) suc
cess of the after-ages shewed, that even in the use of his power
the pope's proceeding was just. For after the death of Victor ,f
the councils of Nicea, of Constantinople, and of Ephesus, ex
communicated again those that held the same custom with the
provinces that the pope had excommunicated, and placed them
in the catalogue of heretics, under the titles of heretics quarto-
decumans. " But to this instance Calvin's sect do annex two new obser
vations ; the first, that the pope having threatened the bishops of
Asia to excommunicate them, Polycrates, the bishop of Ephesus
and metropolitan of Asia, despised the pope's threats, as it appears
by the answer of the same Polycrates to Pope Victor, which is
inserted in the writings of Eusebius,J and of St. Jerome, and
which Jerome seemeth to approve, when he saith, he reports it to
show the spirit and authority of the man. And the second, that
when the pope pronounced anciently his excommunications, he
did no other thing but separate himself from the communion of
those that he excommunicated, and did not thereby separate them
from the universal communion of the church. To the first then
we say, that so far is this epistle of Polycrates from abating and
diminishing the pope's authority, that contrariwise it greatly mag
nifies and exalts it. For although Polycrates, blinded with the
love of the custom of his nation, which he believed to be grounded
upon the word of God, who had assigned the fourteenth of the
month of March§ for the observation of the pasche, and upon the
example of St. John's tradition, || maintains it obstinately ; never
theless this that he answers, speaking in his own name, and in the
name of the council of the bishops of Asia, to whom he presided,
' I fear not those that threaten us ; for my elders have said, it is
better to obey God than man ;' doth it not shew, that had it not
been, that he believed the pope's threat was against the express
words of God, there had been cause to fear it, and he had been
obliged to obey him ? For (m) who knows not, that this answer,
' it is better to obey God than man,' is not to be made but to those
* Iren. apud Euseb. Hist Eccl. 1. v. c. xxvi.
t Cone. Antioch. c. i. Cone. Const, c. 7, Cone. Eph. p. 2, act. 6.
X Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. v. c. xxiv. Hieron. in Script. Eccl. in Polycr.
§ Exod. xii. H Hieron. ubi supra.

454 Protestants not Heretics.
whom we were obliged to obey, if their commandments were not
contrary to the commandments of God ? And that he adds, that
he had called the bishops of Asia to a national council, being (n)
summoned to it by the pope ; doth it not insinuate, that the other
councils, whereof Eusebius* speaks, that were holden about this
matter, through all the provinces of the earth, and particularly
that of Palestina, which, if you believe the act that Bedaf said
came to his hands, Theophilus, archbishop of Caesarea, had called
by the authority of Victor, were holden at the instance of the
pope, and, consequently, that the pope was the first mover of the
universal church ? And that the councils of Nicea, of Constanti
nople, of Ephesus, embraced the censure of Victor, and excom
municated those that observed the custom of Polycrates; doth it
not prove, that it was not the pope, but (o) Polycrates, that was
deceived in believing, that the pope's commandment was against
God's commandment ? And that St. Jerome himself celebrates
the paschal homilies of Theophilus, patriarch of Alexandria,
which followed the order of Nicea concerning the pasche : doth it
not justify, that when St. Jerpme saith, that he reports the epistle
of Polycrates, ' to shew the spirit and authority of the man,' he
intends by authority, not authority of right, but of fact, that is to
say, the credit that Polycrates had amongst the Asians, and other
quartodecumans ?"
These are the cardinal's words, the most material and consider
able passages whereof, to save the trouble of repetition, I have
noted with letters of reference ; whereunto my answers, noted
respectively with the same letters, follow now in order.
(a) If Eusebius were an arian author, it is nothing to the pur
pose ; what he writes there is no arianism, nor any thing towards
it. Never any error was imputed to the arians for denying the
authority or the infallibility of the bishop or church of Rome.
Besides, what Eusebius says, he says out of Irenaeus : neither doth
or can the cardinal deny the story to be true, and therefore he
goes about by indirect arts to foil it, and cast a blur upon it.
Lastly, whensoever Eusebius says any thing which the cardinal
thinks for the advantage of his side, he cites him, and then he is
no arian ; or at least he would not take that for an answer to the
arguments he draws out of him.
(b) That Ruffinus was enemy to the Roman church, is said,
but not proved, neither can it be.
(c) Eusebius says the same also of cateri omnes episcopi, all the
other bishops, that they advised Victor to keep those things that
belonged to peace and unity, and that they sharply reprehended
Victor for having done otherwise.
(d) This is said, but no offer made of any proof of it : the car
dinal thinks we must take every thing upon his word. They to
whom the tradition was delivered, Polycrates and the Asian
bishops, knew no such matter, nay, professed the contrary. And
who is more likely to know the truth, they who lived within two
» Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. v. c. xxiii. t Beda in frag, de jEquinoctio vernalio.

Protestants not Heretics. 455
ages of the fountain of it, or the cardinal who lived sixteen ages
after it? .....
(e) How can it make against those that object it, seeing it is evi
dent from Irenaeus's reprehensions, that he thought Victor and the
Roman church no infallible nor sufficient judge of what was neces
sary to be believed and done, what not ; what was universal tradi
tion, what not ; what was a sufficient ground of excommunication,
and what not ; and, consequently, that there was no such necessity
as is pretended, that all other churches should in matters of faith
conform themselves to the church of Rome ?
(f) This is to suppose, that excommunication is an act, or ar
gument, or sign, of power and authority in the party excommuni
cating, over the party excommunicated ; whereas it is undeniably
evident out of the church story, that it was often used by equals
upon equals, and by inferiors upon superiors, if the equals or in
feriors thought their equals or superiors did any thing which de
served it.
(g) And what is this but to confess, that they thought that a
small cause of excommunication and insufficient, which Victor and
his adherents thought great and sufficient: and, consequently,
that Victor and his part declared that to be a matter of faith,
and of necessity, which they thought not so ? And where was then
their conformity ?
(h) True, you have so expounded it, but not proved nor offered
any proof of your exposition. This also we must take upon your
authority. Irenaeus speaks not one word of any other power, to
which he compares, or before which he prefers, the power of the
Roman church. And it is evident, out of the council of Chal-
cedon,* that — all the principality which it had, was given it (not
by God, but) by the church, in regard it was seated in the impe
rial city. Whereupon, when afterwards Constantinople was the
imperial city, they decreed, that — that church should have equal
privileges, and dignity, and pre-eminence, with the church of
Rome. — All the fathers agreed in this decree, saving only the
legates of the bishop of Rome : showing plainly, that they never
thought of any supremacy given the bishops of Rome by God, or
grounded upon scripture, but only by the church, and therefore
alterable at the church's pleasure.
(i) This is falsely translated : convenire ad Romanam ecclesiam,
every body knows, signifies no more but to resort or come to the
Roman church ; which then there was a necessity that men should
do, because that the affairs' of the empire were transacted in that
place. But yet Irenaeus says not so of every church simply, which
had not been true, but only of the adjacent churches ; for so he
expounds himself in saying, " to this church it is necessary that
every church;" that is, all the faithful, round about, should re
sort. With much more reason therefore we return the argument
thus: had Irenaeus thought, that all churches must of necessity
agree with the Roman, how could he and all other bishops have
* Can. 38.

456 Protestants not Heretics.
then pronounced that to be no matter of faith, no sufficient ground
of excommunication, which Victor and his adherents thought to be
so ? And how then could they have reprehended Victor so much
for the ill use of his power, as Cardinal Perron confesses they
did; seeing, if that was true which is pretended, in this also as
well as other things, it was necessary for them to agree with the
church of Rome ?
Some there are that say, but more wittily than truly, that all
Cardinal Bellarmine's works are so consonant to themselves, as
if he had written them in two hours. Had Cardinal Perron wrote
his book in two hours, sure he would not have done that here in
the middle of the book, which he condemns in the beginning of
it: for here he urgeth a consequence drawn from the mistaken
words of Irenaeus against his lively and actual practice; which
proceeding there he justly condemns of evident injustice. His
words are, * " for who knows not, that it is too great an injustice
to allege consequences from passages, and even those ill interpreted
and misunderstood, and in whose illation there is always some
paralogism hid against the express words, and the lively and ac
tual practice of the same fathers from whom they are collected;
and that it may be good to take the fathers for adversaries, and to
accuse them for want of sense or memory ; but not to take them
for judges, and to submit themselves to the observation of what
they have believed and practised ?"
(k) This is nothing to the purpose ; he might choose these ex
amples, not as of greater force and authority in themselves, but
as fitter to be employed against Victor ; as domestic examples are
fitter and more effectual than foreign : and for his omitting to
press him with his own example and others, to what purpose had
it been to use them, seeing their letters sent to Victor from all
parts, wherein they reprehended his presumption, shewed him
sufficiently, that their example was against him ? But, besides,
he that reads Irenaeus's letter shall see, that in the manner of the
Lent fast, and the great variety about the celebration of it, which
he parallels with this of Easter, he presseth Victor with the
example of himself and others, not bishops of Rome : " both
they (saith he, speaking of other bishops) notwithstanding this
difference, retained peace among themselves ; and we also among
ourselves retain it ;" inferring, from his example, that Victor also
ought to do so.
(I) If the pope's proceeding was just, then the churches of
Asia were indeed, and in the sight of "God, excommunicate, and
out of the state of salvation, which Irenaeus and all the other
ancient bishops never thought ; and, if they were so, why do you
account them saints and martyrs? But the truth is, that these
councils did no way show the pope's proceedings just, but rather
the contrary. For, though they settled an uniformity in this
matter, yet they settled it as a matter formerly indifferent, and
not as a matter of faith or necessity, as it is evident out of Atha-
* In his letter to Casaubon, towards the end.

Protestants not Heretics. 457
nasius ;* and, consequently, they rather declare Victor's proceeding
unjust, who excommunicated so many churches for differing from
him in an indifferent matter.
(m) It seems, then, Polycrates might be a saint and a martyr,
and yet think the commands of the Roman church, enjoined
upon pain of damnation, contrary to the commandments of God.
Besides, St. Peter himself, the head of the church, the vicar of
Christ (as you pretend), made this very answer to the high-priest ;
yet I hope you will not say he was his inferior, and obliged to
obey him. Lastly, who sees not, that when the pope commands
us any thing unjust, as to communicate laymen in one kind, to use
the Latin service, we may very fitly say to him — It is better to
obey God than man, and yet never think of any authority he hath
over us?
(n) Between requesting and summoning, methinks there should
be some difference ; and Polycrates says no more but he was
requested by the church of Rome to call them, and did so. Here
then (as very often) the cardinal is fain to help the dice with a
false translation ; and his pretence being false, every one must see
that that which he pretends to be insinuated by it is clearly incon
sequent. (o) Polycrates was deceived, if he believed it to be against
God's commandment, and the pope deceived as much in thinking
it to be God's commandment ; for it was neither one nor the
other, but an indifferent matter wherein God had not interposed
his authority. Neither did the council of Nice embrace the
censure of Victor, by acknowledging his excommunication to be
just and well-grounded, for which the cardinal neither doth pre
tend, nor can produce any proof any way comparable to the
fore-alleged words of Athanasius testifying the contrary ; though
peradventure, having settled the observation, and reduced it to
an uniformity, they might excommunicate those who afterward
should trouble the church's peace for an indifferent matter. And
thus much for Irenaeus.
31. I come now to St. Augustine, and to the first place out of
him, where he seems to say that the succession in the see of Peter
was the rock which our Saviour meant, when he said, " Upon
this rock," &c. I answer, first, we have no reason to be confi
dent of the truth hereof, because St. Augustine himself was not,
but retracts it as uncertain, and leaves to the reader whether he
will think that or another more probable, Retr. 1. i. c. xxvi.
Secondly, what he says of the succession in the Roman church in
this place, he says it elsewhere of all the successions in all other
apostolic churches. Thirdly, that as in this place he urgeth the
donatists with separation from the Roman church, as an argu-
* In Ep. ad Episcopos in Africa, where he clearly shews that this question was not
a question of faith, by saying, " The council of Nice was celebrated by occasion of the
arian heresy, and the difference about Easter : insomuch as they in Syria, and Cilicia,
and Mesopotamia, did differ herein from us, and kept this feast on the same day with
the Jews. But, thanks be to God, an agreement was made, as concerning the faith, so
also concerning this holy feast."

458 Protestants not Heretics.
ment of their error ; so elsewhere he presseth them with their
separation from other apostolic churches, nay, more from these
than from that; because in Rome the donatists had a bishop,
though not a perpetual succession of them ; but in other apos
tolic churches they wanted both. " These scattered men (saith
he of the donatists, Epist. 165,) read in the holy books in the
churches to which the apostles wrote, and have no bishop in
them ; but what is more perverse and mad, than to the lectors
reading these epistles to say — Peace with you, and to separate
from the peace of these churches, to which these epistles were
written ?" So Optatus, having done you (as it might seem) great
service in upbraiding the donatists as schismatics, because they
had not communion with the church of Rome, overthrows and
undoes it all again, and, as it were, with a sponge wipes out all
that he had said for you, by adding after, that they were schis
matics, because they had not the fellowship of communion with the
seven churches of Asia, to which St. John writes ; whereof he
pronounces confidently (though I know not upon what ground)
Extra septem ecclesias quicquid foris est, alienum est. Now, 1 pray
tell me, do you esteem the authority of these fathers a sufficient
assurance that separation from these other apostolic churches was
a certain mark of heresy, or not ? If so, then your church had
been for many ages heretical. If not, how is their authority a
greater argument for the Roman than for the other churches?
If you say, they conceived separation from these churches a note
of schism, only when they were united to the Roman ; so also
they might conceive of the Roman, only when it was united to
them. If you say they urged this only as a probable, and not as
a certain argument, so also they might do that. In a word, what
soever answer you can devise to shew, that these fathers made not
separation from these other churches a mark of heresy, apply that
to your argument, and it will be satisfied.
32. The other place is evidently impertinent to the present
question, nor is there in it any thing but this — that Caecilian might
contemn the number of his adversaries, because those that were
united with him were more, and of more account, than those that
were against him. — Had he preferred the Roman church alone,
before Caecilian's enemies, this had been little, but something ;
but when other countries, from which the gospel came first into
Africa, are joined in this patent with the church of Rome, how
she can build any singular privilege upon it, I am yet to learn ;
neither do I see what can be concluded from it, but that in the
Roman church was the principality of an apostolic see,* which no
man doubts ; or that the Roman church was not the mother church,
because the gospel came first into Africa, not from her, but from
other churches.
33. Thus you see his words make very little, or indeed nothing
* You do ill to translate it " the principality of the see apostolic," as if there were
but one ; whereas St. Augustine presently after speaks of apostolical churches in the
plural number, and makes the bishops of them joint-commissioners for the judging of
ecclesiastical causes.

Protestants not Heretics. 459
for you. But now his action, which, according to Cardinal Per
ron's rule, is much more to be regarded than his words, as not
being so obnoxious to misrepresentation, I mean his famous oppo
sition of three bishops of Rome, in succession, touching the great
question of appeals, wherein he and the rest of the African
bishops proceeded so far in the first or second Milevitan council,
as to *decree any African excommunicate, that should appeal to
any out of Afric, and therein continued resolute unto death ; I say
this famous action of his makes clearly, and evidently, and infi
nitely against you. For, had Boniface, and the rest of the African
bishops, a great part whereof were saints and martyrs, believed
as an article of faith, that union and conformity with the doctrine
of the Roman church, in all things which she held necessary, was
a certain note of a good catholic, and by God's command neces
sary to salvation, how was it possible they should have opposed it
in this ? Unless you will say they were all so foolish as to believe
at once direct contradictions, viz. that conformity to the Roman
church was necessary in all points, and not necessary in this : or
so horribly impious, as believing this doctrine of the Roman church
true, and her power to receive appeals derived from divine author
ity, notwithstanding to oppose and condemn it, and to anathe
matize all those Africans, of what condition soever, that should
appeal unto it ; I say — of what condition soever : for it is evident
that they concluded, in their determination, bishops as well as the
inferior clergy and laity : and Cardinal Perron's pretence of the
contrary is a shameless falsehood, repugnant to the plain wordsf
of the remonstrance of the African bishops to Celestine, bishop of
Rome. 34. Your allegation of Tertullian is a manifest conviction of
your want of sincerity : for you produce with great ostentation
what he says of the church of Rome : but you and your fellows
always conceal and dissemble, that immediately before these
words he attributes as much for point of direction to any other
apostolic church, and that as he sends them to Rome, who lived
near Italy, so those near Achaia he sends to Corinth, those about
Macedonia to Philippi and Thessalonica, those of Asia to Ephesus.
His words are, " Go to now, thou that wilt better employ thy
curiosity in the business of thy salvation ; run over the apostolical
churches, wherein the chairs of the apostles are yet sat upon in
their places, wherein their authentic epistles are recited, sounding
out the voice, and representing the face, of every one ! Is Achaia
* The words of the decree (which also Bellarm. 1. i. de Matrim. c. xvii. assures us to
have been formed by St. Augustine) are these : " Si qui (Africani) ab episcopis provo-
candum putaverint, non nisi ad Africana provocent concilia, vel ad primates provincia-
rum suarum. Ad transmarina autem qui putaverit appcllandum, h nullo intra Africam
in communionem suscipiatur." This decree is by Gratian most impudently corrupted.
For whereas the fathers of that council intended it particularly against the church of
Rome, he tells us they forbad appeals to all, excepting only the church of Rome.
t The words are these : " Prafato debito salutationis officio, impendio deprecamur,
ut deinceps ad aures vestras hinc venientes, non facilius admittatis ; nee &. nobis excom.
municatos ultra in communionem velitis recipere ; quia hoc etiam Niceno concilio defi-
nitum facile advertet venerabilitas tua. Nam si de inferioribus clericis vel laicis videtur
ad preecaveri, quanta magis hoc de episcopis voluit observari ?"

460 Protestants not Heretics.
near thee ? There thou hast Corinth. If thou art not far from
Macedonia, thou hast Philippi, thou hast Thessalonica. If thou
canst go into Asia, there thou hast Ephesus. If thou be adjacent
to Italy, thou hast Rome, whose authority is near at hand to us
(in Afric) : a happy church, into which the apostles poured forth
all their doctrine, together with their blood," &c. Now I pray
you, sir, tell me, if you can for blushing, why this place might
not have been urged by a Corinthian, or Philippian, or Thessa-
lonian, or an Ephesian, to shew, that, in the judgment of Tertul
lian, separation from any of their churches is a certain mark of
heresy, as justly and rationally as you allege it to vindicate this
privilege to the Roman church only. Certainly, if you will stand to
Tertullian's judgment, you must either grant the authority of the
Roman church, though at that time a good topical argument, and
perhaps a better than any the heretics had, especially in conjunc
tion with other apostolic churches ; yet, I say, you must grant it
perforce but a fallible guide, as well as that of Ephesus, and
Thessalonica, and Philippi, and Corinth; or you shall maintain
the authority of every one of these infallible as well as the Roman.
For though he make a panegyric of the Roman church in parti
cular, and of the rest only in general, yet, as I have said, for point
of direction, he makes them all equal, and therefore makes them
(choose you whether) either all fallible, or all infallible. Now
you will and must acknowledge, that he never intended to attri
bute infallibility to the churches of Ephesus or Corinth ; or, if he
did, that (as experience shows) he erred in doing so : and what
can hinder, but then we may say also, that he never intended to
attribute infallibility to the Roman church ; or, if he did, that he
erred in doing so ?
35. From the saying of St. Basil, certainly nothing can be
gathered, but only that the bishop of Rome may discern between
that which is counterfeit and that which is lawful and pure, and
without any diminution may preach the faith of our ancestors.
Which certainly he might do, if ambition and covetousness did not
hinder him, or else I should never condemn him for doing otherwise.
But is there no difference between may and must ? Between he
may do so, and he cannot but do so ? Or doth it follow, because he
may do so, therefore he always shall or will do so ? In my opinion
rather the contrary should follow : for he that saith, you may do
thus, implies, according to the ordinary sense of the words, that if
he will he may do otherwise. You certainly may, if you please,
leave abusing the world with such sophistry as this : but whether
you will or no, of that I have no assurance.
36. Your next witness I would willingly have examined: but
it seems you are unwilling he should be found, otherwise you
would have given us your direction where we might have him.
Of that Maximianus, who succeeded Nestorius, I can find no such
thing in the councils: neither can I believe, that any patriarch of
Constantinople twelve hundred years ago was so base a parasite of
the see of Rome.
37. Your last witness, John of Constantinople, I confess, speaks

Protestants not Heretics. 461
home, and advanceth the Roman see even to heaven ; but I fear it
is, that his own may go up with it, which he there professes to be
all one see with the see of Rome ; and therefore his testimony, as
speaking in his own cause, is not much to be regarded. But be
sides, I have little reason to be confident that this epistle is not a
forgery ; for certainly Binius hath obtruded upon us many a hun
dred such. This, though written by a Grecian, is not extant in
Greek, but in Latin only. Lastly, it comes out of a suspicious place,
an old book of the Vatican Library, which library, the world knows
to have been the mint of very many impostures.
38. Ad. §. 20 — 23. The sum of your discourse in the four next
sections, if it be pertinent to the question in agitation, must be
this: — Want of succession of bishops and pastors, holding always
the same doctrine, and of the forms of ordaining bishops and
priests, which are in use in the Roman church, is a certain mark
of heresy : but protestants want all these things, therefore they
are heretics. — To which I answer, that nothing but want of truth,
and holding error, can make or prove any man or church hereti
cal. For, if he be a true aristotelian, or platonist, or pyrrhonian,
or epicurean, who holds the doctrine of Aristotle, or Plato, or
Pyrrho, or Epicurus, although he cannot assign any that held it
before him for many ages together ; why should not I be made
a true and orthodox christian, by believing all the doctrine of
Christ, though I cannot derive my descent from a perpetual suc
cession that believed it before me ? By this reason, you should say
as well, that no man can be a good bishop, or pastor, or king, or
magistrate, or father, that succeeds a bad one. For, if I may con
form my will and actions to the commandments of God, why may
I not embrace his doctrine with my understanding, although my
predecessors do not so ? You have above, in this chapter, defined
faith — a free, infallible, obscure, supernatural assent to divine
truths, because they are revealed by God, and sufficiently pro
pounded : this definition is very fantastical ; but for the present I
will let it pass, and desire you to give me some piece or shadow
of reason, why I may not do all this without a perpetual succes
sion of bishops and pastors, that have done so before me. You
may judge as uncharitably, and speak as maliciously of me, as
your blind zeal to your superstition shall direct you ; but certainly
I know (and with all your sophistry you cannot make me doubt
of what I know), that I do believe the gospel of Christ (as it is
delivered in the undoubted books of canonical scripture), as verily
as that it is now day, that I see the light, that I am now writing ;
and I believe it upon this motive, because I conceive it sufficiently,
abundantly, superabundantly, proved to be divine revelation ; and
yet in this I do not depend upon any succession of men, that have
always believed it without any mixture of error ; nay, I am fully
persuaded, there hath been no such succession, and yet do not
find myself any way weakened in my faith by the want of it,
but so fully assured of the truth of it, that not only, though your
devils at Lowden do tricks against it, but though an angel from
heaven should gainsay it, or any part of it, I persuade myself

462 Protestants not Heretics.
that I should not be moved. This I say, and this I am sure is
true ; and if you will be so hypersceptical as to persuade me, that
I am not sure that I do believe all this, I desire you to tell me,
how you are sure that you believe the church of Rome ? For if
a man may persuade himself he doth believe what he doth not be
lieve, then you may think you believe the church of Rome, and
yet not believe it. But if no man can err concerning what he
believes, then you must give me leave to assure myself, that I
do believe, and consequently that any man may believe the fore
said truths upon the foresaid motives, without any dependence
upon any succession that hath believed it always. And as from
your definition of faith, so from your definition of heresy, this
fancy may be refuted. For questionless, no man can be a heretic
but he that holds a heresy, and a heresy, you say, is a voluntary
error ; therefore no man can be necessitated to be a heretic whe
ther he will or no, by want of such a thing that is not in his power
to have : but that there should have been a perpetual succession
of believers in all points orthodox, is not a thing which is in our
own power; therefore our being, or not being heretics, depends
not on it. Besides, what is more certain than that he may make
a straight line, who hath a rule to make it by, though never
man in the world had made any before? And why then may
not he that believes the scripture to be the word of God, and
the rule of faith, regulate his faith by it, and consequently be
lieve aright, without much regarding what other men either will
do, or have done? It is true, indeed, there is a necessity, that if
God will have his word believed, he by his providence must take
order, that either by succession of men, or by some other means,
natural or supernatural, it be preserved and delivered, and suffi
ciently notified to be his word ; but that this should be done by
a succession of men that hold no error against it, certainly there
is no more necessity, than that it should be done by a succession
of men that commit no sin against it. For if men may preserve
the records of a law, and yet transgress it, certainly they may also
preserve directions for their faith, and yet not follow them. I
doubt not but lawyers at the bar do find, by frequent experience,
that many men preserve and produce evidences, which, being ex
amined, ofttimes make against themselves. This they do ignorantly,
it being in their power to suppress, or perhaps to alter them. And
why then should any man conceive it strange, that an erroneous
and corrupted church should preserve and deliver the scriptures
uncorrupted, when indeed, for many reasons which I have formerly
alleged, it was impossible for them to corrupt them ? Seeing, there
fore, this is all the necessity that is pretended of a perpetual suc
cession of men orthodox in all points, certainly there is no necessity
at all of any such, neither can the want of it prove any man or
any church heretical.
39. When therefore you have produced some proof of this,
which was your major in your former syllogism, that want of suc
cession is a certain mark of heresy, you shall then receive a full
answer to your minor. We shall then consider, whether your

Protestants not Heretics. 463
indelible character be any reality, or whether it be a creature of
your own making, a fancy of your own imagination ? And if it
be a thing, and not only a word, whether our bishops and priests
have it not as well as yours ; and whether some men's persuasions,
that there is no such thing, can hinder them from having it, or
prove that they have it not, if there be any such thing (any more
than a man's persuasion, that he has not taken physic or poison,
will make him not to have taken it, if he has, or hinder the
operation of it)? And whether Tertullian, in the place quoted by
you, speaks of a priest made a layman by just deposition or de
gradation, and not by a voluntary desertion of his order? And
whether in the same place he set not some mark upon heretics
that will agree to your church? Whether all the authority of
our bishops in England, before the Reformation, was conferred on
them by the pope ? And, if it were, whether it were the pope's
right, or an usurpation ? If it were his right, whether by divine
law or ecclesiastical ? And if by ecclesiastical only, whether he
might possibly so abuse his power, as to deserve to lose it? Whe
ther de facto he had done so? Whether, supposing he had de
served to lose it, those that deprived him of it had power to take
it from him ? Or, if not, whether they had power to suspend him
from the use of it until good caution were put in, and good assu
rance given, that if he had it again, he would not abuse it as he
had formerly done ? Whether, in case they had done unlawfully
that took his power from him, it may not (things being now set
tled, and the present government established) be as unlawful to
go about to restore it ? Whether it be not a fallacy to conclude,
because we believe the pope hath no power in England, now when
the king, and state, and church, hath deprived him upon just
grounds of it, therefore we cannot believe that he had any before
his deprivation ? Whether without schism a man may not with
draw obedience from an usurped authority, commanding unlawful
things? Whether the Roman church might not give authority
to bishops and priests to oppose her errors, as well as a king gives
authority to a judge to judge against him, if his cause be bad; as
well as Trajan gave his sword to his prefect with this commission,
that — if he governed well, he should use it for him ; if ill, against
him ? Whether the Roman church gave not authority to her
bishops and priests to preach against her corruptions in manners ?
And, if so, why not against her errors in doctrine, if she had
any ? Whether she gave them not authority to preach the whole
gospel of Christ, and consequently against her doctrine, if it should
contradict any part of the gospel of Christ ? Whether it be not
acknowledged lawful in the church of Rome, for any layman, or
woman, that has ability, to persuade others by word or writing
from error, and unto truth? And why this liberty may not be
practised against their religion, if it be false, as well as for it, if
it be true ? Whether any man need any other commission or vo
cation than that of a christian, to do a work of charity? And
whether it be not one of the greatest works of charity (if it be
done after a peaceable manner, and without an unnecessary dis-

464 Protestants Mot Heretics.
turbance of order), to persuade men out of a false into a true
way of eternal happiness? Especially, the apostle having assured
us, that he (whosoever he is) " who converteth a sinner from the
error of his way, shall save a soul from death, and shall hide a
multitude of sins." Whether the first reformed bishops died all
at once, so that there were not enough to ordain others in the
places that were vacant ? Whether the bishops of England may
not consecrate a metropolitan of England, as well as the cardinals
do the pope? Whether the king or queen of England, or they
that have the government in their hands, in the minority of the
prince, may not lawfully commend one to them to be consecrated,
against whom there is no canonical exception ? Whether the
doctrine, that the king is supreme head of the church of England,
(as the kings of Judah, and the first christian emperors, were of
the Jewish and christian church) be any new-found doctrine?
Whether it may not be true, that bishops, being made bishops,
have their authority immediately from Christ, though this or that
man be not made bishop without the king's authority ; as well as
you say the pope, being pope, has authority immediately from
Christ, and yet this or that man cannot be made pope without the
authority of the cardinals ? Whether you do well to suppose, that
christian kings have no more authority in ordering the affairs of
the church than the great Turk, or the pagan emperors? Whe
ther the king may not give authority to a bishop to exercise his
function in some part of his kingdom, and yet not be capable of
doing it himself; as well as a bishop may give authority to a
physician to practise physic in his diocese, which the bishop can
not do himself? Whether, if Nero the emperor would have com
manded St. Peter or St. Paul to preach the gospel of Christ, and
to exercise the office of a bishop of Rome, whether they would
have questioned his authority to do so ? Whether there were
any law of God or man that prohibited king James to give com
mission to bishops, nay, to lay his injunction upon them, to do
any thing that is lawful ? Whether a casual irregularity may not
be lawfully dispensed with? Whether the pope's irregularities,
if he should chance to incur any, be indispensable ? And, if not,
who is he, or who are they, whom the pope is subject unto, that
they may dispense with him ? Whether that be certain, which
you take for granted, that your ordination imprints a character,
and ours doth not ? Whether the power of consecrating and or
daining by imposition of hands, may not reside in the bishops, and
be derived unto them, not from the king, but God ? And yet the
king have authority to command them to apply this power to
such a fit person, whom he shall commend unto them ? As well
as if some architects only had the faculty of architecture, and had
it immediately by infusion from God himself; yet, if they were
the king's subjects, he wants not authority to command them to
build him a palace for his use, or a fortress for his service; or,
as the King of France pretends not to have power to make priests
himself, yet I hope you will not deny him power to command any
of his subjects, that has this power to ordain any fit person priest,

Protestants not Heretics. 465
whom he shall desire to be ordained. Whether it do not follow,
that whensoever the king commands a house to be built, a mes
sage to be delivered, or a murderer to be executed, that all these
things are presently done without the intervention of the architect,
messenger, or executioner ? As well as that they are ipso facto
ordained and consecrated, who by the king's authority are com
mended to the bishops to be ordained and consecrated : especially,
seeing the king will not deny but that these bishops may refuse
to do what he requires to be done, lawfully, if the person be un
worthy, if worthy, unlawfully indeed, but yet de facto they may
refuse; and in case they should do so, whether justly or unjustly,
neither the king himself, nor any body else, would esteem the
person bishop upon the king's designation. Whether many popes,
though they were not consecrated bishops by any temporal prince,
yet might not, or did not, receive authority from the emperor to
exercise their episcopal function in this or that place ? And whe
ther the emperors had not authority, upon their desert, to deprive
them of their jurisdiction, by imprisonment or banishment ?
Whether protestants do indeed pretend that their reformation is
universal ? Whether in saying, the donatists' sect was confined
to Africa, you do not forget yourself, and contradict what you
said above in §. 17 of this chapter, where you tell us — they had
some of their sect residing in Rome? Whether it be certain
that none can admit of bishops willingly, but those that hold
them of divine institution ? Whether they may not be willing to
have them, conceiving that way of government the best, though
not absolutely necessary ? Whether all those protestants, that
conceive the distinction between priests and bishops not to be of
divine institution, be schismatical and heretical for thinking so ?
Whether your form of ordaining bishops and priests be essential
to the constitution of the true church ? Whether the forms of the
church of England differ essentially from your forms ? Whether
in saying, that the true church cannot subsist without undoubted
true bishops and priests, you have not overthrown the truth of
your own church ? Wherein I have proved it plainly impossible,
that any man should be so much as morally certain, either of his
own priesthood, or any other man's. Lastly, whether any one
kind of these external forms, and orders, and government, be so
necessary to the being of a church, but that they may be diverse
in divers places, and that a good and peaceable christian may
and ought to submit himself to the government of the place
where he lives, whatsoever it be ? All these questions will be
necessary to be discussed for the clearing of the truth of the minor
proposition of your former syllogism, and your proofs of it ; and
I will promise to debate them fairly with you, if first you will bring
some better proof of the major, that want of succession is a certain
note of heresy, which for the present remains both unproved and
improbable. 40. Ad. §. 23. The fathers, you say, assign succession as one
mark of the true church : I confess they did urge tradition as an
argument of the truth of their doctrine, and of the falsehood of
GO

466 Protestants not Heretics.
the contrary ; and thus far they agree with you. But now see the
difference ; they urged it not against all heretics that ever should
be, but against them that rejected a great part of the scripture,
for no other reason, but " because it was repugnant to their doc
trine, and corrupted other parts with their additions and detrac
tions, and perverted the remainder with divers absurd interpreta
tions :" so Tertullian, not a leaf before the words by you cited.
Nay, they urged it against them, who, " when they were confuted
out of scripture, fell to accuse the scriptures themselves, as if
they were not right, and came not from good authority, as if they
were various one from another, and as if truth could not be found
out of them, by those who know not tradition ; for that it was not
delivered in writing, (they did mean wholly) but by word of
mouth : and that thereupon Paul also said, ' we speak wisdom
amongst the perfect.' " So Irenaeus, in the very next chapter be
fore that which you allege. Against these men being thus neces
sitated to do so, they did urge tradition ; but what or whose
tradition was it ? Certainly no other but the joint tradition of all
the apostolic churches, with one mouth and one voice, teaching
the same doctrine. Or if, for brevity's sake, they produce the
tradition of any one church, yet it is apparent, that that one was
then in conjunction with all the rest ; Irenaeus, Tertullian, Origen,
testify as much in the words cited, and St. Augustine in the place
before alleged by me. This tradition they did urge against these
men, and in a time, in comparison of ours, almost contiguous to
the apostles : so near, that one of them, Irenaeus, was scholar to
one who was scholar to St. John, the apostle. Tertullian and
Origen were not an age removed from him : and the last of them
all little more than an age from them. Yet after all this they
urged it not as a demonstration, but only as a very probable argu
ment, far greater than any their adversaries could oppose against
it. So Tertullian, in the place above quoted, Sect. 5. " How is
it likely, that so many and so great churches should err in one
faith?" (It should be — should have erred into one faith.) And
this was the condition of this argument, as the fathers urged it.
Now, if you having to deal with us, who question no book of
scripture, which was not anciently questioned by some whom you
yourselves esteemed good catholics ; nay, who refuse not to be
tried by your own canon, and your own translation ; who, in in
terpreting scriptures are content to allow all those rules which
you propose, only except that we will not allow you to be our
judges ; if you will come one thousand five hundred years after
the apostles, a fair time for the purest church to gather much
dross and corruption, and for the mystery of iniquity to bring its
work to some perfection, which in the apostles' time began to
work ; if (I say) you will come thus long after, and urge us with
the single tradition of one of these churches, being now catholic
to itself alone, and heretical to all the rest ; nay, not only with
her ancient and original traditions, but also with her post-nate
introduced definitions, and these, as we pretend, repugnant to
scripture and ancient tradition, and all this to decline an indif-

Protestants not Heretics. 467
ferent trial by scripture, under pretence (wherein also you agree
with the calumny of the old heretics) that all necessary truth can
not be found in them without recourse to tradition : if, I say, not
withstanding all these differences, you will still be urging us with
this argument as the very same, and of the same force with that
wherewith the forementioned fathers urged the old heretics ; cer
tainly this must needs proceed from a confidence you have, not only
that we have no school divinity, nor metaphysics, but no logic, or
common sense ; that we are but pictures of men, and have the defi
nition of rational creatures given us in vain.
41. But now suppose I should be liberal to you, and grant
what you cannot prove, that the fathers make succession a certain
and perpetual mark of the true church : I beseech you what will
come of it? What, that want of succession is a certain sign of an
heretical company ? Truly, if you say so, either you want logic,
which is a certain sign of an ill disputer ; or are not pleased to use
it, which is a worse. For speech is a certain sign of a living man,
yet want of speech is no sure argument that he is dead ; for he
may be dumb, and yet living still ; and we may have other evident
tokens that he is so, as eating, drinking, breathing, moving. So,
though the constant and universal delivery of any doctrine by the
apostolic churches, ever since the apostles, be a very great argu
ment of the truth of it, yet there is no certainty but that truth,
even divine truth, may, through men's wickedness, be contracted
from its universality, and interrupted in its perpetuity, and so
lose this argument, and yet not want others to justify and support
itself. For it may be one of those principles which God hath
written in all men's hearts, or a conclusion evidently arising from
them : it may be either contained in scripture in express terms, or
deducible from it by apparent consequence. If therefore you in
tend to prove want of a perpetual succession of professors a cer
tain note of heresy, you must not content yourself to shew, that
having it is one sign of truth ; but you must shew it to be the only
sign of it, and inseparable from it. But this, if you be well ad
vised, you will never undertake ; first, because it is an impossible
attempt ; and then because, if you do it, you will mar all : for by
proving this an inseparable sign of catholic doctrine, you will
prove your own, which apparently wants it in many points, not to
be catholic. For whereas you say — this succession requires two
things, agreement with the apostles' doctrine, and an uninter
rupted conveyance of it down to them that challenge it ; it will be
proved against you, that you fail in both points ; and that some
things wherein you agree with the apostles, have not been held
always ; as, your condemning the doctrine of the chiliasts, and hold
ing the eucharist not necessary for infants ; and that in many other
things you agree not with them, nor with the church for many ages
after : for example ; in mutilation of the communion, in having your
service in such a language as the assistants generally understand
not, your offering to saints, your picturing of God, your worshipping
of pictures.
42. Ad. §. 24. As for universality of place, the want whereof
gg2

468 Protestants not Heretics.
you object to protestants as a mark of heresy : you have not set
down clearly and univocally what you mean by it, whether uni
versality of fact, or of right ; and if of fact, whether absolute or
comparative ; and if. comparative, whether of the church in com
parison of any other religion, or only of heretical christians ; or if
in comparison of these, whether in comparison of all other sects
conjoined, or in comparison only of any one of them. N°r have
you proved it by any good argument in any sense to be a certain
mark of heresy : for those places of St. Augustine do not deserve
the name. And truly in my judgment you have done advisedly
in proving it no better. For as for universality of right, or a '
right to universality, all religions claim it, but only the true has
it ; and which has it cannot be determined, unless it be first deter
mined which is the true. An absolute universality and diffusion
through all the world if you should pretend to, all the world would
laugh at you : if you should contend for latitude with any one re
ligion, Mahometanism would carry the victory from you : if you
should oppose yourselves against all other christians besides you,
it is certain you would be cast in this suit also : if, lastly, being
hard driven, you should please yourselves with being more than
any one sect of christians, it would presently be replied, that it is
uncertain whether now you are so, but most certain, that the time
has been when you have not been so ; then when the whole
world wondered, that it was become arian ;* then when Athanasius
opposed the world, and the world Athanasius ; then when your
Liberiusf having the contemptible paucity of his adherents ob
jected to him as a note of error, answered for himself, " there
was a time when there were but three opposed the decree of the
king, and yet those three were in the right, and the rest in the
wrong ; then when the professors of error surpassed the number of
the professors of truth, in proportion as the sands of the sea do
the stars of heaven" (as St. AugustineJ acknowledges) ; then when
Vincentius§ confesses, that the poison of the arians had contami
nated, not now some certain portion, but almost the whole world ;
then when the author of Nazianzen's life testifies,|| that the heresy
of Arius had possessed in a manner the whole extent of the world ;
and when Nazianzen found cause to cry out,TI " Where are they who
reproach us with our poverty, who define the church by the mul
titude, and despise the little flock ? They have the people, but we
the faith." And lastly, when Athanasius was so overborne with
shoals and floods of arians, that he was enforced to write a trea
tise on purpose,** against those who judge of the truth only by
plurality of adherents. So that if you had proved want of uni
versality even thus restrained, to be an infallible note of heresy,
there would have been no remedy but you must have confessed,
that the time was when you were heretics. And besides, I see
not how you would have avoided this great inconvenience, of
* Hier. contr. Luciferianos. || In vita Nazianz.
t In Theod. Hist. 1. xvi. c. ii. IT In Orat Arian. et pro seipso.
X In Ep. 48, ad Vinccntium. ** Tom. ii.
§ Commentarii, 1. i. <;. iv.

Protestants not Heretics. 469
laying grounds, and storing up arguments for antichrist, against
he comes, by which he may prove his company the true church.
For it is evident, out of scripture, and confessed by you, that
though his time be not long, his dominion shall be very large ;
and that the true church shall be then the woman driven into the
wilderness. 43. Ad. §. 25, 26. The remainder of this chapter, if I would deal
strictly with you, I might let pass as impertinent to the question
now disputed. For whereas your argument promises, that this
whole chapter shall be employed in proving Luther and the pro
testants guilty of heresy ; here you desert this question and
strike out into another accusation of them — that their faith, even
of the truth they hold, is not indeed true faith. But put case it
were not, does it follow, that the having of this faith makes them
heretics, or that they are therefore heretics, because they have
this faith? Aristotle believed there were intelligences which
moved the spheres; he believed this with a human persuasion,
and not with a certain, obscure, prudent, supernatural faith ; and
will you make Aristotle a heretic, because he believed so ? You
believe there was such a man as Julius Caesar, that there is such
a city as Constantinople, and your belief hereof has not these
qualifications which you require to divine faith. And will you
be content, that this shall pass for a sufficient proof, that you are
a heretic ? Heresy you have defined above to be a voluntary error ;
but he that believes truth, though his belief be not qualified ac
cording to your mind, yet sure in believing truth, he believes no
error; and from hence, according to ordinary logic, methinks it
should follow, that such a man for doing so cannot be guilty of
heresy. 44. But you will say, though he be not guilty of heresy for
believing these truths, yet, if his faith be not saving, to what
purpose will it be ? Truly very little to the purpose of salvation ;
as little as it is to your proving protestants guilty of heresy. But
out of our wonted indulgence, let us pardon this fault also, and
do you the favour to hear what you can say, to beget this faith in
us, that indeed we have no faith, or at least not such a faith, with
out which " it is impossible to please God." Your discourse upon
this point you have, I know not upon what policy, disjoined, and
given us the grounds of it in the beginning of the chapter, and the
superstruction here in the end. Them I have already examined,
and, for a great part of them, proved them vain and deceitful. I
have shewed, by many certain arguments, that though the sub
ject matter of our faith be in itself most certain, yet that absolute
certainty of adherence is not required to the essence of faith, no,
nor to make it acceptable to God ; but that to both these effects
it is sufficient, if it be firm enough to produce obedience and charity.
I have shewed, besides, that prudence is rather commendable
in faith, than intrinsical and essential to it : so that whatsoever is
here said, to prove the faith of protestants no faith, for want of
certainty, or for want of prudence, is already answered before it
is objected; for the foundation being destroyed, the building

470 Protestants not Heretics.
cannot stand. Yet, for the fuller refutation of all pretences, I
will here make good that to prove our faith destitute of these
qualifications, you have produced but vain sophisms, and, for the
most part, such arguments as return most violently upon your
selves. Thus then you say :
45. First, that their belief wanteth certainty, I prove, because
they, denying the universal infallibility of the church, can have no
certain ground to know what objects are revealed or testified by
God. — But if there be no other ground of certainty, but your
church's infallibility, upon what certain ground do you know
that your church is infallible ? Upon what certain ground do
you know all those things which must be known, before you can
know that your church is infallible ? As, that there is a God ;
that God hath promised his assistance to your church, in all her
decrees ; that the scripture, wherein this promise is extant, is the
word of God ; that those texts of scripture, which you allege for your
infallibility, are uncorrupted ; that that which you pretend, is the
true sense of them ? When you have produced certain grounds
for all these things, I doubt not but it will appear, that we also
may have grounds certain enough to believe our whole religion,
which is nothing else but the bible, without dependence on the
church's infallibility. Suppose you should meet with a man, that
for the present believes neither church, nor scripture, nor God, but
is ready and willing to believe them all, if you can shew some suf
ficient ground to build his faith upon ; will you tell such a man
there are no certain grounds by which he may be converted, or
there are ? If you say the first, you make all religion an uncertain
thing ; if the second, then either you must ridiculously persuade,
that your church is infallible, because it is infallible, or else that
there are other certain grounds besides your church's infallibility.
46. But you proceed and tell us — that holy scripture is in
itself most true and infallible ; but without the direction and
declaration of the church, we can neither have certain means to
know what scripture is canonical, nor what translations be faith
ful, nor what is the true meaning of scripture. — Ans. But all
these things must be known before we can know the direction of
your church to be infallible ; for no other proof of it can be pre
tended, but only some texts of canonical scripture, truly inter
preted : therefore, either you are mistaken, in thinking there is
no other means to know these things, but your church's infallible
direction ; or we are excluded from all means of knowing her direc
tion to be infallible.
47. But protestants, though, as you suppose, they are per
suaded their own opinions are true, and that they have used such
means as are wont to be prescribed for understanding the scrip
ture, as prayer, conferring of texts, &c. yet by their disagreement
shew, that some of them are deceived. Now they hold all the
articles of their faith upon this only ground of scripture, inter
preted by these rules ; and therefore it is clear, that the ground
of their faith is infallible in no point at all. The first of these
suppositions must needs be true, but the second is apparently

Protestants not Heretics. 471
false: I mean that every protestant is persuaded, that he hath
used those means which are prescribed for understanding of scrip
ture. But that which you collect from these suppositions, is
clearly inconsequent ; and by as good logic you might conclude,
that logic and geometry stand upon no certain grounds, that the
rules of the one and the principles of the other do sometimes faill
because the disagreements of logicians and geometricians shew,
that some of them are deceived. Might not a Jew conclude as
well against all christians, that they have no certain ground
whereon to rely in their understanding of scripture, because their
disagreements shew that some are deceived ; because some deduce
from it the infallibility of a church, and others no such matter?
So, likewise, a Turk might use the same argument against both
Jews and christians, and an atheist against all religions, and a
sceptic against all reason. Might not the one say, men's disa
greement in religion shews, that there is no certainty in any :
and the other that experience in their contradictions teacheth,
that the rules of reason do sometimes fail ? Do not you see, and
feel, how void of reason, and how full of impiety, your sophistry
is ? and bow, transported with zeal against protestants, you urge
arguments against them, which if they could not be answered,
would overthrow not only your own, but all religion ? But God
be thanked ! the answer is easy and obvious ; for let men but re
member not to impute the faults of men but only to men, and
then it will easily apear, that there may be sufficient certainty
in reason, in religion, in the rules of interpreting scripture, though
men, through their faults, take not care to make use of them, and
so run into divers errors and dissensions.
48. But protestants cannot determine what points be funda
mental, and therefore must remain uncertain, whether or no they
be not in some fundamental error. — Ans. By like reason, since
you acknowledge, that every error in points defined and declared
by your church, destroys the substance of faith, and yet cannot
determine what points be defined, it followeth, that you must re
main uncertain, whether or no you be not in some fundamental
error, and so want the substance of faith, without which there
can be no hope of salvation. Now that you are uncertain what
points are defined, appears from your own words, ch. 4, §. 3, of
your second part, where, you say, — No less impertinent is your
discourse concerning the difficulty to know what is heresy : for we
grant, that it is not always easy to determine in particular occasions,
whether this or that doctrine be such, because it may be doubtful,
whether it be against any scripture or divine tradition, or defini
tion of the church. Neither were it difficult to extort from you
this confession, by naming divers points, which some of you say
are defined, others the contrary, and others hang in suspense,
and know not what to determine. But this I have done else
where; as also I have shewed plainly enough, that though we
cannot perhaps say in particular, this much, and no more, is
fundamental, yet believing all the bible, we are certain enough
that we believe all that is fundamental. As he that in a re-

472 Protestants not Heretics.
ceipt takes twenty ingredients, whereof ten only are necessary,
•though he know not what those ten are, yet, taking the whole
twenty, he is sure enough that he hath taken all that are ne
cessary. 49. Ad. §. 29. — But that he who erreth against any one re
vealed truth, loseth all divine faith, is a very true doctrine, de
livered by catholic divines (you mean your own) with so general
a consent, that the contrary is wont to be censured as temerarious :
now certainly some protestants must do so, because they hold con
tradictions which cannot all be true ; therefore some of them,
at least, have no divine faith. — Ans. I pass by your weakness, in
urging protestants with the authority of your divines, which yet
in you might very deservedly be censured. For when Dr. Potter,
to show the many actual dissensions between the Romish doctors,
notwithstanding their brags of potential unity, refers to Pappus,
who has collected out of Bellarmine their contradictions, and sets
them down in his own words to the number of 237 ; and to Fla-
cius, de Sectis et Controversis Religionis Papistica ; you, making
the very same use of Brerely against protestants, yet jeer and
scorn Dr. Potter, as if he offered you for a proof the bare autho
rity of Pappus, and Flacius ; and tell him, which is all the answer
you vouchsafe him — it is pity that he brings Pappus and Flacius,
flat heretics, to prove your many contradictions : — as if he had
proved this with the bare authority, the bare judgment, of these
men, which sure he does not, but with the formal words of Bellar
mine, faithfully collected by Pappus. And why then might we
not say to you, is it not pretty, that you bring Brerely, as flat a
heretic as Pappus or Flacius, to prove the contradictions of pro
testants? Yet had he been so vain as to press you with the mere
authority of protestant divines in any point, methinks, for your
own sake, you should have pardoned him, who here, and in many
other places, urges us with the judgment of your divines as with
weighty arguments. Yet if the authority of your divines were
even canonical, certainly nothing could be concluded from it in
this matter, there being not one of them, who delivers for true
doctrine this position of yours, thus nakedly set down, that any
error against any one revealed truth destroys all divine faith.
For they all require (not yourself excepted), that this truth must
not only be revealed, but revealed publicly, and (all things con
sidered) sufficiently propounded to the erring party, to be one of
those which God, under pain of damnation, commands all men to
believe. And, therefore, the contradiction of protestants (though
this vain doctrine of your divines were supposed true) is but a
weak argument, that any of them have no divine faith, seeing
you neither have, nor can ever prove (without begging the ques
tion of your church's infallibility), that the truths about which
they differ are of this quality and condition. But though out of
courtesy we may suppose this doctrine true, yet we have no rea
son to grant it, nor to think it any thing but a vain and ground
less fancy ; and, that this very weak and inartificial argument,
from the authority of your divines, is the strongest pillar which

Protestants not Heretics. 473
it hath to support it. Two reasons you allege for it out of Thomas
Aquinas ; the first whereof vainly supposeth, against reason and
experience, that, by the commission of any deadly sin, the habit
of charity is quite extirpated. And for the second, though you
cry it up for an Achilles, and think, like the Gorgon's head, it
will turn us all into stone ; and, in confidence of it, insult upon
Dr. Potter, as if he durst not come near it ; yet in very truth,
having considered it well, I find it a serious, grave, prolix, and
profound nothing. I could answer it in a word, by telling you
that it begs without all proof, or colour of proof, the main ques
tion between us, that the infallibility of your church is either the
formal motive or rule, or a necessary condition of faith : which
you know we flatly deny, and therefore all that is built upon it
has nothing but wind for a foundation. But to this answer I will
add a large confutation of this vain fancy, out of one of the most
rational and profound doctors of your own church ; I mean Es-
tius, who upon the third of the Sent, the 23 dist. §. 13, writes
thus : " It is disputed (saith he) whether in him, who believes
some of the articles of our faith, and disbelieves others, or per
haps some one, there be faith properly so called in respect of that
which he does believe ? In which question we must, before all,
carefully distinguish between those, who, retaining a general
readiness to believe whatsoever the church believes, yet err by
ignorance in some doctrine of faith, because it is not as yet suffi
ciently declared to them, that the church does so believe ; and
those who, after sufficient manifestation of the church's doctrine,
do yet choose to dissent from it, either by doubting of it, or af
firming the contrary. For of the former, the answer is easy :
but of these, that is, of heretics retaining some part of wholesome
doctrine, the question is more difficult, and on both sides by the
doctors probably disputed. For that there is in them true faith
of the articles wherein they do not err, first, experience seems to
convince : for many at this day denying, for example sake, pur
gatory, or invocation of saints, nevertheless firmly hold, as by
divine revelation, that God is three and one, that the Son of God
was incarnate, and suffered, and other like things. As anciently
the novatians, excepting their peculiar errors, of denying recon
ciliation to those that fell in persecution, held other things in
common with catholics: so that they assisted them very much
against the arians, as Socrates relates in his ecclesiastical history.
Moreover, the same is proved by the example of the apostles,
who, in the time of Christ's passion, being scandalized, lost their
faith in him : as also, Christ after his resurrection upbraids them
with their incredulity, and calls Thomas incredulous, for denying
the resurrection, John xx. Whereupon St. Augustine also in his
preface upon Psa. xcvi. saith, that ¦ after the resurrection of
Christ, the faith of those that fell was restored again. And yet
we must not say, that the apostles then lost the faith of the trinity,
of the creation of the world, of eternal life, and such-like other
articles. Besides, the Jews, before Christ's coming, held the
faith of one God, the creator of heaven and earth : who, although

474 Protestants not Heretics.
they lost the true faith of the Messias by not receiving Christ ; yet
we cannot say, that they lost the faith of one God, but still retained
this article as firmly as they did before.'
" Add hereunto, that neither Jews nor heretics seem to lie, in
saying, they believe either the books of the prophets, or the four
gospels: it being apparent enough, that they acknowledge in
them divine authority, though they hold not the true sense of
them ; to which purpose is that in the Acts, ch. xx. ' Believest
thou the prophets? I know that thou believest.' Lastly, it is
manifest that many gifts of God are found even in bad men, and
such as are out of the church ; therefore nothing hinders, but that
Jews and heretics, though they err in many things, yet in other
things may be so divinely illuminated as to believe aright. So
St. Augustine seems to teach in his book De Unico Baptismo
contra Petilianum, c. 3, in these words : ' When a Jew comes
to us to be made a christian, we destroy not him in God's good
things, but his own will. That he believes one God is to be wor
shipped ; that he hopes for eternal life ; that he doubts not of the
resurrection, we approve and commend him : we acknowledge
that as he did believe these things, so he is still to believe them ;
and as he did hold, so he is still to hold them.' Thus he, sub
joining more to the same purpose in the next. And again, in the
xxvi. chap, and in his third book, De Bapt. contra. Donat. cap.
ult. and upon Psa. lxiv. ' But now this reason seems to persuade
the contrary because the formal object of faith seems to be the
first verity, as it is manifested by the church's doctrine as the
divine and infallible rule ; wherefore, whosoever adheres not to
this rule, although he assent to some matters of faith, yet he
embraces them not with faith, but with some other kind of assent ;
as if a man assent to a conclusion, not knowing the reason by
which it is demonstrated, he hath not true knowledge, but an
opinion only of the same conclusion. Now, that a heretic adheres
not to the rule aforesaid, it is manifest ; because if he did adhere
to it, as divine and infallible, he would receive all, without excep
tion, which the church teacheth, and so would not be a heretic'
After this manner St. Thorn, ii. 2. q. 5, art. 3. From whom yet
Durand dissents upon this distinction, thinking, there may be in a
heretic true faith, in respect of the articles in which he doth not
err. Others, as Scotus and Bonaventure, define not the matter
plainly, but seem to choose a middle way.
" To the authority of St. Augustine and these schoolmen this
may be adjoined — that it is usual with good christians to say that
heretics have not the entire faith. Whereby it seems to be in
timated that some part of it they do retain : whereof this may be
another reason ; that if the truths, which a Jew or a heretic holds,
he should not hold them by faith, but after some other manner,
to wit, by his own proper will and judgment, it will follow, that
all that excellent knowledge of God and divine things, which is
found in them, is to be attributed not to the grace of God, but to
the strength of free-will, which is against St. Augustine, both else
where, and especially in the end of his book De Potentia.

Protestants not Heretics. 475
" As for the reason alleged to the contrary, we answer — it is
impertinent to faith by what means we believe the prime verity,
that is, by what means God useth to confer upon men the gift of
faith. For, although now the ordinary means be the testimony
and teaching of the church, yet it is certain, that by other means
faith hath been given heretofore, and it is given still. For many
of the ancients, as Adam, Abraham, Melchisedech, Job, received
faith by special revelation; the apostles, by the miracles and
preaching of Christ; others again, by the preaching and miracles
of the apostles ; and, lastly, others by other means, when as yet
they had heard nothing of the infallibility of the church. To little
children, by baptism, without any other help, faith is infused : and
therefore it is possible that a man, not adhering to the church's
doctrine as a rule infallible, yet may receive some things for the
word of God which do indeed truly belong to the faith, either be
cause they are now, or heretofore have been, confirmed by mira
cles; or because he manifestly sees that the ancient church taught
so, or upon some other inducement. And yet, nevertheless, we
must not say that heretics and Jews do hold the faith, but only
some part of the faith. For the faith signifies an entire thing, and
complete in all parts ; whereupon a heretic is said to be simply an
infidel, to have lost the faith, and according to the apostle, 1 Tim. i.
to have made shipwreck of it, although he holds some things with
the same strength of assent, and readiness of will, wherewith by
others are held all these points which appertain to the faith." And
thus far Estius, whose discourse, I presume, may pass for a sufficient
refutation of your argument out of Aquinas. And, therefore, your
corollaries drawn from it — that every error against faith involves
opposition against God's testimony ; that protestants have no faith,
no certainty ; and that you have all faith, must, together with it,
fall to the ground.
50. But, if protestants have certainty, they want obscurity, and
so have not that faith, which, as the apostle saith, is of things not
appearing. — This argument you prosecute in the next paragraph :
but I can find nothing in it, to convince or persuade me, that pro
testants cannot have as much certainty as is required to faith of
an object not so evident as to beget science. If obscurity will not
consist with certainty in the highest degree, then you are to blame
for requiring to faith contradicting conditions. If certainty and
obscurity will stand together, what reason can be imagined that
a protestant may not entertain them both as well as a papist?
Your bodies and souls, your understandings and wills, are, I think,
of the same condition with ours : and why then may not we be
certain of an obscure thing as well as you? And as you make
this long discourse against protestants, why may not we, putting
church instead of scripture, send it back again to you ? And say —
if papists have certainty, they want obscurity, and so have not that
faith, which, as the apostle saith, is of things not appearing, or
not necessitating our understanding to an assent? For the whole
edifice of the faith of papists is settled on these two principles :
these particular propositions are the propositions of the church ;

476 Protestants not Heretics.
and the sense and meaning of them is clear and evident, at least
in all points necessary to salvation. Now these principles being
once supposed, it clearly followeth, that what papists believe as
necessary to salvation, is evidently known by them to be true, by
this argument : It is certain and evident, that whatsoever is the
word of God, or divine revelation, is true : but it is certain and
evident, that these propositions of the church in particular are the
word of God, or divine revelations : therefore it is certain and
evident, that all propositions of the church are true. Which con
clusion I take for a major in a second argument, and say thus:
It is certain and evident that all propositions of the church are
true : but it is certain and evident that such particulars, for
example, the lawfulness of the half-communion, the lawfulness
and expedience of Latin service, the doctrine of transubstantia
tion, indulgences, &c, are the propositions of the church : there
fore it is certain and evident that these particular objects are true.
Neither will it avail you to say, that the said principles are not
evident by natural discourse, but only by the eye of reason, cleared
by grace : for supernatural evidence no less (yea, rather more)
drowns and excludes obscurity, than natural evidence doth. Nei
ther can the party so enlightened be said voluntarily to captivate
his understanding to that light, but rather his understanding is by
necessity made captive, and forced not to disbelieve what is pre
sented by so clear a light ; and therefore your imaginary faith is
not the true faith defined by the apostle, but an invention of your
own. 51. And having thus cried quittance with you, I must entreat
you to devise (for truly I cannot) some answer to this argument,
which will not serve in proportion to your own. For I hope you
will not pretend that I have done you injury, in settling your
faith upon principles which you disclaim. And if you allege this
disparity, that you are more certain of your principles than we of
ours, and yet you do not pretend that your principles are so evi
dent, as we do that ours are : what is this but to say, that you are
more confident than we, but confess you have less reason for it ?
For the evidence of the thing assented to, be it more or less, is the
reason and cause of the assent in the understanding. But then,
besides, I am to tell you that you are here, as every where, ex
tremely, if not affectedly, mistaken in the doctrine of protestants ;
who, though they acknowledge that the things which they believe
are in themselves as certain as any demonstrable or sensible veri
ties, yet pretend not that their certainty of adherence is most per
fect and absolute, but such as may be perfected and increased as
long as they " walk by faith, and not by sight." And consonant
hereunto is their doctrine touching the evidence of the objects
whereunto they adhere. For you abuse the world and them, if
you pretend that they hold the first of your two principles, that
these particular books are the word of God (for so I think you
mean), either to be in itself evidently certain, or of itself, and be
ing divested of the motives of credibility, evidently credible : for
they are not so fond as to conceive, nor so vain as to pretend, that

Protestants not Heretics. 477
all men do assent to it, which they would, if it were evidently
certain ; nor so ridiculous as to imagine, that if an Indian, that
never heard of Christ or scripture, should by chance find a bible
in his own language, and were able to read it, that upon the read
ing it, he would certainly, without a miracle, believe it to be the
word of God ; which he could not choose, if it were evidently
credible. What then do they affirm of it? Certainly no more
than this, that whatsoever man, that is not of a perverse mind,
shall weigh with serious and mature deliberation those great mo
ments of reason which may incline him to believe the divine au
thority of scripture, and compare them with the light objections,
that in prudence can be made against it, he shall not choose, but
find sufficient, nay abundant, inducements to yield unto it firm
faith and sincere obedience. Let that learned man, Hugo Grotius,
speak for all the rest, in his book of the Truth of the Christian
Religion ; which book, whosoever attentively peruses, shall find,
that a man may have great reason to be a christian without de
pendence upon your church for any part of it ; and that your re
ligion is no foundation of, but rather a scandal and an objection
against, Christianity. He then in the last chapter of his second
book hath these excellent words: "If any be not satisfied with
these arguments above said, but desires more forcible reasons for
confirmation of the excellency of christian religion, let such know,
that as there are variety of things which be true, so there are
divers ways of proving or manifesting the truth. Thus is there
one way in mathematics, another in physics, a third in ethics;
and, lastly, another kind, when a matter of fact is in question :
wherein verily we must rest content with such testimonies as are
free from all suspicion of untruth; otherwise, down goes all the
frame and use of history, and a great part of the art of physic,
together with all dutifulness that ought to be between parents and
children ; for matters of practice can no way else be known but
by such testimonies. Now it is the pleasure of Almighty God, that
those things, which he would have us to believe (so that the very
belief thereof may be imputed to us for obedience), should not so
evidently appear, as those things which are apprehended by sense,
and plain demonstration, but only be so far forth revealed as may
beget faith, and a persuasion thereof, in the hearts and minds of
such as are not obstinate ; that so the gospel may be as a touch
stone for trial of men's judgments, whether they be sound or un
sound. For seeing these arguments, whereof we have spoken,
have induced so many honest, godly, and wise men, to approve of
this religion, it is thereby plain enough that the fault of other
men's infidelity is not for want of sufficient testimony, but because
they would not have that to be had and embraced for truth which
is contrary to their wilful desires ; it being a hard matter for them
to relinquish their honours, and set at nought other commodities ;
which thing they know they ought to do, if they admit of Christ's
doctrine, and obey what he hath commanded. And this is the
rather to be noted of them, for that many other historical narra
tions are approved by them to be true, which notwithstanding are

478 Protestants not Heretics.
only manifest by authority, and not by any such strong proofs,
and persuasions, or tokens, as do declare the history of Christ to
be true ; which are evident, partly by the confession of those Jews
that are yet alive; and partly in those companies and congrega
tions of christians, which are anywhere to be found ; whereof,
doubtless, there was some cause.
Lastly, " Seeing the long duration or continuance of christian
religion, and the large extent thereof, can be ascribed to no hu
man power, therefore the same must be attributed to miracles:
or, if any deny that it came to pass through a miraculous manner,
this very getting so great strength and power without a miracle,
may be thought to surpass any miracle."
52. And now you see, I hope, that protestants neither do, nor
need to pretend to any such evidence in the doctrine they believe,
as cannot well consist both with the essence and obedience of
faith. Let us come now to the last nullity which you impute to
the faith of protestants, and that is — want of prudence : touching
which point, as I have already demonstrated, that wisdom is not
essential to faith, but that a man may truly believe truth, though
upon insufficient motives ; so I doubt not but I shall make good,
that if prudence were necessary to faith, we have better title to it
than you ; and that if a wiser than Solomon were here, he should
have better reason to believe the religion of protestants than
papists, the Bible rather than the council of Trent. But let us
hear what you can say.
53. Ad. §. 31. You demand then, first of all — What wisdom was
it to forsake a church confessed very ancient, and besides which
there could be demonstrated no other visible church of Christ
upon earth ? — I answer, Against God and truth there lies no pre
scription, and therefore certainly it might be great wisdom to
forsake ancient errors for more ancient truths. One God is rather
to be followed than innumerable worlds of men ; and therefore it
might be great wisdom, either for the whole visible church, nay,
for all the men in the world, having wandered from the way of
truth, to return unto it ; or for a part of it, nay, for one man to do
so, although all the world besides were madly resolute to do the
contrary. It might be great wisdom to forsake the errors, though
of the only visible church, much more of the Roman, which, in
conceiving herself the whole visible church, does somewhat like
the frog in the fable, which thought the ditch he lived in to be all
the world.
54. You demand again — What wisdom was it to forsake a
church acknowledged to want nothing necessary to salvation,
endued with succession of bishops, &c. usque ad election or
choice? — I answer, Yet might it be great wisdom to forsake a
church not acknowledged to want nothing necessary to salvation,
but accused and convicted of many damnable errors; certainly
damnable to them who were convicted of them, had they still
persisted in them after their conviction ; though perhaps pardon
able (which is all that is acknowledged) to such as ignorantly
continued in them : a church vainly arrogating, without possibility

Protestants not Heretics. 479
of proof, a perpetual succession of bishops, holding always the
same doctrine ; and with a ridiculous impudence pretending per
petual possession of the world ; whereas the world knows, that a
little before Luther's arising, your church was confined to a part
of a part of it: lastly, a church vainly glorying in the dependence
of other churches upon her, which yet she supports no more than
those crouching antics, which seem in great buildings to labour
under the weight they bear, do indeed support the fabric. For a
corrupted and false church may give authority to preach the
truth, and consequently against her own falsehoods and corrup
tions. Besides, a false church may preserve the scripture true
(as now the Old Testament is preserved by the Jews), either not
being arrived to that height of impiety as to attempt the corrup
tion of it, or not able to effect it, or not perceiving, or not regard
ing the opposition of it to her corruptions. And so we might
receive from you lawful ordination, and • true scriptures, though
you were a false church ; and, receiving the scriptures from you
(though not from you alone), I hope you cannot hinder us, neither
need we ask your leave, to believe and obey them. And this,
though you be a false church, is enough to make us a true one.
As for a succession of men that held with us in all points of doc
trine, it is a thing we need not, and you have as little as we. So
that if we acknowledge that your church before Luther was a true
church, it is not for any ends, for any dependence that we have
upon you ; but because we conceive, that in a charitable construc
tion you may pass for a true church, such a church (and no bet
ter) as you do sometimes acknowledge protestants to be ; that is,
a company of men, wherein some ignorant souls may be saved.
So that in this balancing of religion against religion, and church
against church, it seems you have nothing of weight and moment
to put into your scale; nothing but smoke and wind, vain sha
dows, and fantastical pretences. Yet if protestants, on the other
side, had nothing to put in their scale but those negative com
mendations which you are pleased to afford them; nothing but,
no unity, nor means to procure it ; no farther extent, when Luther
arose, than Luther's body ; no universality of time or place ; no
visibility or being, except only in your church ; no succession of
persons or doctrine; no leader but Luther, in a quarrel begun
upon no ground but passion ; no church, no ordination, no scrip
tures, but such as they received from you ; if all this were true,
and this were all that could be pleaded for protestants, possibly,
with an allowance of three grains of partiality, your scale might
seem to turn. But then, if it may appear, that part of these ob
jections are falsely made against them, the rest vainly ; that what
soever of truth is in these imputations, is impertinent to this trial,
and whatsoever is pertinent is untrue ; and besides, that plenty of
good matter may be alleged for protestants, which is here dissem
bled : then, I hope, our cause may be good, notwithstanding these
pretences. 55. I say then, that want of universality of time and place, the
invisibility or not existence of the professors of protestant doctrine

480 Protestants not Heretics.
before Luther, Luther's being alone when he first opposed your
church, our having our church, ordination, scriptures, personal,
and yet not doctrinal, succession from you, are vain .and imperti
nent allegations, against the truth of our doctrine and church.
That the entire truth of Christ, without any mixture of error,
should be professed or believed in all places at any time, or in
any place at all times, is not a thing evident in reason, neither
have we any revelation for it. And, therefore, in relying so con
fidently on it, you build your house upon the sand. And what
obligation we had, either to be so peevish, as to take nothing of
yours, or so foolish as to take all, I do not understand. For
whereas you say, that this is to be choosers, and therefore here
tics, I tell you, that though all heretics are choosers, yet all
choosers are not heretics ; otherwise they also which choose your
religion must be heretics. As for our wanting unity, and means
of proving it, Luther's 'opposing your church upon mere passion,
our following private men rather than the catholic church, the
first and last are mere untruths; for we want not unity, nor
means to procure it in things necessary. Plain places of scrip
ture, and such as need no interpreter, are our means to obtain it
Neither do we follow any private men, but only the scripture, the
word of God, as our rule ; and reason, which is also the gift of
God given to direct us in all our actions, in the use of this rule.
And then for Luther's opposing your church upon mere passion,
it is a thing I will not deny, because I know not his heart ; and,
for the same reason, you should not have affirmed it. Sure I am,
whether he opposed your church upon reason or no, he had reason
enough to oppose it. And, therefore, if he did it upon passion,
we will follow him only in his action, and not in his passion ; in
his opposition, not in the manner of it ; and then, I presume, you
will have no reason to condemn us, unless you will say that a
good action cannot be done with reason, because somebody before
us hath done it upon passion. You see, then, how imprudent
you have been in the choice of your arguments, to prove protes
tants unwise in the choice of their religion.
56. It remains now, that I should show that many reasons of
moment may be alleged for the justification of protestants, which
are dissembled by you, and not put into the balance. Know
then, sir, that when I say the religion of protestants is in pru
dence to be preferred before yours, as, on the one side, I do not
understand by your religion the doctrine of Bellarmine, or Baro
nius, or any other private man amongst you ; nor the doctrine of
the sorbonne, or of the Jesuits, or of the dominicans, or of any
Other particular company among }rou, but that wherein you all
agree, or profess to agree — the doctrine of the council of Trent ;
so accordingly, on the other side, by the religion of protestants,
I do not understand the doctrine of Luther, or Calvin, or Melanc-
thon ; nor the confession of Augusta, or Geneva, nor the catechism
of Heidelberg, nor the articles of the church of England, no, nor
the harmony of protestant confessions; but that wherein they all
agree, and which they all subscribe with a greater harmony, as a

Protestants not Heretics. 481
perfect rule of their faith and actions : that is, the Bible. The
Bible, I say, the Bible only, is the religion of protestants ! What
soever else they believe besides it, and the plain, irrefragable, in
dubitable consequences of it, well may they hold it as a matter of
opinion : but as matter of faith and religion, neither can they
with coherence to their own grounds believe it themselves, nor
require the belief of it of others, without most high and most
schismatical presumption. I, for my part, after a long, and (as I
verily believe and hope) impartial search of the true way to eter
nal happiness, do profess plainly, that I cannot find any rest for
the sole of my foot but upon this rock only. I see plainly, and
with mine own eyes, that there are popes against popes, councils
against councils, some fathers against others, the same fathers
against themselves, a consent of fathers of one age against a con
sent of fathers of another age, the church of one age against the
church of another age. Traditive interpretations of scripture are
pretended ; but there are few or none to be found : no tradition,
but only of scripture, can derive itself from the fountain, but may
be plainly proved, either to have been brought in, in such an age
after Christ, or that in such an age it was not in. In a word,
there is no sufficient certainty but of scripture only, for any con
sidering man to build upon. This therefore, and this only, I have
reason to believe ; this I will profess ; according to this I will
live ; and for this, if there be occasion, I will not only willingly,
but even gladly, lose my life, though I should be sorry that chris
tians should take it from me. Propose me any thing out of this
book, and require whether I believe it or no, and seem it never
so incomprehensible to human reason, I will subscribe it with
hand and heart, as knowing no demonstration can be stronger
than this — God hath said so, therefore it is true. In other things
1 will take no man's liberty of judgment from him; neither shall
any man take mine from me. I will think no man the worse
man, nor the worse christian, I will love no man the less, for
differing in opinion from me. And what measure I mete to
others, I expect from them again. I am fully assured that God
does not, and therefore that men ought not, to require any more
of any man than this — to believe the scripture to be God's word,
to endeavour to find the true sense of it, and to live according
to it.
57. This is the religion which I have chosen after a long deli
beration, and I am verily persuaded that I have chosen wisely,
much more wisely than if I had guided myself according to your
church's authority. For the scripture being all true, I am
secured, by believing nothing else, that I shall believe no false
hood as matter of faith. And if I mistake the sense of scrip
ture, and so fall into error, yet I am secure from any danger
thereby, if but your grounds be true ; because, endeavouring to
find the true sense of scripture, I cannot but hold my error with
out pertinacity, and be ready to forsake it, when a more true and
more probable sense shall appear unto me. And then all neces
sary truth being, as I have proved, plainly set down in scripture,

482 Protestants not Heretics.
I am certain by believing scripture to believe all necessary truth :
and he that does so, if his life be answerable to his faith, how is it
possible he should fail of salvation ?
58. Besides, whatsoever may be pretended to gain to your church
the credit of a guide, all that and much more may be said for the
scripture. Hath your church been ancient ? The scripture is more
ancient. Is your church a means to keep men at unity ? So is
the scripture, to keep those that believe it, and will obey it, in unity
of belief, in matters necessary or very profitable ; and in unity of
charity, in points unnecessary. Is your church universal for time
or place ? Certainly the scripture is more universal : for all the
christians in the world (those, I mean, that in truth deserve this
name) do now and always have believed the scripture to be the word
of God, so much of it, at least, as contains all things necessary ;
whereas only you say, that you only are the church of God, and all
christians besides you deny it.
59. Thirdly, Following the scripture, I follow that whereby
you prove your church's infallibility, (whereof, were it not for
scripture, what pretence could you have, or what notion could we
have ?) and by so doing tacitly confess, that yourselves are surer of
the truth of the scripture than of your church's authority : for we
must be surer of the proof than of the thing proved, otherwise it is
no proof.
60. Fourthly, Following the scripture, I follow that which must
be true, if your church be true ; for your church gives attestation
to it : whereas, if I follow your church, I must follow that, which,
though scripture be true, may be false, nay, which, if scripture be
true, must be false, because the scripture testifies against it.
61. Fifthly, To follow the scripture, I have God's express war
rant and command, and no colour of any prohibition : but to be
lieve your church infallible, I have no command at all, much less
an express command. Nay, I have reason to fear, that I am
prohibited to do so in these words : " Call no man master on
the earth : they fell by infidelity ; thou standest by faith : be
not high-minded, but fear: the spirit of truth the world cannot
receive." 62. Following your church, I must hold many things not only
above reason, but against it, if any thing be against it ; whereas,
following the scripture, I shall believe many mysteries, but no
impossibilities ; many things above reason, but nothing against
it ; many things, which, had they not been revealed, reason could
never have discovered, but nothing which by true reason may be
confuted ; many things, which reason cannot comprehend how
they can be, but nothing which reason can comprehend that it can
not be. Nay, I shall believe nothing which reason will not con
vince that I ought to believe it : for reason will convince any man,
unless he be of a perverse mind, that the scripture is the word of
God : and then no reason can be greater than this ; God says so,
therefore it is true.
63. Following your church, I must hold many things, which
to any man's judgment, that will give himself the liberty of judg-

Protestants not Heretics. 483
ment, will seem much more contradicted by scripture, than the
infallibility of your church appears to be confirmed by it ; and
consequently, must be so foolish as to believe your church ex
empted from error upon less evidence, rather than subject to the
common condition of mankind upon greater evidence. Now, if
I take the scripture only for my guide, I shall not need to do any
thing so unreasonable.
64. If I will follow your church, I must believe impossibilities,
and that with an absolute certainty, upon motives which are con
fessed to be but only prudential and probable ; that is, with a weak
foundation, I must firmly support a heavy, a monstrous heavy build
ing : now following the scripture, I shall have no necessity to under
go any such difficulties.
65. Following your church, I must be a servant of Christ, and
a subject of the king, but only ad placitum papa. I must be
prepared in mind to renounce my allegiance to the king, when
the pope shall declare him a heretic, and command me not to obey
him ; and I must be prepared in mind to esteem virtue vice, and
vice virtue, if the pope shall so determine. Indeed, you say, it is
impossible he should do the latter ; but that you know is a great
question, neither is it fit my obedience to God and the king should
depend upon a questionable foundation. And howsoever, you
must grant, that if by an impossible supposition, the pope's com
mands should be contrary to the law of Christ, that they of your
religion must resolve to obey rather the commands of the pope
than the law of Christ : whereas, if I follow the scripture, I may,
nay I must, obey my sovereign in lawful things, though a heretic,
though a tyrant; and though, I do not say the pope, but the
apostles themselves, nay, an angel from heaven, should teach any
thing against the gospel of Christ, I may, nay I must, .denounce
anathema to him.
66. Following the scripture, I shall believe a religion, which,
being contrary to flesh and blood, without any assistance from
worldly power, wit, or policy, nay, against all the power and po
licy of the world, prevailed and enlarged itself in a very short
time all the world over; whereas it is too apparent, that your
church hath got, and still maintains, her authority over men's-
consciences, by counterfeiting false miracles, forging false stories,
by obtruding on the world supposititous writings, by corrupting the
monuments of former times, and defacing out of them all which any
way makes against you, by wars, by persecutions, by massacres, by
treasons, by rebellions; in short, by all manner of carnal means,
whether violent or fraudulent.
67. Following the scripture, I shall believe a religion, the first
preachers and professors whereof, it is most certain, they could
have no worldly ends upon the world ; that they should not pro
ject to themselves by it any of the profits, or honours, or plea
sures, of this world : but rather were to expect the contrary, even
all the miseries which the world could lay upon them. On the
other side, the head of your church, the pretended successor of
the apostles, and guide of faith, it is even palpable, that he makes.
H h2

484 Protestants not Heretics.
your religion the instrument of his ambition, and by it seeks to
entitle himself directly or indirectly to the monarchy of the world.
And besides it is evident to any man, that has but half an eye, that
most of those doctrines which you add to the scripture, do make,
one way or other, for the honour or temporal profit of the
teachers of them.
68. Following the scripture only, I shall embrace a religion of
admirable simplicity, consisting in a manner wholly in the worship
of God, in spirit, and in truth : whereas your church and doctrine
is even loaded with an infinity of weak, childish, ridiculous, unsa
voury superstitions and ceremonies, and full of that righteousness,
for which Christ shall judge the world.
69. Following the scriptures, I shall believe that which univer
sal, never-failing tradition assures me, that it was by the admi
rable supernatural works of God c6nfirmed to be the word of
God ; whereas never any miracle was wrought, never so much as
a lame horse cured, in confirmation of your church's authority
and infallibility. And if any strange things have been done,
which may seem to give attestation to some parts of your doc
trine, yet this proves nothing but the truth of the scripture,
which foretold that (God's providence permitting it, and the
wickedness of the world deserving it) strange signs and wonders
should be wrought to confirm false doctrine, that they which love
not the truth may be given over to strong delusions. Neither
does it seem to me any strange thing, that God should permit
some true wonders to be done, to delude them who have forged so
many to deceive the world.
70. If I follow the scripture, I must not promise myself salva
tion without effectual dereliction and mortification of all vices,
and the effectual practice of all christian virtues : but your church
opens an easier and a broader way to heaven, and though I con
tinue all my life long in a course of sin, and without the practice
of any virtue, yet gives mc the assurance that I may be let into
heaven at a postern-gate, even by an act of attrition at the hour
of death, if it be joined with confession, or by an act of contrition
without confession.
71. Admirable are the precepts, of piety and humility, of inno
cence and patience, of liberality, frugality, temperance, sobriety,
justice, meekness, fortitude, constancy, and gravity, contempt of
the world, love of God, and the love of mankind ; in a word, of
all virtues, and against all vice, which the scriptures impose
upon us, to be obeyed under pain of damnation : the sum where
of is in a manner comprised in our Saviour's sermon on the
Mount, recorded in the 5th, 6th, and 7th, of St. Matthew,
which, if they were generally obeyed, could not but make the
world generally happy, and the goodness of them alone were suf
ficient to make any wise and good man believe, that this religion,
rather than any other, came from God, the fountain of all good
ness. And that they may be generally obeyed, our Saviour hath
ratified them all in the close of his sermon, with these universal
sanctions: "Not every one that saith, Lord, Lord, shall enter

Protestants not Heretics. 485
into the kingdom, but he that doth the will of my Father which
is in heaven." And again, " Whosoever heareth these sayings of
mine, and doth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man,
which built his house upon the sand : and the rain descended,
and the floods came, and the winds blew, and it fell, and great
was the fall thereof." Now your church, notwithstanding all this,
enervates, and in a manner dissolves and abrogates many of these
precepts, teaching men that they are not laws for all christians,
but counsels of perfection, and matters of supererogation : that a
man shall do well, if he do observe them ; but he shall not sin,
if he observe them not ; that they are for them who aim at high
places in heaven, who aspire with the two sons of Zebedee to the
right hand, or to the left hand of Christ : but if a man will be con
tent barely to go to heaven, and to be a door-keeper in the house of
God, especially if he will be content to taste of purgatory in the
way, he may attain it at an easier purchase. Therefore the religion
of your church is not so holy nor so good as the doctrine of Christ
delivered in scripture, and therefore not so likely to come from the
fountain of holiness and goodness.
72. Lastly, if I follow your church for my guide, I shall do all
one as if I should follow a company of blind men in a judgment
of colours, or in the choice of a way. For every unconsidering
man is blind in that which he does not consider. Now what is
your church but a company of unconsidering men, who comfort
themselves because they are a great company together? but all
of them, either out of idleness, refuse the trouble of a severe trial
of their religion (as if heaven were not worth it), or out of super
stition fear the event of such a trial, that they may be scrupled,
and staggered, and disquieted by it ; and, therefore, for the most
part, do it not at all : or, if they do it, they do it negligently and
hypocritically, and perfunctorily, rather for the satisfaction of
others than themselves ; but certainly without indifference, with
out liberty of judgment, without a resolution to doubt of it, if
upon examination, the grounds of it prove uncertain, or to leave
it, if they prove apparently false. My own experience assures
me, that in this imputation I do you no injury ; but it is very
apparent to all men from your ranking doubting of any part of
your doctrine among mortal sins. For from hence it follows,
that seeing every man must resolve, that he will never commit
mortal sin, that he must never examine the grounds of it at all, for
fear he should be moved to doubt ; or if he do, he must resolve,
that no motives, be they never so strong, shall move him to doubt,
but that, with his will and resolution, he will uphold himself in a
firm belief of your religion, though his reason and his understand
ing fail him. And seeing this is the condition of ali those whom
you esteem good catholics, who can deny, but you are a company
of men unwilling and afraid to understand, lest you should do
good ! That have eyes to see, and will not see, that have not
the love of truth, (which is only to be known by an indifferent trial)
and therefore deserve to be given over to strong delusions : men
that love darkness more than light : in a word, that you are the

486 Protestants not Heretics.
blind leading the blind ; and what prudence there can be in follow
ing such guides, our Saviour hath taught us in saying, " If the blind
lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch."
73. There remain unspoken to in this section, some places out
of St. Augustine, and some sayings of Luther, wherein he con
fesses that in the papacy are many good things; but for the
former, I have already considered, and returned the argument
grounded on them. As for Luther's speeches, I told you not long
since, that we follow no private men, and regard not much what
he says either against the church of Rome, or for it, but what he
proves. He was a man of a vehement spirit, and very often what
he took in hand he did not do it, but overdo it. He that will
justify all his speeches, especially such as he wrote in heat of
opposition, I believe will have work enough. Yet in these sen
tences, though he overreach in the particulars, yet what he says
in general we confess true, aud confess with him, that in the papacy
are many good things, which have come from them to us ; but
withal we say, there are many bad, neither do we think ourselves
bound in prudence either to reject the good with the bad, or to
retain the bad with the good ; but rather conceive it a high point
of wisdom — to separate between the precious and the vile, to sever
the good from the bad, and to put the good in vessels to be kept,
and to cast the bad away; to try all things, and to hold that which
is good. 74. Ad. §. 32. Your next and last argument against the faith of
protestants is — because wanting certainty and prudence, it must
also want the fourth condition supernaturality. For that being
a human persuasion, it is not in the essence of it supernatural;
and being imprudent and rash, it cannot proceed from divine
motion, and so is not supernatural in respect of the cause from
which it proceedeth. — Ans. This little discourse stands wholly
upon what went before, and therefore must fall together with it.
I have proved the faith of protestants as certain and as pru
dent as the faith of papists; and, therefore, if these be certain
grounds of supernaturality, our faith may have it as well as yours.
I would here furthermore be informed, how you can assure us,
that your faith is not your persuasion or opinion, (for you make
them all one) that your church's doctrine is true? Or, if you
grant it your persuasion, why is it not the persuasion of men, and
in respect of the subject of it, a human persuasion ? I desire also
to know, what sense there is in pretending that your persuasion
is, not in regard of the object only and cause of it, but in the
nature or essence of it, supernatural ? Lastly, whereas you say —
that being imprudent, it cannot come from divine motion ; cer
tainly, by this reason, all they that believe your own religion, and
cannot give a wise and sufficient reason for it, (as millions amongst
you cannot) must be condemned to have no supernatural faith : or,
if not, then, without question, nothing can hinder, but that the im
prudent faith of protestants may proceed from divine motion, as well
as the imprudent faith of papists.
75. And thus having weighed your whole discourse, and found

Charily maintained by Catholics. 487
it altogether lighter than vanity, why should I not invert your
conclusion, and say, seeing you have not proved, that whosoever
errs against any one point of faith loseth all divine faith ; nor
that any error whatsoever, concerning that which by the parties
litigant may be esteemed a matter of faith, is a grievous sin, it
follows not at all, that when two men hold different doctrines con
cerning religion, that but one can be saved? Not that I deny
but that the sentence of St. Chrysostome, with which you conclude
this chapter, may, in a good sense, be true ; for oft-times by the
faith is meant only that doctrine which is necessary to salvation ;
and to say, that salvation may be had without any the least thing
which is necessary to salvation, implies a repugnance, and de
stroys itself. Besides, not to believe all necessary points, and to
believe none at all, is for the purpose of salvation all one ; and
therefore he that does so, may justly be said to destroy the gospel
of Christ, seeing he mak^s it ineffectual to the end for vvhich.it
was intended, the salvation of men's souls. But why you should
conceive that all differences about religion are concerning matters
of faith, in this high notion of the word, for that I conceive no
reason.

CHAPTER VII.
In regard of the precept of charity towards one's self, protestants
are in a state of sin, as long as they remain separated from the
Roman church.
" 1. That due order is to be observed in the theological virtue
of charity, whereby we are directed to prefer some objects before
others, is a truth taught by all divines, and declared in these words
of holy scripture ; ' he hath ordered charity in me.'* The reason
whereof is, because the infinite goodness of God, which is the for
mal object or motive of charity, and for which all other things are
loved, is differently participated by different objects : and there
fore, the love we bear to them for God's sake, must accordingly
be unequal. In the virtue of faith, the case is far otherwise ; be
cause all the objects or points, which we believe, do equally parti
cipate the divine testimony or revelation, for which we believe
alike all things propounded for such. For it is as impossible for
God to speak an untruth in a small as in a great matter. And
this is the ground for which we have so often affirmed, that any
least error against faith is injurious to God, and destructive of
salvation. " 2. This order in charity may be considered, towards God, our
own soul, the soul of our neighbour, our own life or goods, and the
life or goods of our neighbour. God is to be beloved above all
things, both objective (as the divines speak), that is, we must wish
or desire to God a good more great, perfect, and noble, than to any
or all other things ; namely, all that indeed he is, a nature infinite,
independent, immense, &-c. and also appreciative, that is, that we
* Cant. ii. 4.

488 Charity maintained by Catholics.
must sooner lose what good soever, than leave and abandon him.
In the other objects of charity, of which I spake, this order is to
be kept : we may, but are not bound to, prefer the life and goods
of our neighbour before our own : we are bound to prefer the soul
of our neighbour before our own temporal goods or life, if he happen
to be in extreme spiritual necessity, and that we by our assistance
can succour him, according to the saying of St. John, ' In this we
have known the charity of God, because he hath yielded his life
for us, and we ought to yield our life for our brethren.'* And St.
Augustine likewise saith,f ' a christian will not doubt to lose his
own temporal life, for the eternal life of his neighbour.' Lastly,
we are to prefer the spiritual good of our own soul, before both the
spiritual and temporal good of our neighbour, because as charity
doth of its own nature chiefly incline the person, in whom it resides,
to love God, and to be united with him, so of itself it inclines him
to procure those things whereby the said union with God is
effected rather to himself than to others. And from hence it
follows, that in things necessary to salvation, no man ought in any
case, or any respect whatsoever, to prefer the spiritual good,
either of any particular person, or of the whole world, before his
own soul, according to those words of our blessed Saviour, ' What
doth it avail a man, if he gain the whole world, and sustain the
damage of his own soul ?'J And therefore (to come to our present
purpose) it is directly against the order of charity, or against
charity as it has a reference to ourselves, which divines call charitas
propria, to adventure either the omitting of any means necessary
to salvation, or the committing of any thing repugnant to it, for
whatsoever respect ; and consequently, if by living out of the
Roman church we put ourselves in hazard either to want something
necessarily required to salvation, or else to perform some act against
it, we commit a most grievous sin against the virtue of charity as it
respects ourselves, and so cannot hope for salvation without re
pentance. " 3. Now of things necessary to salvation, there are two sorts,
according to the doctrine of all divines. Some things (say they)
are necessary to salvation, necessitate pracepti, necessary only be
cause they are commanded ; for, ' If thou wilt enter into life, keep
the commandments.'^ In which kind of things, as probable igno
rance of the law, or of the commandments, doth excuse the party
from all faulty breach thereof; so likewise doth it not exclude sal
vation, in case of ignorance. Some other things are said to be
necessary to salvation, necessitate medii, finis or salutis ; because
they are means appointed by God to attain our end of eternal
salvation in so strict a manner, that it were presumption to hope
for salvation without them. And as the former means are said to
be necessary, because they are commanded, so the latter are com
monly said to be commanded, because they are necessary ; that is,
although there were no other special precept concerning them, yet
supposing they be once appointed as means absolutely necessary
* 1 John iii. 16. t Matt. vi.
t De mendac. c. vi. § Matt. xix. 17.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 489
to salvation, there cannot but arise an obligation of procuring to
have them, in virtue of that universal precept of charity, which
obligeth every man to procure the salvation of his own soul. In
this sort, divine infallible faith is necessary to salvation ; as like
wise repentance of every deadly sin, and in the doctrine of catholics,
baptism in re, that is, in act, to children, and for those who are
come to the use of reason, in voto, or hearty desire, when they
cannot have it in act. And as baptism is necessary for remission
of original and actual sin committed before it, so the sacrament of
confession or penance is necessary in re, or in voto, in act or desire,
for the remission of mortal sins, committed after baptism. The
minister of which sacrament of penance being necessarily a true
priest, true ordination is necessary in the church of God for re
mission of sins by this sacrament, as also for other ends not
belonging to our present purpose. From hence it riseth, that no
ignorance or impossibility can supply the want of those means
which are absolutely necessary to salvation. As if, for example,
a sinner depart this world without repenting himself of all deadly
sins, although he die suddenly, or unexpectedly fall out of his wits,
and so commit no new sin by omission of repentance ; yet he shall
be eternally punished for his former sins committed, and never re
pented of. If an infant die without baptism, he cannot be saved;
not by reason of any actual sin committed by him in omitting
baptism, but for original sin, not forgiven by the means which God
hath ordained to that purpose. Which doctrine all, or most, pro
testants will (for aught I know) grant to be true, in the children of
infidels ; yea, not only lutherans, but also some other protestants,
as Mr. Bilson, late of Winchester,* and others, hold it to be true,
even in the children of the faithful : and if protestants in general
disagree from catholics in this point, it cannot be denied, but that
our disagreement is in a point very fundamental. And the like I
say of the sacrament of penance, which they deny to be necessary to
salvation, either in act, or in desire : which error is likewise funda
mental, because it concerns (as I said) a thing necessary to salva
tion : and, for the same reason, if their priesthood and ordination
be doubtful, as certainly it is, they are in danger to want a means,
without which they cannot be saved. Neither ought this rigour
to seem strange or unjust : for Almighty God having, of his own
goodness, without our merit, first ordained man to a supernatural
end of eternal felicity; and then, after our fall in Adam, vouchsafed
to reduce us to the attaining of that end, if his blessed will be pleased
to limit the attaining of that end, to some means, which in his infi
nite wisdom he thinks most fit ; who can say, Why dost thou so ?
Or who can hope for that end without such means ? Blessed be his
divine Majesty, for vouchsafing to ordain us, base creatures, to so
sublime an end, by any means at all I
" 4. Out of the aforesaid difference followeth another, that
(generally speaking) in things necessary only because they are
commanded, it is sufficient for avoiding sin, that we proceed pru
dently, and by the conduct of some probable opinion, maturely
* In his True Difference, &c. part iv. p. 368, 369.

490 Charity maintained by Catholics. r
weighed and approved by men of virtue, learning and wisdom.
Neither are we always obliged to follow the most strict, and severe,
or secure part, as long as the doctrine which we embrace proceeds
upon such reasons, as may warrant it to be truly probable and pru
dent, though the contrary part want not also probable grounds.
For, in human affairs and discourse, evidence and certainty cannot
be always expected : but when we treat not precisely of avoiding
sin, but moreover of procuring something, without which I cannot
be saved ; I am obliged by the law and order of charity, to pro
cure as great certainty as morally I am able, and am not to follow
every probable opinion or dictamen, but tutiorem partem, the
safer part ; because, if my probability prove false, I shall not
probably, but certainly, come short of salvation. Nay, in such
a case, I shall incur a new sin against the virtue of charity
towards myself, which obligeth every one not to expose his soul
to the hazard of eternal perdition, when it is in his power, with the
assistance of God's grace, to make the matter sure. From this
very ground it is, that although some divines be of opinion, that
it is not a sin to use some matter or form of sacraments only pro
bable, if we respect precisely the reverence or respect which is due
to sacraments, as they belong to the moral infused virtue of religion ;
yet when they are such sacraments, as the invalidity thereof may
endanger the salvation of souls, all do with one consent agree,
that it is a grievous offence to use a doubtful, or only probable,
matter or form, when it is in our power to procure certainty. If
therefore it may appear, that though it were not certain, that
protestancy unrepented destroys salvation (as we have proved to
be very certain) yet at least that it is probable, and withal, that
there is a way more safe ; it will follow, out of the grounds already
laid, that they are obliged by the law of charity to embrace that
safe way.
" 5. Now that protestants have reason at least to doubt, in what
case they stand, is deduced from what we have said and proved about
the universal infallibility of the church, and of her being judge of
controversies, to whom all christians ought to submit their judg
ment (as even some protestants grant), and whom to oppose in any
one of her definitions is a grievous sin : as also from what we have
said of the unity, universality, and visibility of the church, and of
succession of persons and doctrine ; of the conditions of divine
faith, certainty, obscurity, prudence, and supernaturality, which are
wanting in the faith of protestants ; of the frivolous distinction of
points fundamental and not fundamental (the confutation whereof
proveth, that heretics disagreeing among themselves, in any least
point, cannot have the same faith, nor be of the same church) ; of
schism, of heresy, of the persons who first revolted from Rome, and
of their motives ; of the nature of faith, which is destroyed by any
least error ; and it is certain that some of them must be in error,
and want the substance of true faith ; and, since all pretend the
like certainty, it is clear that none of them have any certainty at
all, but that they want true faith, which is a means most absolutely
necessary to salvation. Moreover, as I said heretofore, since it is

Charity maintained by Catholics. 491
granted, that every error in fundamental points is damnable, and
that they cannot tell in particular what points be fundamental, it
follows, that none of them knows whether he or his brethren do
not err damnably, it being certain, that among so many disagreeing
persons some must err. Upon the same ground of not being able
to assign what points be fundamental, I say, they cannot be sure
whether the difference among them be fundamental, or no ; and,
consequently, whether they agree in the substance of faith, and
hope of salvation. I omit to add, that you want the sacrament of
penance, instituted for remission of sins ; or at least you must con
fess, that you hold it not necessary ; and yet your own brethren,
for example, the century writers,* do acknowledge, that in the
times of Cyprian and Tertullian, private confession, even of thoughts,
was used, and that it was then commanded and thought necessary.
The like I say concerning your ordination, which at least is very
doubtful ; and, consequently, all that depends thereon.
" 6. On the other side, that the Roman church is the safer way
to heaven (not to repeat what hath been already >jsaid upon divers
occasions), I will again put you in mind, that unless the Roman
church was the true church, there was no visible church upon the
earth : a thing so manifest, that protestants themselves confess,
that for more than one thousand years the Roman church possessed
the whole world, as we have shewed heretofore out of their own
words :f from whence it follows, that unless ours be the true church,
you cannot pretend to any perpetual visible church of your own ;
but ours doth not depend on yours, before which it was. And here
I wish you to consider, with fear and trembling, how all Roman
catholics, not one excepted, that is, those very men whom you must
hold not to err damnably in their belief, unless you will destroy your
own church and salvation, do with unanimous consent believe and
profess that protestancy unrepented destroys salvation ; and then
tell me, as you will answer at the last day, whether it be not more
safe to live and die in that church, which even yourselves are forced
to acknowledge not to be cut off from hope of salvation (which are
your own words), than to live in a church which the said confessedly
true church doth firmly believe, and constantly profess, not to be
capable of salvation. And therefore I conclude, that by the most
strict obligation of charity towards your own soul, you are bound
to place it in safety, by returning to that church, from which your
progenitors schismatically departed, lest too late you find that say
ing of the Holy Ghost verified in yourselves, ' He that loves the
danger, shall perish therein. 'J
" 7. Against this last argument of the greater security of the
Roman church, drawn from your own confession, you bring an ob
jection, which in the end will be found to make for us against your
self. It is taken from the words of the donatists, speaking of
catholics in this manner :§ — Yourselves confess our baptism, sacra
ments, and faith (here you put an explication of your own, and say,
for the most part, as if any small error in faith did not destroy all
* Cont 3, c. vi. col. 127. X Eccl. iii. 27.
t Chap. v. Num. 9. § Page 112.

492 Charity maintained by Catholics.
faith), to be good and available. We deny yours to be so, and say,
there is no church, no salvation among you ; therefore, it is safest
for all to join with us.
" 8. By your leave, our argument is not (as you say) for simple
people alone ; but for all of them, who have care to save their souls.
Neither is it grounded upon your charitable judgment (as you*
speak), but upon an inevitable necessity for you either to grant
salvation to our church, or to entail certain damnation upon your
own ; because yours can have no being till Luther, unless ours be
supposed to have been the true church of Christ. And, since you
term this argument a charm, take heed you be none of those, who,
according to the prophet David, do not hear the ' voice of him who
charmeth wisely.'f But, to come to the purpose :- catholics never
granted, that the donatists had a true church, or might be saved:
and, therefore, you, having cited out of St. Augustine the words of
the catholics, that the donatists had true baptism, when you come
to the contrary words of the donatists, you add, ' No church, no
salvation ;' making the argument to have quinque terminos, with
out which addition you did see it made nothing against us: for, as
I said, the catholics never yielded, that among the donatists there
was a true church, or hope of salvation. And yourself, a few
' leaves after, acknowledge — that the donatists maintained an error,
Which was in the matter and nature of it properly heretical, against
that article of the creed, wherein we profess to believe the holy
catholic churchj — and, consequently, you cannot allow salvation ,
to them, as you do, and must do, to us. And, therefore, the dona
tists could not make the like argument against catholics, as catho
lics make against you, who grant us salvation, which we deny to
you. But, at least (you will say) this argument for the certainty
of their baptism was like to ours, touching the security and cer
tainty of our salvation ; and, therefore, that catholics should have
esteemed the baptism of the donatists more certain than their own,
and so have allowed rebaptization of such as were baptized by
heretics or sinners, as the donatists esteemed all catholics to be.
I answer, no ; because it being a matter of faith, that baptism, ad
ministered by heretics, observing due matter, form, &c. is valid; to
rebaptize any, so baptized, had been both a sacrilege in reiterating
a sacrament not reiterable, and a profession also of a damnable
heresy ; and therefore had not been more safe, but certainly damn
able. But you confess that, in the doctrine or practice of the
Roman church, there is no belief or profession of any damnable
error, which if there were, even your church should certainly be no
church. To believe, therefore, and profess as we do, cannot ex
clude salvation, as rebaptization must have done. But if the do
natists could have affirmed with truth, that in the opinion both of
catholics and themselves, their baptism was good; yea, and good
in such sort, as that, unless theirs was good, that of the catholics
could not be such; but theirs might be good, though that of the
catholics were not; and further, that it was no damnable error to
believe, that baptism administered by the catholics was not good,
* Pago 81. t Psal. lvii. 6. X Page 126.

Charity maintained by Catholics. 493
nor that it was any sacrilege to reiterate the same baptism of cath
olics : if, I say, they could have truly affirmed these things, they
had said somewhat which at least had seemed to the purpose. But
these things they could not say with any colour of truth, and there
fore their argument was fond and impious. But we with truth say
to protestants — you cannot but confess, that our doctrine contains
no damnable error, and that our church is so certainly a true
church, that unless ours be true, you cannot pretend any : yea,
you grant, that you should be guilty of schism, if you did cut off
our church from the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation.
But we neither do nor can grant, that yours is a true church, or
that within it there is hope of salvation : therefore it is safest for
you to join with us. And now, against whom hath your objection
greatest force ?
" 9. But I wonder not a little, and so I think will every body
else, what the reason may be, that you do not so much as go about
to answer the argument of the donatists, which you say is all one
with ours, but refer us to St. Augustine, there to read it ; as if
every one carried with him a library, or were able to examine the
place in St. Augustine : and yet you might be sure your reader
would be greedy to see some solid answer to an argument so often
urged by us, and which, indeed, unless you can confute it, ought
alone to move every one that hath care of his soul, to take the
safest way, by incorporating himself in our church. But we may
easily imagine the true reason of your silence; for the answer which
St. Augustine gives to the donatists is directly against yourself, and
the same which I have given, namely, that catholics* approve the
baptism of donatists, but abhor their heresy of rebaptization. And
that, as gold is good (which is the similitude used by St. Augustinef),
yet not to be sought in company of thieves ; so, though baptism be
good, yet it must not be sought for in the conventicles of donatists.
But you free us from damnable heresy, and yield us salvation, which
I hope is to be embraced in whatever company it is found ; or
rather, that company is to be embraced before all other, in which
all sides agree that salvation may be found. We therefore must
infer, that it is safest for you to seek salvation among us. You had
good reason to conceal St. Augustine's answer to the donatists.
" 10. You frame another argument in our behalf, and make us
speak thus :J ' if protestants believe the religion of catholics to be
a safe way to heaven, why do they not follow it ?' Which wise
argument of your own, you answer at large, and confirm your
answer by this instance: 'The Jesuits and dominicans hold dif
ferent opinions touching predetermination, and the immaculate
conception of the blessed Virgin ; yet so, that the Jesuits hold the
dominicans' way safe, that is, their error not damnable ; and the
dominicans hold the same of the Jesuits ; yet neither of them with
good consequence can press the other to believe his opinion, be
cause, by his own confession, it is no damnable error.'
"11. But what catholic maketh such a wise demand as you
* Ad lit. Petil. 1. ii. c. cviii. t Contra Cresc. 1. i. c. xxi. X Page 79.

494 Charity maintained by Catholics.
put into our mouths? If our religion be a safe way to heaven,
that is, not damnable, why do you not follow it? As if every
thing that is good must be of necessity embraced by every body !
But what think you of the argument framed thus? Our religion
is safe even by your confession ; therefore you ought to grant, that
all may embrace it. And yet further, thus ? Among different re
ligions and contrary ways to heaven, one only can be safe : but
ours, by your own confession, is safe, whereas we hold, that in
yours there is no hope of salvation ; therefore you may and ought
to embrace ours. This is our argument. And if the dominicans
and Jesuits did say one to another, as we say to you ; then one of
them might with good consequence press the other to believe his
opinion. You have still the hard fortune to be beat with your own
weapon. " 12. It remaineth, then, that both in regard of faith and charity,
protestants are obliged to unite themselves with the church of
Rome. And I may add also, in regard of the theological virtue of
hope, without which none can hope to be saved, and which you
want, either by excess of confidence, or defect by despair, not un
like to your faith, which I shewed either to be deficient in certainty,
or excessive in evidence ; as likewise, according to the rigid cal
vinists, it is either so strong, that, once had, it can never be lost ;
or so more than weak, and so much nothing, that it can never be
gotten. For the true theological hope of christians, is a hope which
keeps a mean between presumption and desperation, which moves
us to work our salvation with fear and trembling, which conducts
us to make sure our salvation by good works, as holy scripture
adviseth ; but, contrarily, protestants do either exclude hope by
despair, with the doctrine, that our Saviour died not for all, and
that such want grace sufficient to salvation ; or else by vain pre
sumption, grounded upon a fantastical persuasion, that they are
predestinate ; which faith must exclude all fear and trembling.
Neither can they make their calling certain by good works, who
do certainly believe, that before any good works they are justified,
and justified even by faith alone, and by that faith, whereby they
certainly believe that they are justified. Which points some protes
tants do expressly affirm to be the soul of the church, the principal
origin of salvation, of all other points of doctrine the chiefest and
weightiest, as already I have noted, chap. iii. n. 19. And if some
protestants do now relent from the rigour of the aforesaid doctrine,
we must affirm, that at least some of them want the theological
virtue of hope ; yea, that none of them can have true hope, while
they hope to be saved in the communion of those who defend such
doctrines, as do directly overthrow all true christian hope. And
forasmuch as concerns faith, we must also infer, that they want unity
therein, (and consequently have none at all) by their disagreement
about the soul of the church, the principal origin of salvation, of
all other points of doctrine the chiefest and weightiest. And, if
you want true faith, you must by consequence want hope : or if
you hold, that this point is not to be so indivisible on either side,
but that it hath latitude sufficient to embrace all parties, without

Charity maintained by Catholics. 495
prejudice to their salvation; notwithstanding that your brethren
hold it to be the soul of the church, &C, I must repeat what I
have said heretofore, that even by this example it is clear, you
cannot agree what points be fundamental. And so (to whatsoever
answer you fly) I press you in the same manner, and say, that you
have no certainty, whether you agree in fundamental points, or
unity and substance of faith, which cannot stand with difference in
fundamentals. And so, upon the whole matter, I leave it to be
considered, whether want of charity can be justly charged on us,
because we affirm, that they cannot (without repentance) be saved,
who want of all other the most necessary means to salvation,
which are the three theological virtues, faith, hope, and charity.
" 13. And now I end this first part, having, as I conceive, com
plied with my first design (in that measure which time, commodity,
scarcity of books, and my own small abilities, could afford), which
was to show, that amongst men of different religions one side can
only be saved. For, since there must be some infallible means to
decide all controversies concerning religion, and to propound truths
revealed by Almighty God ; and this means can be no other but
the visible church of Christ, which at the time of Luther's ap
pearance was only the church of Rome, and such as agreed with
her ; we must conclude, that whosoever opposeth himself to her
definitions, or forsaketh her communion, doth resist God himself,
whose spouse she is, and whose divine truth she propounds ; and
therefore becomes guilty of schism and heresy, which since Luther,
his associates, and protestants have done, and still continue to do,
it is not want of charity, but abundance of evident cause, that
forceth us to declare this necessary truth — Protestancy unrepented
destroys salvation."

THE ANSWER TO THE SEVENTH CHAPTER.
That protestants are not bound by the charity which they oive to
themselves to re-unite themselves to the Roman church.
The first four paragraphs of this chapter are wholly spent in an
unnecessary introduction unto a truth, which I presume never was,
nor will be, by any man in his right wits, either denied or ques
tioned; and that is — that every man, in wisdom and charity to
himself, is to take the safest way to his eternal salvation.
2. The fifth and sixth are nothing, in a manner, but references
to discourses already answered by me, and confuted in their pro
per places.
3. The seventh, eighth, ninth, tenth, and eleventh, have no other
foundation but this false pretence — that we confess the Roman
church free from damnable error.
4. In the twelfth, there is something that has some probability
to persuade some protestants to forsake some of their opinions, or
others to leave their communion; but to prove protestants in general
to be in a state of sin, while they remain separate from the Roman

496 The Religion of Protestants a safer way
church, there is not one word or syllable. And besides, whatso
ever argument there is in it for any purpose, it may as forcibly be
returned upon papists, as it is urged against protestants ; inasmuch
as all papists either hold the doctrine of predetermination, and
absolute election, or communicate with those that do hold it. Now
from this doctrine, what is more plain and obvious, than for every
natural man (without God's especial preventing grace) to make
this practical collection ? Either I am elected, or not elected ; but
if I be, no impiety possible can ever damn me ; if not, no possible
industry can ever save me. Now, whether this disjunctive persua
sion be not as likely, as any doctrine of any protestants, to extin
guish christian hope, and filial fear, and to lead some men to de
spair, others to presumption, all to a wretched and impious life, I
desire you ingenuously to inform me ? And, if you deny it, assure
yourself you shall be contradicted and confuted by men of your own
religion, and your own society, and taught at length this charitable
doctrine, that though men's opinions may be charged with the ab
surd consequences which naturally flow from them, yet the men
themselves are not; I mean, if they perceive not the consequence
of these absurdities, nor do not own and acknowledge, but disclaim
and detest them. And this is all the answer which I should make
to this discourse, if I should deal rigidly and strictly with you.
Yet, that you may not think yourself contemned, nor have occa
sion to pretend, that your arguments are evaded, I will entreat
leave of my reader to bring to the test every particle of it, and to
censure what deserves a censure, and to answer what may any way
seem to require an answer ; and then, I doubt not, but what I have
affirmed in general, will appear in particular.
5. Ad. §. 1. To the first, then, I say, 1. It was needless to
prove, that due order is to be observed in any thing, much more
in charity, which, being one of the best things, may be spoiled by
being disordered : y.et, if it stood in need of proof, I fear this place
of the Canticles, " He hath ordered charity in me," would be no
enforcing demonstration of it. 2. The reason alleged by you why
we ought to love one object more than another, because one thing
participates the divine goodness more than another, is fantastical,
and repugnant to what you say presently after : for, by this rule,
no man should love himself more than all the world, which yet
you require, unless he were first vainly persuaded, that he doth
more participate the divine goodness than all the world. But the
true reason why one thing ought to be loved more than another is,
.because one thing is better than another, or because it is better to
us, or because God commands us to do so, or because God himself
does so, and we are to conform our affections to the will of God.
3. It is not true, that all objects, which we believe, do equally
participate the divine testimony or revelation : for some are testified
more evidently, and some more obscurely ; and therefore, what
soever you have built upon this ground", must of necessity fall
together with it. And thus much for the first number.
6. Ad. §. 2. In the second, many passages deserve a censure :
1. It is not true, that we are to wish or desire to God a nature

to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 497
infinite, independent, immense ; for it is impossible I should desire
to any, person that which he hath already, if I know that he hath
it ; nor the perpetuity of it, if I know it impossible but he must
have it for perpetuity. And therefore, rejoicing only, and not well-
wishing, is here the proper work of love. 2. Whereas you say,
that — in things necessary to salvation no man ought in any case,
or in any respect whatsoever, to prefer the spiritual good of the
whole world before his own soul. — In saying this, you seem to me
to condemn one of the greatest acts of charity, of one of the great
est saints that ever was; I mean St. Paul, who for his brethren
desired to be an anathema from Christ. And as for the text
alleged by you in confirmation of your saying, " What doth it
avail a man, if he gain the whole world, and sustain the damage of
his own soul ?" it is nothing to the purpose : for, without all ques
tion, it is not profitable for a man to do so ; but the question is,
whether it be not lawful for a man to forego, and part with, his
own particular profit, to procure the universal, spiritual, and eter
nal benefit of others ? 3. Whereas you say — It is directly against
charity to ourselves, to adventure the omitting of any means ne
cessary to salvation. This is true : but so is this also*; that it is
directly against the same charity, to adventure the omitting of any
thing that may any way help or conduce to my salvation, that
may make the way to it more secure, or less dangerous. And,
therefore, if the errors of the Roman church do but hinder me in
this way, or any way endanger it, I am, in charity to myself, bound
to forsake them, though they be not destructive of it. 4. Whereas
you conclude — that if by living out of the Roman church we put
ourselves in hazard to want something necessary to salvation, we
commit a grievous sin against the virtue of charity, as it respects
ourselves. — This consequence may be good in those which are thus
persuaded of the Roman church, and yet live out of it. But the
supposition is certainly false ; we may live and die out of the Roman
church, without putting ourselves in any such hazard : nay, to live
and die in it is as dangerous as to shoot a gulf, which, though some
good ignorant souls may do and escape, yet it may well be feared,
that not one in a hundred but miscarries.
7. Ad. §. 3. I proceed now to the third section; and herein, first,
I observe this acknowledgment of yours — that in things necessary,
only because commanded, a probable ignorance of the command
ment excuses the party from all fault, and doth not exclude salva
tion. From which doctrine it seems to me to follow, that seeing
obedience to the Roman church cannot be pretended to be neces
sary, but only because it is commanded, therefore not only an
invincible, but even a probable, ignorance of this pretended com
mand, must excuse us from all faulty breach of it, and cannot
exclude salvation. Now, seeing this command is not pretended to
be expressly delivered, but only to be deduced from the word of
God, and that not by the most clear and evident consequences that
may be; and seeing an infinity of great objections lie against it,
which seem strongly to prove, that there is no such command,
with what charity can you suppose, that our ignorance of this

498 The Religion of Protestants a safer way
command is not at the least probable, if not, all things considered,
plainly invincible ? Sure I arn, for my part, that I have done my
true endeavour to find it true, and am still willing to do so ; but
the more I seek, the farther I am from finding ; and, therefore, if
it be true, certainly my not finding it is very excusable, and you
have reason to be very charitable in your censures of me. 2.
Whereas you say — that besides these things necessary, because
commanded, there are other things which are commanded, because
necessary ; of which number you make a divine infallible faith,
baptism in act for children, and in desire for those who are come
to the use of reason, and the sacrament of confession for those who
have committed mortal sin. — In these words you seem to me to
deliver a strange paradox, viz. that faith, and baptism, and confes
sion, are not therefore necessary for us, because God appointed
them ; but are therefore appointed by God, because they were
necessary for us, antecedently to his appointment ; which, if it
were true, I wonder what it was beside God that made them ne
cessary, and made it necessary for God to command them ! Be
sides, in making faith one of these necessary means, you seem to
exclude infants from salvation ; for " faith comes by hearing," and
they have not heard. In requiring that this faith should be divine
and infallible, you cast your credence into infinite perplexity, who
cannot possibly, by any sure mark, discern whether their faith be
divine or human ; or if you have any certain sign, whereby they
may discern whether they believe your church's infallibility with
divine, or only with human faith, I pray produce it ; for perhaps it
may serve us to shew, that our faith is divine as well as yours.
Moreover, in affirming, that baptism in act is necessary for infants,
and for men only in desire, you seem to me in the latter to destroy
the foundation of the former. For if a desire of baptism will serve
men instead of baptism, then those words of our Saviour, " Unless
a man be born again of water," &c. are not to be understood lite
rally and rigidly of external baptism ; for a desire of baptism is not
baptism, and so your foundation of the absolute necessity of bap
tism is destroyed. And if you may gloss the text so far, as that
men may be saved by the desire, without baptism itself, because
they cannot have it, why should you not gloss it a little farther,
that there may be some hope of the salvation of unbaptized infants ;
to whom it was more impossible to have a desire of baptism, than
for the former to have the thing itself? Lastly, for your sacrament
of confession, we know none such, nor any such absolute necessity
of it. They that confess their sins, and forsake them, shall find
mercy, though they confess them to God only, and not to men.
They that confess them both to God and men, if they do not effec
tually, and in time forsake them, shall not find mercy. 3. Whereas
you say — that supposing these means once appointed as absolutely
necessary to salvation, there cannot but arise an obligation of pro
curing to have them. — You must suppose, I hope, that we know
them to be so appointed, and that it is in our power to procure
them ; otherwise, though it may be our ill fortune to fail of the end
for want of the means, certainly we cannot be obliged to procure

to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 499
them. For the rule of the law is also the dictate of common reason
and equity, that no man can be obliged to what is impossible. We
can be obliged to nothing but by virtue of some command : now it
is impossible that God should command in earnest any thing
which he knows to be impossible. For to command in earnest, is
to command with an intent to be obeyed, which it is not possible
he should do, when he knows the thing commanded to be impossi
ble. Lastly, Whosoever is obliged to do any thing, and does it
not, commits a fault ; but infants commit no fault in not procuring
to have baptism ; therefore no obligation lies upon them to procure
it. 4. Whereas you say, that — if protestants dissent from you in
the point of the necessity of baptism for infants, it cannot be denied
but that our disagreement is in a point fundamental. — If you mean
a point esteemed so by you, this indeed cannot be denied : but if
you mean, a point that indeed is fundamental, this may certainly
be denied; for I deny it, and say, that it doth not appear to me
any way necessary to salvation to hold the truth, or not to hold an
error, touching the condition of these infants. This is certain, and
we must believe, that God will not deal unjustly with them ; but
how in particular he will deal with them, concerns not us, and
therefore we need not much regard it. 5. Whereas you say the
like of your sacrament of penance, you only say so, but your proofs
are wanting. Lastly, Whereas you say — This rigour ought not to
seem strange or unjust in God, but that we are rather to bless him
for ordaining us to salvation by any means. — I answer, that it is
true we are not to question the known will of God of injustice;
yet whether that which you pretend to be God's will be so indeed,
or only your presumption, this I hope may be questioned lawfully
and without presumption ; and if we have occasion, we may safely
put you in mind of Ezekiel's commination against all those who
say, Thus saith the Lord, when they have no certain warrant or
authority from him to do so.
8. Ad. §. 4. In the fourth paragraph you deliver this false and
wicked doctrine — that for the procuring our own salvation, we
are always bound, under pain of mortal sin, to take the safest way ;
but for avoiding sin we are not bound to do so, but may follow the
opinion of any probable doctors, though the contrary way be cer
tainly free from sin, and theirs be doubtful. — Which doctrine, in
the former part of it, is apparently false : for, though wisdom and
charity to ourselves would persuade us always to do so, yet many
times, that way, which to ourselves and our salvation is more full
of hazard, is notwithstanding not only lawful, but more charitable,
and more noble. For example, to fly from a persecution, and so
to avoid the temptation of it, may be a safer way for a man's own
salvation ; yet, I presume no man ought to condemn him of impiety,
who should resolve not to use his liberty in this matter, but for
God's greater glory, the greater honour of truth, and the greater
confirmation of his brethren in the faith, choose to stand out the
storm, and endure the fiery trial, rather than to avoid it ; rather to-
put his own soul to the hazard of a temptation, in hope of God's-
assistance to go through with it, than to balk the opportunity of
n2

500 The Religion of Protestants a safer way
doing God and his brethren so great a service. This part, there
fore, of this doctrine is manifestly untrue : the other, not only false,
but impious ; for therein you plainly give us to understand, that in
your judgment, a resolution to avoid sin, to the uttermost of our
power, is no necessary means of salvation ; nay, that a man may
resolve not to do so, without any danger of damnation. Therein
you teach us, that we are to do more for the love of ourselves, and
our own happiness, than for the love of God ; and in so doing con
tradict our Saviour, who expressly commands us, to love the Lord
our God with all our heart, with all our soul, and with all our
strength ; and hath taught us, that the love of God consists in
avoiding sin, and keeping his commandments. Therein you di
rectly cross St. Paul's doctrine, who, though he were a very pro
bable doctor, and had delivered his judgment for the lawfulness of
eating meats offered to idols ; yet he assures us, that he which
should make scruple of doing so, and forbear upon his scruple,
should not sin, but only be a weaker brother; whereas he, who
should do it with a doubtful conscience, (though the action were
by St. Paul warranted lawful, yet) should sin, and be condemned
for so doing. You pretend indeed to be rigid defenders, and stout
champions, for the necessity of good works ; but the truth is, you
speak lies in hypocrisy ; and, when the matter is well examined,
will appear to make yourselves and your own functions necessary,
but obedience to God unnecessary : which will appear to any man,
who considers what strict necessity the scripture imposes upon all
men, of effectual mortification of the habits of all vices, and effectual
conversion to newness of life, and universal obedience ; and withal
remembers that an act of attrition, which, you say, with priestly
absolution is sufficient to salvation, is not mortification, which
being a work of difficulty and time, cannot be performed in an
instant. But, for the present, it appears sufficiently out of this im
pious assertion, which makes it absolutely necessary for men, either
in act if it be possible, or if not, in desire, to be baptized and ab
solved by you, and that with intention ; and, in the meantime,
warrants them, that for avoiding of sin, they may safely follow the
uncertain guidance of vain man, who you cannot deny may either
be deceived himself, or out of malice deceive them, and neglect the
certain direction of God himself, and their own consciences. What
wicked use is made of this doctrine, your own long experience can
better inform you, than it is possible for me to do ; yet my own
little conversation with you affords one memorable example to this
purpose. For upon this ground I knew a young scholar in Doway,
licensed by a great casuist to swear a thing as upon his certain
knowledge, whereof he had yet no knowledge, but only a great
presumption, because (forsooth) it was the opinion of one doctor
that he might do so. And, upon the same ground, whensoever
you shall come to have a prevailing party in this kingdom, and
power sufficient to restore your religion, you may do it by deposing
or killing the king, by blowing up of parliaments, and by rooting
out all others of a different faith from you. Nay, this you may
do, though in your own opinion it be unlawful, because Bellar-

to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 501
mine,* a man with you of approved virtue, learning, and judgment,
had declared his opinion for the lawfulness of it in saying — that
want of power to maintain a rebellion, was the only reason, that
the primitive christians did not rebel against the persecuting em
perors. By the same rule, seeing the priests, and scribes, and
pharisees, men of greatest repute among the Jews for virtue, learn
ing, and wisdom, held it a lawful and a pious work to persecute
Christ and his apostles, it was lawful for the people to follow their
leaders ; for herein, according to your doctrine, they proceeded
prudently, and, according to the conduct of opinion, maturely
weighed and approved by men (as it seemed to them) of virtue,
learning, and wisdom ; nay, by such as sat in Moses' chair, and of
whom it was said, " Whatsoever they bid you observe, that observe
and do ;" which universal you pretend is to be understood univer
sally, and without any restriction or limitation. And as lawful was
it for the' pagans to persecute the primitive christians, because
Trajan and Pliny, men of great virtue and wisdom, were of this
opinion. Lastly, That most impious and detestable doctrine (which
by a foul calumny you impute to me, who abhor and detest it),
that men may be saved in any religion, follows from this ground
unavoidably. For certainly, religion is one of those things which
is necessary, only because it is commanded ; for if none were com
manded, under pain of damnation, how could it be damnable to be
of any, or to be of none ? Neither can it be damnable to be of a
false religion, unless it be a sin to be so. For neither are men
saved by good luck, but only by obedience ; neither are they
damned for their ill fortune, but for sin and disobedience. Death
is the wages of nothing but sin ; and St. James sure intended to
deliver the adequate cause of sin and death in these words ; " Lust,
when it hath conceived, bringeth forth sin ; and sin, when it is
finished, bringeth forth death." Seeing, therefore, in such things,
according to your doctrine, it is sufficient for avoiding of sin, that
we proceed prudently, and by the conduct of some probable opin
ion, maturely weighed and approved by men of learning, virtue,
and wisdom : and, seeing neither Jews want their Gamaliels, nor
pagans their Antonius's, nor any sect of christians such professors
and maintainers of their several sects, as are esteemed by the peo
ple which know no better (and that very reasonably), men of virtue,
learning, and wisdom ; it follows evidently, that the embracing
their religion proceeds upon such reason as may warrant their ac
tion to be prudent ; and this (you say) is sufficient for the avoiding
of sin, and therefore, certainly for avoiding damnation ; for that in
human affairs and discourse evidence and certainty cannot be
* Bellar. contr. Barcl. c. vii. in 7. c. Eefutare conatur Bard, verba ilia Romuli :
Veteres illos imperatores, Constantium, Valentem, et casteros.non ideo tolcravit cede-
sia, quod legitime successissent, sed quod illos sine populi detrimento coercere non
poterat. Et miratur hoc idem scripsisse Bellar. 1. v. de Pontif. e. vii. Sed ut magis
miretur, sciat hoc idem sensisse St. Thorn. 2. 2. q. 2, art 2, ad. 1. Ubi dicit eccle
siam tolerasse, ut fideles obedirent Juliano Apostatae, q-uia in sui novitate nondum habe-
bant vires compescendi principes terrenos. Et postea : Sanctus Gregorius dicit, Nullum
adversus Juliani perseeutionem fuisse remedium prseter lacrynias, quoniam non habebat
ecclesia vires, quibus illius tyrannidi resistere posset

502 The Religion of Protestants a safer way
always expected. I have stood the longer upon the refutation of
this doctrine, not only because it is impious, and because bad use
is made of it, and worse may be, but also, because the contrary
position, — that men are bound for avoiding sin always to take the
safest way, is a fair and sure foundation for a clear confutation of
the main conclusion, which in this chapter you labour in vain to
prove ; and a certain proof, that in regard of the precept of charity
towards one's self and of obedience to God, papists (unless ignorance
excuse them) are in a state of sin as long as they remain in subjec
tion to the Roman church.
9. For if the safer way for avoiding sin be also the safer way for
avoiding damnation, then certainly it will not be hard to deter
mine, that the way of protestants must be more secure, and the
Roman way more dangerous. Take but into your consideration
these ensuing controversies ; whether it be lawful to worship pic
tures ? To picture the Trinity ? To invocate saints and angels ?
To deny laymen the cup in the sacrament ? To adore the sacra
ment ? To prohibit certain orders of men and women to marry ?
To celebrate the public service of God in a language which the
assistants generally understand not ? And you will not choose but
confess, that in all these you are on the more dangerous side for
the committing of sin, and we on that which is more secure. For
in all these things, if we say true, you do that which is impious.
On the other side, if you were in the right, yet we might be secure
enough ; for we should only not do something which you confess
not necessary to be done. We pretend, and are ready to justify
out of principles agreed upon between us, that in all these things
you violate the manifest commandments of God ; and allege such
texts of scripture against you, as, if you would weigh them with
any indifference, would put the matter out of question ; but cer
tainly you cannot with any modesty deny, but that at least they
make it questionable. On the other side, you cannot with any face
pretend, and if you should, know not how to go about to prove,
that there is any necessity of doing any of these things ; that it is
unlawful not to worship pictures, not to picture the Trinity, not to
invocate saints and angels, to give all men the entire sacrament,
not to adore the eucharist, not to prohibit marriage, not to cele
brate divine service in an unknown tongue ; I say, you neither do
nor can pretend, that there is any law of God which enjoins us, no,
nor so much as an evangelical council that advises us, to do any
of these things. Now " where no law is, there can be no sin ; for
sin is the transgression of the law." It remains, therefore, that if
your church should forbear to do these things, she must undoubt
edly herein be free from all danger and suspicion of sin ; whereas
your acting of them must be, if not certainly impious, without all
contradiction questionable and dangerous. I conclude, therefore,
that which was to be concluded, that if the safer way for avoiding
sin be also (as most certainly it is) the safer way for avoiding dam
nation, then certainly the way of protestants must be more safe,
and the Roman way more dangerous. You will say, I know, that
these things being by your church concluded lawful, we are obliged

to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 503
by God, though not to do, yet to approve, them : at least in your
judgment we are so, and therefore our condition is as questionable
as yours. I answer, the authority of your church is no common
principle agreed upon between us, and therefore from that you are
not to dispute against us. We might press you with our judgment
as well and as justly as you do us with yours. Besides, this very
thing, that your church hath determined these things lawful, and
commanded the approbation of them, is that whereof she is accused
by us, and we maintain you have done wickedly, or at least very
dangerously, in so determining ; because in these very determina
tions, you have forsaken that way which was secure from sin, and
chosen that which you cannot but know to be very questionable
and doubtful ; and, consequently, have forsaken the safe way to
heaven, and taken a way which is full of danger. And, therefore,
although, if your obedience to your church were questioned, you
might fly for shelter to your church's determinations, yet when
these determinations are accused, methinks they should not be
alleged in defence of themselves. But you will say, your church
is infallible, and therefore her determinations are not unlawful. —
Ans. They that accuse your church of error, you may be sure do
question her infallibility.: shew therefore where it is written, that
your church is infallible, and the dispute will be ended. But, till
you do so, give me leave rather to conclude thus — your church, in
many of her determinations, chooses not that way which is most
secure from sin, and therefore not the safest way to salvation ; than
vainly to imagine her infallible, and thereupon to believe, though
she teach not the surest way to avoid sin, yet she teaches the cer-
tainest way to obtain salvation.
10. In the close of this number, you say as follows: — If it may
appear, though not certain, yet at least probable, that protestancy
unrepented destroys salvation, and withal, that there is a safer way,
it will follow, that they are obliged by the law of charity to embrace
that safe way. — Ans. Make this appear, and I will never persuade
any man to continue a protestant ; for, if I should, I should per
suade him to continue a fool. But, after all these prolix discourses,
still we see you are at — if it may appear : from whence, without all
ifs and ands, that appears sufficiently which I said in the beginning
of the chapter, that the four first paragraphs of this chapter are
wholly spent in an unnecessary introduction unto that which never
by any man in his right wits was denied, that men, in wisdom and
charity to themselves, are to take the safest way to eternal salva
tion. 11. Ad. §. 5. In the fifth you begin to make some shew of argu
ing, and tell us, that protestants have reason to doubt in what case
they stand, from what you have said about the church's universal
infallibility, and of her being judge of controversies, &c. — Ans.
From all that which you have said, they have reason only to con
clude, that you have nothing to say. They have as much reason
to doubt, whether there can be any motion, from what Zeno says
in Aristotle's physics, as to doubt from what you have said, whether
the Roman church may possibly err. For this, I dare say, that

504 The Religion of Protestants a safer way
not the weakest of Zeno's arguments but is stronger than the strong
est of yours, and that you would be more perplexed in answering
any one of them, than I have been in answering all yours. You are
pleased to repeat two or three of them in this section, and in all
probability so wise a man as you are, if he would repeat any> would
repeat the best ; and, therefore, if I desire the reader by these to
judge of the rest, I shall desire but ordinary justice.
12. The first of them being put into form, stands thus — every
least error in faith destroys the nature of faith : it is certain, that
some protestants do err ; and therefore they want the substance of
faith. The major of which syllogism I have formerly confuted by
unanswerable arguments out of one of your own best authors, who
shews plainly that he hath amongst you, as strange as you make it,
many other abettors. Besides, if it were true, it would conclude,
that either you or the dominicans have no faith, inasmuch as you
oppose one another as much as arminians and calvinists.
13. The second argument stands thus: — Since all protestants
pretend the like certainty, it is clear, that none of them have any
certainty at all. Which argument, if it were good, then what can
hinder but this must also be so ; since protestants and papists pre
tend the like certainty, it is clear, that none of them have any cer
tainty at all ! And this too : Since all christians pretend the like
certainty, it is clear, that none of them have any certainty at all I
And, thirdly, this : Since men of all religions pretend a like cer
tainty, it is clear, that none of them have any at all ! And, lastly,
this : Since ofttimes they, which are abused with a specious para
logism, pretend the like certainty with them which demonstrate,
it is clear, that none of them have any certainty at all ! Certainly,
sir, zeal and the devil did strangely blind you, if you did not see,
that these horrid impieties were the immediate consequences of
your positions; if you did see it, and yet would set them down, you
deserve a worse censure. Yet such as these are all the arguments
wherewith you conceive yourself to have proved undoubtedly, that
protestants have reason at least to doubt in what case they stand.
Neither am I afraid to venture my life upon it, that yourself shall
not choose so much as one out of all the pack, which I will not shew
before indifferent judges, either to be impertinent to the question,
inconsequent in the deduction, or grounded upon some false, or at
least uncertain, foundation.
14. Your third and fourth argument may be thus put into one: —
Protestants cannot tell what points in particular be fundamental;
therefore they cannot tell whether they or their brethren do not err
i fundamentally, and whether their difference be not fundamental. —
Both which deductions I have formerly shewed to be most incon
sequent ; for knowing the scripture to contain all fundamentals,
(though many more points besides, which makes it difficult to say
precisely what is fundamental, and what not ; knowing this, I say,
and believing it,) what can hinder but that I may be well assured
that I believe all fundamentals, and that all who believe the scrip
ture sincerely, as well as I, do not differ from me in any thing fun
damental?

to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 505
15. In the close of this section, you say that you omit to add
that we want the sacrament of repentance, instituted for the remis
sion of sins ; or at least we must confess that we hold it not neces
sary : and yet our own brethren the century writers acknowledge,
that in the time of Cyprian and Tertullian, private confession even
of thoughts was used, and that it was then commanded and thought
necessary ; and then our ordination (you say), is very doubtful, and
all that depends upon it. — Ans. I also omit to answer, 1. that your
brother Rhenanus acknowledges the contrary, and assures us, that
the confession then required, and in use, was public, and before
the church, and that your auricular confession was not then in the
world; for which his mouth is stopped by your Index Expurga-
torius. 2. That your brother Arcadius acknowledges, that the
eucharist was in Cyprian's time given to infants, and esteemed
necessary, or at least profitable for them ; and the giving it shews
no less : and now I would know, whether you will acknowledge
your church bound to give it, and to esteem so of it ? 3. That it
might be then commanded, and being commanded, be thought
necessary, and yet be but a church constitution. Neither will I
deny, if the present church could, and would, so order it, that the
abuses of it might be prevented, and conceiving it profitable, should
enjoin the use of it, but that, being commanded, it would be
necessary. 4. Concerning our ordinations, besides that I have
proved it impossible, that they should be so doubtful as yours,
according to your own principles; I answer, that experience shews
them certainly sufficient to bring men to faith and repentance, and
consequently to salvation ; and that if there were any secret defect
of any thing necessary, which we cannot help, God will certainly
supply it.
16. Ad. §. 6. In the sixth you say — You will not repeat, but
only put us again in mind, that unless the Roman church were the
true church, there was no visible church upon earth ; a thing so
manifest, that protestants themselves confess, &c. — Ans. Neither
will I repeat, but only put you in mind, that you have not proved
that there is any necessity that there should be any true church in
your sense visible ; nor, if there were, that there was no other be
sides the Roman. For as for the confession of protestants, which
here you insist upon, it is evident out of their own words cited by
yourself, that by the whole world, they meant only the greatest part
of it, which is an usual figure of speech, and never intended to
deny, that besides the church then reigning and triumphing in
this world, there was another militant church, other christians
visible enough, though persecuted and oppressed. Nor, thirdly,
do you here make good so much as with one fallacy, that if the
Roman church were then the visible church, it must needs be now
the only or the safer way to heaven ; and yet the connexion of this
consequence was very necessary to be shewn. For, for aught I
know, it was not impossible that it might then be the only visible
church, and yet now a very dangerous way to heaven, or perhaps
none at all.
17. Afterwards you vainly pretend, that all Roman catholics,

506 The Religion of Protestants a safer way
not one excepted, profess, that protestancy unrepented destroys
salvation. From which generality we may except two at least to
my knowledge ; and those are, yourself and Franciscus de Sancta
Clara, who assures us,* that ignorance and repentance may excuse
a protestant from damnation, though dying in his error. And this
is all the charity, which by your own confession also, the most fa
vourable protestants allow to papists ; and, therefore, with strange
repugnance to yourself, you subjoin, that these are the men whom
we must hold not to err damnably, unless we will destroy our own
church and salvation. Whereas, as I have said before, though
you were Turks and pagans, we might be good christians. Neither
is it necessary for perpetuating of a church before Luther, that
your errors even then should not be damnable, but only not actu
ally damning, to some ignorant souls among you. In vain therefore
do you make such tragedies as here you do ! In vain you conjure
us with fear and trembling, to consider these things ! We have con
sidered them again and again, and looked upon them on both sides,
and find neither terror nor truth in them. Let children and fools
be terrified with bugbears : men of understanding will not regard
them. 18. Ad. §. 7 — 11. Your whole discourse in your five next para
graphs I have in the beginning of this chapter fully confuted, by
saying, that it stands altogether upon the false foundation of this
affected mistake, that we do and must confess the Roman church
free from damnable error ; which will presently be apparent to any
one who considers, that the seventh and tenth are nothing but Dr.
Potter's words, and that in the other three you obtrude upon us this
crambe no fewer than seven times. May you be pleased to look
back to your own book, and you shall find it so as I have said ; and
that at least in a hundred other places, you make your advantage
of this false imputation : which, when you have observed, and withal
considered, that yourself plainly intimate, that Dr. Potter's discourses,
which here you censure, would be good and concluding, if we did
not (as we do not) free you from damnable error ; I hope you will
acknowledge, that my vouchsafing these sections the honour of any
farther answer, is a great supererogation in point of civility. Never
theless, partly that I may the more ingratiate myself with you, but
especially that I may stop their mouths, who will be apt to say, that
every word of yours, which I should omit to speak to, is an unan
swerable argument, I will hold my purpose of answering them more
punctually and particularly.
19. First, then, to your little parenthesis, which you interline
among Dr. Potter's words, §. 7, That any small error in faith de
stroys all faith (to omit what hath been said before), I answer here,
what is proper for this place, that St. Augustine, whose authority
is here stood upon, thought otherwise : he conceived the donatists
to hold some error in faith, and yet not to have no faith. His words
of them to this purpose are most pregnant and evident : " You are
with us (saith he to the donatists, Ep. 48,) in baptism, in the creed,

* In problem 15 and 16.

to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 507
and the other sacraments:" and, again, Super gestis cum emerit,
'' Thou hast proved to me that thou hast faith ; prove to me, like
wise, that thou hast charity." Parallel to which words are these
of Optatus :* " Amongst us and you is one ecclesiastical conversa
tion, common lessons, the same faith, the same sacraments." Where,
by the way, we may observe, that in the judgment of these fathers,
even donatists, though heretics and schismatics, gave true ordination,
the true sacrament of matrimony, true sacramental absolution, con
firmation, the true sacrament of the eucharist, true extreme unction;
or else (choose you whether) some of these were not then esteemed
sacraments. But for ordination, whether he held it a sacrament or
no, certainly he held, that it remained with them entire ; for so he
says in express terms, in his book against Parmenianus's Epistle.f
Which doctrine, if you can reconcile with the present doctrine of
the Roman church, Eris mihi magnus Apollo.
20. Whereas, in the beginning of the eighth section — you deny,
that your argument drawn from our confessing the possibility of
your salvation is for simple people alone, but for all men — I an
swer, certainly whosoever is moved with it, must be so simple as to
think this a good and a concluding reason : some ignorant men in
the Roman church may be saved, by the confession of protestants
(which is indeed all that they confess) ; therefore, it is safe for me
to be of the Roman church : and he that does think so, what rea
son is there why he should not think this as good ? Ignorant pro
testants may be saved, by the confession of papists (by name Mr.
K.) ; therefore, it is safe for me to be of the protestant church.
Whereas you say — that this your argument is grounded upon an
inevitable necessity for us, either to grant salvation to your church,
or to entail certain damnation upon our own, because ours can have
no being till Luther, unless yours be supposed to have been the
true church — I answer, this cause is no cause ; for, first, as Luther
had no being before Luther, and yet he was when he was, though
he was not before ; so there is no repugnance in the term's, but
that there might be a true church after Luther, though there were
none for some ages before ; as, since Columbus's time there have
been christians in America, though before there were none for many
ages. For neither do you shew, neither does it appear, that the
generation of churches is univocal, that nothing but a church can
possibly beget a church ; nor that the present being of a true
church depends necessarily upon the perpetuity of a church in all
ages, any more than the present being of peripatetics or stoics
depends upon a perpetual pedigree of them. For though I at no
hand deny the church's perpetuity, yet I see nothing in your book
to make me understand, that the truth of the present depends upon
it, nor any thing that can hinder, but that a false church (God's
providence over-watching and over-ruling) may preserve the means
of confuting their own heresies, and reducing men to truth, and so
raising a true church ; I mean the integrity and the authority of
the word of God with men. Thus the Jews preserve means to make
* Lib. v. prope initium. t Lib. ii. c. iii.

508 The Religion of Protestants a safer way
men christians, and papists preserve means to make men protes
tants, and protestants (which you say are a false church) do, as you
pretend, preserve means to make men papists ; that is, their own
bibles, out of which you pretend to be able to prove that they
are to be papists. Secondly, you shew not, nor does it appear,
that the perpetuity of the church depends on the truth of yours.
For though you talk vainly, as if you Were the only men in the
world before Luther, yet the world knows that this is but talk; and
that there were other christians besides you, which might have per
petuated the church, though you had not been. Lastly, you show
not, neither doth it appear, that your being acknowledged in some
sense a true church, doth necessarily import, that we must grant
salvation to it, unless by it you understand the ignorant members
of it, which is a very unusual synecdoche.
21. Whereas you say — that the catholics never granted that the
donatists had a true church, or might be saved : — I answer, St.
Augustine himself granted, that those among them who sought the
truth, being "ready, when they found it, to correct their error,
were not heretics ; and, therefore, notwithstanding their error,
might be saved." And this is all the charity that protestants allow
to papists."
22. Whereas you say, that Dr. Potter, having cited out of St.
Augustine the words of the catholics, that the donatists had true
baptism, when he comes to the contrary words of the donatists,
adds, " no church, no salvation :" — Ans. You wrong Dr. Potter,
who pretends not to cite St. Augustine's formal words, but only his
sense, which in him is complete and full for that purpose whereto
it is alleged by Dr. Potter. His words are,* Petilianus dixit,
Venite ad ecclesiam, populi, et aufugite traditores, si perire non
vultis : " Petilian saith, come to the church, ye people, and fly from
the traditores, if ye will not be damned ; for that ye may know, that
they, being guilty, esteem very well of our faith, behold, I baptize
these whom they have infected, but they receive those whom we
have baptized." Where, it is plain, that Petilian by his words
makes the donatists the church, and excludes the catholics from
salvation absolutely. And, therefore, " no church, no salvation,"
was not Dr. Potter's addition. And, whereas you say — the catho
lics never yielded, that among the donatists there was a true church,
and hope of salvation ; — I say, it appears by what I have alleged
out of St. Augustine, that they yielded both these were among the
donatists, as much as we yield them to be among the papists. As
for Dr. Potter's acknowledgment, that they maintained an error in
the matter and nature of it heretical; this proves them but material
heretics, whom you do not exclude from possibility of salvation.
So that, all things considered, this argument must be much more
forcible from the donatists against catholics, than from papists
against protestants, in regard protestants grant papists no more
hope of salvation than papists grant protestants: whereas the
donatists excluded absolutely all but their own party from hope of
salvation, so far as to account them no christians that were not of
* Cont. lit. Petil. 1. ii. t. cviii.

to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 509
it ; the catholics meanwhile accounting them brethren, and freeing
those among them from the imputation of heresy, who, being in
error, quarebant cauta solicitudine veritatem, corrigi parati, cum
invenerint. 23. Whereas you say — that the argument for the certainty of
their baptism (because it was confessed good by catholics, whereas
the baptism of catholics was not confessed by them to be good) is
not so good as yours, touching the certainty of your salvation
grounded on the confession of protestants, because we confess
there is no damnable error in the doctrine or practice of the Roman
church: — I answer, no; we confess no such matter, and though
you say so a hundred times, no repetition will make it true. We
profess, plainly, that many damnable errors, plainly repugnant to
the precepts of Christ, both ceremonial and moral, more plainly
than this of rebaptization, and therefore more damnable, are be
lieved and professed by you. And, therefore, seeing this is the
only disparity you can devise, and this is vanished, it remains, that
as good an answer as the catholics made touching the certainty of
their baptism, as good may we make, and with much more evidence
of reason, touching the security and certainty of our salvation.
24. By the way, I desire to be informed, seeing you affirm — that
rebaptizing those whom heretics had baptized was a sacrilege, and
a profession of a damnable heresy, when it began to be so ? If from
the beginning it were so, then was Cyprian a sacrilegious professor
of a damnable heresy, and yet a saint and a martyr. If it were
not so, then did your church excommunicate Firmilian and others,
and separate from them without sufficient ground of excommunica
tion or separation, which is schismatical. You see what difficulties
you run into, on both sides; choose whether you will, but certainly
both can hardly be avoided.
25. Whereas again, in this section, you obtrude upon us — that
we cannot but confess, that your doctrine contains no damnable
error, and that yours is so certainly a true church, that, unless
yours be true, we cannot pretend any ; — I answer, there is in this
neither truth nor modesty to outface us, that we cannot but con
fess what indeed we cannot but deny. For my part, if I were upon
the rack, I persuade myself I should not confess the one nor the
other. 26. Whereas again presently you add — that Dr. Potter grants
we should be guilty of schism, if we did cut off your church from
the body of Christ, and the hope of salvation : — I have shewed
above, that he grants no such matter. He says, indeed, that our
not doing so frees us from the imputation of schism ; and from
hence you sophistically infer, that he must grant, if we did so, we
were schismatics ; and then make your reader believe, that this is
Dr. Potter's confession, it being indeed your own false collection.
For as every one, that is not a papist, is not a Jesuit ; and yet not
every one, that is a papist, is a Jesuit : . as whosoever comes not
into England, comes not to London ; and yet many may come into
England, and not come to London : as whosoever is not a man, is
not a king ; and yet many are men, that are not kings : so likewise

510 The Religion of Protestants a safer way
it may be certain, that whosoever does not so, is free from schism ;
and yet they that do so, (if there be sufficient cause) may not be
guilty of it.
27. Whereas you pretend to wonder, that the doctor did not
answer the argument of the donatists, which he says is all one
with yours, but refers you to St. Augustine, there to read it, as if
every one carried with him a library, or were able to examine the
places in St. Augustine : — I answer, the parity of the arguments
was, that which the doctor was to declare, whereunto it was imper
tinent what the answer was; but sufficient it was to shew, that the
donatists' argument, which you would never grant good, was yet as
good as yours, and therefore yours could not be good. Now to
this purpose, as the concealing the answer was no way advan
tageous, so to produce it was not necessary ; and therefore he did
you more service than he was bound to, in referring you to St.
Augustine for an answer to it. Whereas you say, he had reason
to conceal it, because it makes directly against himself; I say, it is
so far from doing so, that it will serve in proportion to the argu
ment, as fitly as if it had been made for it : for as St. Augustine
says, that catholics approve the doctrine of donatists, but abhor
their heresy of rebaptization ; so we say, that we approve those
fundamental and simple necessary truths which you retain, by
which some good souls among you may be saved, but abhor your
many superstitions and heresies. And, as he says that gold is
good, yet ought not to be sought for among a company of thieves ;
and baptism good, but not to be sought for in the conventicles of
donatists ; so say we, that the truths you retain are good, and, as
we hope, sufficient to bring good ignorant souls among you to sal
vation ; yet are they not to be sought for in the conventicles of
papists, who hold with them a mixture of many vanities, and many
impieties. For, as for our freeing you from damnable heresy, and
yielding you salvation, (which stone here again you stumble at)
neither he nor any other protestant is guilty of it ; and, therefore,
you must confess, that this very answer will serve protestants
against this charm of papists, as well as St. Augustine against the
donatists, and that indeed it was not Dr. Potter, but you, that
without a sarcasm had reason to conceal it.
28. The last piece of Dr. Potter's book, which you are pleased
to take notice of in this first part of yours, is an argument he makes
in your behalf, p. 79 of his book, where he makes you speak thus :
if protestants believe the religion of papists to be a safe way to
heaven, why do they not follow it ? This argument you like not,
because many things may be good, and yet not necessary to be
embraced by every body ; and, therefore, scoff at it, and call it an
argument of his own, a wise argument, a wise demand ; and then
ask of him, what he thinks of it being framed thus; our religion
is safe, even by your confession ; and therefore, you ought to grant
that all may embrace it. — And yet farther thus : among different
religions one only can be safe. But yours, by our own confession,
is safe ; whereas you hold, that in ours there is no hope of salva
tion : therefore we ought to embrace yours. Ans. I have advised

to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 511
with him, and am to tell you from him, that he thinks reasonably
well of the arguments, but very ill of him that makes them, as
affirming so often without shame and conscience, what he cannot
but know to be plainly false ; and his reason is, because he is so far
from confessing, or giving you any ground to pretend he does con
fess, that your religion is safe, for" all that are of it, from whence
only it will follow, that all may safely embrace it ; that in this very
place, from which you take these words, he professeth plainly —
that it is extremely dangerous, if not certainly damnable, to all such
as profess it, when either they do, or, if their hearts were upright,
and not perversely obstinate, might believe the contrary ; and that,
for us, who are convinced in conscience, that she (the Roman
church) errs in many things, it lies upon us, even under pain of
damnation, to forsake her in those errors: and though here you
take upon you a shew of great rigour, and will seem to hold that
in our way there is no hope of salvation ; yet formerly you have
been more liberal of your charity towards us, and will needs vie
and contend with Dr. Potter, which of the two shall be more cha
ritable, assuring us* — that you allow protestants as much charity
as Dr. Potter spares you, for whom he makes ignorance the best
hope of salvation. — And now I appeal to any indifferent reader,
whether our disavowing to confess you free from damnable error,
were not (as I pretend) a full confutation of all that you say in these
five foregoing paragraphs : and, as for you, I wonder what answer,
what evasion, what shift you can devise to clear yourself from dis
honesty, for imputing to him, almost a hundred times, this acknow
ledgment, which he never makes, but very often, and that so plainly
that you take notice of it, professeth the contrary.
29. The best defence that possibly can be made for you, I con
ceive, is this; that you were led into this error, by mistaking a
supposition of a confession for a confession, a rhetorical conces
sion of the doctor's for a positive assertion. He says indeed of
your errors — Though in the issue they be not damnable to them
which believe as they profess ; yet for us to profess what we be
lieve not, were without question damnable. — But to say, though
your errors be not damnable, we may not profess them, is not to
say your errors are not damnable, but only though they be not. As
if you should say, though the church err in points not fundamental,
yet you may not separate from it ; or, though we do err in believ
ing Christ really present, yet our error frees us from idolatry ; or,
as if a protestant should say, though you do not commit idolatry
in adoring the host, yet being uncertain of the priest's intention to
consecrate, at least you expose yourself to the danger of it ; I pre
sume you would not think it fairly done, if any man should inter
pret either this last speech as an acknowledgment, that you do not
commit idolatry, or the former as confessions, that you do err in
points not fundamental, that you do err in believing the real pre
sence. And, therefore, you ought not so to have mistaken Dr.
Potter's words, as if he had confessed the errors of your church not
damnable, when he says no more but this — though they be so — or,
* Chap. i. §. 4.

512 The Religion of Protestants a safer way
suppose, or put the case they be so, yet being errors, we that know
them, may not profess them to be divine truths. Yet this mistake
might have been pardonable, had not Dr. Potter in many places of
his book, by declaring his judgment touching the quality and
malignity of your errors, taken away from you all occasion of error.
But now that he says plainly — that your church hath many ways
played the harlot, and in that regard deserved a bill of divorce from
Christ, and the detestation of christians, p. 11. That for that mass
of errors and abuses in judgment and practice, which is proper to
her, and wherein she differs from us, kwe judge a reconciliation
impossible, and to us (who are convicted in conscience of her cor
ruptions) damnable, p. 20. That popery is the contagion or plague
of the church, p. 60. That we cannot, we dare not, communicate
with her in her public liturgy, which is manifestly polluted with
gross superstition, p. 68. That they who in former ages died in the
church of Rome, died in many sinful errors, p. 78. That they
that have understanding and means to discover their errors, and
neglect to use them, he dares not to flatter them with so easy a
censure as to give them hope of salvation, p. 79. That the way of
the Roman religion is not safe, but very dangerous, if not certainly
damnable, to such as profess it when they believe (or, if their
hearts were upright, and not perversely obstinate, might believe)
the contrary, p. 79. That your church is but, in some sense, a true
church ; and your errors only to some men not damnable ; and
that we, who are convinced in conscience, that she errs in many
things, are, under pain of damnation, to forsake her in those errors:
— Seeing, I say, he says all this so plainly, and so frequently, cer
tainly your charging him falsely with this acknowledgment, and
building a great part not only of your discourse in this chapter,
but of your whole book upon it, possibly it may be palliated with
some excuse, but it can no way be defended with any just
apology : especially seeing you yourself, more than once or twice,
take notice of these his severer censures of your church, and
the errors of it, and make your advantage of them. In the first
number of your first chapter, you set down three of the former
places ; and from thence infer, that as you affirm protestancy un
repented destroys salvation, so Dr. Potter pronounces the like
heavy doom against Roman catholics : and again, §. 4 of the same
chapter — We allow protestants as much charity as Dr. Potter
spares us, for whom he makes ignorance the best hope of salvation.
— And Chap. V. §. 41, you have these words: " It is very strange,
that you judge us extremely uncharitable in saying, protestants
cannot be saved, while yourself avouch the same of all learned ca
tholics, whom ignorance cannot excuse !" Thus out of the same
mouth you blow hot and cold ; and, one while, when it is for your
purpose, you profess Dr. Potter censures your errors as heavily
as you do ours ; which is very true, for he gives hope of salvation
to none among you, but to those whose ignorance was the cause of
their error, and sin no cause of their ignorance ; and, presently
after, when another project comes in your head, you make his
words softer than oil towards you : you pretend he does and must

to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 513
Confess, that your doctrine contains no damnable error, that your
church is certainly a true church, that your way to heaven is a safe
way ; and all these acknowledgments you set down simple and
absolute, without any restriction or limitation ; whereas in the
doctor they are all so qualified, that no knowing papist can promise
himself any security or comfort from them. " We confess (saith
he) the church of Rome to be, in some sense, a true church, and
her errors to some men not damnable ; we believe her religion safe,
that is, by God's great mercy, not damnable, to some such as be
lieve what they profess ; but we believe it not safe, but very dan
gerous, if not certainly damnable, to such as profess it, when they
believe (or, if their hearts were upright, and not perversely obsti
nate, might believe) the contrary." Observe, I pray you, these
restraining terms which formerly you have dissembled : — A true
church, in some sense, not damnable to some men ; a safe way,
that is, by God's great mercy, not damnable to some. — And then,
seeing you have pretended these confessions to be absolute, which
are thus plainly limited, how can you avoid the imputation of an
egregious sophister? You quarrel with the doctor, in the end of
your preface, for using in his book such ambiguous terms as these
— in some sort, in some sense, in some degree ; and desire him, if
he make any reply, either to forbear them, or to tell you roundly in
what sort, in what sense, in what degree, he understands these and
the like mincing phrases. But the truth is, he hath not left them so
ambiguous and undetermined as you pretend : but told you plainly,
in what sense your church may pass for a true church, viz. in
regard we may hope, that she retains those truths which are simply,
absolutely, and indispensably necessary to salvation, which may
suffice to bring those good souls to heaven, who wanted means of
discovering their errors. This is the charitable construction in which
you may pass for a church ; and to what men your religion may
be safe, and your errors not damnable, viz. to such whom ignorance
may excuse. And, therefore, he hath more cause to complain of
you, for quoting his words without those qualifications, than you
to find fault with him for using of them.
30. That your discourse in the 12th §. presseth you as forcibly
as protestants, I have shewed above. I add here, 1. Whereas
you say, that " faith, according to your rigid calvinists, is either
so strong, that, once had, it can never be lost ; or so more than
weak, and so much nothing, that it can never be gotten ;" that
these are words without sense. Never any calvinist affirmed that
faith was so weak, and so much nothing, that it can never be gotten ;
but it seems you wanted matter to make up your antithesis ; and,
therefore, were resolved to speak empty words, rather than lose your
figure.  Crimina rasis
Librat in antithetis, doctas posuisse figuras
Laudatur  .
2. That there is no calvinist that will deny the truth of this pro
position, Christ died for all ; nor subscribe to that sense of it,
which your dominicans put upon it ; neither can you, with coherence
KK

514 The Religion of Protestants a safer way
to the received doctrine of your own society, deny that they, as well
as the calvinists, take away the distinction of sufficient and effectual
grace, and indeed hold none to be sufficient, but only that which
is effectual. 3. Whereas you say — They cannot make their calling
certain by good works, who do certainly believe, that before any
good works they are justified, and justified by faith alone, and by
that faith whereby they certainly believe they are justified. — I
answer, there is no protestant but believes, that faith, repentance,
and universal obedience, are necessary to the obtaining of God's
favour and eternal happiness. This being granted, the rest is but
a speculative controversy, a question about words, which would
quickly vanish, but that men affect not to understand one another.
As if a company of physicians were in consultation, and should all
agree, that three medicines, and no more, were necessary for the
recovery of the patient's health ; this were sufficient for his direction
towards the recovery of his health; though concerning the proper and
specifical effects of these three medicines, there should be amongst
them as many differences as men ; so likewise, being generally at
accord, that these three things, faith, hope, and charity, are neces
sary to salvation, so that, whosoever wants any of them, cannot
obtain it, and he which hath them all, cannot fail of it ; is it not
very evident, that they are sufficiently agreed for men's directions
to eternal salvation ? And, seeing charity is a full comprehension
of all good works, they requiring charity as a necessary qualifica
tion in him that will be saved, what sense is there in saying — they
cannot make their calling certain by good works? — They know
what salvation is as well as you, and have as much reason to desire
it ; they believe it as heartily as you, that there is no good work
but shall have its proper reward, and that there is no possibility of
obtaining the eternal reward, without good works; and why then
may not this doctrine be a sufficient incitement and provocation
unto good works?
31. You say — that they certainly believe that before any good
Works they are justified : but this is a calumny ; there is no protes
tant but requires to justification remission of sins, and to remission
of sins they all require repentance, and repentance, I may presume,
may not be denied the name of a good work ; being, indeed, if it be
rightly understood, and according to the sense of the word in scrip
ture, an effectual conversion from all sin to all holiness. But though
it be taken for mere sorrow for sins past, and a bare purpose of
amendment, yet even this is a good work ; and therefore protestants,
requiring this to remission of sins, and remission of sins to justifica
tion, cannot with candour be pretended to believe, that they are
justified before any good work.
32. You say — they believe themselves justified by faith alone,
and that by that faith whereby they believe themselves justified.
Some peradventure do so ; but withal they believe, that that faith
which is alone, and unaccompanied with sincere and universal
obedience, is to be esteemed not faith, but presumption, and is at
no hand sufficient to justification ; that though charity be not im
puted unto justification, yet it is required as a necessary disposi-

to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 515
tion in the person to be justified ; and that though, in regard of
the imperfection of it, no man can be justified by it, yet that, on
the other side, no man can be justified without it. So that, upon
the whole matter, a man may truly and safely say, that the doc
trine of these protestants, taken all together, is not a doctrine of
liberty, not a doctrine that turns hope into presumption and carnal
security ; though it may justly be feared, that many licentious per
sons, taking it by halves, have made this wicked use of it. For my
part, I do heartily wish, that by public authority it were so ordered,
that no man should ever preach or print this doctrine, that faith
alone justifies, unless he joins this together with it, that universal
obedience is necessary to salvation ; and, besides, that those chap
ters of St. Paul, which entreat of justification by faith, without the
works of the law, were never read in the church, but when the
13th chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians, concerning the
absolute necessity of charity, should be, to prevent misprision, read
together with them.
33. Whereas you say — that some protestants do expressly affirm
the former point to be the soul of the church, &c. and that, there
fore, they must want the theological virtue of hope ; and that none
can have true hope, while they hope to be saved in their commu
nion : — I answer, they have great reason to believe the doctrine of
justification by faith only, a point of great weight and importance,
if it be rightly understood : that is, they have reason to esteem it
a principal and necessary duty of a christian, to place his hope of
justification and salvation, not in the perfection of his own right
eousness (which, if it be imperfect, will not justify), but only in the
mercies of God, through Christ's satisfaction ; and yet, notwith
standing this, nay, the rather for this, may preserve themselves in
the right temper of good christians, which is a happy mixture, and
sweet composition, of confidence and fear. If this doctrine be
otherwise expounded than I have here expounded, I will not un
dertake the justification of it ; only I will say (that which I may
do truly), that I never knew any protestant such a soli-fidian, but
that he did believe these divine truths : — that he must make his
calling certain by good works ; that he must work out his salva
tion with fear and trembling ; and that, while he does not so, he
can have no well-grounded hope of salvation : — I say, I never met
with any who did not believe these divine truths, and that with a
more firm, and a more unshaken assent, than he does, that himself
is predestinate, and that he is justified by believing himself jus
tified. I never met with any such, who if he saw there was a
necessity to do either, would not rather forego his belief of these
doctrines than the former ; these which he sees disputed, and con
tradicted, and opposed, with a great multitude of very potent argu
ments, than those, which, being the express words of scripture,
whosoever should call into question, could not with any modesty
pretend to the title of christian. And, therefore, there is no reason
but we may believe, that their full assurance of the former doctrine
doth very well qualify their persuasion of the latter ; and that the
former (as also the lives of many of them do sufficiently testify) are
kk2

516 The Religion of Protestants a safer way
more effectual to temper their hope, and to keep it at a stay of a
filial and modest assurance of God's favour, built upon the con
science of his love and fear, than the latter can be to swell and
puff them up into vain confidence and ungrounded presumption.
This reason, joined with our experience of the honest and religious
conversation of many men of this opinion, is a sufficient ground for
charity, to hope well of their hope ; and to assure ourselves, that
it cannot be offensive, but rather most acceptable to God, if, not
withstanding this diversity of opinion, we embrace each other with
the strict embraces of love and communion. To you and your
church we leave it to separate christians from the church, and to
proscribe them from heaven upon trivial and trifling causes. As
for ourselves, we conceive a charitable judgment of our brethren
and their errors, though untrue, much more pleasing to God than
a true judgment, if it be uncharitable; and, therefore, shall always
choose (if we do err) to err on the milder and more merciful part,
and rather to retain those in our communion, which deserve to be
ejected, than eject those that deserve to be retained.
34. Lastly, whereas you say — that seeing protestants differ
about the point of justification, you must needs infer, that they want
unity in faith, and consequently all faith; and, then, that they can
not agree what points are fundamental : — I answer to the first of
these inferences, that as well might you infer it upon Victor, bishop
of Rome, and Polycrates, upon Stephen, bishop of Rome, and St.
Cyprian, inasmuch as it is undeniably evident, that what one of
those esteemed necessary to salvation, the other esteemed not so.
But points of doctrine (as all other things) are as they are, and not
as they are esteemed : neither can a necessary point be made un
necessary, by being so accounted, or an unnecessary point be made
necessary, by being overvalued. But as the ancient philosophers
(whose different opinions about the soul of man you may read in
Aristotle de Anima, and Cicero's Tusculan Questions), notwith
standing their diverse opinions touching the nature of the soul, yet
all of them had souls, and souls of the same nature ; or, as those
physicians, who dispute whether the brain or heart be the princi
pal part of a man, yet all of them have brains, and have hearts,
and herein agree sufficiently ; so likewise, though some protestants
esteem that doctrine the soul of the church, which others do not
so highly value, yet this hinders not, but that which is indeed the
soul of the church may be in both sorts of them : and though one
account that a necessary truth, which others account neither ne
cessary, nor perhaps true : yet, this notwithstanding, in those truths,
which are truly and really necessary, they may all agree. For no
argument can be more sophistical than this : they differ in some
points, which they esteem necessary ; therefore they differ in some
that in deed, and in truth are so.
35. Now as concerning the other inference — that they cannot
agree what points are fundamental : — I have said and proved for
merly, that there is no such necessity as you imagine or pretend,
that you should certainly know what is, and what is not, funda
mental. They that believe all things plainly delivered in scripture,

to Salvation than the Religion of Papists. 517
believe all things fundamental, and are at sufficient unity in mat
ters of faith, though they cannot precisely and exactly distinguish
between what is fundamental, and what is profitable : nay, though
by error they mistake some vain, or perhaps some hurtful opinions,
for necessary and fundamental truths. Besides, I have shewed
above, that as protestants do not agree (for you over-reach in say
ing they cannot,) touching what points are fundamental, so neither
do you agree what points are defined, and so to be accounted, and
what are not; nay,* not concerning the subject in which God hath
placed this pretended authority of defining, some of you settling
it in the pope himself, though alone without a council ; others in
a council, though divided from the pope ; others only in the con
junction of council and pope ; others not in this neither, but in the
acceptation of the present church universal. Lastly, others not
attributing it to this neither, but only to the perpetual succession
of the church of all ages ; of which divided company, it is very evi
dent and undeniable, that every former may be and are obliged to
hold many things defined, and therefore necessary, which the latter,
according to their own grounds, have no obligation to do ; nay, can
not do so, upon any firm, and sure, and infallible foundation.

THE CONCLUSION.
And thus, by God's assistance, and the advantage of a good
cause, I am at length, through a passage rather tiring than difficult,
arrived at the end of my undertaken voyage ; and have, as I sup
pose, made appear, to all disinterested and unprejudicate readers,
what in the beginning I undertook, that a vein of sophistry and
calumny runs through this first part of your book; wherein, though
I never thought of the directions you have been pleased to give me
in your pamphlet, intituled, " A Direction to N. N.," yet, upon
consideration of my answer, I find that I have proceeded as if I
had it always before my eyes, and steered my course by it, as by a
card and compass.
For, first, I have not proceeded by a mere destructive way (as
you call it), nor objected such difficulties against your religion, as
upon examination tend to the overthrow of all religion ; but have
shewed, that the truth of Christianity is clearly independent upon
the truth of popery ; and that, on the other side, the arguments
you urge, and the courses you take, for the maintenance of your
religion, do manifestly tend (if they be closely and consequently
followed) to the destruction of all religion, and lead men by the
hand to atheism and impiety ; whereof I have given you ocular
demonstrations in divers places of my book; but especially in my
answer to your " Direction to N. N."
Neither can I discover any repugnance between any one part of
my answer and any other, though 1 have used many more judicious
and more searching eyes than mine own, to make, if it were pos-
* C. 3, §. 54, et alibi.

518 Conclusion.
sible, such a discovery; and therefore am in good hope, that
though the music I have made be but dull and flat, and even down
right plain song, even your curious and critical ears shall discover
no discord in it; but, on the other side, I have charged you fre
quently, and very justly, with manifest contradiction and retracta
tion of your own assertions, and not seldom of the main grounds
you build upon, and the principal conclusions which you endeavour
to maintain, which I conceive myself to have made apparent, even
to the eye, c. ii. §. 5, c. iii. §. 88, c. iv. §. 14, 24, c. v. §. 93, c. vi.
\. 6, 7, 12, 17, c. vii. §. 29, and in many other parts of my answer.
And though I did never pretend to defend Dr. Potter absolutely,
and in all things, but only so far as he defends truth (neither did
Dr. Potter desire me, nor any law of God or man oblige me, to de
fend him any farther), yet I do not find that I have cause to differ
from him in any matter of moment, particularly, not concerning the
infallibility of God's church, which I grant with him to be infallible
in fundamentals ; because, if it should err in fundamentals, it were
not the church : nor concerning the supernaturality of faith, which
I know and believe as well as you, to be the gift of God, and
that flesh and blood revealed it not unto us, but our Father which
is in heaven. But now, if it were demanded what defence you can
make for deserting " Charity Mistaken," in the main question dis
puted between him and Dr. Potter — whether protestancy, without
a particular repentance and dereliction of it, destroys salvation,
whereof I have convinced you ? I believe your answer would be
much like that which Ulysses makes in the Metamorphosis for his
running away from his friend Nestor ; that is, none at all.
For opposing the articles of the church of England, the appro
bation, I presume, clears my book from this imputation.
And whereas you gave me a caution — that my grounds destroy
not the belief of divers doctrines, which all good christians believe,
yea, and of all verities that cannot be proved by natural reason : —
I profess sincerely that I do not know, nor believe, that any ground
laid by me in my whole book is any way inconsistent with any one
such doctrine, or with any verity revealed in the word of God,
though never so improbable or incomprehensible to natural reason ;
and if I thought there were, I would deal with it as those primitive
converts dealt with their curious books in the Acts of the Apostles.
For the epistle of St. James, and those other books which were
anciently controverted, and are now received by the church of
England as canonical, I am so far from relying upon any principles,
which must, to my apprehension, bring with them the denial of
the authority of them, that I myself believe them all to be
canonical. For the overthrowing the infallibility of all scripture, my book
is so innocent of it, that the infallibility of scripture is the chiefest
of all my grounds.
And, lastly, for arguments tending to prove an impossibility of
all divine, supernatural, infallible faith and religion, I assure my
self, that if you were ten times more a spider than you are, you
could suck no such poison from them. My heart, I am sure, is

Conclusion. 519
innocent of any such intention, and the Searcher of all hearts
knows that I had no other end in writing this book, but to confirm
to the uttermost of my ability, the truth of the divine and infal
lible religion of our dearest Lord and Saviour Christ Jesus, which
I am ready to seal and confirm, not with my arguments only, but
my blood.
Now these are the directions which you have been pleased to
give me, whether out of a fear that I might otherwise deviate from
tbem, or out of a desire to make others think so ; but howsoever,
I have not, to my understanding, swerved from them in any thing ;
which puts me in good hope, that my answer to this first part of
your book will give even to yourself indifferent good satisfaction.
I have also provided, though this were more than I undertook, a
just and punctual examination and refutation of your second part;
out, if you will give your consent, am resolved to suppress it, and
that for divers sufficient and reasonable considerations.
First, because the discussion of the controversies entreated of in
the first part, if we shall think fit to proceed in it, as I for my part
shall, so long as I have truth to reply, will, I conceive, be sufficient
employment for us, though we cast off the burden of those many
lesser disputes which remain behind in the second. And perhaps
we may do God and his church more service, by exactly discussing,
and fully clearing, the truth in these few, than by handling many
after a slight and perfunctory manner.
•Secondly, because the addition of the second part, whether for
your purpose or mine, is clearly unnecessary ; there being no under
standing man, papist or protestant, but will confess, that (forasmuch
as concerns the main question now in agitation, about the saveable-
bleness of protestants) if the first part of your book be answered,
there needs no reply to the second ; as, on the other side, I shall
willingly grant, if I have not answered the first, I cannot answer a
great part of the second.
Thirdly, because the addition of the second not only is unneces
sary, but in effect by yourself confessed to be so. For in your
preamble to your second part you tell us, that the substance of the
present controversy is handled in the first ; and therein also you
pretend to have answered the chief grounds of Dr. Potter's book;
so that in replying to your second part, I shall do little else but pur
sue shadows.
Fourthly, because your second part (setting aside repetitions and
references) is in a manner made up of disputes about particular
matters, which you are very importunate to have forborne, as sus
pecting, at least pretending to suspect, that they were brought in
purposely by Dr. Potter to dazzle the reader's eyes, and distract
his mind that he might not see the clearness of the reasons
brought in defence of the general doctrine delivered in " Charity
Mistaken :" all which you are likely enough, if there be occasion,
to say again to me ; and therefore I am resolved for once even to
humour you so far as to keep my discourse within those very lists
and limits which yourself have prescribed, and to deal with you
upon no other arguments, but only those wherein you conceive

520 Conclusion.
youf chief advantage, and principal strength, and, as it were, your
Samson's lock, to lie ; wherein, if I gain the cause clearly from you
(as I verily hope, by God's help, I shall do), it cannot but redound
much to the honour of the truth maintained by me, which by so
weak a champion can overcome such an Achilles in error, even in
his strongest holds.
For these reasons, although I have made ready an answer to
your second part, and therein have made it sufficiently evident,
that, for shifting evasions from Dr. Potter's arguments,. for imper
tinent cavils, and frivolous exceptions, and injurious calumnies
against him for his misalleging of authors; for proceeding upon
false and ungrounded principles; for making inconsequent and so
phistical deductions ; and, in a word for all the virtues of an ill
answer, your second part is no way second to the first ; yet, not
withstanding all this disadvantage, I am resolved, if you will give
me leave, either wholly to suppress it, or at least to defer the pub
lication of it, until I see what exceptions, upon a twelve-month's
examination (for so long I am well assured you have had it in
your hands), you can take at this which is now published ; that so,
if my grounds be discovered false, I may give over building on
them ; or (if it shall be thought fit) build on more securely, when
it shall appear that nothing material and of moment, is or can be
objected against them. This I say upon a supposition, that your
self will allow these reasons for satisfying and sufficient, and not
repent of the motion which yourself have made, of reducing the
controversy between us to this short issue. But in case your mind
be altered, upon the least intimation you shall give me, that you
do but desire to have it out, your desire shall prevail with me above
all other reasons, and you shall not fail to receive it with all con
venient speed.
Only, that my answer may be complete, and that I may have all
my work together, and not be troubled myself, nor enforced to trou
ble you, with after-reckonings, I would first entreat you to make
good your promise, of not omitting to answer all the particles of
Dr. Potter's book, which may any way import, and now, at least, to
take notice of some (as it .seems to me) not inconsiderable passages
of it, which between your first and second part, as it were between
two stools, have been suffered hitherto to fall to the ground, and
not been vouchsafed any answer at all.
For after this neglectful fashion you have passed by in silence,
first, his discourse, wherein he proves briefly, but very effectually,
that protestants may be saved, and that the Roman church, espe
cially the Jesuits, are very uncharitable. S. 1, p. 6 — 9. Secondly,
The authorities, whereby he justifies, that the ancient fathers, by
the Roman, understood always a particular, and never the catholic,
Church ; to which purpose he allegeth the word's of Ignatius, Am
brose, Innocentius, Celestine, Nicolaus. S. 1, p. 10. Whereunto
you say nothing, neither do you infringe his observation with any
one instance to the contrary.
Thirdly, The greatest and most substantial part of his answers
to the arguments of Charity Mistaken, built upon Deut. xvii.

Conclusion. 521
Numb. xvi. Matt, xxviii. 20 ; xviii. 17, and in particular many preg
nant and convincing texts of scripture, quoted in the margin of his
book, p. 25, to prove, that the judges of the synagogue (whose in
fallibility yet you make an argument of yours, and therefore must
be more credible than yours) are vainly pretended to have been in
fallible: but as they were obliged to judge according to law, so
were obnoxious to deviations from it. S. 2, p. 23 — 27.
Fourthly, His discourse, wherein he shews the difference between
the prayers for the dead used by the ancients, and those now in use
in the Roman church.
Fifthly, The authority of three ancient, and above twenty modern,
doctors of your own church, alleged by him to shew, that in their
opinion even pagans, and therefore much more erring christians, (if
their lives were morally honest) by God's extraordinary mercy, and
Christ's merit, may be saved. S. 2, p. 45.
Sixthly, A great part of his discourse, whereby he declares, that
actual and external communion with the church is not of absolute
necessity to salvation ; nay, that those might be saved, whom the
church utterly refused to admit to her communion. S. 2, p.
46—49. Seventhly, His discourse concerning the church's latitude, which
hath in it a clear determination of the main controversy against
you : for therein he proves plainly, that all appertain to the church.,
who believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and Saviour
of the world, with submission to his doctrine in mind and will ;
which he irrefragably demonstrates by many evident texts of scrip
ture, containing the substance of his assertion even in terms. S. 4,
p. 114—117.
Eighthly, That wherein he shews, by many pertinent examples,
that gross error and true faith may be lodged together in the same
mind. And that men are not chargeable with the damnable con
sequences of their own erroneous opinions. S. 4, p. 112.
Ninthly, A very great part of this chapter touching the dissen
sions of the Roman church, which he shews (against the pretences
of Charity Mistaken) to be no less than ours, for the importance of
the matter, and the pursuit of them to be exceedingly uncharitable.
S. 6, p. 188—191, 193—197.
Tenthly, His clear refutation, and just representation, of the doc
trine of implicit faith, as it is delivered by the doctors of your
church ; which he proves very consonant to the doctrine of heretics
and infidels, but evidently repugnant to the word of God. Ibid. p.
202—205. Lastly, His discourse, wherein he shews — that it is unlawful for
the church of after ages to add any thing to the faith of the apostles ;
and many of his arguments, whereby he proves, that in the judg
ment of the ancient church the apostles' creed was esteemed a suf
ficient summary of the necessary points of mere belief; and a great
number of great authorities, to justify the doctrine of the church
of England, touching the canon of scripture, especially the Old
Testament. S. 7, p. 221, 223, 228, 229.
All these parts of Dr. Potter's book, for reasons best known to

522 - The Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy demonstrated.
yourself, you have dealt with, as the priest and Levite in the gospel
did with the wounded Samaritan ; that is, only looked upon them,
and passed by : but now, at least, when you are admonished of it,
that my reply to your second part (if you desire it) may be perfect,
I would entreat you to take them into your consideration, and to
make some show of saying something to them, lest otherwise the
world should interpret your obstinate silence a plain confession, that
you can say nothing.

THE
APOSTOLICAL INSTITUTION OF EPISCOPACY
DEMONSTRATED.

Sect. 1. If we abstract from episcopal government all acciden
tals, and consider only what is essential and necessary to it, we
shall find in it no more but this ; an appointment of one man of
eminent sanctity and sufficiency to have the care of all the churches,
within a certain precinct or diocese, and furnishing him with autho
rity, (not absolute or arbitrary, but regulated and bounded by laws,
and moderated by joining to him a convenient number of assistants)
to the intent, that all the churches under him may be provided of
good and able pastors : and that both of pastors and people, conformi
ty to laws, and performance of their duties, may be required, under
penalties not left to discretion, but by law appointed.
Sect. 2. To this kind of government, I am not, by any particular
interest, so devoted, as to think it ought to be maintained, either in
opposition to apostolic institution, or to the much-desired reforma
tion of men's lives, and restoration of primitive discipline, or to any
law or precept of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ ; for that were
to maintain a means contrary to the end ; for obedience to our
Saviour is the end for which church government is appointed. But
if it may be demonstrated, (or made much more probable than the
contrary) as I verily think it may : 1. That it is not repugnant to
the government settled in and for the church by the apostles : 2.
That it is as compilable with the reformation of any evil, which we
desire to reform, either in church or state, or the introduction of
any good, which we desire to introduce, as any kind of government :
and, 3. That there is no law, no record of our Saviour against it :
then, I hope, it will not be thought an unreasonable motion, if we
humbly desire those that are in authority, especially the high court
of parliament, that it may not be sacrificed to clamour, or over
borne by violence : and though (which God forbid) the greater part
of the multitude should cry, crucify, crucify, yet our governors
would be so full of justice and courage, as not to give it up, until
they perfectly understand concerning episcopacy itself, quid mail
fecit ?

The Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy demonstrated. 523
Sect. 3. I shall speak at this time only of the first of these three
points ; that episcopacy is not repugnant to the government settled
in the church for perpetuity by the apostles. Whereof I conceive
this which follows is as clear a demonstration as any thing of this
nature is capable of:
" That this government was received universally in the church,
either in the apostles' time, or presently after, is so evident and
unquestionable, that the most learned adversaries of this go
vernment do themselves confess it."
Sect. 4. Petrus Molinaeus, in his book, De Munere Pastorali,
purposely written in defence of the presby ferial government, acknow
ledgeth, that presently after the apostles' times, or even in their
time, (as ecclesiastical story witnesseth) it was ordained, that in
every city one of the presbytery should be called a bishop, who
should have pre-eminence over his colleagues, to avoid confusion,
which ofttimes ariseth out of equality. And truly this form of govern
ment all churches every where received.
Sect. 5. Theodorus Beza, in his tract, De triplici Episcopatus
genere, confesseth in effect the same thing. For, having distin
guished episcopacy into three kinds, divine, human, and satanical,
and attributing to the second (which he calls human, but we main
tain and conceive to be apostolical) not only a priority of order,
but a superiority of power and authority over other presbyters,
bounded yet by laws and canons provided against tyranny ; he
clearly professeth, that of this kind of episcopacy is to be understood
whatsoever we read concerning the authority of bishops, (or presi
dents, as Justin Martyr calls them) in Ignatius, and other more
ancient writers.
Sect. 6. Certainly, from these two great defenders of the pres
bytery,* we should never have had this free acknowledgment, (so
prejudicial to their own pretence, and so advantageous to their
adversaries' purpose) had not the evidence of clear and undeniable
truth enforced them to it. It will not therefore be necessary to spend
any time in confuting that uningenuous assertion of the anonymous
author of the Catalogue of Testimonies, for the equality of bishops
and presbyters, who affirms, that their disparity began long after
the apostles' times: but we may safely take for granted, that
which these two learned adversaries have confessed, and see,
whether upon this foundation laid by them, we may not bv unan
swerable reason raise this superstructure :
" That seeing episcopal government is confessedly so ancient,
and so catholic, it cannot with reason be denied to be
apostolic."
Sect. 7. For so great a change, as between presbyterial govern
ment and episcopal, could not possibly have prevailed all the
world over in a little time. Had episcopal government been an
* To whom two others also from Geneva may be added : Daniel Chamierus (in
Panstratia, tom. ii. lib. x. cap. vi. sect. 24,) and Nicol. Videlius, (Exercitat 3, in Epist.
Ignatii ad Philadelph. cap. xiv. et Exercit. 8, in Epist. ad Mariam, cap. iii.) which is
also fully demonstrated in Dr. Hammond's Dissertations against Blondel, (which never
were answered, and never will) by the testimonies of those who wrote in the very next
ages after the apostles.

524 The Apostolical Institution of Episcopacy demonstrated.
aberration from (or a corruption of) the government left in the
churches by the apostles, it had been very strange, that it should
have been received in anyone church so suddenly, or that it should
have prevailed in all for many ages after. Variasse debuerat error
ecclesiarum : quod autem apud omnes unum est, non est erratum, sed
traditum. " Had the churches erred, they would have varied :
what therefore is one and the same amongst all, came not surely by
error, but tradition." Thus Tertullian argues very probably, from
the consent of the churches of his time, not long after the apostles,
and that in matter of opinion much more subject to unobserved
alteration. But that in the frame and substance of the necessary
government of the church, a thing always in use and practice,
there should be so sudden a change, as presently after the apostles'
times ; and so universal, as received in all churches : this is clearly
impossible. Sect. 8. For, what universal cause can be assigned or feigned of
this universal apostacy ? You will not imagine, that the apostles,
all or any of them, made any decree for this change when they
were living ; or left order for it in any will or testament when they
were dying. This were to grant the question ; to wit — That the
apostles, being to leave the government of the churches themselves,
and either seeing by experience, or, foreseeing by the Spirit of
God, the distractions and disorders which would arise from a mul
titude of equals, substituted episcopal government instead of their
own. General councils, to make a law for a general change, for
many ages there was none. There was no christian emperor, no
coercive power, over the church to enforce it. Or, if there had
been any, we know no force was equal to the courage of the chris
tians of those times. Their lives were then at command (for they had
not then learnt to fight for Christ), but their obedience to any thing
against his law was not to be commanded (for they had perfectly
learnt to die for him). Therefore, there was no power then to com
mand this change ; or, if there had been any, it had been in vain.
Sect. 9. What device then shall we study-, or to what fountain
shall we reduce this strange pretended alteration ? - Can it enter
into our hearts to think, that all the presbyters and other christians
then, being the apostles' scholars, could be generally ignorant of
the will of Christ, touching the necessity of a presbyterial govern
ment? Or, dare we adventure to think them so strangely wicked
all the world over, as against knowledge and conscience to con
spire against it ? Imagine the spirit of Diotrephes had entered into
some, or a great many of the presbyters, and possessed them with
an ambitious desire of a forbidden superiority, was it possible they
should attempt and achieve it at once without any opposition or
contradiction ? And, besides, that the contagion of this ambition
should spread itself, and prevail without stop or control ; nay,
without any noise or notice taken of it, through all the churches in
the world ; all the watchmen in the mean time being so fast asleep,
and all the dogs so dumb, that not so much as one should open his
mouth against it ?
Sect. 10. But let us suppose (though it be a horrible untruth)

Reasons against Popery. 525
that the presbyters and people then were not so good christians as
the presbyterians are now ; that they were generally so negligent to
retain the government of Christ's church commanded by Christ,
which we are now so zealous to restore, yet certainly we must not
forget nor deny, that they were men as we are. And if we look
upon them as mere natural men, yet, knowing by experience, how
hard a thing it is, even for policy armed with power, by many
attempts and contrivances, and in a long time, to gain upon the
liberty of any one people ; undoubtedly we shall never entertain so
wild an imagination, as that, among all the christian presbyters in
the world, neither conscience of duty, nor love of liberty, nor
averseness from pride and usurpation of others over them, should
prevail so much with any one, as to oppose this pretended uni
versal invasion of the kingdom of Jesus Christ, and the liberty of
christians. Sect. 11. When I shall see therefore all the fables in the Meta
morphosis acted, and prove true stories ; when I shall see all the
democracies and aristocracies in the world lie down and sleep, and
awake into monarchies ; then will I begin to believe, that presby-
terial government, having continued in the church during the
apostles' times, should presently after (against the apostles' doc
trine, and the will of Christ) be whirled about like a scene in a
mask, and transformed into episcopacy. In the mean time, while
these things remain thus incredible, and in human reason impossible,
I hope I shall have leave to conclude thus :
" Episcopal government is acknowledged to have been universally
received in the church, presently after the apostles' times."
" Between the apostles' times and this presently after, there was
not time enough for, nor possibility of, so great an alteration."
" And therefore, there was no such alteration as is pretended.
And therefore episcopacy, being confessed to be so ancient
and catholic, must be granted also to be apostolic : Quod erat
demonstrandum."

REASONS AGAINST POPERY,
In a letter from Mr. Wm. Chillingworth to his friend Mr. Lewgar,
persuading him to return to his mother, the church of England,
from the corrupt church of Rome.
Good Mr. Lewgar,
Though I am resolved not to be much afflicted at that which is
not in my power to help, yet I cannot deny, but the loss of a friend
goes very near to my heart ; and by this name of a friend, I did
presume, till of late, that I might have called you ; because, though
perhaps for want of power and opportunity I have done you no
good office, yet I have always been willing and ready to do you
the best service I could; and therefore, I cannot but admire at your
affected strangeness, which in your last letter to me you seem to
take upon you ; renouncing in a manner all relation to me, and

526 Reasons against Popery.
tacitly excommunicating me from all interest in you. The super
scription of your letter is to Mr. William Chillingworth, and the
subscription John Lewgar, as if you either disdained, or made a
conscience of styling me your friend, or yourself mine. If this pro
ceed from passion and weakness, pray mend it ; if from reason pray
shew it : if you think me one of those, to whom St. John forbids
you to say, God save you, then you are to think and prove me one
of those deceivers, which deny Christ Jesus to be come in the flesh.
If vou think me an heretic, and therefore to be avoided, you must
prove me to be uuToxaraxpirov, condemned by mine own judgment,
which I know I am not, and therefore think you cannot. If you
say I do not hear the church, and therefore am to be esteemed an
heathen or publican, you are to prove then, that by the church
is meant the church of Rome ; and yet, when you have done so, I
hope christians are not forbidden to shew humanity and civility even
to pagans.
For God's sake, Mr. Lewgar, free yourself from this blind zeal,
at least for a little space, and consider with reason and moderation,
what strange crime you can charge me with, that should deserve
this strange usage, especially from you. Is it a crime with all my
understanding to endeavour to find your religion true, and to make
myself a believer of it, and not to be able to do so ? Is it a crime
to employ all my reason upon the justification of the infallibility of
the Roman church, and to find it impossible to be justified? I
will call God to witness, who knows my heart better than you do,
that I have evened the scale of my judgment as much as possibly
I could, and have not willingly allowed one grain of worldly mo
tives on either side, but have weighed the reasons for your religion,
and against it, with such indifference, as if there were nothing in
the world but God and myself; and is it my fault, that the scale
goes down, which hath the most weight in it ? That the building
falls that hath a false foundation ? Have you such power over your
own understanding, that you can believe what you please, though
you see no reason ? Or that you can suspend your belief, when
you see reason ? If you have, I pray for old friendship's sake teach
me this trick ; and, until I have learned it, I pray blame me not for
going the ordinary way, I mean for believing, or not believing, as I
see reason. If you can convince me of wilful opposition against
the known truth, of negligence in seeking it, of unwillingness to
find it, of preferring temporal respects before it, or of any other
fault which is in my power to amend, that is indeed a fault ; if I
mend it not, be as angry with me as you please : but to impute to
me involuntary errors, or that I do not see that which I would see,
but cannot ; or that I will not profess that which I do not believe ;
certainly this is a far more unreasonable error, than any you can
justly charge me with ; for, let me tell you, the imputing socinian
ism to me (whosoever was the author of it) was a wicked and
groundless slander. Perhaps you will say, (for this is the usual
song of that side) pride is a voluntary fault, and with this I am
justly chargeable, for forsaking the guide that God hath appointed
me to follow ; but what, if I forsook it, because I thought I had

Reasons against Popery. 527
reason to fear it was one of those blind guides, which whosoever
blindly follows, is threatened by our Saviour, that both he and his
guide shall fall into the ditch? Then I hope you will grant it was
not pride, but conscience, that moved me to do so ; for as it is wise
humility to obey those whom God hath set over me, so it is sinful
credulity to follow every man, or every church, that without warrant
will take upon them to guide me : shew then some good and evident
title which your church of Rome hath to this office ; produce but
one reason for it, which upon trial will not finally be resolved and
vanished into uncertainty ; and if I yield not unto it, say, if you
please, I am as proud as Lucifer.
In the mean time, give me leave to think it strange, and not far
from a prodigy, that this doctrine of the Roman church's being the
guide of faith, (if it be true doctrine) should either not be known to
the evangelists, or if it were known to them, yet being wise and
good men, they should either be so envious of the church's happi
ness, or so forgetful of the work they took in hand, which was to
write the whole gospel of Christ, as that not so much as one of
them should mention so much as once this so necessary part of the
gospel, without the belief whereof there is no salvation, and with
the belief whereof, unless men be snatched away by sudden death,
there is hardly any damnation. It is evident, they do all of them
with one consent speak very plainly of many things of no impor
tance in comparison hereof; and, is it credible, or indeed possible,
that with one consent, or rather conspiracy, they should be so
deeply silent concerning this unum necessarium ? You may believe
it, if you can ; for my part, I cannot, unless I see demonstration of
it : and if you say they send us to the church, and consequently to
the church of Rome, this is to suppose that which can never be
proved, that the church of Rome is the only church ; and without
this supposal upon the division of the church, I am as far to seek
for a guide of my faith as ever.
As, for example : in that great division of the church, when the
whole world wondered, said St. Jerome, that it was become arian,
when Liberius, pope of Rome (as St. Athanasius, St. Jerome, and
St. Hilary testify) subscribed their heresy, and joined in commu
nion with them ; or in the division betwixt the Greek and Roman
church, about the procession of the Holy Ghost, when either side
was the church to itself, and each part schismatical and heretical
to the other ; what direction could I then, an ignorant man, have
found from the text of scripture, " unless he hear the church, let
him be unto thee as a heathen or a publican : upon this rock will I
build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
Again ; give me leave to wonder, that neither St. Paul writing to
the Romans, should so much as intimate this their privilege of in
fallibility, but rather, on the contrary, put them in fear, in the 11th
chapter, that they, as well as the Jews, were in danger of falling
away. That St. Peter, the pretended bishop of Rome, writing two catho-.
lie epistles, mentioning his departure, should not once acquaint the
christians whom he writes to, what guide they were to follow after
he was taken from them !

528 Reasons against Popery.
That the writers of the New Testament should so frequently
warn men of heretics, false christs, false prophets, and not once arm
them against them, with letting them know this only sure means
of avoiding their danger !
That so great a part of the New Testament should be employed
about antichrist, and so little, and indeed none at all, about the
vicar of Christ, and the guide of the faithful !
That our Saviour should leave this only means for the ending of
controversies, and yet speak so obscurely and ambiguously of it,
that now our judge is the greatest controversy, and the greatest
hindrance of ending them !
That there should be better evidence in the scripture to justify
the king to this office, who disclaims it, than the pope, who pretends
to it !
That St. Peter should never exercise over the apostles any one
act of jurisdiction, nor they ever give him any one title of authority
over them !
That if the apostles did know, that St. Peter was made head of
them, when our Saviour said, " thou art Peter," they should still
contend who shall be the first, and that our Saviour should never
tell them, that St. Peter was the man !
That St. Paul should say, he was nothing inferior to the very
chief apostles I
That the catechumeni in the primitive church should never be
taught this foundation of their faith, that the church of Rome was
the guide of their faith !
That the fathers, Tertullian, St. Jerome, and Optatus, when they
flew highest in recommendation of the Roman church, should
attribute no more unto her than to all apostolical churches !
That in the controversy about Easter, the bishops and churches
of Asia should be so ill catechised, as not to know this principle of
christian religion, the necessity of conformity of doctrine with the
church of Rome !
That they should never be pressed with any such conformity in
all things, only with the particular tradition of the western churches
in that point !
That Irenaeus, and many other bishops, notwithstanding, ad hancce
ecclesiam necesse est omnem convenire ecclesiam, should not yet think
that a necessary doctrine, nor a sufficient ground of excommunica
tion, which the church of Rome thought to be so !
That St. Cyprian, and the bishops of Afric, should be so ill in
structed in their faith, as not to know this foundation of it !
That they likewise were never urged with any such necessity of
conformity with the church of Rome, nor ever charged with heresy
or error for denying of it !
That when Liberius joined in communion with the arians, and
subscribed their heresy, the arians then should not be the church,
and the guide of the faith !
That never any heretics, for five ages after Christ, were pressed
with this argument of the infallibility of the present church of
Rome, or charged with the denial of it as a distinct heresy ; so that

Reasons against Popery. 529
jEneas Sylvius should have cause to say, Ante tempora Concilii
Niceni quisque sibi vivebat, et parvus respectus habebatur ad eccle
siam Romanam !
That the ecclesiastical story of these times, mentions no act of
authority of the church of Rome over other churches ; as if there
should be a monarchy, and the king for some ages together should
exercise no act of jurisdiction in it !
That to supply this defect, the decretal epistles should be so im
pudently forged, which in a manner speak nothing else but reges et
monarchas, I mean the pope's making laws to exercise authority
over all other churches !
That the African churches in St. Augustine's time should be so
ignorant that the pope was the head of the church, and judge of
appeals, Jure Divino, and that there was a necessity of conformity
with the church in this and all other points of doctrine !
Nay, that the popes themselves should be so ignorant of the
ground of this their authority, as to pretend to it, not upon scrip
ture, or universal tradition ; but upon an imaginary pretended non
such canon of the council of Nice !
That Vincentius Lirinensis, seeking for a guide of his faith, and
a preservation from heresy, should be ignorant of this so ready an
one, the infallibility of the church of Rome !
All these things, and many more are very strange to me, if the
infallibility of the Roman church be indeed, and were always, by
christians acknowledged, the foundation of our faith ; and there
fore, I beseech you, pardon me, if I choose mine upon one that is
much firmer and safer, and lies open to none of these objections,
which is scripture and universal tradition.
And if one, that is of this faith, may have leave so to do, I will
subscribe with hand and heart, Your very loving and true friend,
W. Chillingworth.

l L

SERMONS.

SERMON I.
" This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come.
For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters,
proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
without natural affection, truce-breakers, false accusers, incon
tinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, traitors, heady,
high-minded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God ; having
a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof." — 2 Tim.
iii. 1—5.
To a discourse upon these words, I cannot think of any fitter in
troduction, that that wherewith our Saviour sometime began a
sermon of his, " This day is this scripture fulfilled." And I would
to God, there were not great occasion to fear, that a great part of
it may be fulfilled in this place.
Two things are contained in it : First, the real wickedness of the
generality of the men of the latter times, in the first four verses.
For by "men shall be lovers of themselves, covetous, boasters,
proud," &c, I conceive is meant, men generally shall be so ;
otherwise this were nothing peculiar to the last, but common to
all times ; for in all times some, nay, many, have been " lovers of
themselves, covetous, boasters, proud," &c. Secondly, we have
here the formal and hypocritical godliness of the same times, in
the last verse ; " having a form of godliness, but denying the
power thereof;" which latter ordinarily and naturally accompanies
the former. For, as the shadows are longest when the sun is
lowest, and as vines, and other fruit-trees, bear the less fruit, when
they are suffered to luxuriate and spend their sap upon superfluous
suckers, and abundance of leaves; so commonly, we may observe,
both in civil conversation, where there is great store of formality,
there is little sincerity ; and in religion, where there is a decay of
true cordial piety, there men entertain and please themselves, and
vainly hope to please God, with external formalities and perform
ances, and great store of that righteousness, for which Christ shall
judge the world.
It were no difficult matter to shew, that the truth of St. Paul's
prediction is by experience justified in both parts of it ; but my
purpose is to restrain myself to the latter, and to endeavour to clear
unto you that, that in our times is generally accomplished : that
almost in all places the power of godliness is decayed and vanished;
the form and profession of it only remaining ; that the spirit, and
soul, and life of religion, is for the most part gone ; only the out-
(530)

The First Sermon. 531
ward body or carcass, or rather the picture or shadow of it, being
left behind. This is the doctrine which at this time I shall deliver
to you ; and the use, which I desire most heartily you shall make
of it, is this : to take care that you confute, so far as it concerns
your particulars, what I fear I shall prove true in the general.
To come then to our business without further compliment, let us
examine our ways, and consider impartially, what the religion of
most men is.
We are baptized in our infancy, that is, as I conceive, dedicated
and devoted to God's service, by our parents and the church, as
young Samuel was by his mother Hannah ; and there we take a
solemn vow, to forsake the devil and all his works, the vain pomp
and glory of the world, with all the covetous desires of it ; to for
sake also the carnal desires of the flesh, and not to follow nor be
led by them. This vow we take when we are children, and under
stand not ; and how many are there, who know, and consider, and
regard what they have vowed, when they are become men, almost
as little as they did being children ! Consider the lives and public
actions of most men of all conditions, in court, city, and country,
and then deny it, if you can, that those three things, which we
have renounced in our baptism, the profits, honours, and pleasures
of the world, are the very gods which divide the world amongst
them ; are served more devoutly, confided in more heartily, loved
more affectionately, than the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, in
whose name we are baptized : deny, if you can, the daily and con
stant employment of all men to be either a violent prosecution of
the vain pomp and glory of the world, or of the power, riches, and
contemptible profits of it, or of the momentary or unsatisfying plea
sures of the flesh, or else of the more diabolical humours of pride,
malice, revenge, and such like ; and yet with this empty form we
please and satisfy ourselves, as well as if we were lively born again
by the Spirit of God, not knowing or not regarding what St. Peter
has taught us, that the baptism which must save us, is, " not the
putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good con
science unto God." 1 Pet. iii. 21.
When we are come to years capable of instruction, many, which
is lamentable to consider, are so little regarded by themselves or
others, that they continue little better than pagans in a common
wealth of christians, and know little more of God, or of Christ,
than if they had been bred in the Indies. A lamentable case, and
which will one day lie heavy upon their account which might have
amended it, and did not. But many, I confess, are taught to act
over this play of religion and learning to say, " Our Father which
art in heaven ;" and, " I believe in God the Father Almighty ;"
but where are the men that live so, as if they did believe in earnest,
that God is the almighty father? Where are they that fear him,
and trust in him, and depend upon him only for their whole happi
ness, and love him, and obey him, as in reason we ought to do to
an almighty Father ; who, if he be our Father, and we be indeed
his children, will do for us all the good he can ; and if he be
almighty, can do for us all the good he will; and yet, how few
ll2

532 The First Sermon.
are there, who love him with half that affection as children usually
do their parents, or believe him with half that simplicity, or serve
him with half that diligence ? And then, for the Lord's Prayer,
the plain truth is, we lie unto God for the most part clean through
it ; and for want of desiring indeed, what in word we pray for,
tell him to his face, as many false tales as we make petitions. For
who shews by his endeavours, that he desires heartily that God's
name should be hallowed, that is, holily and religiously worshipped
and adored by all men? That his kingdom should be advanced
and enlarged ; that his blessed will should be universally obeyed ?
Who shows, by his forsaking sin, that he desires, so much as he
should do, the forgiveness of it? Nay, who doth not revenge,
upon all occasions, the affronts, contempts, and injuries put upon
him, and so upon the matter curse himself, as often as he says,
"Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against
us." How few depend upon God only for their " daily bread,"
viz. the good things of this life, as upon the only giver of them, so
as neither to get nor keep any of them, by any means, which
they know or fear to be offensive unto God? How few desire
in earnest to avoid temptation ? Nay, who almost is there, that
takes not the devil's office out of his hand, and is not himself a
tempter both to himself and others ? Lastly, who almost is there
that desires heartily, and above all things, so much as the thing
deserves, to be delivered from the greatest evil ; sin, I mean, and
the anger of God ? Now, beloved, this is certain ; he that employs
not requisite industry, to obtain what he pretends to desire, does
not desire indeed, but only pretends to do so ; he that desires not
what he prays for, prays with tongue only, and not with his heart :
indeed does not pray to God, but play and dally with him. And
yet this is all which men generally do, and therefore herein also
accomplish this prophecy, " Having a form of godliness, but deny
ing the power thereof."
And this were ill enough, were it in private; but we abuse God
Almighty also with our public and" solemn formalities: we make
the church a stage whereon to act our parts, and play our pagean
try ; there we make a profession every day of confessing our sins
with humble, lowly, and obedient hearts ; and yet, when we have
talked after this manner, twenty, thirty, forty years together, our
hearts for the most part continue-as proud, as impenitent, as dis
obedient, as they were in the beginning. We make great protes
tations, " when we assemble and meet together to render thanks
to God Almighty, for the benefits received at his hands;" and if
this were to be performed , with words, with hosannas and halle
lujahs, and gloria patris, and psalms and hymns, and such like out
ward matters, peradventure we should do it very sufficiently ; but,
in the mean time, with our lives and actions we provoke the
Almighty, and that to his face, with all variety of grievous and
bitter provocations; we do daily and hourly such things as we
know, and he hath assured us, to be as odious unto him, and
contrary to his nature, as any thing in the world is to the nature of
any man in the world ; and all this upon poor, trifling, trivial, no

The First Sermon. 533
temptations. If a man whom you have dealt well with, should deal
so with you, one whom you had redeemed from the Turkish slavery,
and instated in some indifferent good inheritance, should make you
fine speeches, entertain you with panegyrics, and have your praises
always in his mouth ; but all this while do nothing that pleases
you, but upon all occasions, put all affronts and indignities upon
you : would you say this were a thankful man ? Nay, would
you not make heaven and earth ring of his unthankfulness, and
detest him almost as much for his fair speeches, as his foul actions ?
Beloved, such is our unthankfulness to our God and Creator, to our
Lord and Saviour : our tongues ingeminate, and cry aloud, Hosan-
na, hosanna, but the louder voice of our lives and actions is, " Crucify
him, crucify him." We court God Almighty, and compliment with
him, and profess to esteem his service perfect freedom ; but if any
thing be to be done, much more if any thing be to be suffered for
him, here we leave him. We bow the knee before him, and put a
reed in his hand, and a crown upon his head, and cry, " Hail, King
of the Jews :" but then, with our customary sins, we give him gall
to eat, and vinegar to drink ; we thrust a spear in his side, nail
him to the cross, and crucify to ourselves the Lord of glory. This
is not the office of a friend to bewail a dead friend with vain la
mentations ; sed qua voluerit meminisse, qua mandaverit exequi —
to remember what he desires, and execute what he commands.
So said a dying Roman to his friend, and so say I to you. To be
thankful to God, is not to say, God be praised, or, God be thanked;
but to remember what he desires, and execute what he commands.
To be thankful to God is certainly to love him, and to love him is
to keep his commandments: so saith our Saviour (John xix.) "If
ye love me, keep my commandments." If we do so, we may justly
pretend to thankfulness ; which, believe me, is not a word, nor to
be performed with words : but, if we do not so, as generally we do
not, our talk of thankfulness is nothing else but mere talk, and we
accomplish St. Paul's prophecy herein also ; having a form of thank
fulness, but not the reality, nor the power of it.
If I should reckon up unto you, how many direct lies every
wicked man tells to Almighty God, as often as he says amen to
this " form of godliness," which our church hath prescribed ; if I
should present unto you all our acting of piety, and playing of hu
miliation, and personating of devotion, in the psalms, the litanies,
the collects, and generally in the whole service, I should be infinite ;
and, therefore, I have thought good to draw a veil over a great part
of our hypocrisy, and to restrain the remainder of our discourse to
the contrariety between our profession and performance, only in two
things ; I mean faith and repentance.
And, first, for faith : we profess, and indeed generally, because it
is not safe to do otherwise, that we believe the scripture to be true,
and that it contains the plain and only way to infinite and eternal
happiness ; but if we did generally believe what we do profess, if
this were the language of our hearts, as well as our tongues, how
comes it to pass, that the study of it is so generally neglected ?
Let a book, that treats of the philosopher's stone, promise never

534 The First Sermon.
so many mountains of gold, and even the restoring of the golden
age again, yet were it no marvel, if few should study it ; and the
reason is, because few would believe it. But if there were a book
extant, and ordinarily to be had, as the bible is, which men did
generally believe to contain a plain aftd easy way for all men to
become rich, and to live in health and pleasure, and this world's
happiness, can any man imagine, that this book would be unstudied
by any man? And why then should I not believe, that, if the
scripture were firmly and heartily believed the certain and only way
to happiness, which is perfect and eternal, it would be studied by
all men with all diligence ? Seeing, therefore, most christians are
so cold and negligent in the study of it, prefer all other business,
all other pleasures, before it, is there not great reason to fear, that
many, who pretend to believe it firmly, believe it not at all, or very
weakly and faintly ? If the general of an army, or an ambassador
to some prince or state, were assured by the king his master, that
the transgressing any point of his commission should cost him his
life, and the exact performance of it be recompensed with as high
a reward as were in the king's power to bestow upon him; can it
be imagined, that any man, who believes this, and is in his right
mind, can be so supinely ^and stupidly negligent of this charge,
which so much imports him, as to oversee, through want of care,
any one necessary article, or part of his commission, especially, if
it be delivered to him in writing, and at his pleasure to peruse it
every day ? Certainly, this absurd negligence is a thing without
example, and such as peradventure will never happen to any sober
man to the world's end ; and, by the same reason, if we were firmly
persuaded, that this book doth indeed contain that charge and
commission, which infinitely more concerns us, it were not in reason
possible, but that to such a persuasion, our care and diligence
about it should be in some measure answerable. Seeing, therefore,
most of us are so strangely careless, so grossly negligent of it, is
there not great reason to fear, that though we have professors and
protestors in abundance, yet the faithful, the truly and sincerely
faithful, are, in a manner, failed from the children of men ? What
but this can be the cause, that men are so commonly ignorant of
so many articles and particular mandates of it, which yet are as
manifest in it, as if they were written with the beams of the sun ?
For example, how few of our ladies and gentlewomen do or will
understand, that a voluptuous life is damnable and prohibited to
them? Yet St. Paul saith so very plainly, "She that liveth in
pleasure is dead while she liveth."* I believe this case directly
regards not the sex : he would say, he, as well as she, if there had
been occasion. How few of the gallants of our time do or will
understand, that it is not lawful for them to be as expensive and
costly in apparel, as their means, or perhaps their credit, will ex
tend unto? Which is to sacrifice unto vanity, that which by the law
of Christ is due unto charity ; and yet, the same St. Paul forbids
plainly this excess even to women — " Also let women (he would
have said it much rather to the men) array themselves in comely
* 1 Tim. v. 6.

The First Sermon. 535
apparel, with shamefacedness and modesty, not with embroidered
hair, or gold, or pearls, or costly apparel."* And, to make our ig
norance the more inexcusable, the very same rule is delivered by
St. Peter also, 1 epist. iii. 3.
How few rich men are or will be persuaded that the law of
Christ permits them not to heap up riches forever, nor perpetually
to add house to house, and land to land, though by lawful means ;
but requires of them thus much charity at least, that ever, while
they are providing for their wives and children, they should, out of
the increase wherewith God hath blessed their industry, allot the
poor a just and free proportion ? And when they have provided
for them in a convenient manner (such as they themselves shall
judge sufficient and convenient in others), that then they should
give over making purchase after purchase ; but with the surplus
age of their revenue beyond their expense, procure, as much as lies
in them, that no christian remain miserably poor ; few rich men, I
fear, are or will be thus persuaded, and their daily actions shew as
much : yet undoubtedly, either our Saviour's general command, of
loving our neighbours as ourselves, which can hardly consist with
our keeping vainly, or spending vainly what he wants for his ordi
nary subsistence, lays upon us a necessity of this high liberality:
or his special command concerning this matter ; Quod superest date
pauperibus, " That which remains give to the poor :" or that which
St. John saith, 1 epist. iii. 1 7, reacheth home unto it : " Whosoever
hath this world's goods, and seeth his brother have need, and shut-
teth up the bowels of his compassion from him, how dwelleth the
love of God in him ?" Which is, in effect, as if he had said, he
that keepeth from any brother in Christ, that which his brother
wants, and he wants not, doth but vainly think, that he loves God ;
and therefore vainly hopes, that God loves him.
Where almost are the men that are or will be persuaded, the gos
pel of Christ requires of men humility, like to that of little children,
and that under (he highest pain of damnation ? That is, that we
should no more overvalue ourselves, or desire to be highly esteemed
by others ; no more undervalue, scorn, or despise others ; no more
affect pre-eminence over others, than little children do, before we
have put that pride into them, which afterwards we charge wholly
upon their natural corruption : and yet our blessed Saviour requires
nothing more rigidly, nor more plainly, than this high degree of hu
mility : " Verily (saith he), I say unto you, (he speaks to his disci
ples affecting high places, and demanding which of them should be
greatest) except you be converted, and become as little children,
ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven."
Would it not be strange news to a great many, that not only
adultery and fornication, but even uncleanness and lasciviousness ;
not only idolatry and witchcraft, but hatred, variance, emulations,
wraths, and contentions ; not only murders, but envyings ; not
drunkenness only, but revelling, are things prohibited to christians,
and such as, if we forsake them not, we cannot inherit the kingdom
of heaven ? And yet these things, as strange as they may seem,
* 1 Tim. ii. 9.

536 The First Sermon.
are plainly written ; some of them by St. Peter (1 epist. ch. iv.) ;
but all of them by St. Paul (Gal. v. 19), " Now the works of the
flesh are manifest, which are these, adultery, fornication, unclean-
ness, lasciviousness, &c. of the which I tell you before, as I have
told you in times past, that they who do such things, shall not in
herit the kingdom of God."
If I should tell you, that all bitterness and evil-speaking, (nay,
such is the modesty and gravity which Christianity requires of us)
foolish talk and jesting, are things not allowed to christians, would
not many cry out, these are hard and strange sayings, who can hear
them? And yet, as strange as they may seem, they have been
written, well nigh one thousand six hundred years, and are yet ex
tant in very legible characters, in the epistle to the Ephesians, the
end of the fourth, and the beginning of the fifth chapter.
To come a little nearer to the business of our times, the chief ac
tors in this bloody tragedy, which is now upon the stage, who have
robbed our Sovereign Lord the king of his forts, towns, treasure,
ammunition, houses, of the persons of many of his subjects, and (as
much as lies in them) of the hearts of all of them ; is it credible
they know and remember, and consider the example of David, re
corded for their instruction, whose heart smote him, when he had
but cut off the hem of Saul's garment?
They that made no scruple at all of fighting with his sacred
majesty, and shooting muskets and ordnance at him, (which sure
have not the skill to choose a subject from a king) to the extreme
hazard of his sacred person, whom by all possible obligations tbey
are bound to defend, do they know, think you, the general rule,
without exception or limitation, left by the Holy Ghost, for our
direction in all such cases : " Who can lift up his hand against the
Lord's anointed, and be innocent?"* Or do they consider his com
mand in the Proverbs of Solomon : " My son, fear God, and the
king, and meddle not with them that desire change ?"f Or, his
counsel in the book of Ecclesiastes : " I counsel thee to keep the
king's commandment, and that in regard of the oath of God ?"J
Or, because they possibly may pretend, that they are exempted
from, or unconcerned in the commands of obedience delivered in
the Old Testament, do they know and remember the precept given
to all christians by St. Peter ; " Submit yourselves to every ordi
nance of man for the Lord's sake, whether it be to the king, as
supreme, or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him ?"
Or, that terrible sanction of the same command, " They that resist
shall receive to themselves damnation," left us by St. Paul, in his
Epistle to the Romans, who then were the miserable subjects of
the worst king, the worst man, nay, I think I may add truly, the
worst beast in the world; that so all rebels' mouths might be
stopped for ever, and left without all colour of pretence whatso
ever, to justify resistance of sovereign power? Undoubtedly, if
they did know, and consider, and lay close to their hearts, these
places of scripture, or the fearful judgment which befel Corah,
Dathan, and Abiram, for this very sin which now they commit, and
* 1 Sam. xxvi. 9. t Prov. xxiv. 21. X Eccles. viii. 2.

The First Sermon. 537
with a high hand still proceed in, it would be impossible but their
hearts would smite them, as David's did upon an infinitely less oc-
casion,.and affright them out of those ways of present confusion,
and eternal damnation. And then, on the other side, they that
maintain the king's righteous cause with the hazard of their lives
and fortunes, but by their oaths and curses, by their drunkenness
and debauchery, by their irreligion and profaneness, fight more
powerfully against their party, than by all other means they do or
can fight for it, are not, I fear, very well acquainted with any part
of the bible: but that strict caution, which properly concerns them
selves, in the book of Leviticus, I much doubt they have scarce
ever heard of it: "When thou goest to war with thine enemies,
then take heed there be no wicked thing in thee :" not only no
wickedness in the cause thou maintainest, nor no wickedness in
the means by which thou maintainest it, but no personal impieties
in the persons that maintain it. Beloved, for the former two, we
have reason to be full of comfort and confidence : for what is our
cause? What is that which you fight, and we pray for? But to
deliver the king and all his good subjects out of the power of their
enemies, who will have no peace but with their slaves and vassals;
and for the means by which it is maintained, it is not by lying; it
is not by calumnies ; it is not by running first ourselves, and then
forcing the people, to universal perjury ; but by a just war, be
cause necessary; and by as fair and merciful a war, as if they were
not rebels and traitors you fight against, but competitors in a
doubtful title. But now for the third part of the caution, that, to
deal ingenuously with you, and to deliver my own soul, if I cannot
other men's, that I cannot think of with half so much comfort as
the former ; but seeing so many Jonahs embarked in the same ship,
the same cause with us, and so many Achans entering into battle
with us, against the Canaanites ; seeing publicans and sinners on
the one side, against scribes and pharisees on the other ; on the
one side hypocrisy, on the other profaneness; no honesty nor justice
on the one side, and very little piety on the other ; on the one side,
horrible oaths, curses, and blasphemies ; on the other, pestilent
lies, calumnies, and perjury : when I see among them the pretence
of reformation, if not the desire, pursued by antichristian, mahome-
tan, devilish means ; and amongst us little or no zeal for reforma
tion of what is indeed amiss, little or no care to remove the cause
of God's anger towards us, by just, lawful, and christian means ; I
profess plainly, I cannot without trembling consider, what is likely
to be the event of these distractions; I cannot but fear, that the
goodness of our cause may sink under the burden of our sins ; and
that God in his justice, because he will not suffer his judgments to
achieve their prime scope and intention, which is our amendment
and reformation, may either deliver us up to the blind zeal and
fury of our enemies, or else, which I rather fear, make us instru
ments of his justice each against other, and of our own just and
deserved confusion. This, I profess plainly, is my fear, and I
would to God it were the fear of every soldier in his majesty's
army : but, that which increaseth my fear is, that I see very many

538 The First Sermon.
of them have very little or none at all ; I mean not, that they are
fearless towards their enemies, (that's our joy and triumph) but
that they show their courage even against God, and fear not him,
whom it is madness not to fear. Now from whence can their not
fearing him proceed, but from their not knowing him, their not
knowing his will, and their own duty ? Not knowing how highly
it concerns soldiers, above other professions, to be religious ? And
then, if ever, when they are engaged in dangerous adventures, and
every moment have their lives in their hands, when they go to
war with their enemies, then to take heed there be no wicked thing
in them.
You see, beloved, how many instances and examples I have
given you of our gross ignorance of what is necessary and easy for
us to know ; and to these it were no difficult matter to add more :
now from whence can this ignorance proceed, but from supine
negligence ? And from whence this negligence, but from our not
believing what we pretend to believe ? For, did we believe firmly
and heartily, that this book were given us by God for the rule of
our actions, and that obedience to it were the certain and only way
to eternal happiness, it were impossible we should be such enemies
to ourselves, such traitors to our own souls, as not to search it, at
least with so much diligence, that no necessary point of our duty
plainly taught in it, could possibly escape us. But it is certain
and apparent to all the world, that the greatest part of christians,
through gross and wilful negligence, remain utterly ignorant of
many necessary points of their duty to God and man ; and there
fore it is much to be feared, that this book, and the religion of
Christ contained in it, among an infinity of professors, labours with
great penury of true believers.
It were an easy matter (if the time would permit) to present unto
you many other demonstrations of the same conclusion ; but to this,
drawn from our willing ignorance of that which is easy and neces
sary for us to know, I will content myself to add only one more,
taken from our voluntary and presumptuous neglect to do those
things which we know and acknowledge to be necessary.
If a man should say unto me, that it concerns him as much as
his life is worth, to go presently to such a place, and that he
knows but one way to it, and I should see him stand still, or go
some other way, had I any reason to believe, that this man believes
himself? Quid verba audiam, cum facta videam? saith he in the
comedy : Protestatio contra factum non valet, saith the law ; and
why should I believe, that that man believes obedience to Christ
the only way to present and eternal happiness, whom I see, wit
tingly, and willingly, and constantly, and customarily, to disobey
him ? The time was, that we all knew, that the king could reward
those that did him service, and punish those that did him disservice,
and then all men were ready to obey his command, and he was
a rare man that durst do any thing to his face that offended him.
Beloved, if we did but believe in God, so much as most subjects
do in their king; did we as verily believe, that God could and
would make us perfectly happy, if we serve him, though all the

The First Sermon. 539
World conspire to make us miserable; and that he could and would
make us miserable, if we serve him not, though all the world should
conspire to make us happy ; how were it possible, that to such a
faith our lives should not be conformable ? Who was there ever
so madly in love with a present penny, as to run the least hazard
of the loss of 10,0007. a year to gain it, or not readily to part with
it upon any probable hope, or light persuasion, much more a firm
belief, that by doing so he should gain 100,000/. Now, beloved,
the happiness which the servants of Christ are promised in the
scripture, we all pretend to believe, that it exceeds the conjunction
of all the good things of the world, and much more such a propor
tion as we may possibly enjoy, infinitely more than 10,0007. a year,
*or 100,0007. doth a penny; for 100,0007. is but a penny so many
times over, and 10,0007. a year is worth but a certain number of
pence ; but between heaven and earth, between finite and infinite,
between eternity and a moment, there is utterly no proportion; and
therefore, seeing we are so apt, upon trifling occasions, to hazard
this heaven for this earth, this infinite for this finite, this all for this
nothing ; is it not much to be feared, that though many of us pre
tend to much faith, we have indeed but very little or none at all ?
The sum of all, which hath been spoken concerning this point, is
this — Were we firmly persuaded, that obedience to the gospel of
Christ is the true and only way to present and eternal happiness
(without which faith no man living can be justified), then the in
nate desire of our own happiness could not but make us studious
inquirers of the will of Christ, and conscionable performers of it ;
but there are (as experience shows) very few who make it their
care and business to know the will of Christ ; and of those few
again, very many, who make no conscience at all of doing what
they know ; therefore, though they profess and protest they have
faith, yet their protestations are not to be regarded against their
actions; but we may safely and reasonably conclude what was to
be concluded, that the doctrine of Christ, amongst an infinity of
professors, labours with great scarcity of true, serious, and hearty
believers; and that herein also we accomplish St. Paul's predic
tion, " Having a form of godliness, but denying," &c.
But perhaps the truth and reality of our repentance may make
some kind of satisfaction to God Almighty for our hypocritical
dallying with him in all the rest. Truly, I would be heartily glad
it were so : but I am so far from being of this faith, that herein I
fear we are most of all hypocritical, and that the generality of pro
fessors is so far from a real practice of true repentance, that scarce
one in a hundred understands truly what it is.
Some satisfy themselves with a bare confession and acknowledg
ment, either that they are sinners in general, or that they have com
mitted such and such sins in particular; which acknowledgment
comes not yet from the heart of a great many, but only from their
lips and tongues : for how many are they, that do rather complain
and murmur, that they are sinners, than acknowledge and confess
it; and make it, upon the matter, rather their unhappiness and mis
fortune, than their true fault, that they are so? Such are all they

540 The First Sermon.
who impute all their commissions of evil to the unavoidable want
of restraining grace, and all their omission of good to the like
want of effectual exciting grace; all such as pretend, that the
commandments of God are impossible to be kept any better than
they are kept; and that the world, the flesh, and the devil, are
even omnipotent enemies; and that God neither doth, nor will, give
sufficient strength to resist and overcome them ; all such as lay all
their faults upon Adam, and say, with those rebellious Israelites
(whom God assures, that they neither had nor should have just
reason to say so), that their fathers had eaten sour grapes, and
their teeth were set on edge : lastly, all such as lay their sins upon
divine prescience and predestination, saying with their tongues, 0
what wretched sinners have we been ! but in their hearts, How
could we help it ? We were predestinate to it, we could not do
otherwise. All such as seriously persuade themselves, and think to hide
their nakedness with such fig-leaves as these, can no more be said
to acknowledge themselves guilty of a fault, than a man that was
born blind, or lame, with the stone or gout, can accuse himself with
any fault for being born so ; well may such an one complain, and
bemoan himself, and say, O wretched man that I am, who shall
deliver me from this unhappiness ? But such a complaint is as
far from being a true acknowledgment of any faults, as a bare
acknowledgment of a fault is from true repentance. For to confess
a fault, is to acknowledge, that freely and willingly, without any
constraint, or unavoidable necessity, we have transgressed the law
of God, it being in our power, by God's grace, to have done other
wise. To aggravate this fault, is to confess we have done so when
we might easily have avoided it, and had no great nor violent
temptation to it : to pretend any great difficulty in the matter, is to
excuse and extenuate it : but to say, that, all things considered, it
was absolutely impossible for you to avoid it, is flatly to deny it.
Others there are, that think they have done enough, if to confes
sion of sin they add some sorrow for it ; if, when the present fit of
sin is past, and they are returned to themselves, the sting re
maining breed some remorse of conscience, some complaints against
their wickedness and folly for having done so, and some intentions
to forsake it, though vanishing and ineffectual. These heat-drops,
this morning dew of sorrow, though it presently vanish, and they
return to their sin again upon the next temptation, " as a dog to
his vomit," when the pang is over : yet in the pauses between,
while they are in their good mood, they conceive themselves to
have very true, and very good repentance : so that if they should
have the good fortune to be taken away in one of these intervalla,
one of these sober moods, they should certainly be saved ; which
is just as if a man in a quartan ague, or the stone, or gout, should
think himself rid of his disease as oft as he is out of his fit.
But if repentance were no more but so, how could St. Paul have
truly said, that " godly sorrow worketh repentance ?" (2 Cor. vii.
10.) Every man knows, that nothing can work itself. The archi
tect is not the house which he builds, the father is not the son

The First Sermon. 541
which he begets, the tradesman is not the work which he makes ;
and therefore, if sorrow, godly sorrow, worketh repentance, cer
tainly sorrow is not repentance. The same St. Paul tells us in the
same place, that " the sorrow of the world worketh death ;" and
you will give me leave to conclude from hence, therefore it is not
death ; and what shall hinder me from concluding thus also; "godly
sorrow worketh repentance," therefore it is not repentance ?
To this purpose it is worth observing, that when the scripture
speaks of that kind of repentance, which is only sorrow for some
thing done, and wishing it undone, it constantly useth the word
u.STa(i,sXsia, to which forgiveness of sins is nowhere promised. —
So it is written of Judas, the son of perdition, (Matt, xxvii. 5,)
HSTau,sX^e/'s direrge-^e, " he repented, and went and hanged him
self," and so constantly in other places. But that repentance, to
which remission of sins and salvation are promised, is perpetually
expressed by the word u.st<xvokx, which signifies a thorough change
of the heart and soul, of the life and actions, MsTavosiVs" tfyyixs
ya| '!j /3affiXsia twv oupavuv, (Matt. iii. 2,) which is rendered in our
last translation, " Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
But much better, because freer from ambiguity, in the entrance to
our Common Prayer Book, "Amend your lives, for the kingdom of
heaven is at hand." From hence, by the way, we may observe, that
in the judgment of those holy and learned martyrs, repentance and
amendment of life are all one : and I would to God, the same men,
out of the same care of avoiding mistakes, and to take away occa
sion of cavilling our liturgy from them that seek it, and out of fear
of encouraging carnal men to security in sinning, had been so pro
vident, as to set down in terms the first sentence taken out of Ezek.
xviii. and not have put in the place of it an ambiguous, and (though
not in itself, yet accidentally, by reason of the mistake to which it
is subject) I fear very often a pernicious paraphrase : for whereas
thus they make it, " At what time soever a sinner doth' repent him
of his sins from the bottom of his heart, I will put all his wickedness
out of my remembrance, saith the Lord;" the plain truth, if you
will hear it, is, the Lord doth not say so, these are not the very
words of God, but the paraphrase of men : the words of God are
as follow : " If the wicked turn from all the sins which he hath
committed, and keep all my statutes, and do that which is lawful
and right, he shall surely live, he shall not die ;" where I hope, you
easily observe, that there is no such word as, " At what time so
ever a sinner doth repent," &c. And that there is a wide difference
between this (as the word repent usually sounds in the ears of the
people) and turning from all sins, and keeping all God's statutes ;
that indeed, having no more in it but sorrow and good purposes,
may be done easily and certainly, at the last gasp, and it is very
strange, that any christian, who dies in his right senses, and
knows the difference between heaven and hell, should fail of the
performing it; but this work of turning, keeping, and doing, is
(though not impossible by extraordinary mercy to be performed at
last, yet) ordinarily a work of time, a long and laborious work
(but yet heaven is very well worth it) ; and, if you mean to go

542 The First Sermon.
through with it, you had need go about it presently. Yet seeing
the composers of our liturgy thought fit to abbreviate — turning
from all sin, and keeping all God's statutes, and doing that which
is lawful and right, into this one word, repenting, it is easy and
obvious to collect from hence, as I did before from the other place,
that by repentance they understood not only sorrow for sin, but
conversion from it. The same word, pvsravoia, (Matt. xii. 41,) is
used in speaking of the repentance of the Ninevites ; and, how
real, hearty, and effectual a conversion that was, you may see,
Jonah iii. from the fifth to the last verse : " The people of Nineveh
believed God, and put on sackcloth from the greatest of them to
the least of them; for word came from the king of Nineveh, and
he arose from his throne, and he cast his robe from him, and
covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes; and he caused it to
be proclaimed and published throughout Nineveh, by the decree of
the king, and of his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast,
herd nor flock, taste any thing; let them not feed, nor drink
water ; but let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry
mightily unto God; yea, let every one turn from his evil way,
and from the violence which is in their hands: who can tell, if
God will turn and repent, and turn away his fierce anger, that we
perish not?"
Which words contain an excellent and lively pattern for all true
penitents to follow, and whereunto to conform themselves in their
humiliation and repentance. And truly, though there be no Jonah
sent expressly from God to cry unto us, " Yet forty days, and Nine
veh shall be destroyed ;" yet seeing the mouth of eternal truth hath
taught us, that a kingdom divided is in such danger of ruin and de
struction, that, morally speaking, if it continue divided, it cannot
stand ; and seeing the strange and miserable condition of our na
tion at this time may give any considering man just cause to fear,
that as in Rehoboam's case, so likewise in ours, " the thing is of
the Lord," intending to bring his heavy judgment upon us, for our
great sins, and our stupid and stupendous security in sinning, and
to make us instruments of his designed vengeance, one upon ano
ther ; peradventure, it would be a seasonable and necessary mo
tion to be made to our king and his nobles — to revive this old pro
clamation of the king of Nineveh, and to send it with authority
through his majesty's dominions, and to try whether it will produce
some good effect: " Who can tell, if God will turn and repent, and
turn away from his fierce anger, that we perish not ?" Who can
tell, whether he that hath the hearts of king and people in his hand,
and turneth them whithersoever he thinketh best, may not upon
our repentance take our extremity for his opportunity, and at last
open our eyes, that we may see those things that belong to our
peace, and shew us the way of peace, which hitherto we have not
known ? But this by the way : for my purpose, I observe, that this
repentance, which, when the sword of God was drawn, and his arm
advanced for a blow, stayed his hand, and sheathed his sword
again, was not a mere sorrow for their sins, and a purpose to leave
them; nay, it was not only laying aside their gallantry and bravery,

The First Sermon. 543
and putting on sackcloth, and sitting in ashes, and crying mightily
unto God, of which yet we are come very short : but it was also,
and that chiefly, their universal turning from their evil way, which
above all the rest was prevalent and effectual with God Almighty :
for so it is written : " And God saw their works, that they turned
from their evil way, and God repented him of the evil, that he said
he would do, and he did it not."
In the Gospel of St. Luke, (chap, xxiv.) the condition of the new
covenant, to which remission of sins is promised, is expressed by
the word (/.sravoia. — " Thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise
from the dead, and that (ixsranm) repentance and remission of sins
should be preached in his name." Which place, if ye compare it
with that in the Gospel of St. Matthew, " Go and teach all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of
the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all whatsoever I shall
command you ;" it will be no difficulty to collect that what our
Saviour calls in one place u,STavoia, repentance ; that he calls in
another, observing all that he hath commanded ; which, if repent
ance were no more but sorrow for sin, and intending to leave it, cer
tainly he never could, nor would, have done : and as little could
St. Paul (Acts xx. 21) profess, that the whole matter of his preach
ing was nothing else but Msravoia eis <rov ©sov, " Repentance toward
God, and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ:" it being manifest in his
epistles, he preaches, and presses every where, the necessity of mor
tification, regeneration, new and sincere obedience, all which are
evidently not contained under the head of faith; and therefore it is
evident, he comprised all these under the name of repentance.
In which words, moreover, it is very considerable, as also in an
other place, (Heb. vi. 1,) where, among the fundamentals of Chris
tianity, the first place is given to Msrdvoia owro tojv vsxpuv epyav ;
I say, it is very considerable, that though the word may not
very absolutely be rendered repentance, yet we shall do much right
to the places, and make them much more clear and intelligible, if,
instead of repentance, we should put conversion, as it is in some of
the best Latin translations : so, for example, if instead of " repent
ance toward God," (Acts xx.) and " repentance from dead works,"
in the epistle to the Hebrews, which our English tongue will
hardly bear, we should read " conversion to God," and " conversion
from dead works ;" every one sees it would be more perspicuous
and more natural ; whereas, on the other side, if, instead of repent
ance, we should substitute sorrow (as every true genuine interpre
tation may, with advantage to the clearness of the sense, be put in
place of the word interpreted), and read the place " sorrow towards
God," and " sorrow from dead works," it is apparent that this
reading would be unnatural, and almost ridiculous ; which is a
great argument, that [Asravoia, to which forgiveness of sins is pro
mised in the gospel, is not only sorrow for sin, but conversion from
sin. And yet, if it be not so, but that heaven may be purchased at
easier, and cheaper rates ; how comes it to pass, that in the New
Testament we are so plainly and so frequently assured, that with-

544 The First Sermon.
out actual and effectual amendment, and newness of life, without
actual and effectual mortification, regeneration, sanctification, there
is no hope, no possibility of salvation ?
" Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down,
and cast into the fire." (Luke iii. 9.) So St. John Baptist preaches
repentance. It is not then the leaves of a fair profession, no, nor
the blossoms of good purposes and intentions ; but the fruit, the
fruit only, that can save us from the fire: neither is it enough not
to bear ill fruit, unless we bring forth good. "Every tree that
bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire."
" Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into
the kingdom of heaven, but he that doth the will of my Father
which is in heaven :" so our Saviour, Matt. vii. 21. And again,
after he had delivered his most divine precepts in his sermon on
the Mount (which sermon contains the substance of the gospel of
Christ), he closeth up all with saying, " He that heareth these
sayings of mine, and doth them not (and yet these were the hardest
sayings that ever he said), I will liken him to a foolish man, which
built his house upon the sand (that is, his hope of salvation upon
a sandy and false ground) ; and when the rain descended, and the
floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house, it fell,
and great was the fall of it."
" They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affec
tions and lusts :" so St. Paul, Gal. v. 24. They then that have not
done so, nor crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts, let
them be as sorrowful as they please, let them intend what they
please, they, as yet, are none of Christ's : and, good Lord ! what a
multitude of christians then are there in the world, that do not
belong to Christ I
" The works of the flesh, says the same St. Paul, (Gal. v. 19—21,)
are manifest, which are these ; adultery, fornication, uncleanness,
lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations,
wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness,
revellings ; of which I tell you before, as I have told you in times
past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom
of God." He doth not say, they which have done such things shall
not be saved, but manifestly to the contrary — " Such were some of
you ; but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified:" but he says, they
which do such things, and without amendment of life shall con
tinue doing them, shall not be excused by any pretence of sor
row and good purposes : they " shall not inherit the kingdom of
heaven." And again, in another epistle, " Know ye not, that the unrighte
ous shall not inherit the kingdom of God ? Be not deceived, neither
fornicators, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor abusers of themselves
with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor revilers,
shall inherit the kingdom of God."
" In Christ Jesus (said the same St. Paul in other places) nothing
availeth but faith : nothing but a new creature : nothing but keep
ing the commandments of God." It is not then a wishing, but a
working faith ; not wishing you were a new creature, nor sorrowing

The First Sermon. 545
you are not, but being a new creature : not wishing you had kept,
nor sorrowing you have not kept, not purposing vainly to keep, but
keeping his commandments, must prevail with him.
" Follow peace with all men, and holiness (saith the divine au
thor of the epistle to the Hebrews), without which no man shall
see the Lord."
St. Peter, in his second epistle, commends unto us a golden
chain of christian perfections ; consisting of these links ; " faith,
virtue, knowledge, temperance, patience, godliness, brotherly kind
ness, charity ;" and then adds — " He that lacketh these things is
blind, and knoweth not that he was purged from his old sins."
Let his sorrow be never so great, and his desires never so good, yet
if he lack these things, he is blind ; and was purged from his old
sins, but is not.
Lastly, St. John, " He that hath this hope, purifieth himself,
even as He is pure :" the meaning is not, with the same degree of
purity, for that is impossible ; but with the same kind, the same
truth of purity; he that doth not purify himself, may, nay doth,
flatter himself, and without warrant presume upon God's favour ;
but this hope he hath not : and again, " Little children, let no man
deceive you ; he that doth righteousness, is righteous, even as He
is righteous ;" and thus you see all the divine writers of the
New Testament, with one consent, and with one mouth, proclaim
the necessity of real holiness, and labour together to disenchant us
from this vain fancy, that men may be saved by sorrowing for
their sin, and intending to leave it, without effectual conversion and
reformation of life ; which, it may well be feared, hath sent thou
sands of souls to hell in a golden dream of heaven.
But is not this to preach works, as the papists do ? No certainly,
it is not ; but to preach works, as Christ and his apostles do : it is
to preach the necessity of them, which no good protestant, no good
christian, ever denied ; but it is not to preach the merit of them,
which is the error of the papists.
But is it not to preach the law in the time of the gospel ? No
certainly, it is not ; for the law forgives no sins, but requires exact
obedience, and curseth every one which, from the beginning to the
end of his life, " continueth not in all things which are written in
the law to do them ;" but the gospel says, and . accordingly I have
said unto you, that there is mercy always in store for those who
know the day of their visitation, and forsake their sins in time of
mercy ; and that God will pardon their imperfections in the pro
gress of holiness, who miscall not presumptuous and deliberate
sins by the name of imperfections, but seriously and truly endea
vour to be perfect : only I forewarn you, that you must never look
to be admitted to the wedding feast of the king's son, either in
the impure rags of any customary sin, or without the wedding-
garment of christian holiness; only I forewarn you, that whosoever
looks to be made partaker of the joys of heaven, must make it the
chief, if not the only business of his life, to know the will of God,
and to do it ; that great violence is required by our Saviour for the
taking of this kingdom, that the race we are to run is a long race,
M M

546 The First Sermon.
the building we are to erect is a great building, and will hardly,
very hardly, be finished in a day ; that the work we have to do of
mortifying all vices, and acquiring all christian virtues, is a long
work ; we may easily defer it too long, we cannot possibly begin
it too soon. Only I would persuade you, and I hope I have done
it, that that repentance, which is not effectual to true and timely
conversion, will never be available unto eternal salvation. And if
I have proved unto you, that this is indeed the nature of true re
pentance, then certainly I have proved withal, that that repentance,
wherewith the generality of christians content themselves, notwith
standing their great professions what they are, and their glorious
protestations of what they intend to be, is not the power but the
form, not the truth but the shadow, of true repentance ; and that
herein also we accomplish St. Paul's prediction, " Having a form of
godliness," &c.
And now what remains, but that (as I said in the beginning) I
should humbly entreat, and earnestly exhort, every man that hath
heard me this day, to confute in his particular what I have proved
true in the general ; to take care that the sin of formality, though
it be the sin of our times, may yet not be the sin of our persons ;
that we satisfy not ourselves with the shadows of religion without
the substance of it, nor with the " form of godliness" without the
power of it ?
To this purpose I shall beseech you to consider, that though
sacrificing, burning incense, celebrating of set festivals, praying,
fasting, and such like, were, under the law, the service of God com
manded by himself, yet, whensoever they proceeded not from, nor
were joined with, the sincerity of an honest heart, he professeth
frequently almost in all the prophets, not only his scorn and con
tempt of them all, as fond, empty, and ridiculous; but also his
hating, loathing, and detesting of them as abominable and impious.
" The sacrifice of the wicked is abomination to God." (Prov. xv. 8.)
" What have I to do with the multitude of your sacrifices ? saith
the Lord." (Isa. i.) " I am full of the burnt-offerings of ram', and
of the fat of fed beasts. When ye come to appear before me, who
required this at your hands? bring no more vain oblations: incense
is an abomination to me : I cannot suffer your new moons, nor sab
baths, nor solemn days, it is iniquity, even your solemn assemblies:
my soul hateth your new moons, and appointed feasts : they are a
burden to me, I am weary to bear them ; and when you shall
stretch out your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you ; and though
you make many prayers, I will not hear ; for your hands are full of
blood.?' And again, (Isa. lxvi. 3,) " He that kills an ox, is as if he slew a
man ; he that sacrificeth a lamb, as if he cut off a dog's neck ; he
that offereth an oblation, as if he offered swine's flesh; he that
burnetii incense, as if he blessed an idol." And what is the reason
of this strange aversion of God from his own ordinances? It follows
in the next words : " They have chosen their own ways, and their
soul delighteth in their abominations."
Terrible are the words which he speaketh to the same purpose

The First Sermon. 547
in the prophecy of Amos, (chap. v. 21 — 23.) " I hate, I despise
your feast days, and I will not smell in your solemn assemblies:
though you offer me burnt-offerings, and meat-offerings, I will not
accept them ; nor will I regard your peace-offerings."
Now, beloved, if this hypocrisy, this resting in outward perform
ances, were so odious to God under the law, a religion full of
shadows and ceremonies ; certainly it will be much more odious to
do so under the gospel, a religion of much more simplicity, and
exacting so much the greater sincerity of the heart, even because it
disburdens the outward man of the performance of legal rites and
observances. And, therefore, if we now under the gospel shall
think to delude God Almighty, as Michal did Saul, with an idol
handsomely dressed instead of the true David; if we shall content
and please ourselves with being of such or such a sect or profes
sion : with going to church, saying, or hearing of prayers, receiv
ing of sacraments, hearing, repeating, or preaching of sermons,
with zeal for ceremonies, or zeal against them ; or, indeed, with
any thing besides constant piety towards God, loyalty and obe
dience towards our sovereign, justice and charity towards all our
neighbours, temperance, chastity, and sobriety towards ourselves ;
certainly we shall one day find that we have not mocked God, but
ourselves ; and that our portion among hypocrites shall be greater
than theirs.
In the next place, let me entreat you to consider the fearful
judgment which God hath particularly threatened to this very sin,
of drawing nigh unto him with our lips, when our hearts are far
from him. It is the great judgment of being given over to the
spirit of slumber and security, the usual forerunner of speedy deso
lation and destruction, as we may see in the twenty-ninth chapter
of Isaiah, from the ninth to the fourteenth verses: "Stay your
selves and wonder, cry ye out, and cry, They are drunken, but not
with wine, they stagger, but not with strong drink ; for the Lord
hath poured out upon you the spirit of deep sleep, and hath closed
your eyes. The prophets, and your rulers the seers, hath he
covered :" and after, at the fourteenth verse, " The wisdom of
their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent
men shall be hid." Certainly, this judgment, if ever it were upon
any people, we have cause to fear it is now upon us. For, if the
spirit of deep sleep were not upon us, how could we sleep so se
curely even upon the brink of the pit of perdition ? How could
we proceed on so confidently in our mirth and jollity, nay, in our
crying sins, and horrible impieties ; now when the hand of God is
upon us, and wrath is gone out, and even ready to consume us ?
And if the wisdom of our wise men were not perished, how were it
possible they should so obstinately refuse the security offered of
our laws, liberties, and religion, by the king's oath, by his execra
tions on himself, and his posterity, in case he should violate it ; by
the oaths of all his ministers, not to consent to, or be instruments
in, such a violation ; by the so-much-desired triennial parliament,
from which no transgressor can possibly be secure ; and instead
of all this security seek for it by a civil war, the continuance
mm2

548 The Second Sermon.
whereof must bring us to destruction and desolation ; or else he hath
deceived us, by whom we are taught, that " a kingdom divided
against itself cannot stand."
Now, what was the sin which provoked this fearful judgment ?
What but that which I have laboured to convince you of, and to
dissuade you from, even the sin of hypocrisy ? As we may see at
the twelfth verse : " Wherefore, saith the Lord, forasmuch as this
people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour
me, but have removed their heart far from me; and their fear to
wards me is taught by the precepts of men : therefore, behold, I will
proceed to do a marvellous work amongst tbem ; for the wisdom of
their wise men shall perish," &c.
Consider, thirdly, what woes, and woes, and woes, our Saviour
thunders out against the scribes and pharisees for their hypocrisy :
" Woe be unto you, scribes and pharisees, hypocrites;" and again
and again, " Woe be unto you, scribes and pharisees, hypocrites."
Beloved, if we be hypocrites, as they were, " tithe mint and cum
min, and neglect the weighty matters of the law, judgment, and
justice, and mercy," as they did ; " make long prayers, and under
a pretence devour widows' houses," as they did ; " wash the out
side of the dish and platter," while within we are full of ravening
and wickedness; write God's commandments very large and fair
upon our phylacteries, but shut them quite out of our hearts : " build
the sepulchres of the old prophets," andkill their successors : in fine,
if we be like " painted sepulchres," as they were, " outwardly gar
nished and beautiful, but within full of dead men's bones and rot
tenness ;" we are then to make account that all these woes belong
to us, and will one day overtake us.
Consider, lastly, the terrible example of Ananias and Sapphira,
and how they were snatched away in the very act of their sin ; and
that their fault was (as the text tells us) that " they lied unto God."
Beloved, we have done so a thousand thousand times : our whole
lives (if sincerely examined) would appear, I fear, little less but a
perpetual lie. Hitherto God hath been merciful to us, and given
us time to repent ; but let us not proceed still in imitating their fact,
lest at length we be made partakers of their fall.
God of his infinite mercy prevent this in every one of us, even for
his Son our Saviour Jesus Christ's sake ; by whom, and with whom,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit, be all honour and glory to the eter
nal Father, world without end. Amen.

SERMON II.
" The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." — Psalm xiv. 1.
If you will turn over some few leaves, as far as the fifty-third
psalm, you shall not only find my text, but this whole psalm,
without any alteration, save only in the fifth verse, and that not at

The Second Sermon. 549
all in the sense neither. What shall we say? Took the Holy
Spirit of God such especial particular notice of the sayings and
deeds of a fool, that one expression of them would not serve the
turn ? Or, does the babbling and madness of a fool so much con
cern us, as we need to have them urged upon us once and again,
and a third time in the third of the Romans? Surely not any one
of us present here is this fool. Nay, if any one of us could but tell
where to find such a fool as this, that would offer to say, though in
his heart, " There is no God," he should not rest in quiet, he should
soon perceive we were not of his faction.
2. We that are able to tell David an article or two of faith, more
than ever he was acquainted with, nay, more, can we with any
imaginable ground of reason be supposed liable to any suspicion
of atheism, that are able to read David a lecture out of his own
psalms, and explain the meaning of his own prophecies, much
clearer than himself, which held the pen to the Holy Spirit of
God ? Though we cannot deny, but that in other things there
may be found some spice of folly, and imperfection in us : but it
cannot be imagined, that we, who are almost cloyed with the
heavenly manna of God's word, that can instruct our teachers,
and are able to maintain opinions and tenets, the scruples whereof
not both the universities of this land, nor the whole clergy, are able
to resolve ; that it should be possible for us ever to come to that
perfection and excellency of folly and madness, as to entertain a
thought that there is no God: nay, we are not so uncharitable
as to charge a Turk, or an infidel, with such a horrible imputation
as this.
3. Beloved christians, be not wise in your own conceits : if you
will seriously examine the third of the Romans (which I mentioned
before) you shall find, that St. Paul, out of this psalm, and the
like words of Isaiah, doth conclude the whole posterity of Adam
(Christ only excepted) under sin, and the curse of God : which in
ference of his were weak and inconcluding, unless every man of
his own nature were such an one as the prophet here describes,
and the same apostle in another place expresses, " Even altogether
without God in the world;" i. e. not maintaining it as an opinion,
which they would undertake by force of argument to confirm, that
" there is no God ;" for we read not of above three or four among
the heathens, that were of any fashion, which went thus far; but
such as, though in their discourse and serious thoughts they do not
question a deity, but would abhor any man, that would not liber
ally allow unto God all his glorious attributes, yet in their hearts
and affections they deny him ; they live as if there was no God, hav
ing no respect at all to him in all their projects ; and therefore, in
deed, and in God's esteem, become formally, and in strict propriety
of speech, very atheists.
4. That this is most true, and that therefore many, who, because
they are orthodox in opinion, have thereupon a great conceit of
their faith towards God; yet, being strictly examined, shall be
found to have built such glorious buildings in shew upon sand ; or,
which is worse, to have made hay and stubble (matter fit only for

550 The Second Sermon.
the fire) foundations of many golden hopes, and giorious presump
tions, must be shewed at large hereafter.
5. The words now read are a secret confession, which the fool
whispers to his own heart ; he neither can nor dare profess this
openly ; and when he calls his reason to counsel about this busi
ness, the question is far otherwise stated. The words do not run
thus : The fool being convicted by evidence of reason and demon
stration, hath concluded, " there is no God :" no, this is no heathen
ish philosophical fool ; he is quite of another temper : this is a
worldly, proud, malicious, projecting, wise fool ; a fool that knows
it is for his advantage to put God out of his thoughts; and there
fore doth forcibly captivate, and wilfully hoodwink, his understand
ing ; and thinks he hath obtained a great victory, if he can con
trive any course to bring himself to that pass, that no cold melan
choly thoughts of God or hell may interrupt or restrain him from
freely wallowing in the lusts and uncleanness of his heart, without
any remorse, without any reluctance or griping, within him. It is
for his heart's sake, the love that he bears to the lust thereof, that
makes him an atheist : if it could stand with that course and trade
of life that he is resolved upon, to entertain contrary thoughts, he
would as soon work his judgment and thoughts another way. And,
therefore, in his open profession, it sometimes falls out, that even
when he wishes, there were no God, yet he is a very forward zeal
ous acknowledger in general of God, and his glorious attributes :
so that the same desire of a quiet and uninterrupted enjoying the
scope and freedom of the lusts and affections of his heart, makes
him both a resolute secret atheist, and withal wise enough to keep
his folly to himself, and to make none else acquainted with his cu
rious art and method of such woeful self-deceiving, but his dearly
beloved heart : " The fool," &c.
6. The discussion of these words does not engage me to a divid
ing or descanting upon the whole psalm. Let it suffice, that we
may most probably conceive, that David, in this psalm, intends
the description of the woeful estate of that kingdom, after God
had taken away his good Spirit from Saul ; wherein the secret ene
mies of God did greedily lay hold on that occasion to vex and de
spite, and, as much as was in their power, to lay waste the heri
tage of God.
7. " The fool " (who is the person that through the whole psalm
works all the mischief), in the original is Nabal, which hath the
signification of fading, dying, or falling away, as doth a leaf or
flower, (Isa. xl. 8,) and is a title given to the foolish man, as having
lost the juice and sap of wisdom, reason, honesty, and godliness;
being fallen from grace, ungrateful, and without the life of God:
as a dead carcass (which of this word is called Nebalah, Lev. xi.
40), and therefore ignoble and of vile esteem, opposed to the
noble man, (Isa. xxxii. 5). The apostle, in Greek termeth it im
prudent, or without understanding. (Rom. x. 19 ; from Deut.
xxxii. 21.)
8. " Hath said in his heart, There," &c. i. e. not so much per-
suadeth himself in secret, that " there is no God :" but rather

The Second Sermon. 551
expresseth so in his life, or in his affections, which are called the
heart, in the phrase of God ; proportionable to the same expression
of David (Psal. x. 4,) " The wicked through the pride of his
countenance will not seek after God : God is not in all his crafty
purposes." If you would have the full sense of my text more
largely expressed, turn to Tit. i. 16, where persons of the same
mould, that the prophet here complains of, are thus described;
" They profess that they know God, but in works they deny him,
being abominable, and disobedient, and to every good work void of
judgment." 9. Where are observable, first, the cause of this practical
atheism, in these last words of the verse ; " They were to every
good work, aowifioi," and that was ignorance, or rather impru
dence, inconsiderance ; implying not a bare want of knowledge,
but an abusing thereof, in not reducing it to practice, in hiding the
light which was in them under a bushel. Secondly, then we have
the manner of the expression of this atheism, viz. not in words, or
in opinion, to deny God ; but, which is worse, in the carriage and
course of our life : to allow him attributes, and yet not to fear
him, not to stand in awe of his power, which he acknowledgeth to
be infinite, to distrust his providence, to slight his promises, neglect
his threatenings, which is in effect, as much as in him lieth, to tear
and ravish from him all his glorious attributes, by living, as if God
himself were less powerful, less wise than himself, improvident, not
deserving so much fear of his power, or respect to his command, as
he would perform to a wretched mortal man, that is a little richer,
or in some place of authority above him.
10. I need travel no farther for a division to my own text. Here
we may observe, likewise, first, the cause of atheism, and, by con
sequence, all the abominable impieties that follow in the psalm ;
and-that is ignorance, indiscretion, inconsiderance, expressed in the
person of Nabal, " the fool." Secondly, we have the expression of
it, not by word of mouth, or writing, but per motum cordis, by the
inclination of the heart, or affections.
11. In the prosecution of the former part (which may very well
take up and spend this hour-glass), I shall proceed thus : first, I
will consider wherein this folly consists, and that it is not so much
in an utter ignorance of God and his holy word, as a not making
a good use of it when it is known, a suffering it to lie dead, to swim
unprofitably in the brain, without any fruit thereof in the reforma
tion of one's life and conversation : and there I will shew you the
extreme folly for a man to seek to increase his knowledge of his mas
ter's will, without a desire and resolution to increase proportionably
in a serious active performance thereof. Secondly, I will propose
to your consideration the extreme unavoidable danger and increase
of guilt, that knowledge without practice brings with it. To both
which considerations I shall severally annex applications to the con
sciences of you, my hearers, and to spend out my time.
12. Now I take it for granted, that I have hit right in declaring
wherein the folly of Nabal in my text consists ; namely, in an
unfruitful knowledge, a knowledge that lies fallow, is not exer-

552 The Second Sermon.
cised ; which if it were not allowed me, I would only refer myself
for proof unto some of David's psalms, and almost all his son's pro
verbs. I should sin against the plenty of matter in my text, more
worth our consideration, if I should enlarge myself in this point :
only one place of David shall suffice, and that is in Psal. cxi. 10 ;
where he repeats that old divine Proverb made by God himself,
the Lord knows how long since, and by him delivered to man, as
Job telleth us (chap, xxviii. ver. 28). The psalmist's words are
these : " The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, and a good
understanding have all they that do thereafter."
13. I do not now exclude ignorance from making up some part
of this fool ; but because the other piece of extreme desperate folly
is rather the sin of these days, namely, a barren uneffectual know
ledge, therefore I shall rather insist upon it : yet, by the way, I
shall not fail to discover to you the danger of the other too.
14. It is a pretty observation, that the author of the narration of
the English seminary founded in Rome has, concerning the method
and order the devil has used in assailing and disturbing the peace
and quiet of the church with heresies and schisms. He began
(saith he) with the first article of our creed, concerning one God,
the Father Almighty, Creator of heaven and earth ; against which,
in the first three hundred years, he armed the Simonians, Menan-
drians, Basilidians, Valentinians, Marcionites, Mahichees, and
Gnostics. After the three hundredth year he opposed the second
article concerning the divinity of our Lord Jesus Christ, by his be
loved servants the Noetians, Sabellians, Paullians, Photinians, and
Arians. After the four hundredth year he sought to undermine the
fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh articles, of the incarnation, passion,
resurrection, ascension, and the second coming to judgment, by the
heresies of Nestorius, Theodorus, Eutyches, Dioscorus, Cnapheus,
Sergius, &c. After the eight hundred and sixtieth he assailed the
eighth article concerning the Holy Ghost, by the heresy and schism
of the Greek church. Lastly, since the year 1000, till these times,
his business and craft has especially expressed itself in seeking to
subvert the ninth and tenth, concerning the holy catholic church,
and forgiveness of sins, by the aid and ministry of the Pontificians,
anabaptists, familists, and the like : and with the deceits and snares
of these, his cunning ministers, hath he entangled the greatest part
of the now christian world.
15. But (our blessed and gracious God be praised for it!) we,
and some with us, have escaped as a bird out of the snare of the
fowler ; the net was broken, and we were delivered. The whole
doctrine of christian faith is restored to the primitive lustre and in
tegrity : nay more (which is a greater happiness than God ever
created to those his chosen good servants which lived in the infancy
of the church), the profession of a pure unspotted religion is so far
from being dangerous or infamous, that we have the sword of the
civil magistrate, the power and enforcement of the laws and sta
tutes, to maintain this our precious faith, without stain and unde-
filed, against all heretical and schismatical oppugners thereof.
16. If ever we forget the goodness and mercy of God in this oar

The Second Sermon. 553
deliverance, then let our tongues cleave to the roof of our mouths:
nay, if in our songs of joyfulness and melody we remember not our
escape, wherewith the Lord snatched us out of Egypt, and our vic
torious passage through a red sea of blood and ruin, thou, O Lord,
wilt not hear our prayers.
17. It was a seasonable admonition that the apostle St. Paul*
gave to other gentiles after such a glorious victory and deliverance
as this of ours, " be not high-minded, but fear." Heresy is not the
only engine that Satan is furnished with, to assault and infest the
church of Christ, neither is it the most dangerous : he has the cun
ning to destroy foundations, and make no use of heresy in the work
neither. You would wonder how it should be possible for the devil
to make an orthodox christian, one perfect and studied in all the
points of the creed, and one that can for a need maintain the truth
thereof against all gainsayers : I say, it would seem strange for the
devil to make such a one to destroy and utterly demolish the very
foundations of his faith, and yet not at all to alter his opinions
neither : yet, that it is not only a possible contrivance, but too, too
ordinary and familiar in these times, woeful experience hath made
it evident. 18. The art and cunning whereby this great work of the devil's
is brought about, is clearly detected by our Saviour in his exposi
tion of the parable of the sower, in these words :f " when they have
heard, then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their
hearts;" i. e. the devil will give such people leave freely to hear the
word of God preached, to study it, dispute it,- to know and be ac
quainted with all the curious intricate subtilties of it, upon condi
tion that they will promise to 'resolve not to be a jot the better
disposed for it in their lives. He can well suffer it to swim in the
brain, that the understanding should be enlightened, the fancy
affected and pleased with it, so that he may have leave to stop the
secret intercourse and passages thence to the heart : it troubles him
not to have the precious seed of the word entertained by a man, so
that it may be kept up safe in granaries, and not multiply ; so that
the heart be not ploughed up, and furrowed, for the receiving of it;
as long as there is no fruitful harvest there, all goes well.
19. He will be so far from hindering such from going to the
church, so that their errand be to learn what they may be able to
talk of, and maintain discourse with, that he could wish every day
were a Sunday for them, that they might be able, by abundance
of knowledge, fruitless, and. void of practice, to hasten and aggra
vate their own damnation.
20. Now whom the devil thus uses, whom he thus baits, nay,
contents and satisfies with an empty, speculative, aerial knowledge,
a knowledge only fruitful in increasing their guilt and torment, who
can deny to be sottish, ignorant, easy fools, childishly affected with
a knowledge, glorious only in show, without any substance or depth
at all? And yet, this was a temptation strong enough for paradise:
for just so did the devil entrap Adam at the first ; so that, in him,
we have received one foil already at this weapon: and he proceeds
* Rom. xi. 20. t Luke viii. 12.

554 The Second Sermon.
daily in acting that over again. For what was it destroyed Adam,
but the preferring of the tree of knowledge before the tree of life !
21 . St. James,* speaking of such persons so ensnared, seems to
take much of the envy and deceit of so cruel deceit and cozenage,
as this is, from off the devil, and to lay it upon themselves : " be
not hearers of the word only, but doers also ; deceiving yourselves."
He confesses such to be fools, cozened and deceived people : but,
themselves, saith he, are their own cheaters ; wherein lies a strong
emphasis, expressing the extreme unhappiness of such poor deceived
wretches. If the cunning insinuation of one, that for his own ends
pretends friendship to me, draw me into some inconvenience or
danger, the world will think me a fool for being so catched, and
not being able to dive and pierce into his secret purposes : but this
folly is not of so perfect a strain, but that it may deserve both ex
cuse and pity. But that man that spends his whole life in con
triving and plotting, and laying snares for his own soul ; if, after
all this ado, he be indeed caught in the pit, that, with so much
pains, he digged only for himself, would not any man forfeit his
discretion, that should either excuse or pity him ? And in such,
or worse a case, is he, that contents himself with bare hearing and
knowing the word.
22. Who do you think would undertake to excuse a pharisee, if
he should be condemned for want of spiritual wisdom ; one whose
profession it was, whose trade and course of life, to be conversant
in the scriptures; who had spent his age in reading the holy writ,
and teaching others out of it; one that was so curious in having the
scripture always near him, that he wore it continually about him ;
it was a trimming and ornament to his apparel ; it was always in
his eyes; it was girded about the wrists of his arms, and instead of
a lace or fringe at the bottom of his garment? If one, after all this
curiosity of dressing, sedulity in reading, industry in teaching,
should, at length, with so good parts, in such good clothes, go
down into hell, and so die for want of true knowledge ; who would
adventure to excuse him, who would dare to pity him ?
23. Yet not one or two, but the whole college, the whole faction
of them, you shall find, in Matt, xxiii. very near the end, no less
than eight woes denounced against them by our Saviour himself
(who is not very forward to destroy ; he came upon a far other
business), and all I hose woes for their folly and blindness. In the
denouncing of every woe, but one, he styles them hypocrites (and a
hypocrite, you know, is the veriest fool in the world ; for he thinks
to cozen and put a cheat upon God, whom yet himself confesses
to be omniscient, and who knoweth all things) : in that single woe
he calls them "blind guides," elsewhere "fools and blind." This
was our Saviour's judgment of them, and you may rest upon it, that
it was upon sufficient grounds.
24. But their folly and ridiculous madness will yet more appear,
if you take notice of the opinion and judgment that these very
pharisees gave of themselves: it is in John vii. 48, 49. The occa
sion of it was this : the great council of the sanhedrim, seeing so
* James i. 22.

The Second Sermon. 555
many of the ignorant people (as they thought), seduced by our
Saviour, to remedy any further spreading of so dangerous a con
tagion, they, by common advice, send officers to attach him, and
to make him sure enough for preaching. The officers find him
busy, instructing the people ; and, instead of .laying hands on him,
themselves are even caught, and almost bereft of their infidelity.
When sermon was done, they return to their masters, the rulers and
pharisees, without their prisoner, and give a good account why they
did not fulfil their command, in telling them, they never heard a
better preacher in their lives : " never man (say they*) spake like
this man." These wise magistrates, pitying the simplicity and
easiness of their sergeants, answer them thus :f " are ye also de
ceived ? Have any of the rulers, or of the pharisees, believed on
him? But this people, who know not the law, are cursed;" imply
ing that, if the people had been as well read in the law of God as
their teachers were, they would have kept themselves safe enough
from the ensnaring sermons of Christ. But now they may see what
difference there is between men utterly unacquainted with God's
word,^and themselves; how subject they are to destruction, and to
be cursed of God.
25. How is it possible for the wit of man to imagine folly and
madness of a more perfect strain ? Our Saviour Christ, who is
truth itself, did not exact faith from his followers merely for his
miracles' sake, but sent them to search the scriptures :J " for they
(saith he) testify of me." And yet these wise men impute it to their
knowledge of the law, that they were freed from this curse, into
which the poor ignorant people fell. How cunningly have these
fools laid a snare for their own lives !
26. Alas ! what could the poor people think, when they heard
their doctors and magistrates (men that were gods to them, that
sat in Moses' chair) condemned of such extreme folly and indiscre
tion? What will become of us, might they say, if the pharisees
(from whom all that we know is but a thin thrifty gleaning), have
so many woes denounced against them for want of spiritual know
ledge ?
27. Certain it was, there were many poor souls whom the
pharisees kept out of heaven for company. Our Saviour tells
them so much, " Ye neither go into heaven yourselves, nor suffer
others to go in :" but they were such as they had infected with
their leaven ; such as made those rotten superstructions which
those great doctors built upon the word, foundations of their faith
and hope. And as certain it is, that many there were, upon whom
God, out of his gracious favour and mercy, had not bestowed such
piercing brains, and inquiring heads, as to make them acquainted
with their dangerous opinions and traditions. They were such as
made better use of that little kuowledge they had, than to vent it
in discourse, or in maintaining opinions and tenets against the
church. They heard the word with an humble honest heart, sub
mitting themselves wholly to it, and restored their faith to its
proper seat, the heart and affections; and it was fruitful in their
* John vii. 46. t Ver. 47—49. X John v. 39.

556 The Second Sermon.
lives and practice. The wisdom of Solomon himself, as long as
he gave himself to idolatry and luxury, was folly and madness, to
the discretion and prudence of these poor despised people.
28. Thus you see, " the fool," that in my text is so mad as (o
say, "there is no God," may have wit enough to understand more;
nay, in the opinion of the world, may make a silly fool of him that
has laid up in his heart invaluable treasures of spiritual wisdom
and knowledge. And, therefore, the Latin translation, following
St. Paul, might more significantly have styled him imprudens than
insipiens. For the wisdom which is according to godliness, doth
most exactly answer to that prudence which moral philosophers
make a general overruling virtue, to give bounds and limits to all
our actions, and to find out a temper and mean wherein we ought
to walk : and, therefore, a most learned divine of our church, yet
alive, knew very well what he said, when he defined our faith' to
be a spiritual prudence ; implying, that faith bears the same office
and sway in the life and practice of a christian, as prudence of a
moral honest man.
29. Now, saith Aristotle, there may be many intemperate,
youthful, dissolute spirits, which may have an admirable, piercing,
discerning judgment in speculative sciences, as the mathematics,
metaphysics, and the like ; because the dwelling upon such con
templations does not at all cross or trouble those rude untamed
passions and affections of theirs; yea, they may be cunning in the
speculative knowledge of virtues : but all this while they are, not
withstanding, utterly, invincibly imprudent ; because prudence
requires not only a good discerning. judgment and apprehension,
but a serenity and calmness in the passions.
30. Therefore the same philosopher does worthily reprehend
some ancients, who called all virtues sciences ; and said, that each
particular virtue was a several art, requiring only an enlightening
or informing of the reason and understanding, which any, for a
little cost, and small pains-taking, in frequenting the learned lec
tures of philosophers, need not doubt but easily to obtain.
31. This conceit of so learned a man does very well deserve our
prosecution ; and it will not be at all swerving from the business
in hand : therefore I shall shew you, how the moralist, by the
force of natural reason, hath framed to himself a divinity and
religion, resembling, both in method and many substantial parts,
the glorious learning of a christian. I told you, the fore-named
doctor did very well to call our faith, or assent to supernatural
mysteries, a spiritual prudence.
32. Now, besides moral prudence, nay, before the moralist can
make any use thereof, or exercise it in the work of any virtue,
there is required another general virtue, which the philosopher
calls universal justice ; which is nothing else but a sobriety and
temper in the affections, whereby they are subdued and captivated
unto well informed reason : so that whatsoever it commands to be
done, there is no rebellion, no unwillingness in the passions, but
they proceed readily to execution, though it be never so distasteful
to sense.

The Second Sermon. 557
33. Now, how well does this express the nature of charity ! for,
what else is love, but a sweet breathing of the Holy Spirit upon
our passions, whereby the Holy Ghost does, as it did in the be
ginning of Genesis, incubare aquis, move by a cherishing, quieting
virtue, upon the sea of our passions ? Did not the same Spirit
come to Elijah in a soft whisper ? he walks not, in turbine, in a
strong wind, to raise a tempest in our affections. Now, when we
have received this ipsissimam Dei particulam, (as Plato said of the
soul) this shred or portion of the Holy Spirit, which is charity,
how evenly and temperately do we behave ourselves to God, and
all the world besides ! how willingly and obediently do we submit
ourselves to the performance of whatsoever faith, out of God's
word, doth enjoin us !
34. But yet the analogy and proportion between these two
are more evident and observable : that universal justice is no
particular singular virtue, neither hath it any particular singular
object (as other virtues have ; for example, temperance, or absti
nence, which hath to do with sensual delights and pleasures, and
none else) ; but when it is determined to, and fastens on, the object
of a particular virtue, it is converted into, and incorporates with,
that very virtue : for example, if I do exercise this general habit
of observing a mean and temper in things that concern diet, or
sensual pleasures, it becomes abstinence ; if upon objects of ter
ror, it becomes fortitude, or magnanimity. Just so is it with
charity. For,
35. Charity is a virtue which never goes alone, and is busied in
solitary places, being reserved and excluded from the society and
communion of other graces : but it is that which seasons, gives
life and efficacy to, all the rest; without which, if it were possible
for me to enjoy all the graces that the bountiful hand of God ever
showered upon a reasonable creature, yet, if St. Paul speaks truth,
I should be nothing worth : it is that which fulfils all the com
mandments. This is evident to all that shall but slightly, and
in haste, read over 1 Cor. xiii. beginning with verse 4, and so
onwards; where we may behold almost all the virtues that can be
named, enwrapt in one virtue of charity and love, according to the
several acts thereof, changed and transformed into so many several
graces : it " suffereth long," and so it is longanimity : it " is kind,"
and so it is courtesy ; it " vaunteth not itself," and so it is modesty ;
it " is not puffed up," and so it is humility ; it " is not easily pro
voked," and so it is lenity ; it " thinketh no evil," and so it is
simplicity ; it " rejoiceth in the truth," and so it is verity ; it
" beareth all things," and so it is fortitude ; it " believeth all
things," and so it is faith ; it " hopeth all things," and so it is
confidence ; it " endureth all things," and so it is patience ; it
" never faileth," and so it is perseverance.
36. You see two glorious and divine virtues, namely, faith and
charity, though not naturally expressed, vet pretty well counter
feited, by the moralist. And, to make up the analogy complete,
we have the third royal virtue, which is hope, reasonably well
shadowed out in that which they call intentio finis ; which is

558 The Second Sermon.
nothing else but a foretasting of the happiness which they propose
to themselves as a sufficient reward for all their severe and
melancholic endeavours.
37. What shall we say (my beloved friends) ? Shall the heathen
ish moralist, merely out of the strength of natural reason, conclude
the knowledge of what is good, and fit to be done, without a
practice of it upon our affections, and outward actions, to be
nothing worth, nay, ridiculous and contemptible? and shall we,
who have the oracles of God, nay, the whole perfect will of God,
fully set down in the holy scriptures, in every page almost whereof
we find this urged and pressed upon us, that to know our master's
will, without performing it, is fruitless unto us; nay, will intend
the heat, and add virtue and power to the lake of fire and brim
stone, reserved for such empty and unfruitful christians: and
shall we, I say, content ourselves any longer with bare hearing
and knowing of the word, and no more ? God forbid ! rather let
us utterly avoid this holy temple of God; let us rather cast his
word behind our backs, and be as ignorant of his holy will as
even our forefathers were; let us contrive any course to cut off all
commerce and intercourse, all communion and acquaintance with
our God, rather than when we profess to know him, and willingly
to allow him all those glorious titles and attributes, by which he
hath made himself known unto us in his word, in our hearts to
deny him, in our lives and practices to dishonour him, and use
him despitefully.
38. It were no hard matter, I think, to persuade any, but
resolved hardened minds, that fruit is necessary before any admis
sion into heaven, only by proposing to your considerations the
form and process of that judgment, to which you and every man
in his own person must submit. The author's word may be taken
for the truth of what I shall tell you ; for the story we receive
from his mouth that shall be judge of all, and therefore is likely
to know what course and order himself will observe.
39. In the general resurrection, when sentence of absolution, or
condemnation, shall be passed upon every one according to his
deserts, knowledge is on no side mentioned : but one, because he
hath clothed the naked, and fed the hungry, and done such-like
works of charity, he is taken ; and the rest, that have not done
so much, are refused. Will it avail any one then to say, Lord,
we confess we have not done these works, but we have spent many
an hour in hearing and talking of thy word ; nay, we have main
tained, to the utmost of our power, and to our own great preju
dice, many opinions and tenets? Alas! we little thought, that
any spotted imperfect work of ours was requisite ; we were resolved
that, for working, thou hadst done enough for us to get us to hea
ven. Will any such excuses as these serve the turn? far be it from
us to think so.
40. If you will turn to Matt. vii. 22, you shall find stronger
and better excuses than these to no purpose. " Many shall say
unto me, (saith Christ) Lord, have not we prophesied in thy
name?" These were something more than hearers, they had

The Second Sermon. 559
spent their time in preaching and converting souls unto Christ;
(which is a work, if directed to a right end, of the most precious
and admirable value that it is possible for a creature to perform :)
and yet, while they did not practise themselves what they taught
others, they became castaways. Others there were, that had
"cast out devils, and done many miracles;" and yet so loved the
unclean spirits that themselves were possessed withal, that they
could not endure to part company then, and now were never
likely. 41. But have not I all this while mistaken my auditory ? Were
not these instructions fitter for the' universities? Had it not been
more fit and seasonable for me to have instructed and catechized
mine hearers, rather than to give them cautions and warnings,
lest they should abuse their knowledge ? No, surely ! instructions
to make use of knowledge in our practice and conversation, and
not to content ourselves with mere knowing, and hearing, and
talking of the mysteries of our salvation, cannot in the most igno
rant congregation be unseasonable. Even the heathen, which were
utter strangers from the knowledge of God's ways, did, notwith
standing, render themselves inexcusable, for detaining some part of
the truth, as it were, naturally ingrafted in them, in unrighteous
ness. So that there is no man in the world but knows much more
than he practises ; every man hides some part, at least, of his
talent in a napkin ; wherefore let every man, even the most igno
rant that hears me this day, search the most inward secret corners
of his heart for this treasure of knowledge, and let him take it
forth, and put it into the usurer's hands, and trade thriftily with
it, that he may return his Lord his own with increase. "Blessed
is that servant, whom his lord, when he cometh, shall find so do
ing: verily, I say unto you, he shall make him ruler over all his
household." 42. And thus I have gone through one member of my first
general, namely, the consideration wherein the imprudence of the
fool in my text doth consist. In the prosecution whereof I have
discovered unto you, how severally Satan plants his engines for
the subversion of the church. In the primitive times, when reli
gion was more stirring and active, and charity in fashion, he
essayed to corrupt men's understandings with heresies ; and there,
by the way, was observed his order and method, how distinctly
beginning in those first times with the first article, he hath orderly
proceeded to corrupt the next following ; and now, in these last
days, he is got to even the last end of the creed. But since, by
the mercy and goodness of God, we are delivered, and stand firm
in the " faith once delivered to the saints ;" he hath raised another
engine against us that stand, and that is, to work, that our orthodox
opinions do us no good, which he performs by snatching the wdrd
out of our hearts, and making it unfruitful in our lives. Now,
those that are thus inveigled and wrought upon, are merely be
fooled by the devil, or rather by themselves ; for so I told you
that St. James says ; and, for an example, I proposed the learned
pharisees, who, for all their learning and knowledge in the scrip-

560 The Second Sermon.
ture, yet our Saviour denounceth eight several woes against them
for being fools and blind guides. So that the fool in hand
was not opposed to a learned man, but to a prudent man ; and
therefore, a worthy doctor of our church did well define faith to
be a spiritual prudence, that is, a knowledge sought not only for
practice. And there I compared faith with moral prudence, and
the fruit thereof, charity, with the virtue of universal justice.
Therefore, lest the very heathen should rise up in judgment
against us, for not doing so much, with the help and advantage
of God's word, as they could without it; I did and do beseech
you, not to content yourselves with mere knowing and hearing,
with only a conceit of faith without works; for that was an ancient
heresy in the Nicolaitans (whom God by name professed a hatred
to, as Eusebius tells us). And, for an effectual motive, I told you
how, at the last great trial, you shall not be catechized, how well
you can say your creed, or how many catechisms without book,
but how fruitful in works of charity your faith hath been. And
so I come to the second member of the first general, namely,
the consideration how dangerous and grievous a burthen know
ledge will be, where it is fruitless and ineffectual; of which
briefly. 43. I will once again repeat that divine sentence of the Psalmist
in Psal. cxi. 10. " The fear of God is the beginning of wisdom,
and a good understanding "have all they that do thereafter ;" i. e.
till a man put his knowledge in practice, he is so far from being a
good man, that he is scarce a man, hath not the understanding of
a man, till he do, till he fall at work : he was wiser a great deal
before he gained his knowledge. Knowledge alone is a goodly pur
chase in the mean time ; it is so worthy a purchase, that, as it
should seem by our Saviour's account, till a man have obtained
some competency in knowledge, he hath gotten no right to the king
dom of darkness and hell.
44. For, certainly, no man can justly challenge damnation, but
he that is burdened with sin ; now, he that hath no knowledge,
but is utterly blind in his understanding, hath no sin, that is, in
comparison. The words are : (John ix. 39, &c.) " And Jesus
said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see
not might see, and that they which see might be made blind:"
not as if Christ did imprint, or inflict, blindness upon any man,
but only occasionally; that is, those which walk in darkness, and
love it, when the light comes upon them, and discovers their
wandering, they hate it, and turn their eyes from it, and become
more perversely and obstinately blind. In the same sense that
St. Paul saith, (Rom. vii.) " Sin, taking occasion by the law, be
comes more sinful ;" whilst sin is not opposed, it goes on in its
course quietly ; but when the commandment comes, and discovers
and rebukes it, it becomes furious and abominable, and much
more raging and violent.
45. There follows, (ver. 40,) "And some of the pharisees,
which were with him, heard these words, and said unto him, Are
we blind also ?" There is nothing in the world that a pharisee

The Second Sermon. 561
can with less patience endure, than to hear any intimation given,
that he may be suspected of folly ; and, therefore, they were not
so sensible or conceited of some wrong received, when our Saviour
called them " generation of vipers," as they are when their wis
dom and discretion are called in question. Witness this answer ;
when no man spake to them, they suspiciously demand, whether
Christ, in his last words, meant them, or not. But what answers
our Saviour ?
46. (Ver. 41.) "Jesus said unto them, if ye were blind ye
should have no sin ; but now ye say, we see, therefore your sin
remaineth." As if he had said, so little shall this supposed know
ledge and wisdom that ye have profit you, that you shall curse
the time that ever you saw the holy word of God, and wish that
all the sermons that ever you have heard, all the gracious invi
tations, and sweet promises, which God, by the ministry of his
servants the prophets, hath sent unto you, had been sentences of
some horrible death and torments from the mouth of a severe
judge : for your sins, which otherwise had not been so insupport
able, now, by your abusing the knowledge which God hath given
you by your wilful contempt of those many invitations which have
continually sounded in your ears, are become as a mountain upon
you, to crush you into powder. You have hanged a mill-stone
about your own necks, which shall irrecoverably sink you into the
bottomless, comfortless pit, whereas otherwise there might have been
some hope of escape.
47. And yet, for all this, let not any one favour and cherish
himself in this conceit, that he thanks God he is ignorant enough,
that a very little practice will serve his turn, his knowledge is
not so much, that it should put him to too great a labour in ex
pressing it in the course of his life ; for whosoever he be, that
dares entertain or give way to such a thought as this is, let him
be sure, that if he do not know so much as God requires at his
hands (especially now that God hath sealed up the scripture canon,
now that the whole will of God is revealed), this very ignorance
alone will be a thousand weights, to fasten him to the earth, to
make him sure from ever ascending to God, in whom there is no
darkness at all.
48. For it is not so with an ignorant man, as it is with one that
is blind, who, if he will be sure not to tempt God, by venturing
and rushing forward in paths unknown to him, may live as long
and as safe as he that is most quick-sighted : no, ignorance alone,
though it be not active and fruitful in works of darkness, is crime
enough. For, with what colour of reason will such an one expect
the reward of the just ? Such an one will not doubt, but that
the gates of heaven are barred against the sottish, blind, ignorant
heathen, to whom God never revealed any part of his will ; yet
himself may fare well enough. Is not this a degree beyond mad
ness itself? What, does such an one think, that because he lives
among religious people, and such as are well acquainted with
the way to heaven, that himself shall be sure to go for company ?
Does he make no doubt of his part in the resurrection of the just,
N N

562 The Second Sermon.
because he was born in England, or in such a year of our Lord,
when the gospel flourished ? Nay, shall it not be much more
tolerable for the worst of heathens than for such a man ?
49. For, if the heathen were left without excuse, because they
knew not God, or, if they knew him, they did not honour him as
God, whereas they were only instructed by the book of nature;
the very main principle of all religion, namely — that there is a
God, was a business of great labour, and required a good under
standing to find out, being a conclusion to be collected and de
duced from many experiments of his power, providence, and the
like : shall those hope to escape, that pretend ignorance, after
they may, if they refuse it not, have use of all that ever reason
found out ; nay, have before their eyes the sum and effect of all the
sermons and instructions that ever any prophet or apostle made since
the world began ? If, after all this, there be any safety to be hoped
for from ignorance, then have the apostles travelled, Christ preached,
nay died, in vain.
50. But to return to our business in hand. Knowledge, at
least in some measure, there must necessarily be, else no hope of
salvation ; and with knowledge there must of necessity be joined
some proportionable measure of practice, else a greater and more
insupportable burden of woe and destruction. And the reason is
evident out of those words of our Saviour, " To whom much is
given, of him shall much be required." We must know that
there is not any good thing in the world wherein we have any
propriety ; we are only stewards, and have such things committed
to our trust, and one day there will certainly be exacted a strict
account, as of our riches, health, education, but much more our
knowledge, and especially that knowledge which is perfected only
in practice : such is the wisdom of a christian.
51. What reason can be imagined why God should take such
pains, give such royal and precious graces to his servants the
prophets and apostles, to enable them to make known his good
will and pleasure, and what he commands us, and expects at our
hands ? Was all this performed, think we, to afford us only mat
ter of table-talk ? Does he exhort and persuade us, to hear and
discourse? No, surely; he gave it us to profit withal both our
selves and others. And, therefore, where there is a more abundant
plenty of knowledge lent us, the bill of account must arise propor-
tionably, or for what is wanting in the sum we remain debtors ; and
when once the creditor catches us by the throat, and casts us into
prison, there is no coming out till all, even the uttermost farthing,
be discharged : he might well have said never ; for it comes all to
one end.
52. It will be worth our consideration, and very material to
press this so necessary a point, to take notice of the nature and
fashion of the judgment which shall befall the fool in my text,
and such companions of his as are content to enjoy a fruitless in
effectual knowledge, how fit and suitable it is to their offence.
You shall find it expressed in Luke xiii. 25, &c. in these terms:
"Many in that day shall begin to say, We have eaten and drunk

Tlie Second Sermon. 5g3
in thy presence, and thou hast taught in our streets:" this is
something more than hearing sermons, or learning catechisms by
heart. These had heard him preach, nay, were familiarly ac
quainted with him; and yet in that day will get but a comfortless
answer from him in the following verse; " But he shall say, I
tell you, I know not whence you are : depart from me, ye workers
of iniquity." St. Matthew hath it more sharply : "I never knew
ve." They might else have imputed his not knowing them to the
weakness of his memory : but he stops that conceit, and professes
he never knew them, i. e. he denies not but he had often seen
them at sermon when he preached ; and, it may be, he had eaten
and drunk with them ; yet, for all this, he never knew them ;
they were strangers to him, he never acknowledged them to be
his flock, and therefore was not bound to take notice of them:
but there is one will own them, even Satan, whom before they ac
knowledged for their Lord, and to his kingdom they may, nay they
must, go.
53. Are not these men rightly served ? Are not they justly and
righteously dealt withal ? They had eaten and drunk in his pre
sence, it is true ; nay, peradventure they had eaten him and
drunk him in his sacrament; they had oft heard him preach in
their streets, and could for a need repeat a great deal of the sub
stance of his sermons ; but in very deed they never knew him,
nor one word that ever he spoke ; that is, they took no especial
notice of him, they did not acknowledge him for their Lord, neither
cared they to perform any thing that he commanded. And now
he is quit with them, he remembers well enough what kind of peo
ple they were, even his very enemies and deriders ; and as he never
did acknowledge them for his sheep, so neither now will he admit
them into his fold. A most righteous, yet withal a most heavy
doom. 54. And here I will briefly end my other member of the first
general, namely, how dangerous and heavy a burden knowledge
will be, where it is fruitless and ineffectual : where you have
heard, how poor and worthless a purchase knowledge alone is,
nay, how without it a man has scarce any title at all unto hell ;
there is no guilt without it : alone it is a good qualification, a
fair towardly disposition towards our ruin. Our Saviour pro
fesses, that the pharisees themselves, (a nation the very proverb
of perverseness and infidelity) if they had been blind, i. e. with
out knowledge, they had had no sin. Yet for all this, though
knowledge be so dangerous a ware, (it is something like gunpow
der ; a man when he has it, must take heed how he uses it) yet
this is by no means a sufficient excuse for any one utterly to
neglect the purchase of it, at least, in some measure : for it is
true, knowledge not used, or ill used, will aggravate our tor
ment, and adds even fire unto hell ; yet withal it is true, that an
utter neglect of all knowledge, especially in these times of light,
when it is to be had at so cheap a rate, will make damnation as
sure to a man as the former. Now the reason why knowledge,
where it is fruitless in practice, will be abundantly fruitful in tor-
N N 2

564 The Second Sermon.
ment, is taken from that maxim of our Saviour, " To whom much
is given, of him much shall be required ;" i. e. we being only
stewards of God's blessings, no proprietaries in them, must expect
one day to give account for them all, but especiajly knowledge,
which is a ware of the chiefest trade. Now where there are great
receipts, and no disbursements, the debt must needs be exceeding
great; and when once the sergeant hath arrested us for it, the
Lord knows when we shall pay it. The last thing, that I pro-
posed to your thoughts was, the suitableness of the punishment
that will attend such an offence : for the fool in my text, when he-
would give himself leave to think, knew well enough that there
was a God, and that all his love and service were due to him;
but these were melancholic thoughts, and such as would hinder
him in the prosecution of his designed projects, and therefore he
put them far from him : so that, in effect, and in God's account,
he was utterly ignorant of him, did not at all know him. Just so
shall they be served. Christ knows all the world better than any
man knows his own heart; yet, in that great day, he shall prove
to be a very stranger, utterly ignorant of the greatest part of the
world, though many of them had been his acquaintance here;
nay, though, through faith in his power, they had, unawares, by
wonders and miracles, brought many to heaven, and had been good
helpers to destroy the infernal kingdoms, whereof before they were
in affection, and now for ever must be inhabitants.
55. There remains the other main general, which is indeed the
substance of the whole text, namely, the fruit of this folly ; and
that is, atheism, not in opinion, but practice. In the prosecution
whereof, I shall mainly insist upon this : to demonstrate, by in
fallible deductions, out of God's word, that men who profess re
ligion, and a perfect knowledge of God, yet, whilst they allow
him only the brain, and not (what he only desires) the heart and
affections, may prove, in God's account, very atheists. Or, to briDg
it nearer home, I will shew how that many the ordinary courses,
and the most uncontrolled practices, of men of this age, do utterly
contradict, and formally destroy, the very foundations and princi
ples of the glorious religion which they profess. But this will re
quire a much longer time than your patience can allow me : there
fore I will only add some few words of application of what hath
been spoken, and so conclude.
56. That jewel which our Saviour so magnifies, (Matt, xiii.)
and so commends the wisdom of the merchant for selling all, even
utterly undoing himself, to purchase it, is the gospel of the kingdom
of hea'ven : which, though it be of most precious and inestimable
value, worthy the selling of the whole world to buy it, yet is every
man's money, every man has riches enough to adventure upon it, so
he will but sell all that he has, so he will be content to turn bank
rupt for it ; and upon no other terms can he have it.
57. That advice which Christ gave the rich young man, that
had a good mind to follow him, viz. that he should sell all that
he had, and take up his cross, was not any extraordinary unusual
trial, but we have all accepted the same offer upon the very same

The Second Sermon. 565
conoitions : we must of necessity sell all, deny and renounce the i
keeping and possessing of any thing besides this pearl ; we must '
even sell ourselves, deny and renounce our own souls; they are
both become God's own, and we are but borrowers of them. —
Now, if we be not masters of our goods, nor of ourselves, neither
then may we do our own actions, we must not think our own
thoughts. They were such fools as this great notorious one in my
text, who in Psal. xii. say, " Our tongues are our own ; we may
say what we list." We are all bought with a price, yea, all that
we have is bought.
58. Yet though we must sell all, and deny our ownselves, yet
we need not part with our goods or riches, we need not make
away ourselves. For example : when our Saviour says, " He that
hateth not father, and mother, and brethren, and sisters," and all
the world besides, " for my name's sake, and the gospel's, is not
worthy of me ;" this speech does not bind me to hate, persecute,
and destroy all the kindred I have: no, but rather to love and
honour them, to spend and be spent for them : yet, if those per
sons, or if it be possible for aught else to be more dear and pre
cious than they, stand in my way to hinder me from coming to
Christ, then it is time for me to hate them, then I must trample
them under my feet. So that a man is no more bound to sell his
goods, that is, to throw them away, than he is to hate his parents;
only neither of them may by any means offend us or annoy us in
our journey to Christ.
59. Now, to bring this home to our purpose : can any face be
so impudent as to profess he hath already sold all, himself to boot,
and is ready to part with them when God shall call for them, who
contents himself only with knowing and hearing stories of him,
and reserves his heart to his own use which is all that God re
quires ? Can he with any reason in the world be said to sell all
for the gospel of Christ, that sees Christ himself, every day al
most/hungry, and does not feed him; naked, and does not clothe
him ; in prison, and does not visit him ? for, inasmuch as they do
not these offices of charity to his beloved little ones, they deny
them to him. Will he be found to be worthy of Christ, that for
his sake will not renounce one delightful sin, which an heathen
would easily have done, only for the empty reward of fame ?
that for his sake will not forgive his brother some small injury
received, nay, perhaps some great kindness offered, as a season
able reproof, or loving dissuasion from sinning ; that for his
sake will not undergo the least trouble in furthering his own
salvation? 60. Far from us, beloved christians, be so barren a profession ;
a profession having only the visard and " form of godliness, but
denying the power thereof!" No: let us, with thankful hearts
and tongues, recount and consider what God hath done for our
souls, how he hath given us his word, abundantly sufficient to
instruct us; how he hath spoken the word, and great is the
multitude of preachers. Yet withal let us consider, that it is

566 The Third Sermon.
in our power to turn these invaluable treasures of God's favours
into horrible curses. Let us consider how God hath sent out
his word, and it will not return unto him empty: it will be ef
fectual one way or other, it will perform some great work in
us. God doth but expect what entertainment it finds upon earth,
and will proportion a reward accordingly : on them which de
tain the truth in unrighteousness, he will rain snares, fire, and
brimstone : but to such as, with meek hearts, and due reverence,
" receive it into good ground," and express the power thereof in
their lives, there remaineth an exceeding eternal weight of joy and
glory. " Let us therefore walk as children of the light," and not
content ourselves with, a bare empty profession of religion: "Let
him that but nameth the name of the Lord, depart from iniquity."
Brethren, consider what I say, and the Lord give you understand
ing in all things ! "ToGod,"&c.

SERMON III.
" The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God." — Psalm xiv. 1.
I will not be ashamed to be so far my own plagiary, as for
your sakes, that you may be the better able to go along with me
in what remains of this text, briefly to discover unto you, how far
I have already, in another auditory, proceeded in it.
2. First, therefore, I conceived (by attending to the course
and series of the psalm, and by comparing this place with many
others in holy scripture in different language, expressing the
same sense) that this fool in my text was not a man utterly ig
norant and devoid of the knowledge of God and his word : for
he is supposed by the psalmist to be a man living within the
pale of the church, and outwardly professing the true religion
and worship of God. And thereupon, secondly, that his atheism
was no heathenish, philosophical atheism, no problematical main
taining an opinion that " There is no God ;" for, even among
the very heathens, we read not of above three or four of any
account, which have proceeded to this excelling degree and height
of impiety.
3. But this person (whether Doeg the Edomite, or whosoever
he were) is such an one, as, though in his profession, and even
serious thoughts, he do not question a deity, but would be a '
mortal enemy to any one who should dare to deprive and rob
Almighty God of any of his glorious attributes; yet notwith
standing, in his heart", (that is, in the phrase of the scripture)
in the propension and inclination of his affections, and, by conse
quence, in the course and practice of his life, he denies and re
nounces God : he accounts the spending a little time in thinking
and meditating on the providence, or mercy, or severity of God,
to be an employment very ungainful and disadvantageous to
him, a business likely to trouble and spoil many of his ungodly

The Third Sermon. 567
projects, and to hinder him in his fortunes; and, for this reason, he
will put God far away from him ; he will not suffer him to be (as
the Psalmist saith, Psal. x. 4,) " in all his crafty purposes."
4. I yet willingly confess, that this saying in the heart, " There
is no God," may reasonably be interpreted to be a secret whisper
ing suggestion, an inward persuasion, by fits, which a wretched
worldling may have, that since he has thrived so well by his
carelessness in observing God's word, and obstinate opposing
himself to his will, it may be possible there is indeed no God at
all ; or if there be, that he will not vouchsafe to descend so low
as to take notice what is done here on earth, or to observe how
each particular person behaves himself in this life. Now, be
cause I will not set up one of these expositions against the other,
I will hereafter, as occasion shall offer itself, make use of them
both. 5. Having therefore conceived the sense of the text to be such
as I have now told you ; in the words I observed two general
parts. First, the cause of atheism, and, by consequence, all the
abominations following through the whole psalm, intimated in the
person Nabal, i. e. the fool, which is folly, i. e. ignorance or ra
ther incogitancy, inconsideration. Secondly, the effect of this
folly, which is atheism, and that seated not in the brain, but in
the heart or affections. I have already gone through the former
part, namely, the cause of atheism, which is folly ; in the prosecu
tion whereof; I endeavoured to discover wherein this folly doth con
sist : and that is not so much in an utter ignorance of God, and his
holy word, as not making a good use of it, when it is known ; a
suffering it to lie dead, to swim unprofitably in the brain, with
out any fruit thereof in the reformation of a man's life and con
versation. And, there I shewed, first, what extreme folly it was
for a man to seek to increase the knowledge of his master's will,
without a resolution to increase proportionably in a serious active
performance thereof. And, secondly, the extreme unavoidable
danger and increase of guilt, which knowledge, without practice,
brings with it. To both which considerations I severally annexed
applications to the consciences of them that heard me, and should
have proceeded to —
6. The second general part ; which is, the effect and fruit of the
folly or inconsideration of Nabal, (the fool) in my text, which is
atheism practical, not of the understanding, but the will and affec
tions. But the time being spent in the prosecution of the former
general part, I was forced to reserve this second general, to be the
employment of another hour.
7. Only thus much I then made promise of, (which debt I pur
pose now to discharge to you) namely, to demonstrate by infallible
deductions out of God's word, that many who profess religion
and a perfect knowledge of God's word, yet whilst they allow him
only the brain, and not (what he almost only requires) the heart
and affections, may prove in God's account very atheists. Or, to
bring it nearer home, I promised to shew how that many of the

568 The Third Sermon.
ordinary courses, and most uncontrolled practices, of men of this
age, do utterly contradict, and formally destroy the very founda
tions and principles of that glorious religion which they profess.
Of these, &c.
8. At the first sight, indeed, a man would think, that of all the
places in holy scripture, and of all the ages which have been since
the world began, that this text, and these times, should suit worst
together : for, first, if a man would strive, with all the earnest
ness, and even spite, he could, in all the abominable odious colours
to describe the worst of all human creatures, even the idolatrous,
self-devouring Indians, what more horrible expression could he
imagine to himself than to call them fools, and such fools who
say in their heart—" There is no God ?" Again, if we shall in
quire and ask the former ages, if ever the world was so stored,
and even oppressed with knowledge ; they will tell us, that the light
was never a burden, nor knowledge a vice, before now. Never, till
now, did all sorts and conditions of men pretend to be able to state
the most intricate profound questions of our religion : never till now,
was Moses' wish fulfilled, " I would to God, that all the people of
the Lord were prophets ;" though in a sense which would scarce
have pleased him.
9. These things considered, were it not fit (think you) that I
should renounce my text, or travel to find out a nation whom
it may concern, and who have need to hear atheists condemned?
I would to God (my beloved brethren) that whatsoever I shall
speak against that fearful sin of atheism, may prove vain unpro
fitable words, words which may return empty, having found none
to fasten upon : I would to God, that I might strive now as one
that beateth the air, so that you (even you that know so much)
were innocent. But David found this a doctrine fit to be pressed
in his days, which were none of the worst neither : yea, he hath
a second time, in Psal. Jiii. almost in terminis terminantibus, re
peated whatsoever he here speaks of the atheist : we find not such
an example through the whole scripture, except it be in a history,
or where the quotation is mentioned. Therefore, surely it may
be pertinent, and sometimes useful, even in the church, to have
atheism discovered, to have this doctrine preached and re-preached;
it was so in David's time ; and it shall go hard, but we shall shew,
that we ourselves, though never so wise, and learned, and knowing
in our own opinion, yet that we also ought not to take it to heart,
if sometimes we be suspected and challenged of atheism.
10. That temptation which the devil found hard enough for
himself, even when he was an angel of light, namely, Ero similis
Altissimo, " I shall be like the Most Highest," now that it is his
office and employment to become a tempter, he hath since scarce
ever varied. At the first exercise of his trade with his first cus
tomers, Adam and Eve, he began with it : " Ye shall be as gods,
knowing good and evil." And if we shall impartially examine
our own thoughts, we shall find almost in every suggestion, at
least, some degree and tincture of atheism : either we do exalt

The Third Sermon. 569
and deify our ownselves, or else we do dishonour, and in a manner
degrade Almighty God, deposing him from that sovereignty and sway
which he ought to exercise in our hearts and consciences.
11. This, I say, is true, in some measure, in all temptations, in all
sins whatsoever — there is some quantity Of atheism, though the sins
be but of an ordinary size and rank. But this is not that which I
would now stand upon : it concerns me to shew, that though men
be never so orthodox in their opinions, though they pretend to never
so much zeal of the truth which they profess, yet unless that divine
truth be powerful and persuasive enough to the performance and
practice of such duties as bear a natural resemblance and propor
tion unto it ; they that make such a profession of God's truth do
but flatter themselves ; they only think they believe ; but in deed,
and in truth, there is no such thing as faith in them. For we
must know, that there is no divine truth so utterly speculative,
but that there naturally and infallibly flows and results from it
(as necessarily as warmth from light) a duty to be practised and
put in execution ; insomuch that it is impossible for a man to be
truly persuaded of the one, but he shall infallibly be persuaded to
the other : so that " he which saith he knoweth God, and keepeth
not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him."
(1 John ii. 4.) And this I shall endeavour to confirm by induction,
examining the truth and reality of our assent to the chief funda
mental points of our religion by our practices answerable thereto,
and concluding, that where the latter is not to be found, it is but a
vain persuasion, and fantastical illusion, for a man to think he hath
the former.
12. But, in the first place, that we may be the better able and
without interruption proceed in this designed course, I will first
remove an objection which may seem to prevail against that which
hath been spoken to this effect : " The devils (as St. James saith*)
believe and tremble :" they do indeed assent unto the truth of all
the mysteries of our salvation : in the place of St. James they
acknowledge one God ; in Matt. viii. 29, they acknowledge the se
cond article of our faith, allowing Christ to be the Son of God ; and
the like may be said of the others following : and yet, if we ex
amine their practice, how absolutely contradicting and warring it
is with their profession ! Therefore, it may seem, that where there
is a firm assent to divine truths, there may consist with it a contrary
repugnant practice.
13. For answer, therefore, we must know, that the assent which
the devil gives to the revelations of God is extremely different
from that belief which is exacted of us christians, and which every
one of us (though never so vicious and irreligious) would gladly
persuade ourselves that we allow unto God's word. For though,
for example, the devils acknowledged the precepts and command
ments of God to be holy, and just, and good, and most fit to be
observed; as likewise, that to those who sincerely, and without
hypocrisy, shall perform these commandments of God, the pro-
* James ii. 19,

570 The Third Sermon.
mises of God shall be " yea and amen," they shall infallibly attain
those joys, which exceed man's understanding to comprehend:
yet these things to them are only as a tale which is told ; or ra
ther, they are to some occasion of horror and gnashing of teeth,
that there should be such glorious comfortable things, which do no
thing concern them, and of malice and hatred to those who have an
interest in them, and are in a fair possibility of attaining unto
them ; and therefore no marvel, if such a faith as this be barren
and unfruitful of good works : whereas " our faith (saith St. Paul,
Heb. xi. 1,) is the substance of things hoped for," of things which
concern us : we do not only acknowledge, that the precepts of God
are good, but also necessarily to be performed by us ; and, that the
promises of God are not only desirable in themselves, but also that,
being such, they were revealed for our sakes, and are infallibly
destined unto us, when we shall have performed such conditions
as may, by the assistance of God, be executed by us, even with ease
and pleasure. Now, wheresoever persuasions such as these are, it
is impossible (even if the devils themselves could be supposed ca
pable of them) but that there should accompany them earnest and
serious endeavours not to come short of the glory of God. This
difficulty therefore being dissolved, I shall pursue the examination
of our belief of the foundations of our religion by the fruits and is
sues of it in the practice of our lives.
14. We will begin with some of God's attributes: Whosoever
thou art that professest thyself a christian, thou believest that
God, whom thou servest, is present every where, both in heaven
and earth, insomuch that it is altogether impossible for thee to
exclude him from thy company; wheresoever thou goest, he will
pursue thee : though thou should clothe thyself with darkness as
it were with a garment, the darkness would be to him as the noon
day ; and though it were possible for thee to deceive the eyes and
observation of men and angels, yea, even of thine own conscience,
yet to him thou wouldst be open and transparent, yvp-vls xal
TwpaxflXitf^of. as it were, dissected, and having the very entrails
exposed to his sight.
15. Thou canst hide, therefore, nothing which thou doest from
his eves ; he taketh notice of every word which thou speakest, he
hears even the very whispering of thy thoughts : and all this thou
sayest thou acknowledgest. Out of thy own mouth shalt thou be
condemned, thou wicked servant: darest thou then make thy master
a witness of thy rebellion and disobedience ? When thou art about
the fulfilling of any of thine ungodly lusts, thou retirest thyself
from company, and art afraid of the faces of men ; thou abhorrest
the light, and yet darest outface him whose eyes are ten thou
sand times brighter than the sun. Thou wouldst not have the con
fidence to commit filthiness, if thy friend were in company ; and
yet, what injury is done to him by it? What commandment of his
dost thou transgress in it? Or, if thou didst, what power or au
thority has he over thee to punish thee ? Thou wouldst be ashamed
to commit such a sin, if thy servant were by, one whom thou art

The Third Sermon. 572
so far from being afraid of, that himself, his words, almost his very
thoughts, are in thy power ; nay, if a child were in company, thou
wouldst not have the face to do it.
16. Thou canst not deny, but respect to a friend, to a servant,
even to a child, will withhold thee from such practices ; and yet
withal confessest, that Almighty God, whom thou professest to
serve, to fear, and to love, that he all the while looks upon thee,
and observes thee ; his eyes are never removed from thee, and,
which is worse, though thou mayest endeavour to forget and blot
such actions out of thy remembrance, yet it is impossible he should
ever forget them; he keeps a register of all thy sins, which no
time shall ever be able to deface : and what will it then profit
thee to live a close concealed sinner from the world, or to gain
amongst men the reputation of a devout religious christian, when
in the mean time thine own heart and conscience shall condemn
thee ; nay, when Almighty God, " who is greater than thy heart,
and knoweth all things," when he shall be able to object unto
thee all thy close and ungodly projects, all thy bosom private
lusts ? Yea, when that conceit (wherein thou didst so much please
thyself) of being able to delude and blind the observation of the
world, shall nothing avail thee ; but whatsoever mischiefs thou
hast contrived in thy closet, whatsoever abominations thou hast
practised in thy bed, all these, with each aggravating circumstance,
shall be discovered in the presence of all men, and angels and
devils ; when Satan, whom before thou madest an instrument and
bawd unto thy lusts, to whose counsels and suggestions thou before
wouldst only hearken, shall be the most forward and eager to ap-
peach thee.
17. When thou art brought to such an exigent as this, (which,
without a timely unfeigned repentance, as sure as there is a God
in heaven, thou shalt at last be brought to) what will then thy
orthodox opinions do thee good ? What will it then profit thee to
say, thou never didst maintain any impious dishonourable tenets
concerning God, or any of his glorious attributes? Yea, how
happy hadst thou been, if, worse than the most ignorant heathen
ish atheist, no thought or consideration of God had entered info
thy heart! For this professing thyself a christian, rightly in
structed in the knowledge of God, will prove heavier to thee than
a thousand mill-stones hanged about thy neck, to sink thee into
the bottom of that comfortless lake of fire and brimstone. For,
for example, what a strange plea would it be for a murderer,
to say, 1 confess I have committed such or such a murder,
but all the excuse which I can allege for myself is, that I was
well studied in the laws which forbade murder, and I knew, that
my judge, who tied me to the observance of this law, upon pain
of death, was present, and observed me when I committed the
fact ? Surely it would be more tolerable for him to say, I never
heard of any such law or judge ; or, if I had been told of such
things, I gave but little heed to the report, I did not at all
believe it. For though this plea will be very insufficient to acquit
the malefactor, vet it will be much more advantageous than the

572 Tlie Third Sermon.
former ; for what were that, but to flout the judge to his face, and
to pretend a respectful worthy opinion, for this end, that his con
tempt and negligence in performing his commandments may be more
extreme and inexcusable, and, by consequence, without all hope or
expectation of pardon ? I need make no application of the example ;
the similitude doth sufficiently apply itself.
18. Therefore, if I were to advise any man, who is resolved by his
practice to contradict that opinion, which he saith he hath of God,
or that is not resolved to live with that reverence and awfulness
due to the majesty of Almighty God, in whose presence he always
is, I would counsel him not to believe himself, when he professes
the omnipresence or omniscience of God ; for, without all contra
diction, though by living in a nation, where every one with whom
he converses, professeth so much, he may have learned to say,
there is a God, and that this God is every where present, and
takes particular notice of whatsoever is done in heaven and earth ;
yet, if this notion were firmly rooted in his soul, as a matter of
religion, as a business upon which depends the everlasting welfare
of his soul and body, it is altogether impossible for him to con
tinue in an habitual practice of such things as are evidently re
pugnant and destructive to such a conceit. For, tell me, would
any man in his right senses, when he shall see another drink down
a poison, which he knows will suddenly prove mortal unto him, — I
say, will any man be so mad as to believe such an one, though he
should, with all the most earnest protestations that can be imagined,
profess that he is not weary of his life, but intends to prolong it as
long as God and nature will give him leave ?
19. The case is altogether, in each point and circumstance, the
same : for he which saith, he believeth or assenteth to any doctrine,
as a fundamental point of his religion, intends thus much by it —
that he has bound himself in certain bonds unto Almighty God
(for so the very name of religion doth import) to expect no bene
fit at all from him, but upon condition of believing such divine
truths, as it shall please him to reveal unto him, namely, as means
and helps of a devout religious life, and worship of him : for God
reveals nothing of himself to any man for this end, to satisfy his
curiosity, or to afford him matter of discourse or news ; but to in
struct him how he may behave himself here in this life, that he may
attain those promises, which shall be fulfilled to those who sincerely
and devoutly serve and obey him.
20. Therefore he that shall say, I believe such a truth revealed
by God, and yet lives as if he had never heard of such a thing,
yea, as if he had been persuaded of the contrary, is as much
to be believed, as if he should say, I will drink a deadly
poison to quench my thirst, or will stab myself to the heart
for physic, to let out superfluous blood : so that that man
who is not resolved to break off his wicked courses by re
pentance, and conversion unto God ; that lives as if the devil
only were every where, and he resolved to please and delight him
with his ungodly life ; let not such an one use himself to say, I
believe that God is always present with me, and a spectator of my

TJie Third Sermon. 573
actions ; for thereby he shall only add a lie to the rest of his sins
and fuel to the lake of fire and brimstone : he shall never persuade
God to believe him, that he was of such an opinion ; but that what
soever his tongue said, and his fancy now and then apprehended,
yet in his conscience he was always a constant resolved atheist, and
in his heart he said, " There is no God."
21. In the second place, thou acknowledgest, that God, whom
thou professest obedience to, is infinitely righteous, insomuch that
it is impossible that he should not hate and abhor unrighteousness
in whomsoever he finds it ; yea, so natural and essential is his justice
unto him, that he should deny himself, if he should except any man's
person, if he should not be avenged on sin, if he should not most
severely punish it. Thou canst not be ignorant how many vows
and protestations he hath made almost every where through the
holy scripture, of his hatred and indignation against sin, insomuch
that heaven and earth may pass away, but not one jot or tittle of
those curses and plagues shall fall to the ground, which he hath
denounced against impenitent sinners.
22. And shall not thy own mouth here once again condemn
thee, 0 thou wicked servant ? Darest thou then every hour
wilfully, and even contentedly, do such things as must certainly pro
cure his anger and indignation against thee for ever? Wilt thou,
for the sinful pleasure of a few minutes, put thyself in such a con
dition, that God must of necessity be angry with thee ? That he
must cease to be God, unless he hate and abhor thee ? Certainly,
if thou wouldst descend into thine own heart, if thou wouldst give
thyself leave carefully and impartially to examine thy thoughts,
thou wouldst find, that thy tongue has given thy soul the lie,
when it has told thee, that God is immutably just and righteous ;
and yet for all that, that thou art resolved to run on in such courses,
as must of necessity pull down his heavy displeasure against
thee. 23. At least, thou wilt find in thy heart earnest desires and
wishes, that God were not so righteous as preachers tell thee he
is ! 0 ! (thinkest thou in thy heart,) that God were such an un
righteous person as I am ! O ! that he could be content to wink
at me, when I am about the fulfilling of my ungodly desires!
Alas ! what harm is it to him, what inconvenience accrues to him
by it, if I enjoy the sinful pleasures of this life ? Or, if he will
needs be angry, O that it were not in his power to revenge him
self upon me ! O that his power were not so unlimited as they say
it is !
24. I know men will be apt to flatter themselves though they
be never so vicious, and to think, that they are extremely wronged,
to have such imputations laid upon them : they will be ready to
answer me, in the words of Hazael to the prophet Elisha, when he
told him what horrible massacres he should commit among the
Israelites, when he should have the crown of Syria set on his head,
" What ! dost thou think us dogs, that we should do such things as
these?" We are so far from robbing God of his justice, that we
should be mortal enemies to any that dare proceed to that height

574 The Third Sermon.
of impiety; nay, we should be content to sacrifice our own lives,
rather than be brought to deny that, or any other of his glorious
attributes. 25. Truly, I am so charitably minded, as to think that there is
none so wicked, but would confidently make this defence for him
self, yea, and believes he is in earnest when he speaks so. But
this will not serve the turn ; for " God seeth not as man sees,"
he judgeth not as man judgeth, but he judgeth righteous judg
ment : for instance, in that great example which our Saviour
gives of the fashion and course of judgment, according to which he
purposes to proceed in the last day ; he accuses the wicked, and
condemns them for neglect of visiting, and feeding, and clothing
him. The apology which they make for themselves, as having
never seen him in that exigence, would not be taken : for though
I am persuaded they there spake nothing but what they verily
thought, namely, that if ever they had seen Christ himself in such
want and necessity, they would not have been so hard-hearted to
him as they were to his poor servants; yet Christ will not allow
of that excuse, but accounts of their uncharitableness to afflicted
christians as directed to himself.
26. So likewise in the case in hand : though I believe it would
be hard to persuade even the most licentious professed sinner, that
he believes not indeed the justice and righteousness of God : yet
he shall find at last, and that miserably to his cost, that God, who
knows his heart much better than himself, for all his professions,
will yet esteem him an atheist ; and will prove evidently and con
vincingly unto him, that since that knowledge, which he pretended
to have of God's righteousness, had been so fruitless and superficial,
that, notwithstanding such a conceit, he proceeded still on in his
ungodly courses, that therefore he did but delude himself all
the while with fantastical ungrounded illusions; so that what
soever imagination swim in his brain, yet, in the language of
his heart, that is, in the propension and sway of his affections,
he said, " There is no God." — Now, what hath been said of the
omnipresence, infinite knowledge, and justice of God, may by the
same reason and proportion, be spoken of the rest of his glorious
attributes. But the straitness of time will force me to leave the
rest untouched : I will proceed therefore to make the like collections
from one or two articles more of the creed.
27. Thou believest, that, after this life, (which cannot last very
long ; it will, and that shortly, have an end,) there remain but
two ways for all men, of what state and condition soever, that
ever were to be disposed of; either into life and glory everlasting,
or else into pains and torments infinite and insupportable; and,
by consequence, that thy soul is an immortal substance, which
shall for ever continue somewhere: and according to thy beha
viour here, during that short measure of time which thou hvest
upon the earth, it must expect a reward proportionable thereto.
If thou canst persuade thyself to walk worthy of that calling,
whereunto thou art called in Jesus Christ; if thou wilt not for
swear and renounce that glorious profession which thou madest

Tlie Third Sermon. 575
in thy baptism ; if thou canst be content to submit thyself to the
easy yoke of Christ ; propose to thyself what reward thou canst
imagine, give thy thoughts scope and license to be excessive and
overflowing in their desires ; if thou art not satisfied to the utter
most, infinitely above what thou art now able to comprehend, tell
God he is a liar, and hath deceived thee. O ! what unspeakable
joys shall hereafter expect thee ! O ! with what a burden and
weight of glory shalt thou even be oppressed !
28. But on the other side, if, notwithstanding such inestimable
blessings as are now set before thine eyes, thou art yet resolved
to content thyself with such vain trifling pleasures as thou canst
meet with in this life, which yet thou canst not attain to but with
as much pains, and anxiety, and care, as, if rightly applied, would
have been sufficient to have procured heaven for thee ! what shall
I say unto thee? Only this — "thou hast thy reward; remem
ber that thou hast already received thy good things." What a
terrible affrighting speech is this ! it may be, thou hast fed and
glutted thy lusts with some pleasures of this life ; it may be, thou
hast satisfied, in some small measure, thy ambition with honour
and preferment ; and yet it may be, for all thy cares and travails,
thou hast not been able to attain to any of those things as thou
didst desire : whether thou hast or not, it is all one, there is little
to choose ; but howsoever, " Remember that thou hast received
thy good things;" remember, "Thou hast thy reward." Do not
hereafter presume to offer to pretend to any the least good from
God. It may be, hereafter thou mayest come to such want, as to
stand in need of a cup of cold water ; nay, it may be, thou wouldst
think thyself happy, if any body would afford thee but one drop
of water to refresh thy tongue : but in vain ; for, " Son, remem
ber thou hast already received thy good things." Thou never
sawest a beggar so utterly wretched and destitute, but he might
almost every where have filled himself with water, and have
thanked nobody for it; and yet, though thou shouldst even con
sume thyself with entreating and crying for it, yet none should
be found to give it thee ; even thy liberal good father Abraham
will deny it to thee.
29. Surely there cannot be found so impudent, so unreasonable
a sinner, as to profess he is fully persuaded of these things, and
that he hath a desire, and even some hope, that God will be so
merciful to him, as to preserve him, that none of those things
happen unto him, and yet resolve to follow the devices of his own
heart ; to say, he acknowledgeth that the joys, which are reserved
for penitent believers, are so excessively glorious, that the afflic
tions of this life are not worthy of them, much less the vain plea
sures thereof; and yet withal, rather than not enjoy the "plea
sures of sin for a season," to make himself incapable of those
great blessings ! Such a generation of men I find in holy scripture,
and God himself takes notice of them, who say, " We shall have
peace, though we walk in the imaginations of our heart :" but
withal I can scarcely meet with God so impatient through the
whole Bible, as he is with people of such a temper as this;

576 The Third Sermon.
" Surely the Lord will be avenged of such a nation as this, and will
make his wrath to smoke against them."
30. Therefore, whosoever thou art, that hast taken up thy re
solution to walk in the imagination of thine own heart ; at least,
take so much pity of thyself, do not thou thyself add violence and
heat to the wrath of God, which shall smoke against thee, by
pretending to a belief of heaven or hell, or by seeming to profess,
that all the while that thou art busy in the prosecution of thine
ungodly lusts, notwithstanding that, all that time, this opinion
hath never left thee, " that God will bring thee to judgment;"
that even that very body of thine, which thou madest a mansion
for the devil, an instrument for any wickedness that he would
suggest unto thee, yet that that body would be raised up ; that,
to thy extreme horror and astonishment, God would take such
particular care of that very body of thine, that wheresoever it were
lost, he would recover it, though dispersed to the four winds of
heaven, and build it up again, (thou sayest thou knowest for what
use) even to be a mark, against which he will empty his quivers,
and shoot out all the darts of fiery indignation, in the punishing of
whom he will express his Almighty power.
31. But I cannot allow myself any longer time to prosecute
the former part of my proposition, viz. to shew how much men
deceive themselves, who think they indeed believe the funda
mental points of their faith, when, by their practice and course of
life, they live in an habitual exercise of such sins as are utterly
repugnant and destructive of such a belief. And this I think I
have performed but yet only in general terms, not descending to a
view of some more eminent and particular sins and enormities :
for that therefore which remains of the time that your patience
will allow me, I will spend it in acquitting myself of the other
part of my promise, namely, in instancing in some extraordinary
uncontrolled practices of these times, and discovering how utterly
they do destroy the very grounds and foundations of our religion,
and how impossible it is they should consist with a true sincere pro
fession of Christianity.
32. As first, for example, how ordinarily do we meet with this
practice, for men which are above others in wealth and power, to
employ both these to their utmost abilities for the maintaining of
an unjust cause against a poor inferior adversary? I am sure this
is no news to you ; you do not startle at the hearing of such a
crime as this ; and yet, if it be well considered, what can be
imagined more monstrous and abominable ? For, give me leave
to suppose, or put the case, that some one of this company were
guilty of this sin.
33. If I should ask him, Whence, and from whom he had his
riches or power? whom he would acknowledge for his benefactor?
I make no question but he would give me a good religious an
swer, and say, " that he would not sacrifice to his net, nor burn
incense to his drag;" but that God who gave a blessing to his
cares and endeavours, had advanced him to such a place and for
tune in the world. Again, if I should ask him, In what esteem

The Third Sermon. 577
and value (he thought that) God holds his faithful servants ? or,
whether he would take it well to have them oppressed and tram
pled on by others more potent than themselves? he must needs
answer again, that God is no accepter of persons, neither riches
nor poverty are a means to procure his favour ; but that in all
conditions of men, "he that loveth righteousness, and hateth ini
quity, shall be accepted by him."
34. If these be his answers (as, without all contradiction, unless
he will profess himself an( atheist, such must be the effect of
them), then let him consider, what a woeful condition he has con
cluded himself to be in, and what reason he has to thank God for
his honour or riches! Does he think, that God has furnished
him with strength and weapons for this end, that thereby he might
be able to make war with himself, that he might have the power
to overrun and lay waste those whom God loveth as the apple of
his own eye? Can he imagine, that God has been so beneficial
and liberal to him, in preferring him to a rank and degree above
others not inferior to him in the riches and treasures of God's
grace, and therefore as dear unto him as himself, for this end,
that thereby he may prove a more able and fit instrument for the
devil to wreak his malice and hatred upon those whom God
loves ?
35. Therefore, if there be ever such a person in this auditory
(yet I hope there is not, but and if there be), what shall I say
unto him? Let him consider, what a hard task he has under
taken, to war against God ! Let him consider, what a strange
reckoning he is likely to make unto God, when he shall at last (as
undoubtedly he will) require of him an account of his stewardship !
Behold, Lord, thou hast given me five talents, and what have I
done with them ? Why, lo, I have made them ten talents. But
how, by what courses? Why, I have unjustly and injuriously
robbed and wrung from my fellow-servants those few talents
which thou gavest them : I have gained thus much by my violent
maintaining of a cause which thou hatest, and which myself could
not deny but to be most unjust. This is surely a sore evil under
the sun. But since I hope it little concerns any one here to have
such a crime as this dissected curiously, and purposely insisted
upon, it shall suffice me to say, that they who are guilty of it are
far from knowing of what spirit they are, when they say they are
christians, since even a very heathen would abhor to countenance
or entertain such a vice as this.
36. In the second place, " How can ye believe (saith Christ),
who seek honour one of another, and not that honour which is of
God ?" If these words of Christ be true, that they who too earn
estly desire applause and reputation among men, neglecting in
the mean time seriously to endeavour the attaining to the honour
which is of God, that is, obedience and submission to his com
mands, which is that wherein a christian ought especially to place
his honour and reputation ; if such men as these do in vain, and
without all ground of reason, reckon themselves in the number of
true believers; again, if the chief badge and xpi<r»j|iov, whereby
oo

578 The Third Sermon.
Christ would have his servants to be distinguished from the world,
be a willingness to suffer injuries, a desire rather to have the other
cheek stricken, and to have the cloak go the same way with the
coat, than to revenge one blow with another, or go to law for a
matter of no great moment, for recovering of that which a man
might well enough lose, without endangering his estate :
37. If these things, I say, be true; suppose Christ (according
to the vision of Ezekiel, Ezek. ix. 5, 6,) should command his
angels utterly " to slay through all Jerusalem," that is, the church,
"old and young, maids, and little children, and women, excepting
only those upon whom his mark and badge were to be found ;"
what destruction and desolation would there be ! How would the
sanctuary of God be defiled, and his courts be filled with the
slain ! How would many (who now pass, both in their own and
other men's opinions, for good christians enough) be taken for
Mahomet's servants, whose religion it is, by fury and murder to
gain proselytes to their abominable profession ! Suppose our gar
ments should be presented to God with the same question that
Jacob's sons sent their brother Joseph's, Num hac est tunica filii
tui ? " Is this thy son's coat ?" Would they not rather be taken
for the skins of savage beasts ? so unlike are they to that garment
of humility and patience, which our Saviour wore, and which he
bequeathed us in his legacy I
38. We are so far from seeking that honour which is of God,
from endeavouring to attain unto, or so much as countenancing,
such virtues, which God hath often professed that he will exalt
and glorify, such as humility, and patiently bearing of injuries,
that we place our honour and reputation in the contrary ; that
fe counted noble and generous in the world's opinion, which is
odious and abominable in the sight of God. If thy brother offend
or injure thee, forgive him, saith Christ ; if he proceed, forgive
him : what, until seven times ? Ay, until seventy times seven
times. But how is this doctrine received now in the world?
What counsel would men, and those none of the worst sort, give
thee in such a case ? How would the soberest, discreetest, well-
bred christians advise thee? Why thus; If thy brother or thy
neighbour have offered thee an injury, or affront, forgive him I by
no means; of all things in the world take heed of that: thou art
utterly undone in thy reputation then, if thou dost forgive him.
What is to be done then? Why, let not thy heart rest, let all
other business and employment be laid aside, till thou hast his
blood. What ! a man's blood for an injurious passionate speech,
for a disdainful look ! Nay, this is not all : that thou mayst gain
amongst men the reputation of a discreet well-tempered murderer,
be sure thou killest him not in passion, when thy blood is hot and
boiling with the provocation, but proceed with as much temper
and settledness of reason, with as much discretion and prepared
ness, as thou wouldst to the communion : after some several days'
meditation, invite him, mildly and affably, into some retired place ;
and there let it be put to the trial, whether thy life or his must
answer the injury.

The Third Sermon. 579
39. Oh most horrible Christianity! That it should be a most
sure settled way for a man to run into danger and disgrace with
the world, if he shall dare to perform a commandment of Christ's,
which is as necessary to be observed by him, if he have any hope
of attaining heaven, as meat and drink is for the sustaining of his
life ! That ever it should enter into the heart of a christian, to
walk so exactly and curiously contrary to the ways of God ; that
whereas he every day and hour sees himself contemned and de
spised by thee, who art his servant, his creature, upon whom he
might (without any possible imputation of unrighteousness) pour
down the phials of his fierce wrath and indignation \ yet he, not
withstanding, is patient and long-suffering towards thee, hoping
that his long-suffering may lead thee to repentance, and earnestly
desiring and soliciting thee by his ministers to be reconciled unto
him ! Yet, that thou, for all this, for a blow in anger, it may be,
for a word, or less, shouldest take upon thee to send his soul, or
thine, or, it may be, both, clogged and pressed with all your sins
unrepented of (for thou canst not be so wild as to think thou canst
repent of thy sins, and yet resolve upon such a business,) to expect
your sentence before the judgment-seat of God ; wilfully and irre
coverably to deprive yourselves of all those blessed means, which
God had contrived for your salvation, the power of his word, the
efficacy and virtue of his sacraments, all which you shall utterly
exclude yourselves from, and leave yourselves in such a state, that
it shall not be in God's power to do you any good ! " O consider
this, all ye that fight against God, lest he tear you in pieces, and
there be none to deliver you."
40. In the third place, there is another great evil under the
sun, and that is, when men are not content to dishonour Almighty
God, and their glorious religion, by unworthy scandalous prac
tices, but, to make themselves innocent, they will entitle God to
their abominations: of this nature are those who are curious and
inquisitive into scripture, great students in it, for this end, that
they may furnish themselves with some places, which, being
violently wrested, and injuriously handled, may serve, at least in
their opinion, to patronize and warrant their ungodly, irreligious
courses. The time will come, saith Christ to his disciples, when
they who hate and persecute you shall think they do God good
service. And the time is come, when men think they can give no
greater nor more approved testimony of their religion, and zeal
of God's truth, than by hating and abhorring, by reviling and
traducing, their brethren, if they differ from them in any, though
the most ordinary innocent opinions : if men accord not altogether
with them, if they run not on furiously with them in all their
tenets, they are enemies unto God and his truth, and they can
find scripture enough to warrant them to disgrace and revile such,
to raise any scandalous dishonourable reports of them, and to poison
utterly their reputation with the world.
An Application to the Communion.
I have hitherto, as carefully as so short a time would permit
00 2

580 The Fourth Sermon.
(and yet, it may be, with greater earnestness than you could have
been content I should), searched into the retired corners of our
hearts, and there discovered a vice, which, it may be, you little
expected, namely, atheism ; a strange vice, I confess, to be found
in christian hearts. I have likewise exemplified in some particular
practices of these times, most exactly contrary to our profession
of christian religion. If I should endeavour to discover all that
might be observed of this nature, not my hour only, but the day
itself, would fail me. Notwithstanding, I am resolved to make
one instance more about the business for which we are met together
namely, the receiving of the blessed body and blood of our Lord
Jesus Christ. I suppose you will all acknowledge with me, that
that is a business of the greatest consequence that a christian is
capable of performing. I hope I need not to instruct you, how
inexcusably guilty those men render themselves, who come with an
unprepared heart, with an unsanctified mouth, to the partaking of
these heavenly mysteries. " Who art thou (saith God by the psalm
ist) that takest my word into thy mouth, when thou hatest to be
reformed ?" And if that be so great a crime for a man only to talk
of God, to make mention of his name, when the heart is unclean
and unreformed, with how much greater reason may Christ say,
what art thou that takest me into thy mouth? What art thou that
darest devour my flesh, and suck my blood, that darest incorporate
my flesh and blood into thyself, to make my spotless body an instru
ment of thy lusts, a temple for the devil to inhabit and reign in?
To crucify Christ once more, and put him to open shame ? To
crucify him so that no good shall follow upon it, to make the blood
of the new covenant a profane thing ? And thus far, if not deeper
is that man guilty, that shall dare to come to this heavenly feast
with spotted and unclean affections.

SERMON IV.
"Let him deny himself." — Luke ix. 23.
Good reason there is, that, according to that excess of value
and weight, wherewith heavenly and spiritual things do surmount
and preponderate earthly and transitory ; so likewise the desire
and prosecution of them should be much more contentiously active
and earnest, than that of the other : yet, if men were but in any
proportion so circumspect and careful in businesses that concern
their eternal welfare, as even the most foolish worldlings are about
riches, honour, and such trifles, as are not worthy to take up the
mind even of a natural man ; we should not have the glorious pro
fession of Christianity so carelessly and sleepily undertaken, so
irresolutely and fearfully, nay, cowardly maintained ; I might add,
so treacherously pretended, and betrayed to the encompassing of
base and unworthy ends, as now it is.
2. To what may we more justly impute this negligent, wretch-

The Fourth Sermon. 5gi
less behaviour of christians, than to an extreme incogitancy, and
want of consideration in us, upon what terms it is, that we have
entered into league with God, and to what considerable strict con
ditions we have, in our first initiation at our baptism, so solemnly
submitted and engaged ourselves ; without a serious resolute per
formance whereof, we have promised by no means to expect any
reward at all from God, but to remain strangers, utterly excTuded
from the least hope of enjoying any fruit of those many glori
ous promises, which it hath pleased our gracious God so liberally
to offer and reach out unto us, in our blessed Saviour Jesus
Christ? 3. It was no good sign, when the precious seed of the word was
received into the stony ground with such a sudden joy : hearers,
resembled by that ground, give good heed to the glorious and
comfortable promises which attend religion, without having re
spect to many troublesome and melancholic conditions which must
necessarily go along too ; and, therefore, when persecution begins,
either within them, when they are commanded to strangle a lust
as dear unto them, and as necessary for their employments, as an
eye, or right hand ; or without them, when that profession, which
they have undertaken, becomes offensive or scandalous to great
men ; then (as if they had been mistaken in the purchase, or de
ceived by the preacher) the joy, so suddenly kindled, as soon van
ishes, and they retire themselves home, expecting a more commo
dious and gainful bargain.
4. Hereupon it is, that our Saviour in this chapter spends two
parables — one for a king preparing for war, the other of a builder
for a house; whereby to instruct his hearers, what they should
do, before they did offer to undertake this service ; the sum
whereof is this : that, if they had any ends and projects of their
own, if they thought to serve themselves upon him, they were
much deceived : that they should deeply and thoughtfully con
sider, of what weight and consequence the business was that they
were about.
5. There is a kingdom to be obtained, and a glorious palace,
wherein are to be erected many fair mansions to reign in ; but it is a
kingdom that suffers violence, and the violent must take it by force ;
and it is a building that will exact perchance all the means they
have, and their whole lives' labour to boot. Wherefore it is good
for them to sit down, to send for their friends to counsel ; to ques
tion their hearts, whether they have courage and resolution ; and
to examine their incomes, whether they will bear the charges ; to
muster soldiers for the conquest, and labourers for the building.
6. If they like these large offers, and have means enough for
the employment, and are unwilling to spare for cost, let them go
in God's name : there is no doubt to be made of an end, that shall
fully recompense their losses, and satisfy their utmost, boldest, de
sires, and fill the whole capacity of their thoughts. But on the
other side, unless all these conditions concur, he has so much
care of their credit, that he would wish them not to set one foot
further in the employment, but to betake themselves home, lest

582 The Fourth Sermon.
if they should fail in the business, they should make themselves ri
diculous to the world of scorners; to whom it would be meat and
drink to see some glorious fresh ruins of a building left to the fowls
and beasts to inhabit ; or to see a fierce invading army forced to
retire themselves home, cooled, and content with their former want
and poverty.
7. Object. But might not some poor, low-minded, sinful hearer
reply upon our Saviour, and inquire whence these sums must be
raised, and these forces mustered ? Alas ! what is a wretched
mortal man, that he should think of taking heaven by composi
tion, much more of forcing and invading it? What is there on
earth to lay in balance against heaven ? Has not the Spirit of
God told us, that all is vanity, nay, lighter than vanity, through
all Ecclesiastes? And, again, that men of low condition are
vanity, and men of high condition (to wit, such as, because they
abound with wealth, think that therefore they are in much better
esteem and favour with God than their brethren) they are worse
than vanity ? for, as it is, Psal. lxii. 9, " they are a lie ;" that is,
they are no such things as they take themselves for, they are quite
contrary to what they seem.
8. Reply. The answer hereto is not very difficult : for, it is true,
if we consider our own abilities, such I mean as our forefathers
have left us, it is as impossible for us, by any worth in our power to
offer at the purchase of heaven, as to make a new one ; yet such
is the mercy of God in Jesus Christ, that so glorious a bargain is al
ready made to our hands, the gain whereof will redound unto us
upon very reasonable conditions : namely, if we can be brought to
acknowledge our own beggarly, starved estate, and thereby eva
cuating ourselves of all manner of worth and desert in ourselves,
and relying only upon his mercy, which is infinite, submitting like
wise ourselves to be absolutely at his disposition without any reser
vation at all.
9. So that the same invaluable precious jewel, which cost the
rich merchant in the parable all his estate, and had like to have
made a young gentleman in the gospel turn bankrupt, may be
come ours, even the poorest and most despised persons amongst
us ; if we will be content to part with our totum nihil, all what
soever we are, or have ; if we can persuade ourselves to esteem
pleasure and profit as dross and dung, when they come in com
petition with this pearl ; if we can readily and affectionately hate
our dearest friends and kindred, even tread our parents under our
feet, when they lie in our way unto Christ; if we can perfectly de
test even the most dearest, closest lusts and affectionate sins; finally,
if our own souls become contemptible and vile in our own eyes, in
respect of that glorious inheritance so dearly purchased for us; then
are we rich to purchase this pearl, then are we able and sufficient
to go through with this building, and strong enough to conquer this
kingdom. 10. Now all this (as must be shewed in many more particulars)
is properly to deny ourselves, which is a condition that our
Saviour makes so necessary and inseparable in every one, that

The Fourth Sermon. 583
purposes to be anything the better for him ; that desires to be found
in the number of those that have given up their names unto him ;
for, saith the text, " Jesus saith unto them all, if any man will come
after me, let him deny himself," &c.
11. These few words are not conveniently capable of a division :
but, taking them in gross, as a precept or law delivered by Christ,
and which concerns every man, of what state or condition soever,
that resolves to accept of him for a Lord and Saviour; we will pro
ceed according to the ordinary method of expounding a law ; namely,
first, we will, in general, consider the nature, meaning, and extent
of this law ; how far the action here enjoined (which is a denying
or renouncing) doth reach ; and how much is comprehended in the
object thereof, ourselves. Secondly, I will restrain this general
duty into several special cases, which may conveniently be re
duced to three ; as namely, that by virtue thereof we are bound
to evacuate ourselves, and utterly deny, 1. Our own wisdom or un
derstanding. 2. Our will and affections. And, lastly, our own de
sert and righteousness.
12. Out of this commandment then, considered in general
terms only (for so I shall only handle it in this hour's discourse)
as it is contained in these two words, airapvrjtfoKrtJw Iowtov, but two
such words, so full and swelling with expression, that our lan
guage can scarce at all, or but faintly, express and render the
force and vigour of them in twenty ; I shall observe unto you
this doctrinal position ; namely, that it is absolutely and indispensa
bly required of every man that professes Christianity, not only ut- ,'
terly to renounce all manner of things that thwart and oppose God's /
will and command, but also resolutely, and without all manner of :
reservation, to purpose and resolve upon the denial of whatsoever ,
is in ourselves, or any thing else, how full of pleasure, profit, or
necessity soever, though in themselves indifferent, lawful, or con- j:
venient, when they come in competition with what Christ hath
enjoined us. Which, after I have explained and confirmed, by
comparing this law with many other precepts of the same nature
in the holy scripture, I shall apply unto your consciences by two
useful enforcements: one, taken from the extreme undeniable
reasonableness of the thing here commanded : the other from the
wonderful love and kindness of the lawgiver, that requires not so
much at our hands, as himself hath already voluntarily performed,
and that for our sakes; for thus, or to this purpose run the
words: "if any man will come after me, let him (do as I have
done) even deny himself, take up his (indeed my) cross daily, and
so follow me."
13. I told you, I remember, my text was a law, and I repent
not of the expression, though I know not how, since our divinity
has been imprisoned and fettered in theses and distinctions, we
have lost this word law ; and men will by no means endure to hear
that Christ came to command us any thing, or that he requires
any thing at our hands : he is all taken up in promise : all those
precepts which are found in the gospel are nothing, in these men's
opinions, but mere promises of what God will work in us, I know

584 The Fourth Sermon.
not how, sine nobis, though indeed they be delivered in fashion,
like precepts.
14. These, and many other such dangerous consequences, do,
and must necessarily arise from that newly-invented fatal neces
sity — a doctrine that fourteen centuries of Christianity never heard
of. If we will inquire after the old and good ways, we shall find
the gospel itself, by its own Author, called a law : for thus saith
the Psalmist in the person of Christ : " I will preach the law,
whereof the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son, this day
have I begotten thee."* And how familiar are such speeches as
those in our Saviour's mouth : This is my command : " A new com
mandment I give unto you ! Ye shall be my disciples, if you do those
things which I command you !" Among the ancient fathers we find
not only that Christ is a lawgiver, but that he hath published laws
which were never heard of before ; that he hath enlarged the an
cient precepts, and enjoined new ; and yet now it is socinianism to
say but half so much. Clemens Alexandrinus (3. 2r£wf*. in fine) saith,
that Christ is more than a lawgiver; he is both Aoyos xal Nojaos, and
quotes St. Peter for it.
15. Well then, my text is a law, and a preparatory law ; it is
the voice of one crying, Prepare the ways of the Lord ; let all hills
be depressed, and all valleys exalted. It bears indeed the same
office in our conversion, or new faith, that Aristotle assigns to his
privation in respect to natural generation. It hath no positive
active influence upon the work, but it is Principium occasionale, a
condition or state necessarily supposed, or pre-required in the sub
ject, before the business be accomplished. For, as in physical
generation there can be no superinduction of forms, but the sub
ject, which expects a soul, must necessarily prepare a room or
mansion for it; which cannot be, unless the soul that did before in
habit there be dispossessed ; so it likewise comes to pass in our re
generation : there is no receiving of Christ, to dwell and live with
us, unless we turn all our other guests out of doors. The devil,
you know, would not take possession of a house till it was swept and
garnished ; and dares any man imagine, that a heart defiled, full
of all uncleanness, a decayed ruinous soul, an earthly sensual mind,
is a tabernacle fit to entertain the Son of God ? Were it reasona
ble to invite Christ to sup in such a mansion, much more to rest and
inhabit there ?
16. In the ordinary sacrifices of the old law, God was content to
share part of them with his servants the priests, and challenged
only the inwards as his own due. And proportionably in the
spiritual sacrifices, his claim was, " My son, give me thy heart."
He was tender then in exacting all his due. It was only a tempt
ation, we know, when God required of Abraham that his only son
Isaac should be offered in holocaustum, for a whole burnt sacrifice,
to be utterly consumed, so that no part nor relics should remain
of so beloved a sacrifice ; yet even in those old times there were
whole burnt-offerings : whereby (besides that one oblation of
Christ) was prefigured likewise our giving up our whole selves,
* Psalm ii. 7.

The Fourth Sermon. 5g5
souls and bodies, as a living reasonable sacrifice unto God. And
therefore, our Saviour Christ (who came to fulfil the law, not only
by his obedience thereto, but also by his perfect and complete ex
pression of its force and meaning) doth in plain terms resolutely
and peremptorily exact from all them that purpose to follow him,
a full, perfect resignation of themselves to his disposing, without all
manner of condition or reservation.
17. This was a doctrine never heard of in the world before
completely delivered. Never did any prophet or scribe urge or
enforce so much upon God's people as is herein contained. Yet,
in the evangelical law, we have it precisely and accurately pressed ;
insomuch, that the Holy Spirit of God has taken up almost all the
metaphors that can possibly be imagined, the more forcibly to urge
this so necessary a doctrine.
18. We are commanded so perfectly and wholly to devote our
selves to God's service ; so earnestly and resolutely to undertake
his commands, that we must determine to undervalue and despise
all earthly and transitory things beside : nay, from the bottom of
our hearts we must hate and detest all things (how gainful, or de
lightful, or necessary soever they seem) if they do in any measure
hinder or oppugn us in our journey to Christ.
19. We must not so much as look upon Christ, or glance our
eyes upon his glorious mercy, expressed in suffering and satisfying
for us (for St. Luke calls this dewpiav) but we must resolve to
keep them there fixed, and not deign to think any creature to be
a spectacle worthy our looking on : dipopouvTsj sfe 'Irjirouv, saith St.
Paul.* We have no English term that can fully express the force
of this word ; for it is not only, as we have it translated, " looking
unto Christ," but taking off our speculations from other objects,
and fastening them upon Christ, the author and finisher of our
faith. 20. When we have been once acquainted, though but imper
fectly, with this saving knowledge, we must straight bring our
understandings into captivity unto the obedience thereof; and
whatsoever other speculations we have, how delightful soever
they be unto us, yet, rather than they should over-leaven us,
and (as knowledge without charity is apt to do) puff us up, we
must, with much greater care and industry, study to forget them,
and resolve, with St. Paul, to know nothing " save Jesus Christ and
him crucified."
21. When we have had notice of that inestimable jewel, the
kingdom of heaven (so called by our Saviour in the parable),
exposed to sale, though our estate be never so great, our wares
never so rich and glorious, yet we must resolvedly part with all
we have; utterly undo ourselves, and turn bankrupts for the pur
chasing of it. Hence are those commands, " Sell all thou hast ;"
and, lest a man should think, that when the land is sold, he may
keep the money in his purse, there follows, " and give to the
poor." And such care is taken by the Holy Ghost in those ex
pressions, lest any evasion should be admitted ; lest it should hap-
* Heb. xii. 2.

586 The Fourth Sermon.
pen, that such a merchant should find no chapman to buy his
wares, nor (which is scarce possible) hands to receive his money,
when he would bestow it ; it is further said — Forsake all, leave
all ; by all means quit thyself of thy own riches, run away from
thy possessions, and, if there be any thing yet more dear unto thee
than thy possessions, as necessary as thy clothes, Despolia teipsum,
"Put off the old man, with his lusts and affections;" and though it
stick never so close, tear it from thee, shake off the sin that hangeth
so fast on.
22. And yet the Holy Ghost proceeds further in a more for
cible expression : for many heathens have been found, that could
persuade themselves to prefer fame, obtained by a philosophical
austere life, before riches or honours ; but " every one loveth and
cherisheth his flesh ;" therefore, if there be a lust so incorpo
rated into thee, that it becomes as useful and necessary as thy
right hand or eye, yet thou must resolve to be thine own execu
tioner, to deform and maim thyself; for what will it profit thee
to go a proper personable man into hell ! Nay, if thy whole body
begin to tyrannize over thee, thou must fight and war with it, and
never leave till thou hast brought it into captivity. Then must
thou use it like a slave, with short and coarse diet, and store of cor
rection, as St. Paul did, ijiroiria^u jllou to tfUfAoi xai <5ouXayuyu. Nay,
more, saith he, 'Eyu to, rffiyUiOCTa tou xugiou iv tu\i ffdu,a.ri u,ou /3ao,Ta£u.
Such hatred he bore to the body of sin, which did always accom
pany him, that, not content to over-master it, he did ignominiously
stigmatize and brand it with the marks of slavery.
23. Yet this is not all : if it be rebellious and incorrigible, thou
must even dispatch it, put it to death, and that no ordinary one ;
it must be a servile, slavish, cruel death : " Crucify the flesh,
with the lusts and affections thereof." A man would think that
this were sufficient, and that we might here rest from further
tyrannizing over ourselves ; but there is no such matter : " If any
man hate not father, and mother, and brethren, and sisters, and
all the world besides, even his own soul, for my name's sake and
the gospel's," saith Christ, " he cannot be my disciple." And now
we are at the height ; never till now did I tell you the full meaning
of my text ; how far every man is engaged by virtue of this precept,
" Let him deny himself."
24. The strength and vigour of this phrase (which expresses
as much, indeed, as all the former laid together) we shall the
better understand, saith St. Chrysostom, if we consider what it is
to deny another : if a father in extreme displeasure do so cast off
his son, that he denies him to be a son, he becomes worse than a
stranger ; for he will not so much as admit him to enjoy the bene
fit, that common humanity teacheth every man to shew to another:
he will not endure him in his sight, less will he vouchsafe to expos
tulate with him ; nay, he will rejoice when he hears of some mis
fortune that hath befallen him, and be beholden to any man that
will revenge his injuries upon him.
25. Thus must every one do, who enters into league or friend
ship with God ; he must work himself out of his own acquaint-

TJie Fourth Sermon. 587
ance ; he must be a stranger, or (if God will have him) an enemy 1
to all the world, and especially to himself; though he flow with !
wealth, yet he must live as being poor, " as having nothing," saith
St. Paul. If afflictions or persecution come upon him in God's be
half, he must with all joy entertain them. Whatsoever God enjoins
him, though otherwise never so distasteful to Kim, it must be his
meat and drink to perform it. There is nothing must lay a neces
sity upon him, but only God ; and, to serve him, he must account
the only unum necessarium.
26. Will you see an example of such obedience, and that in the
old law ? An extraordinary one you shall find in Exod. xxxii. 29,
which depends upon a story which went before, the sum whereof
was this : Moses, in revenge of that horrible idolatry which was
committed during his absence upon the Mount, commands the
sons of Levi, to consecrate every man himself unto the Lord, upon
his son, and upon his brother, and upon his neighbour, by de
stroying any man, whoever he were, that came in their way; which
they resolutely performed. And this obedience of theirs was so
acceptable to God, that at Moses' death they obtained the blessing
of Urim and Thummim above all the tribes, with this eulogy : " He
said unto his father and to his mother, I have not seen them ; neither
did he acknowledge his brethren, nor knew his own children, for
they have observed thy word, and kept thy covenant." By which
obedience, the children wiped out, as it were, the fact of their fa
ther Levi, who had before abused his sword unto injustice, for
which he lost the blessing, that else he should have had. (Gen.
xlix.) 27. But will not here be room for that earnest objection which
the disciples, in great anxiety of mind, made to our Saviour, when
he was pressing a doctrine of the same nature with this we have
in hand, " Who then can be saved ?" If there be required at our
hands so absolute and peremptory a resignation of ourselves to
God's disposal, that we must root out of our hearts all manner of
love of ourselves, or any other creature, then Christ hath de
stroyed the whole second table of the law ; for, at the best, we are
but to love our neighbours as ourselves : if therefore our first
lesson must be to learn to contemn and despise, nay, even hate our
own souls, why do we not, with the LeVites, so commended, even
now consecrate every man himself to the Lord upon our kindred
and neighbours, destroying all about us? Besides, how dare we
presume to be rich, or retain those possessions, which, as it seems,
God hath bought from us ? If our goods be not our own, if our
souls be not our own, " men and brethren, what shall we do ?"
Into what a strait are we fallen ! We are commanded to love our
brethren as our own souls, and we are commanded to hate our
own souls ; we are enjoined to give God thanks for those blessings,
which here we are enjoined to cast away ; we are counselled even
by our Saviour, to be perfect as our heavenly father is perfect, and
yet we must deny ourselves ; whereas the Spirit of God hath told us,
that it is impossible that God should deny himself.
28. For answer : this law must be read and understood (as the

588 The Fourth Sermon.
schools say) cum grano salis : for though it must be most true,
that by virtue of this precept we are obliged to an utter evacua
tion of the love and desire of any thing, and of all manner of confi
dence in ourselves, or any other creature ; yet this must be under
stood not absolutely, but when such things come in competition with
our love or obedience to God ; for, otherwise, we are most necessa
rily bound to love ourselves and others, to study and care for our
own good, and the welfare of our brethren, even to lay down our
lives for them. So that we are not bound to destroy the love of
ourselves, but only when it is a hindrance to our fulfilling of what
God commands us.
29. We therefore, who have given up our names unto Christ,
must expect to enjoy the fruits of his obedience, by treading in the
same steps which he hath left unto us ; as shall be shewed here
after more plentifully.
30. And yet it is not necessary, that we should exactly and curi
ously apply ourselves to the rule of his obedience : for whereas
he voluntarily undertook the form and fashion of a servant, and
being Lord of heaven and earth, despised and neglected the
riches and glory of this world ; we notwithstanding are not tied
to such hard conditions, but may flow and abound with wealth
and honour ; neither need we to deny to our souls any pleasure
under the sun, but liberally enjoy it as the gift of God, as long
as thereby we withdraw not our obedience and allegiance from
God. 31. Peccatum non est appetitus malarum rerum, sed desertio
meliorum (saith St. Augustine, quoted by Lombard, 2 Sent. 42.
dist.) i. e. Sin does not consist in desiring or lusting after things,
which in their own natures are evil and inconvenient, but in pre
ferring a low, inconstant, changeable good, before another more
worthy, and of greater excellency and perfection. Whilst there
fore God has that estimation and value in our thoughts, that he
deserves ; whilst there is nothing in ourselves, or any other crea
ture, which we prefer before him ; whilst w,e conspire not with
our lusts to depose him from bearing a sovereign sway in our hearts
and consciences ; whilst we have no other God before him, not
committing idolatry to wealth, honour, learning, and the like ; it
shall be lawful, in the second place, to love ourselves: so that we
fulfil this commandment, when we do not deify ourselves ; whilst we
sacrifice not to our own wisdom, nor burn incense to the pride of
our hearts, &c.
32. Conceive then the meaning of this law to be such, as if it
had been more fully enlarged on this wise : let every one that but
hears any mention of Christ this day, take into deep consideration,
and spend his most serious morning thoughts, in pondering and
weighing, whether those benefits, which Christ hath promised to
communicate to every one that shall be joined and married to him
by a lively faith, be worthy his acceptation : let him oppose to them
all the pleasures and profits, which he can promise, or but fancy,
to himself under the sun.
33. If after a due comparing of these things together, he have

The Fourth Sermon. 589
so much wisdom as to acknowledge, that an eternal weight of joy
and glory, an everlasting serenity and calmness be to be prefer
red before a transitory, unquiet, restless, unsatisfying pleasure;
and seeing both these are offered and set before him ; or rather,
seeing such is the extreme mercy of our God, that whereas the
goods of this life are not allowed, nor so much as offered equally
and universally to all (for not many have ground to hope for
much wealth; nor many wise, nor many learned, saith St. Paul),
yet to every man, whom God hath called to the acknowledgment
of the gospel, these inestimable benefits are offered and presented,
bona fide, without any impossible condition ; so that (let the dis-
puters of this age say what they will) it shall be found, that those,
who have failed and come short of these glories offered, may
thank themselves for it, and impute it to an actual voluntary
misprision and undervaluing of these riches of God's mercies,
which they might have procured, and not to any fatal over-ruling
power, that did enforce, and necessitate, and drive them to their
destruction. 34. These things considered, if you are indeed convinced, that
light is to be preferred before darkness; it is impossible but that
you should likewise acknowledge, that it were mere madness for a
man to imagine to himself any the most vanishing faint expectation
of those glorious promises, whilst he is busy and careful, by all
means, to avoid those, indeed thorny and unpleasant, paths that
lead unto them ; whilst he promiseth to himself rest and impunity,
though he walk in the imagination of his own heart : surely the
Lord will be avenged on such a person, and will make his fierce
wrath to smoke against him.
35. Therefore resolve upon something : If the Lord be God,
follow him, serve him, conform yourselves to the form of new
obedience which he hath prescribed ; but if Baal be God, if Mam
mon be God, if yourselves be gods, follow the devices of your
own hearts ; but by no means expect any reward at all from God
for dishonouring him, or preferring a base, unworthy lust before
his commands. Lo, 'tis the Lord of glory, who is salvation, and
the way too; it is he that hath professed, that there is no possible
way of attaining unto him, but by treading in the same steps
which he hath left us : a way, which he found full of thorns, full
of difficulties, but hath left it to us even strewed with roses, in
comparison. 36. The greatest and most terrible enemies which we can
fashion to ourselves, are those three, which St. Paul hath mustered
together, and ordered them just Roman-wise, the strongest in the
rear: 1. Death; and, 2. The sting of that, sin ; and, 3. The poison
of that sting, the law. But over all these we are more than con
querors ; for it follows, " Thanks be to God, which (mark, hath al
ready) given us the victory through our Lord Jesus Christ." At the
first, indeed, till the paths were worn, and made smooth, there were
some difficulties ; for what could the primitive christians expect,
having all the world their enemies, but reproaches, exiles, deporta
tions, even horrible torments and death.

590 The Fourth Sermon.
37. But we (blessed be our gracious God !) are so far from being
annoyed with such difficulties and pressures in the way, that all
those are to be feared and expected by them, that dare deny the
profession of our glorious religion. What, therefore, if the Lord
had commanded some great thing of us, even as much as he did
of his beloved servants, the apostles and primitive christians,
would we not have done it? How much more, when he says
only, be not ashamed of me ; now, when you dare not be ashamed
of me ; now, when it is almost death to be ashamed of me ; deny
not me before this generation, who would hate and persecute you
to the death, if you should deny me ; crucify unto you the unclean
affections, the incendiary lust of your hearts, which the heathens
have performed for the poor empty reward of fame; prefer not
riches nor honours before me, which is no more than many philoso
phers have done for those vulgar changeable gods, which themselves
have contemned?
38. Having therefore (beloved christians) such promises to en
courage, such as the poor heathens never dreamed of; and yet, for
all that, travelled more earnestly after an airy fantastical happi
ness of their own, than we (to our extreme shame be it spoken) do
after the true one ; having such advantages, even above the blessed
apostles and ancient martyrs ; let us walk as becometh the children
of God, having our eyes fastened upon the Lord our salvation, and
conforming ourselves freely and unconstrainedly to whatsoever it
shall please him to prescribe unto us : not admitting our own car
nal reason and worldly wisdom into council about his worship, nor
believing any thing, which he has proposed unto us in his word,
but for the authority of him that spoke it : not accepting the per
sons of men, nor persuading ourselves to the belief of horrible and
unworthy opinions of God, because men, affected by us, have so de
livered. It was a grievous complaint that God made by the pro
phet Isaiah, (chap. xix. 13,) "Their fear towards me is taught by
the commandments of men."
39. Again we must subdue our affections to be ruled and
squared according to the good will of God, rejoicing to see our
most beloved sins discovered and rebuked, and even crucified by
the powerful word and Spirit of God. Lastly, we must be ready
for Christ's sake, to root out of our hearts that extravagant im
moderate love of our ownselves, that private affection, as Basil
calleth it ; resolving rather to undergo a shameful, horrible, death,
than to maintain any inordinate base desire, or to take part with
our filthy lusts against our Saviour, who hath so dearly re
deemed us.
40. Thus have you heard, in general terms, largely, and I fear
tediously, delivered, the sum and effect of this doctrine of self-
denial (for the restraining of it to particular cases I have reserved
to another hour). Now I will, according to my promise, as
earnestly as I can, enforce this necessary duty upon you, from the
two circumstances before mentioned; viz. 1. From the great
reasonableness in the thing commanded ; and, 2. Extreme love
and kindness of the lawgiver, that hath, in his own person, given

The Fourth Sermon. 591
us a perfect example, directing us how we should fulfil his com
mand. 41. For the first, namely, the reasonableness of the thing com
manded : to omit, how all creatures, in acknowledgment of that
duty, which they owe to God their Creator, do willingly submit
themselves to his disposition, denying their own specifical private
natures for the general good of the world : for example ; the ele
ments are subject to alterations and deportations, to be destroyed
and revived, to be instruments of God's favour, and again, of his
wrath: surely man, above all the world besides, (not excepting
that glorious heavenly host of angels) is by a more indissoluble
adamantine chain obliged and bound to his Maker; " For to which
of the angels said he at any time, Thou art my son ; this day have
I begotten thee ?"
42. Again, when a great portion of those glorious spirits had
mutinously rebelled against God, and man, following the example
of their prevarication, had with them plunged himself irrecovera
bly into extreme unavoidable destruction ; in that necessity, God
had no respect to those heavenly spirits, which were by nature
much more admirable and perfect than we ; for he did in no wise
(saith the apostle) take upon him the nature of angels, but he took
on him the seed of Abraham, and therein performed the glorious
work of our redemption.
43. Surely, after this great love, than which (I dare not say,
God cannot, but) I may well say, he will never shew a greater,
we his unworthy creatures are bound to express some greater
measure of thankful obedience, than we were for our creation ;
and yet, even then, the least that could be expected from us, was
a full perfect resignation of ourselves to the disposition of that
God that gave us our being. Therefore now, after a work that
has cost God all that pains and study in inventing and contriving,
and so much sorrow and labour in performing ; certainly, after all
this, it is no great thing, if the Lord should require our whole selves,
souls and bodies, for a whole burnt-offering, a sacrifice of praise
and thanksgiving ; if he should require from us our whole sub
stance, whole rivers of oil, and all the cattle feeding on a thou
sand hills.
44. Yet now he is content that less thanks shall satisfy, than
were due before ever he performed that glorious work ; nay, he
hath after all this taken off and subducted from that debt, which
we owed him for our creation : for whereas then one actual offence
against this law did necessarily draw along with it inevitable de
struction ; yet now our gracious God, perceiving that we are but
dust, accepts of our imperfect, sinful obedience, nay, sometimes,
of the inward desire and willingness to perform, where there is
not power to put it in execution. Nothing then can be more
reasonable, than that a christian should be commanded, not to
prefer the fulfilling of his own will before God's will ; not to
suffer that his carnal desires should have greater power and sway
with him than the command of such a God; or, lastly, not to
withdraw his allegiance and obedience due to his Redeemer, and

592 The Fourth Sermon.
place them upon a creature, but equal, or may be, inferior to
himself. 45. Secondly, consider the wonderful love and kindness of the
lawgiver, that hath already tasted unto us; tasted, nay, hath
drank the dregs of this unpleasant bitter potion. He, by whom
all things were made, even the eternal almighty Word : he, who
thought it no robbery to be equal with God; became his own
creature, and submitted himself to be trod upon, reviled, hated,
despised by the worst of all creatures, cruel, ungodly, and per
verse sinners : he, of whose fulness we have all received, did
utterly evacuate and empty himself of his glory and majesty,
denying to himself such things, which he would not even to the
most despised creatures. For, saith he, " The foxes have holes,
and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of man hath not
whereon to lay his head." — "Ye know (saith St. Paul, 2 Cor.
viii. 9,) the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, that though he was
rich, he became poor, that ye through his poverty might be made
rich." So poor he was, that he was forced to borrow tribute money
of a fish, and was fain to strain himself to a miracle to get the fish
to bring it : so poor, that he was forced to borrow a young colt of
strangers, never known to him: "Say (saith he) the Lord has need
of him :" a strange unheard-of speech ! The Lord that created
the world, and can as easily annihilate it, yet he hath need, and hath
need of a colt, the foal of an ass ! Time would fail me, for I sup
pose the world itself would not contain the books that might be
written of his dangers, his temptations, his fastings, his travels, his
disgrace, torments, and death ; all performed without any end pro
posed to himself, besides our good and happiness.
46. " It behoved him (saith St. Paul) to be made like his
brethren in all things, that he might be a merciful and faithful
high-priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation
for the sins of the people ; for in that he himself hath suffered,
being tempted, he is able to succour them which are tempted."*
Which of you (my beloved friends) when he does seriously me
ditate on this place, will not be forced to sit down, even ravished
and astonished at the excessive and superabundant mercy of our
Lord Jesus Christ ; that he who was the God that created us, in
whom we live, move, and have our being ; and, being more intriu-
sical to us than our own natures (as the schools do boldly express)
doth know our most hidden thoughts long before they are ; that he,
notwithstanding, should descend to submit himself to the same in
firmities and temptations with us, to this end, that by bettering and
adding to that knowledge, which he had before of our wants and
miseries-, to wit, by perfecting and increasing his former speculative
knowledge by a new acquired experimental knowledge, he might
be better acquainted with what we want, and thereby more in
clined to mercy and commiseration, and more powerful to succour
us, being tempted.
47. See, behold, beloved christians, how for our sakes he hath
enlarged, as it were, three of his glorious, incomprehensible attri-
*Heb. ii. 17, 18.

The Fourth Sermon. 593
butes. 1. His omniscience, by knowing that personally and ex
perimentally, which he did before only know contemplatively.
2. His mercy, in that this his knowledge doth more incite his
goodness. And, 3. Flis omnipotent power ; for (saith the text) in
that he himself hath suffered, being tempted, he is (thereby) able
to succour them which are tempted. There seems likewise to be
an access to his glory by this his great humility; for, saith the
text in Heb. v. 5, "Christ glorified not himself to be a high-
priest." 48. Woe unto us, my beloved friends, if such mercies as these
be neglected and slighted by us : woe unto us, if a commandment
proceeding from such a Lawgiver have not greater force upon us,
than any obligation whatsoever.
49. And if these things be so, then (in the first place) how
miserably are those deceived, that think they have sufficiently
observed this commandment, when they deny to themselves some
one delightful insinuating affection, some one enormous crying
sin, to which they see others wilfully and scandalously devoted ;
yet, in the mean time, reserve to themselves many a bosom, pri
vate, beloved lust.
50. You that know the story of Ananias and Sapphira, may
remember with what a fearful name fhe Holy Spirit hath branded
their sin ; it is called no less than lying to the Holy Ghost ; it
comes near, both in name and condition, to that fearful sin for
which Christ did not die, and for which God could yet never find
mercy enough to forgive.
51. Yet consider what this sin was; they voluntarily sold all
the means they had, that the money, being equally divided, might
supply the necessity of those that wanted. Notwithstanding, to
make sure work for some certain estate whereupon they might
rely, they subducted some part of the money, and laid the rest at
the apostles' feet.
52. St. Peter told them that their land was in their own power ;
neither did any constraint lie upon them to enforce them to sell
all: but since they had professed themselves among the number
of them who were willing to clothe, and cherish, and feed Christ,
in the persons of their new-converted brethren ; it was horrible
theft, and desperate lying against God, to diminish one penny of
the sum.
53. Now that you may know how much this concerns you :
which of you, beloved christians, hath not solemnly and publicly
sworn and vowed to Almighty God at your baptism, not to prefer
the vain pomp and vanities of this world, much less the abomi
nable crimes thereof, above your Saviour, into whose name you
were baptized ?
54. Are not you then most shamefully perjured, when you are
so far from renouncing the vanities of this world for Christ's
sake, that you will not be withdrawn from the crimes of it?
When the base lust of a harlot, or the furious excess of wine, or
that untempting, undelightful, and therefore more unpardonable
pp

594 The Fourth Sermon.
sin of swearing, and blasphemy, shall be of sufficient force with
you every hour, not only to withdraw all manner of respect and
obedience from Christ, but even to make you crucify him again,
and to put him to open shame.
55. And do not please yourselves in this conceit, that because
God does not exact of you now the forfeiture of your vow and
promise, as he did of Ananias and his wife, that therefore your
case is much better than theirs; for, let me tell you, as our
Saviour on such an occasion told the Jews, Think you that you
are less sinners than they, whose blood Pilate mingled with "the
sacrifices ; or those, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell ? so let
me say unto you : Think you, that because God shewed so terrible
an example upon Ananias and Sapphira, for their lying to the
Holy Ghost, by taking them away suddenly by a fearful death, and
hath not yet shewed the like upon you, that your sin comes much
short of theirs, and that you may notwithstanding escape? "I tell
you nay, but except ye repent, ye shall likewise perish." Alas,
what a trifle was that judgment which befel them, to those plagues
which are reserved for wilful, obstinate sinners !
56. I beseech you, therefore, brethren, even by the bowels of
Jesus Christ, that you would consider what it is you do, when you
allow yourselves in the practice of any one habitual sin : it is no
less than a wilful wiping off the water wherewith you were bap
tized; it is no less than an abjuring of Christ; nay, it is no less
than a devoting and sacrificing yourselves to devils.
57. In the second place, where will those appear, that are so
far from denying all for Christ, that for his sake they will not
leave one delightful, profitable sin ? they will rather deny Christ
himself, than the least troublesome pleasure, running into all
excess of riot; nay, they will sell Christ cheaper than Judas did;
they will sell him, and take no money for him ! What else do
those that spend their time in idle, vain lying, in fruitless oaths, in
unnecessary blasphemy ? They can be content to see Christ him
self almost every day naked, and do not clothe him ; hungry, and
do not feed him ; in prison, and do not visit him : for inasmuch as
they perform not these works of charity to his beloved little ones,
they deny them to him. Will they be found worthy of Christ, that
for his sake will not do so much as a heathen hath done in a hu
mour, or for the unprofitable reward of fame ? That, for his sake,
will not forgive their brother some small injury received; nay, per
haps, some great kindness offered, as a seasonable correction, or
loving dissuasion from sin ; that, for his sake, will not take the least
pains in furthering their own salvation ?
58. Lastly, what will become of me, and you, beloved fathers
and brethren of the clergy, we to whom God hath intrusted the
exercise and managing of three or four of his glorious attributes?
for to us is committed the gospel of Christ, which is the wisdom
of God hidden from the world ; and to us is committed the gospel
of Christ, which is the power of God to salvation, and which
worketh mightily in them which believe, even according to the

The Fifth Sermon. 595
mighty working whereby he raised Oirist from the dead ; and to
us is committed the gospel of Christ, even the dispensation of the
riches of his glorious mercy and compassions.
59. What then will become of us, if we, notwithstanding these
great engagements, these inestimable prerogatives, shall turn this
wisdom of God into foolishness, by exalting and deifying our own
carnal wisdom ; if we shall weaken and make void this almighty
power, by the violent opposition of our sinful lusts and affections;
finally, if we shall be too sparing and niggardly in the dispensing
of these his mercies ; if we shall render his goodness suspected to
our hearers, as if those frequent and plentiful offers of pity and
compassion were only empty, histrionical expressions, and not pro
fessions of a mind heartily and sincerely inclined unto us ?
60. I will tell you what will become of us; and I shall the better
do it, by telling you first, what an excessive weight of glory we,
especially, shall lose by it : " They that be wise (saith Daniel) shall
shine as the brightness of the firmament ; and they that turn many
to righteousness, as the stars for ever and ever." Not as those
vulgar, ordinary stars, that have light enough only to make them
visible ; but like those more noble lights, which are able to cast a
shadow through the whole creation, even like the sun in his full
strength. And the preferment we are likely to gain is very an
swerable to our loss ; we shall be glorious, shining firebrands, of the
first magnitude, in whose fearful, horrible destruction, God will
show what he is able to do.

SERMON V.
" Who is he that condemneth ? it is Christ that died, yea rather,
that is risen again." — Rom. viii. 34.
If I durst appear in this place with any ends and projects of
mine own; if, whilst I preach unto you Jesus Christ, I could
think it worth my labour to lose a thought about the purchasing
of a vain, fruitless reputation and opinion amongst my hearers ;
surely, I should by no means omit so commodious and tempting
an opportunity as this argument of Christ's resurrection may sug
gest unto me ; it being a business, in the effecting whereof, above
all the works which God ever made since he began to work, he
most especially glorified almost all his divine attributes; it be
ing a deliverance, even of God himself, from destruction and
rottenness. 2. It is an argument so pleasing to St. Paul, that in many
places, he seems to magnify it even to the undervaluing and dis
paragement of whatsoever Christ before either did or suffered.
In a sermon of his (Acts xiii.) preached at Antioch, he makes it the
complement and fulfilling of whatsoever God before had promised
to the fathers, and of all the prophecies, which, since the begin
ning of the world, had been delivered by God's messengers. To
pp2

596 The Fifth Sermon.
make which good, the apostle himself in that place (whereas he
needed not to strain so far; there were then extant prophecies
enough, purposely and precisely declaring the glory and power of
Christ's resurrection) he notwithstanding, as it would seem, mis
takes that famous prophecy of Christ's birth, in those words of the
second psalm, "Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee;"
and seemingly misapplies them to his resurrection. Why, was
he then indeed the carpenter's son ? was it a confession, and not
humility, that he called himself the Son of man? were the tor
ments of his passion and death (as himself seems to intimate,
John xvi. 21,) only the pangs and throes of his new birth?
3. By no means ; he was, even in the extremest degree, and
lowest point of his humiliation ; yea, when himself, in that last
terrible agony, did seem to call it in question ; yet then also he
was indeed the only-begotten eternal Son of God ; or, if he had
not, most miserable and desperate had been our case. But by his
resurrection he did declare, unquestionably, and without all con
tradiction, unto the world, his glory and majesty; or, to speak in
St. Paul's words, (Rom. i.) " He was mightily declared to be the
Son of God, by his resurrection from the dead."
4. But we now celebrate a feast, a season of joy and exultation,
which we used not to do upon the memory of God's most won
derful acts and exploits, though never so much expressing the
glory of his majesty and power, unless they have been beneficial
unto us ; unless they have very nearly concerned our safety and
happiness. 5. And surely this great deliverance of Christ from the do
minion and power of hell and the grave, when God called his
Son the third time out of Egypt ; this victory of his, did in a
high degree import us, and advance our welfare; it had some
more than ordinary influence upon our salvation, otherwise, this
season, dedicated to the memory thereof, would not have been so
acceptable to the primitive Christians, to make them (as it were
in revenge and faction against the late melancholy time of fasting
and repentance) for its sake, to set up an anti-lent, and to ap
point other forty days of feasting and triumph, which was more
(as Tertullian boasteth) than all the solemn holidays of the
heathen joined together. Yea, so scrupulous were they in the
celebration of this feast (quite opposite to the solemn peevishness
of some Christians of our times) that, for the whole space between
Easter and Pentecost, as it is thought, they quite intermitted the
works and exercise of their vocations : they would not suffer one
fasting-day to appear ; they left off their severity and discipline,
their Vigilia and Stationes ; nay, they would not, all that time,
so much as de geniculis adorare (in the witty barbarous expression
of the same father, in his book De corona militis) they would not
shew so much faint-heartedness and dejection, as to kneel at
prayers. 6. Therefore, instead of saying fine things of the fashion and
contrivance of this business of Christ's resurrection ; "instead of
raising matter of wonder and astonishment out of the glory and

The Fifth Sermon. 597
power of it ; I will endeavour (being to conclude the solemn cele
bration of this feast) by way of use and application, to discover the
issue and fruit thereof in respect of us : not only the convenience,
but the extreme necessity, and the strict coherence, which our sal
vation has, not only upon the satisfaction and death, but upon the
resurrection and life, of our blessed Saviour.
7. Now we find many things ascribed to Christ's life and death
in holy scripture, only as to patterns and exemplary causes, being
duties, which the consideration of Christ's death and resurrection
ought proportionably to exact from us: as, if Christ be dead, then
count yourselves also dead unto sin ; if risen again, then count your
selves alive unto righteousness. For how it should come to pass,
that so much of our holiness as makes up mortification, and no more,
should be ascribed to Christ's death, as a proper effect and fruit
thereof; and the rest, which is newness of life and obedience,
should be imputed to his resurrection, I shall never be able to
comprehend. 8. The benefits, therefore, which accrue unto us by Christ, 1
suppose may be divided either into those which flow from the
merit of his death, or from the power and influence of his life.
In the former, are comprehended all whatsoever Christ hath done
for us; in the latter, whatsoever he doth or will work in us. And
both being extremely necessary, it shall be this hour's employ
ment, to shew with what good reason we celebrate a feast at this
time, that we should not terminate our contemplation only on the
great love and bowels of compassions on Good Friday expressed
unto us; but also, and with better reason, on the joy and comfort,
which with great reason we may collect from this business of
Easter, even that lively hope whereunto we are regenerated by
the resurrection of Christ ; and to join with St. Paul in his wonder
and amazement, at the consideration of the infinite mercy and
power of God ; and thereupon his boasting and challenging, se
curely, all manner of adversaries : " Who is he that shall lay any
thing to the charge of God's elect ? It is God that justifieth : who
is he that condemneth ? It is Christ that died, yea rather, that is
risen again."
9. In which words are comprehended the great dependence and
combination which our non-condemnation or salvation has, not
only with the death and satisfaction of Christ, but also rather,
even with advantage, on his resurrection. Now because they are
so few, they cannot conveniently be divided, I will out of them raise
this doctrinal proposition, namely, That Christ's resurrection and
exaltation is fully as necessary and effectual to procure and per
fect our salvation, if not more, than even the all-sufficient sacrifice
upon the cross.
10. Which, that I may more fully and distinctly confirm it unto
you, I will divide into two propositions, which, if sufficiently
maintained, do necessarily infer the doctrine. The first whereof
is this: That the purpose of Christ, who satisfied for our sins,
and the covenant which he made with God, who accepted of this
satisfaction, was not, that remission of sins should immediately

598 The Fifth Sermon.
ensue upon his death, but only upon performance of the conditions
of the new covenant made in Christ's blood ; which are, unfeigned
repentance for sin, and a serious conversion unto God by faith.
The second, That by the dominion and power of Christ, which
at his resurrection, and not before, he received as a reward of his
great humility ; we are not only enabled to the performance of the
conditions of this new covenant, and, by consequence, made capable
of an actual application of his satisfaction ; but also, by the same
power, we shall hereafter be raised up, and exalted to everlasting
happiness. Of these two propositions, therefore, in the order pro
posed, very briefly, and even too plainly. And first of the first,
namely. That the purpose of Christ, who, &c.
11. I confess, it would be no hard matter for a disputant,
meeting with an adversary that would be content to be swayed
and governed by reason alone, to molest, and even fright him
from the truth of this doctrine : for, if we shall consider, not only
the excessive, unspeakable torments which Christ suffered for us,
but especially the infinite majesty and glory of the person, who wil
lingly submitted himself to that curse ; what less reward can be
expected, than the present deliverance and salvation, not only of a
few men, but even of many worlds of men and angels.
12. But it is not for us, beloved christians, to set our price and
value upon Christ's precious blood : to say, thus much it is worth,
and no more. As there have not wanted men on the other side,
who have dared to affirm, that Christ's blood, according to exact
estimation, did amount to a certain value, by the worth and cost
whereof, such a set number as shall be saved were redeemed and
purchased ; and if one besides should be delivered, it were more
than the price of the blood came to. What a fearful dangerous
curiosity is this ! Is it not a piece of Judas's sin, to set our own
estimation and value upon, to make a bargain and sale of Christ's
death ; to set up a kind of shambles to sell his flesh and blood in ?
13. But leaving these vain, fantastical calculations to their chief
professors, the schoolmen, who are so unreasonably addicted to
this dreaming learning, that nothing can escape their compass and
balance: for, to omit their curious descriptions and maps of the
dimensions and situation of heaven and hell ; the figure, borders,
islands of both ; they have undertaken to discover the exact, pro
portionable increase of the graces of the saints, especially of the
blessed Virgin ; whose good actions they have found to increase just
in octupla ratione : so that, for example, her twentieth good action
did exceed the first in virtue and intention of grace, as much as
the whole earth doth exceed a grain of mustard-seed :
14. Is not this, beloved friends, a learning and wisdom to be
pitied ? Is not this that disease, which St. Paul discovers (1 Tim.
vi.) the effect whereof is to make men sick about vain questions,
and oppositions of science, falsely so called ? Therefore, leaving
these vain speculations, as likewise others about the business in
hand, no less curious, and much more dangerous, yet securely
stated in these days, almost in every pamphlet and synopsis ; as,
namely, whether God could have contrived any course for man's

The Fifth Sermon. 599
salvation besides that which he prosecuted? Whether, without
accepting any satisfaction to his justice, he could freely and abso
lutely have remitted our sins ?
15. For what use or profit can be made of these questions,
though with never so great sub.tilty and curiosity stated ? Besides,
we find that God had professed unto Adam, that his death, to
gether with the destruction of all mankind, should be the reward
of the breach of his covenant: by which means God's justice
being interested in the business, the very grounds and foundation
of this latter question are destroyed, the doubt and screw whereof
must needs have been blasphemous; namely, whether God could
have been unjust? Nay, more, it makes the sending of Christ
into the world, together with his obedience to the death, even that
accursed death of the cross, to be a matter of no necessary impor
tance ; to be only a great compliment, whereby God shews unto
mankind, that though he could easily have remitted their sins with
out any satisfaction (for whatsoever is possible to God, is easy),
notwithstanding, that they should see, he would strain himself even
farther for them, was very requisite ; and withal, to shew his abomi
nation of sin, he was content, that all this ado, all these pompous,
tragical businesses should be performed.
16. But what saith the scripture ? " If there had been a law,
which could have given life," Christ should have died without
cause. And thereupon our apostle (Rom. iii. 25,) saith, that
" God hath set forth his Son to be a propitiation through faith in
his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins
that are past, through the forbearance of God : to declare, I say,
at this time his righteousness, that he might be just." That is,
lest by the forbearance of God, who since the foundation of the
world had shewed no sufficient example of his hatred and indigna
tion unto sin ; as also to shew there was a reason sufficient to
move him to remit the sins of many his chosen servants before
Christ; he hath now at last evidently expressed unto the world
his righteousness ; to wit, his ixSixygiv, and avraifodoaiav, by condemn
ing sin, and revenging himself upon it, in the person of his beloved,
innocent Son.
17. And, lest this stir should seem to have been kept only to
give us satisfaction, and to create in us a great opinion and con
ceit of his righteousness ; the apostle clearly saith, he did all this
to " declare at this time his righteousness, that he might be just,"
which otherwise it seems he could not have been. But I am re
solved to quit myself abruptly, and even sullenly, of those questions,
and betake myself more closely to the matter in hand.
18. What therefore is the effect and fruit, which accrues even
to the elect of God, by virtue of Christ's satisfaction, humiliation,
and death, precisely considered, and excluding the power and
virtue of his resurrection and glorious life ? Why, reconciliation
to God, justification or remission of sins, and finally salvation
both of body and soul. But is there any remission of sins without
faith? Shall we not only exclude works from justification, but
faith also ? God forbid : for so we should not only contradict the

600 The Fifth Sermon.
grounds of God's holy word, but also raze and destroy the very
foundations of the second covenant.
19. For answer; we must consider our reconciliation under a
two-fold state (according to the distinction of the reverend and
learned Dr. Davenant, bishop of Salisbury) ; 1. Either as it is
applicabilis, not yet actually conferred ; or, 2. as applicata, parti
cularly sealed and confirmed to us by a lively faith. For the
understanding of which, we must know, that in Christ's death
there was not only an abolishing of the old covenant of works, the
hand-writing which was against us, which Christ nailed unto his
cross ; (as St. Paul saith, Col. i.) delivering us from the curse
and obligation thereof ; but also there was a new gracious cove
nant, or (which is a word expressing greater comfort to us) a new
will or testament made, wherein Christ hath bequeathed unto us
many glorious legacies, which we shall undoubtedly receive, when
we shall have performed the conditions, when we shall be found
qualified so as he requires of us.
20. Till which conditions be performed, by the power of God's
Spirit assisting us, all that we obtain by the death of Christ is
this: that, first, whereas God, by reason of sin, was implacably
angry with us, would by no means accept of any reconciliation
with us, would hearken to no conditions ; now, by virtue of
Christ's death and dissatisfaction, he is graciously pleased to admit
of composition ; the former aversion and inexorableness is taken
away ; or, to speak more significantly, in St. Paul's language,
(Ephes. ii. 16,) " the enmity is slain." Secondly, that whereas
before we were liable to be tried before the throne of his exact,
severe, rigorous justice, and bound to the performance of condi
tions, by reason of our own contracted weakness become intoler
able, nay, impossible unto us ; we are released of that obligation,
and though not utterly freed from all manner of conditions, yet
tied to such as are not only possible, but by the help of his Spirit
which inwardly dispose! h and co-operateth with us, with ease and
pleasure to be performed. Besides which, we have a throne of
equity and grace to appear before. Mercy is exalted above, even
against justice ; it rejoiceth against judgment ; it is become the
higher court, and hath the privileges of a superior court, that
appeals may be made from the inferior court of justice to that of
mercy and favour. Nay, more ; whereas before we were justly
delivered into the power of Satan, now being reconciled to God, by
the blood of Christ, we are (as it is in Col. i. 13,) delivered from
the power of darkness, and translated into the kingdom of his dear
Son. 21. All this, and more (if it were the business of this time to
be punctual in discovering all) hath Christ wrought for us, being
aliens and strangers, yea, enemies afar off, without God in the
world. Yet for all this that Christ hath merited thus much for
us, and more ; notwithstanding, take away the power of Christ's
resurrection and life ; take away the influence of his Holy Spirit,
whereby we are regenerated and made new creatures, and we are
yet in the gall of bitterness and bond of iniquity. For though (as

The Fifth Sermon. 601
it is, Heb. x. 19,) we have wajSpViav, i. e. liberty, and free leave to
enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus; though there be a way
made open, yet walk we cannot ; we are not able to set forwards
into it, as long as we are bound and fettered with our sins ; though
there be an access to the throne of grace, yet it is only for them
which are sanctified.
22. And, therefore, what dangerous consequences do attend
that doctrine, which teacheth, that, immediately upon the death
of Christ, all our sins are actually forgiven us, and we effectually
reconciled ! But because another employment is required by this
time, I will, out of many, make use of two reasons only to destroy
that doctrine ; whereof the one is taken from the nature of the
second covenant, the other from the necessity of Christ's resur
rection. 23. For the first : if we, that is, the elect of God (for I am re
solved to have to do with none else at this time) be effectually
reconciled to God, by virtue of Christ's death, having obtained a
full perfect remission of all our sins, why are we frighted, or, to
say truly, injured with new covenants? why are we, seeing our
debts are paid to the utmost farthing, the creditor's demands ex
actly satisfied, the obligation cancelled ; why then are we made
believe that we are not quite out of danger ; nay, that unless we
ourselves, out of our own stock, pay some charges and duties extra
ordinarily, and, by the by, enforced upon us ; all the former pay
ments, how valuable soever, shall become fruitless, and we to re
main accountable for the whole debt ?
24. But it may be (and that seems most likely) there is no such
thing indeed as a new covenant. Promises and threatenings are
only a pretty kind of rhetorical device, which God is pleased to use,
sometimes to allure us, and win our hearts to do that which shall
please bim ; at other times to startle and affright us, when we are
about something contrary to his command. And, to say the truth,
this must of necessity be the issue of the former doctrine : for how
is it possible to make these things hold together ! We are already
perfectly reconciled to God by the death of his Son, without any
consideration had to our personal faith and repentance ; and yet,
unless we do earnestly repent us of our sins, and with a lively faith
adhere to God's promises, we shall never be reconciled unto God :
or these ? All our sins are already remitted, and that only for the
virtue of Christ's satisfaction ; and yet, unless we believe, our sins
shall never be forgiven us.
25. So that by this reckoning, we must be forced to purge the
gospel of those troublesome, dangerous terms of covenant and
conditions, of those fruitless, affrighting conjunctions, si credideris,
si non pmnitentiam egeris. Or (which is all one) soften them into
a sense utterly repugnant and warring against the natural force
and signification of the words : on this wise ; where the scripture
saith, If thou repentest not, thy sins shall not be forgiven thee ;
thou art not to conceive, that forgiveness of thy sins is a work
yet to be done, or that it has any dependence upon any thing in
thee: but this great blessing shall be hid from thine eyes, thou

602 The Fifth Sermon.
shalt never come to the knowledge of it, and thereby shalt live
here a discontented, pensive, suspicious life. Again: if thou be
lievest, thou shalt be saved : that is, thou shalt obtain a comforta
ble assurance of hope, nay, an infallible faith of thy future salva
tion ; though that was intended thee, without any consideration of
thy faith.
26. So that the gospel of Christ is not the power of God unto
salvation : for how can the word be an instrument of that which
was long ago absolutely performed and purchased? and there
fore Christ, his preaching, his miracles, and tears, the apostles'
travels and persecutions, the sending of the Holy Spirit, baptism,
eucharist, imposition of hands, absolution, and many more blessed
means of our salvation, were not instituted for this end, to make us
capable of remission of sins (for that, it seems, was already not only
meritoriously, but effectually procured, and without all manner
of conditions infallibly destined to God's elect) ; but only for this
end, that whilst they live here, to their thinking, in danger and
hazard (but they are fools for thinking so) they may now and
then be a little cheered and comforted with apprehending what
Christ hath done for them ; and to what a comfortable state and
inheritance he hath destined them. Thus the covenant, which
God hath sworn shall be everlasting, is by the improvidence
and ignorance of some men rendered unprofitable ; yea, utterly ab
rogated : but (ne quid inclementius dicam) we have not so learned
Christ. 27. The second reason destroying the former doctrine, I told
you should be taken from the necessity of Christ's resurrection.
For if the immediate effect of Christ's death be the purchasing of
a perfect reconciliation with God, and full remission of sins for us
the elect of God ; then (I will not say, what benefit, but) what ne
cessity is there of Christ's resurrection in respect of us ? For, by
this account, after the consummatum est upon the cross, when the
satisfaction was perfected, and our debts paid ; though Christ had
afterwards miscarried, though he had been detained by death,
though his soul had been left in hell, and he had seen corruption ;
notwithstanding, we should stand upon good terms with God, unless
we shall conceive of him worse than of the most oppressing usurer,
that when a debt is discharged, and the bond cancelled, will not
withstanding not release the prisoner, unless the undertaker come
in person, or by main force deliver him.
28. I confess, that to see a friend that had ventured so far for
us, as our Saviour did : that to do us good had put himself in such
extreme danger : I say, to see such an one to be utterly cast away,
without all hopes and possibility of being able to pay him our
thanks, would be a spectacle, which would grieve and pierce our
very souls; it would be a rending to our bowels. But this is only
charity and gratitude, or good nature in us, which would procure
this grief; not that it stands upon our safety, his preservation being
a matter only of convenience, not extreme necessity to us.
29. We all do worthily condemn and detest that blasphemous
heresy of the socinians, who exclude the meritorious death and

The Fifth Sermon. g03
suffering of Christ from having any necessary influence into our
justification or salvation, making it of no greater virtue than the
sufferings of the blessed martyrs, who, by their death, set their
seal and testimony to the truth of the gospel, which freely offers
forgiveness of sins to all penitent believers. Now the same injury
which these heretics do to the merits of Christ's death, in propor
tion the former doctrine fastens upon his resurrection and new
life, by taking from it the chief and proper effect thereof, which
is an actual vindication of us from the power of sin, into the glo
rious liberty of the sons of God, by the power of Christ's Spirit,
plentifully by him diffused and shed abroad in our hearts; and
making the chief virtue thereof to consist in affording us only mat
ter of comfort and hope, that God will deal no otherwise with us,
than he hath dealt with Christ, and after a life full of disturbance
and misery, revive us to glory and immortality with his Son for
evermore: whereas St. Paul hath another kind of conceit of Christ's
resurrection ; for, saith he, in Heb. v. 9, Christ being made per
fect, i. e. glorified, (chap. ii. 10,) becomes author of eternal salva
tion to all that obey him : " And if Christ be not risen, your faith
is vain, you are yet in your sins ;" and if Christ be not risen, neither
shall we ever be raised, but be utterly irrecoverably condemned to
everlasting rottenness.
30. And thus I am unawares fallen upon my second proposi
tion, namely, that by the dominion and power of Christ, which
at his resurrection, and not before, he received as a reward of his
great humility, we are not only enabled to the performance of the
conditions of this new covenant, and, by consequence, made capable
of an actual application of his satisfaction ; but also by the same
power, we shall hereafter be raised up, and exalted into everlast
ing happiness.
31. Though by the virtue of the incarnation of our Saviour,
the human nature was raised to a state and condition of unspeak
able glory; notwithstanding, if in this place, as well as before,
we shall be content to submit our reason to scripture, we shall
find, that, according to a covenant made between Christ and his
Father, he was content not to challenge to himself any right of do
minion and rule over us, till he had perfectly deserved and earned
it by a former voluntary submission and humiliation of himself.
32. The conditions on Christ's part we find most exactly per
formed by him, wholly resigning and prostrating his own will to
the will and disposition of his Father. At his private passion,
which immediately went before his attachment, when he was
sacrificed, and even crucified alone in the garden, without the as
sistance and malice of a traitorous disciple, of the chief priests,
or Romans ; though he retained that innocent fear of death and
shame, which is natural to man, which forced him to cry out,
" Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me ;" notwith
standing, though he could not hate his own life, yet to shew he
preferred the fulfilling of his Father's will before ,it, he adds,
" Nevertheless, not my will, but thy will be done :"* by which
* Luke xxii. 42.

604 The Fifth Sermon.
words he resigns the whole power and faculty of his will into his
Father's hands. In the words of another evangelist he saith,—
" Not what I will, but what thou wilt ;"* where he resigns and
submits the act and exercise of his will. And, lastly, to make
all complete, in the expression of a third evangelist, he saith,
" Not as I will, but as thou wilt ;"f where he subjects not only
the faculty and exercise of his will to the performance of what
God shall command him, but is willing and desirous to do it after
what manner and fashion soever God shall be pleased. It is not
possible for the understanding of man to add or conceive a degree
beyond this.
33. In the next place, we shall see how God the Father is as
good as his word to his son. But, first, give me leave to com
plain to you of that tyranny, which custom, partiality, or some
thing worse, has laid upon our understandings ; and that is this :
that wheresoever any former protestant writer hath suspected a
doctrine as not beneficial, but rather dangerous, to some conclusion,
which he is resolved to maintain against the papists, we their scho
lars are obliged to make good their jealousies, and (may be) ground
less suspicions.
34. To omit many examples, I will produce only these few. It
lies upon us to maintain, that St. John's baptism was one and the
same sacrament with that of Christ's, contrary to express words of
scripture : and something else : that Christ is a mediator, secundum
divinam naturam ; which borders, I fear, upon an old dangerous
heresy : as likewise (which especially concerns this place) that
Christ merited nothing to himself by his passion, neither was the
exaltation of his human nature to the dominion and rule over all
creatures a reward of his humility, but a preferment due to his per
son, though by special dispensation the exercise thereof was defer
red for a time, but should have been conferred upon him as fully as
he now enjoys it, though he had never suffered.
35. But scripture teacheth us, that Christ was to be made per
fect by sufferings : that because he had drunk of the brook by
the way, therefore he should lift up his head : that, " for the joy
which was set before him (that is, having an eye to the glorious re
ward and fruit of his sufferings) he endured the cross, and despised
the shame, and therefore is set up at the right hand of glory."
Because " being found in fashion as a man, he humbled himself,
and became obedient to death, even the death of the cross; Sio,
therefore (for this reason) God hath highly exalted him, and given
him a name, which is above every name,"J &c. Nay, St. Paul
makes the obtaining a rule and dominion over mankind, a main
end of his death ; for in Rom. xiv. 9, he saith, E<s touto, " For this
end, Christ both died and rose again, that he might be Lord both
of the dead and of the living :" by his death meriting this dominion ;
by his resurrection, receiving it. But I will forbear controversy, be
cause I desire to seek out no adversary, especially in my preaching,
but only the devil and sin.
36. This therefore I think we shall agree upon, that it was the
» Mark xiv. 36. t Matt xxvi. 39. X Phil. ii. 8, 9.

The Fifth Sermon. g05
purpose and immutable decree of God, that after the fall and
misery of man, whatsoever good should befall us toward our re
stitution and repairing to our lost happiness, should be conveyed
unto us by our own nature ; that the seed of the woman should
break the serpent's head ; that is, not only, in St. John's phrase,
destroy the works of the devil, but also, in St. Paul's, destroy his
kingdom and power, which is death. So that, as by man came sin
and error, so by man also should come grace and truth. " As by
man came death, so by man also should come the resurrection
from the dead." By man also, life and immortality should be brought
to light.
37. Now that these great projects and intendments might be
brought about, and that the human nature might be furnished
with ability to discharge this province, and to go through with
this great undertaking, God the Father, for the merit of Christ's
great humility, by his resurrection, " hath highly exalted him
far above all principality, and power, and might, and dominion,
and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in
that which is to come :* and hath given him a name above all
names, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things
in heaven, and things in the earth, and things under the earth ; and
that every tongue should confess, that Jesus is the Lord, to the
glory of God the Father."f
38. And thus much Christ himself confesseth and acknow-
- ledgeth presently upon his resurrection ; for then he saith, " All
power is given unto me in heaven and earth." It was then only
he received the dominion, whereof his father David's kingdom
was but a type and shadow : and as his father David was anointed
and deputed by God to the kingdom, but received not actual
possession of it till after many persecutions and afflictions at the
hands of his master Saul ; in like manner, though our Saviour,
even in the days of his humility, teacheth us, that the Father
judgeth no man, but resigneth all judgment to the Son ; notwith
standing these words are to be understood only by way of antici
pation or prophecy of what should befall him, after he should have
performed the work of our redemption : for while he lived here
among men, he professed he was so far from being a king, that
be had no sufficient authority given him to be a petty judge in a
case of inheritance ; and that wicked Pilate himself had power
given him from heaven to become his judge : so that, though in
the days of his flesh, he was heir of all things, yet he was only
a conditional heir ; and, therefore, till the conditions were per
formed, and himself seised of the inheritance, even the heir himself
differed nothing from a servant.
39. But within three days after his passion, the case was much
altered : for, whereas before he was allowed no authority, no, not
in Israel; at his resurrection, he obtains the heathen for his in
heritance, and the uttermost parts of the earth for his possession.
Now it would be a hard undertaking to describe the limits and
borders of Christ's kingdom ; as also to define the polity, whereby
* Eph. i. 20. t Phil. ii. 9—11.

606 The Fifth Sermon.
it is administered. Therefore, leaving the most glorious part of
it, which is in heaven, undiscovered; we find in holy scripture,
that according to the several dispositions and qualifications of men
here on earth, he hath both a sceptre of righteousness to govern
and protect his faithful subjects and servants; and a rod of iron,
to break the wicked in pieces like a potter's vessel. And though
the greatest part of the world will acknowledge no subjection to
Christ's kingdom, notwithstanding, this does not take away his
authority over them, no more than the murmuring and rebellion
of the Israelites did depose Moses their governor. But there will
come a time when that prophetical parable of his shall be resolved,
and interpreted to their confusion ; when he shall indeed say,
" Where are those my enemies, which would not have me to reign
over them ? Bring them hither, and slay them before me."
40. But the most eminent and notorious exercise of Christ's
dominion is seen in the rule over his church, which he purchased
with his own blood. Now the first business he took in hand, pre
sently upon his resurrection, when all power and dominion was
given him, was, to give commission and authority to his ambassa
dors the apostles, and disciples, to make known to the world that
so great salvation which he had wrought at his passion. Now,
though the apostles were sufficiently authorised, by virtue of that
commission, which Christ gave to them in those words : " As my
Father sent me, so send I you" — notwithstanding, they were not to
put this authority presently in practice, but to wait for the sending
of the Holy Ghost, which Christ before had promised them ; that by
his virtue and influence they might be furnished with abilities to go
through with that great employment of reconciling the world unto
God, by subduing men's understandings to the truth and obedience
of the gospel.
41. We read in the gospel of St. John, that, during the life
which Christ lived in the flesh, the Holy Ghost was not sent; and
the reason is added, " Because the Son of man was not yet glo
rified." The strength and vigour of which reason doth excellently
illustrate the point in hand. For the sending of the Holy Ghost
was one of the most glorious acts of Christ's kingly office, and
the most powerful means of advancing his kingdom. Therefore,
in the days of his humiliation, whilst he lived in the form of a
servant, before he had purchased to himself a church by his own
blood, his human nature obtained no right of dominion and power
over mankind. For till we were redeemed from the power and
subjection of the devil and sin, by the merit of Christ's death, we
were none of Christ's subjects, but servants and slaves, sold under
sin and Satan.
42. So that it being necessary that the Son of man should not
only pay a price and ransom for our redemption by his death, but
also that the same Son of man, and none else, should actually and
powerfully vindicate his elect from the bondage they were in,
and effectually apply his merits and satisfaction to their souls and
consciences, till he was, in St. Paul's words,* Aia to rfadijfjia rod
* Heb. ii. 9.

Tfie Fifth Sermon. 607
davorou oo|jj xai <riu.fi' idre(puvuu,£vos, " For the suffering of death
crowned with glory and honour ;" he, according to his human
nature (and that was the only instrument whereby our salvation
was to be wrought) had no power of sending the Holy Ghost.
43. And indeed till reconciliation was made by his death, to
what purpose should the Holy Ghost be sent? what business or
employment could we find for him on earth ? You will say, to
work grace and new obedience in us. I confess that is a work
worthy the majesty and goodness of God's Holy Spirit ; but yet,
suppose all this had been wrought in us ; put the case, our hearts
were sprinkled from an evil conscience, and that we were renewed
in the spirit of our minds ; perhaps all this might procure us a
more tolerable cool place and climate in hell ; but without Christ '
it would be far from advantaging us towards our salvation : for,
alas ! though we should turn never so holy, never so virtuous and
reformed ; what satisfaction or recompense could we make for
our former sins and iniquities? God knows, it must cost more to
redeem a soul, therefore we must let that alone for ever ; we
must take heed of ever meddling in that office, we must let it
alone to him (even Jesus Christ) who alone is able to be at that
cost. 44. But I might have spared all these suppositions : for as, ex
cluding Christ, there is no satisfaction, no hope of redemption for
us; so excluding Christ's satisfaction, he hath no power or autho
rity, as man, of sending the Holy Ghost, thereby to work in us
an ability of performing the conditions of the second covenant ;
and, by consequence, of making us capable of the fruit and benefit
of his satisfaction. Therefore, blessed be God, the Father, for
the great glory which he gave unto Christ ; and blessed be our
Lord Jesus Christ, for meriting and purchasing that glory at so
dear a rate ; and blessed be the Holy Spirit, who, when Christ (who
is flesh of our flesh, and bone of our bone) did send him, would be
content to come down and dwell among us.
45. We find in holy scripture, that our salvation is ascribed to
all the three persons of the blessed Trinity, though in several re
spects : to the Father, who accepts of Christ's satisfaction, and offer-
eth pardon of all our sins ; to the Son, who merited and procured
reconciliation for his elect faithful servants ; and to the Holy Ghost,
the comforter, who, being sent by the Son, worketh in us power to
perform the conditions of the new covenant, thereby qualifying us
for receiving actual remission of our sins, and a right to that glorious
inheritance purchased for us.
46. And from hence may appear how full of danger the former
doctrine is, which teacheth that actual remission of sins is pro
cured to God's elect immediately by Christ's death ; and how dis
honourable it is to the Spirit of grace, excluding him from having
any concurrence or efficacy in our salvation : for, if this should be
true, the powerful working of the Holy Spirit can in no sense
concern either our justification, or everlasting happiness. For
how can it be said that the Holy Spirit doth co-operate to our sal
vation, since all our good and happiness was procured by Christ's

608 The Fifth Sermon.
death ; not only before, but without all manner of respect had to
our regeneration and sanctification, by the power of the blessed
Spirit ? Therefore, by this doctrine, if we be any thing at all be
holden to the Holy Spirit, it is only for this, that he is pleased now
and then, by fits, to be a messenger or intelligencer, to discover unto
us what Christ alone hath purchased for us.
47. But I forbear to enlarge myself further in this point ; and,
indeed, I have already done too much wrong to the honour and
dignity of this feast, not only in mixing the business of Good Friday
with it, as I did in my former part ; but also (as I now have done)
in taking in the matter and employment of Whitsuntide too. Suf
fice it, therefore, that the sending of the Holy Ghost was an especial
exercise of that power which was given Christ at his resurrection ;
by the influence and virtue whereof, we do restrain and appropriate
the merit of his death to our own good and benefit.
48. Now I would not be mistaken, as if I said that the resur
rection of Christ, precisely taken for that individual action,
whereby he was restored to life and glory, was then effectual and
powerful to produce those admirable effects : for, that being a
transient action, past and finished many hundred years since, can
very improperly be termed capable of having such effects ascribed
to it, as have since, and shall to the end of the world be wrought
in God's elect. Therefore St. Paul shall be my interpreter, in Rom.
v. 10, saying, " If when we were enemies, we were reconciled to
God by the death of his Son, much more, being reconciled, we shall
be saved by his life ;" that is, by that glorious life which began at
his resurrection.
49. For as in the matter of satisfaction, we ascribe our recon
ciliation to his death especially, yet not excluding his former obe
dience and humiliation ; but naming that, as being the complement
and perfection, terminating whatsoever went before ; so, likewise,
in Christ's exaltation, though there were divers degrees, and
ascents, and stages of it ; yet we especially take notice of his re
surrection, because in that Christ took his rise, as it were, and was
then* a bridegroom coming out of this chamber, " rejoicing as a
giant to run his race." His goings out indeed were from the grave,
but his circuit is to the ends of heaven, and nothing is hid from his
heat and virtue. He illuminates every man that cometh into the
world : " He was made (saith St. Paul) a quickening spirit ;" cherish
ing, actuating, and informing us with life and motion. By the influ
ence and power of his life he undergoes, as it were, a second incar
nation, living and dwelling in our hearts by his grace, and reigning
powerfully in our souls by faith.
50. And hereby he even shares his kingdom, his power, and
his victory with us : for (saith St. John) " this is the victory
whereby ye overcome the world, even your faith." Christ is not
content only to destroy in us the works of darkness, to dispel the
clouds of ignorance and error, or to rectify the crookedness and
perverseness of our wills ; neither yet to implant in us a heavy,
inactive, sleepy harmlessness, a dull, lethargic innocence ; but
* Psal. six.

The Fifth Sermon. 609
withal, endues us justitia germinante, with a fruitful, budding
righteousness, and works in us, in the expression of St. Paul,
both* Cirofiov^v ttjs iXriSos, a patient, unwearied hope, not hasty
nor discontented with expecting ; and xoirov <rr\s a.ya.irt\s, a painful
laborious love ; and egyov r^g iritfreus, a working, sprightful vigor
ous faith, whereby we violently lay hold on the promises. And
in this sense the same apostle saith.f that as "Christ died for
our sins, so he rose again for our justification ;" that is, one chief
end of Christ's resurrection, in respect of us, was to work in us
a lively faith, whereby we might be justified and acquitted from
our sins.
51. And yet the power of Christ's life leaves us not here nei
ther : nay, all this is performed only to make us capable of greater
blessings yet. For by our sanctification and new birth we are (saith
Tertullian)J restitutione inaugurati, designed and consecrated to
a glorious resurrection. Hereupon St. John calls holiness the first
resurrection, whereby sin is destroyed : and it is a pawn of the se
cond, whereby death also shall be swallowed up in victory. By the
first, the sting of the serpent is taken away, which is sin (as St. Paul
saith, " the sting of death is sin"), and, when the sting is gone, the
serpent cannot long outlive it ; for by the second resurrection that
also is destroyed.
52. But you will say, how is death destroyed ? Do not all men
die ? Do not all men see corruption ? You may as well ask, how
is sin destroyed ? For, have not all men sinned, and come short
of the glory of God ? Nay, do not all men sin, how righteous so
ever? And, if they were rewarded according to their own de
merits, would they not all come short of the glory of God ? Most
certainly true : therefore, to say the truth, as yet, neither sin nor
death are destroyed; but only the dominion of sin, and the victory
of the grave. And thereupon the apostle, contemplating the con
quering power of Christ at his resurrection, saith not, Oh death,
or, Oh grave, where are you ? (for a little travail would serve the
turn to assoil that question) but " Oh death, where is thy sting ?"§
How comes it to pass, that thy poison is not so keen and mortal,
as it hath been ? that it is so easily, though not expelled, yet
tempered and corrected by the healing bezoartical virtue of grace ?
And thou, " oh grave, where is thy victory ?" Though thou hast
given thine adversary the foil, though thou hast gotten him under
thee, yet thou shalt never be able to detain him long: for, "be
hold, a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not
tarry." He will ransack the most private reserved corners of thy
treasure ; and though thou mayest consume and devour our
bodies, yet he will force thee to vomit and disgorge them again;
he will not leave one portion, one morsel of them in thy stomach
and entrails.
53. I know the ingenious and learned Paraeus, because he
would not suffer any portion of the merit of Christ's death to be
extended and meant to the ungodly ; or, that he, by the fruit of
*lThess. i. 3. tRom. iv. 24. X Tertull. De res. carnis. § 1 Cor. xv. 55.
QO.

610 The Fifth Sermon.
his passion, should obtain any power over them, will, therefore,
consequently, exclude them from the efficacy and power of his re
surrection and life : he will not allow them to be raised by the
power of Christ, but only by the justice of God to their own con
demnation : so that by his reckoning, the great business and work
of the last day shall not wholly lie upon Christ's hands to perform,
but shall be parted and shared between the power of Christ and
the justice of God.
54. I am confidently persuaded St. Paul in this point was not of
his mind, when he saith, " as in Adam all have died, so by Christ
shall all (all, without exception) be made alive again." And, "as
by man came death, so by man also cometh the resurrection of the
dead." Indeed, I wonder Paraeus would not likewise find some
shift to exclude Christ, as well from being a judge to condemn the
wicked : for, with as much reason, and as great ease, he might
have given him a writ of ease, a discharge from that office as well
as the other.
55. And now I could wish I had said nothing all this while
(and likely enough so could you) : but it grieves me that the
portion of time allowed me, will not suffer me, in any reasonable
proportion, to contemplate the wonderful mercy and goodness of
God ; who, to do us good, has given such power to our nature in
Christ, to make a new heaven, and a new earth, to restore a new
generation of creatures, ten times more glorious and perfect than
the first. Only, now tell me, did not St. Paul, with good reason,
speaking of the resurrection of Christ give it an advantage and
pre-eminence, even above his death ? Is not the MaXXov Se in
my text, the " yea rather," verbum raXavnxiov, a word of great
moment and weight ? since the resurrection of Christ actuates and
ripens the fruit of Christ's death, which, without, it, would have
withered, and been of no help to us. Is not the doctrine of Christ's
resurrection and exaltation with as good reason made an article of
our, creed, and as necessarily, if not rather, to be leaned upon, as
any of the rest ? Nay, hath not St. Paul epitomized the whole
creed into that one article, saying, (in Rom. x. 9,) " if thou shalt
believe in thine heart, that God raised the Lord Jesus from the
dead, thou shalt be saved ?"
56. And now it is time to consider, who are the persons whom
the death, yea rather, the resurrection of Christ, will protect and
warrant from condemnation. In my text, as we find none to con
demn, so likewise we cannot light upon any to be condemned.
In the verse immediately before these words, the elect of God are
those which are justified, and therefore must not be condemned.
And, to say the truth, though we dispute till the world's end, the
event will shew, that the elect of God, and only they, shall reap
the harvest of Christ's sufferings, and bring their sheaves with
them. As for the wicked and reprobates, it shall not be so with
them : but why it shall not be so with them ; whether, because
they have wilfully excluded themselves, or, because God had no
mind they should be any thing the better for these things, I will
not tell you.

The Fifth Sermon. 611
57. In the verses on both sides of my text we find, that we are
those that must not be condemned. We? Which we? Why
Paul and the Romans, Jews and gentiles. What, all Jews, and
all gentiles? I told you, I will not tell: only thus much let me
tell you, we may boldly maintain St. Paul's phrase : nay, it is un
safe and dangerous to alter it. Why, it is all the comfort we have
to live by; it is our glory and crown of rejoicing, that we are those,
whose salvation Christ did so earnestly and unfeignedly desire, and
thirst after; that, to obtain power and authority to bestow it on us,
he suffered such torments and blasphemies, that never sorrow was
like unto his sorrow, which was done unto him, wherewith the Lord
afflicted him in the day of his fierce wrath.
58. Wherefore, I beseech you, beloved brethren, even by the
bowels of this Jesus Christ, that you would give me leave to advise
you; if there be any here fit to be advised by me, if there be any
in this company as weak and ignorant as myself (and though my
heart be deceitful above all things, yet as far as I understand mine
own heart, if I speak these words out of partiality or faction, let me
be excluded from having any part in those merits) — I say, let me
desire you, or rather, let our holy mother the church persuade you
(in the 17th article) to receive God's promises in such wise as they
are generally set forth to us in holy scriptures.
59. For, consider impartially with yourselves, what an unrea
sonable, horrible thing is it, seeing there are so many several,
frequent expressions of God's general love and gracious favour
unto mankind, enforced and strengthened with such protestations
and solemn oaths, that the cunningest linguists of you all cannot,
with your whole life's study, conceive or frame expressions more
full and satisfactory ; I say, then, is it not desperate madness for a
man to shew such hatred and abomination at these comfortable and
gracious professions of God, that he can be content to spend almost
his whole age in contriving and hunting after interpretations, ut
terly contradicting and destroying the plain, apparent sense of those
scriptures; and will be glad and heartily comforted to hear tidings
of a new-found-out gloss, to pervert, and rack, and torment God's
holy word ?
60. On the other side, far be it from us to think, that it is in
our power, when we list or have a mind to it, to put ourselves in
the number of God's elect, faithful servants : or, to imagine, that
we have God so sure chained and fettered to us by his promises,
that we may dispense now and then for the commission of a de
lightful, gainful crime : or, that, when we have business for a sin
to advantage us in our fortunes, we need not be too scrupulous
about it, seeing God is bound, upon our sorrow and contrition, to
receive us again into favour. Thou wretched fool ! darest thou
make an advantage of God's goodness, to assist and patronise thy
security ? 'Tis true, God has promised remission of sins to a re •
pentant, contrite sinner; but has he assured thee, that he will
give thee repentance, whensoever thou pleasest to allow thyself
leisure to seek it? No: know that there is a time (and pre
suming security, like sleep, doth hasten and add wings to that
<*<*2

612 The Fifth Sermon.
time) when there will be found no place for repentance, though
thou seekest it with tears. And thus more than I meant for the
persons. 61. And now what remains, but that we try an experiment?
That we may know in what a comfortable state Christ hath set
us, let us consider, and look about us, to see if we can find any ene
mies that are likely to do us any harm : for which purpose, we shall
not meet with a more accurate spy and intelligencer than St. Paul,
who, in the remainder of this chapter, after my text, hath mustered
them together in one roll. But, first, there is one, if he were our
adversary, be would be instead of a thousand enemies unto us, and
that is God. But him we are sure of in the verse before my
text ; for it is he that justifies, therefore surely he will not con
demn : therefore what say you to " tribulation, or distress, or per
secution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or the sword ?" Why,
these are not worthy the naming, for over all these we are more
than conquerors. More than conquerors ? What is that ? Why
they are not only overcome and disarmed, but they are brought
over to our faction ; they war on our side.
62. Well, in the next file, there follow adversaries of better
fashion ; there is life, and death, and angels, and principalities, and
powers. Who are those ? In truth I know not ; but be they who
they will, they can do us no harm : no, " nor things present, nor
things to come, nor height, nor depth ;" (these are adversaries we
should scarce have dreamed of:) and, to make all sure in a word,
there is no other creature shall ever " be able to separate us from
the love of God which is in Jesus Christ our Lord."
63. Yet for all St. Paul's exactness, there remains one enemy
behind, and that is a sore one, of prime note ; and truly I won
der how the apostle could miss him. And that is sin. I would to
God St. Paul had taken notice of him ; for this one enemy is able
to do us more harm than all the rest put together : nay, but for
sin, all the rest almost were our very good friends. Had we best
supply St. Paul's incogitancy, and even adventure to put him in
the catalogue too ? Well, let them that have a mind to it, do it ;
truly, I dare not. And, but that I know Martin Luther was a
bold-spirited man, I should wonder how he durst so confidently
have adventured upon it : in his book, intituled, Captivitatis
Babylonica, (cap. de Baptismo, near the beginning) he hath these
words : Vides quam dives sit homo Christianus sive baptizatus, qui
etiam volens non potest perdere suam salutem quantiscunque pecca-
tis, nisi nolit credere. I will not translate them to you ; and I
would they never had been Englished ; for by that means, it may
be, some of our loudest preachers would have wanted one point
of comfortable false doctrine, wherewith they are wont to pleasure
their friends and benefactors. Only let us do thus much for St.
Paul's credit, to believe it was not merely inconsideration in him
to leave out sin in this catalogue ; that there was some ground of
reason for it ; for though it may come to pass, by the mercy and
goodness of God, that even sin itself shall not pluck us out of his
hand, yet it would be something a strange, preposterons doctrine)

The Fifth Sermon. 613
for a preacher of the new covenant to proclaim, that we shall un
doubtedly obtain the promises of the covenant, though we never so
much break the conditions.
64. I do confess myself very guilty, and am sorry that I have
thus long exercised and wearied your patience ; and yet, for all
that, have not performed that task, which I fully resolved upon,
when I adventured upon this subject : and that was, to spend this
time in raising our devotions to the contemplation of the glorious
mercies of God, expressed to us in Christ's resurrection and exalta
tion. But because other thoughts have carried me away (even
against my will) almost all this while, I shall further take leave to
wrong and injure your patience, with proposing one consideration
more which ought by no means to be omitted.
65. And that is, to take notice of the person, to whom we have
been beholden for these unspeakable mercies; and that is Christ,
Christ alone, none else mentioned or thought upon. If Bellar
mine had been to advise St. Paul, if he had been privy to the
writing of this epistle, it is likely he would not have taken it ill,
to have had Christ's name in the matter of our salvation ; but he
would not have endured the apostle's utter silence of all helps
and aids besides : yea, though himself acknowledgeth it to he
the safest course, to put our whole confidence only in the mercy
of God ; yet, quia magis honorificum est habere aliquid ex merito,
because it concerns our credit, to put in a little for merit and
desert on our side ; he would not have us so to disparage our
selves, as to make salvation a mere alms, proceeding merely out of
courtesy. 66. Nay, but, oh thou man, what art thou that answerest
against God? What art thou that justifiest thyself before him?
Nay, what art thou that condemnest God, making him a liar all
the scripture over ? The whole project thereof is this, to let us
know, how unable, how sick, how dead, we are of ourselves, and
therefore ought most necessarily to have recourse to him for our
salvation. As for us, beloved christians, if we must needs re
joice, let us rejoice, let us rejoice in our infirmities ; let our glory
be our shame, and let us lift up our eyes and behold, *" Who is
this that cometh from Edom, with dyed garments from Bozrah ;
this, that is glorious in his apparel, travelling in the greatness of
his strength ?" And Christ will say, it is " I that speak in righte
ousness, mighty to save." But wherefore, Lord, art thou "red
in thine apparel, and thy garments like him that treadeth in the
wine-fat 1" He will answer, " I have trodden the wine-press
alone, and of the people there was none with me ;" for which
reason I am now crowned with glory, and honour, and immortality :
I alone am mighty to save, and besides me there is none other.
_ 67. And " good luck have thou with thine honour, O Lord ;
ride on, because of thy word of truth, of meekness, and of righte
ousness; and thy right hand shall teach thee terrible things :"j-
terrible things for the king's enemies, for them who would not
have thee to rule over them. And good luck have we " with
* Isa. Ixiii. 1, 2. tPsal. xiv.

614 Tfte Sixth Sermon.
thine honour, O Lord ; ride on, because of thy word of truth, of
meekness, and of righteousness; and thy right hand shall teach
thee" gracious and comfortable things for us thy servants, and
sheep of thy pasture, who dare not exalt a weak arm of flesh
against thee. Thy right hand shall mightily defend us in the
midst of all our enemies. Thy right hand shall find us out, and
gather us up, though lost and consumed in the grave; though
scattered before the four winds of heaven : and, thy right hand
shall exalt us to glory and immortality for ever with thee in thy
heavenly kingdom, where all the days of our life, yea, all the
days of thy glorious endless life, we shall, with angels and arch
angels, say, Glory, and honour, and power, and immortality, be
unto him which sitteth on the throne, and to the Lamb, and to the
Holy Spirit, for ever and for ever. Amen, Amen.

SERMON VI.
" Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness, that
when ye fail, they. may receive you into everlasting habitations."
— Luke xvi. 9.
" The children of this world (saith Christ) are wiser in their
generation than the children of light." To make which good,
our Saviour, in so much of the chapter as goes before my text,
brings in a story, or, as they call it, a parable of a cunning
fellow, yet no great projector neither, no very subtle politician ;
notwithstanding, one who being in an extremity, turned out of
his office for mispending his master's goods, had found out a
shift, and that by mere cozenage, to procure so much as would
serve to keep him, indeed not according to the port and fashion
after which before he had lived : but only to maintain him in
meat and drink, out of danger of starving, or, which was more
fearful, because more full of trouble or dishonour, hard labour or
begging. 2. Surely it had been no hard matter for our Saviour, who
knew all whatsoever was in man, to have discovered more subtle
projects, plots of a finer and more curious contrivance than this
fellow's; but this, it seems, would serve his turn well enough
for the purpose for which he made use of it: and, to say the
truth, there cannot be imagined an example more exactly suiting,
more closely applicable to his intent : which was, not to discredit
and dishearten his followers, first, by comparing and preferring the
cunning of an ordinary fellow, a mere bailiff, or steward, before
that spiritual, heavenly wisdom, to which they pretend: nor,
secondly, to instruct them by indirect and unwarrantable courses to
provide for themselves hereafter ; but chiefly this :
3. To teach us, by objecting to our view a man, who by his
own negligence and carelessness being brought to an extremity,
(for there was no necessity he should be brought to these plunges ;
a little timely care and providence, even ordinary honesty, would
easily have warranted and preserved him) had upon the sudden

The Sixth Sermon. 615
found out a trick of his office, namely, by proceeding in his old
courses, of wasting his master's substance to the enriching of his
fellow-servants, and thereby gained their good wills, that for the
time following they might preserve him from perishing.
4. Our Saviour, I say, by this example, would teach us, that
since God hath placed us here in this world as his stewards, has
put into our hands his goods, his riches, to be dispensed for his
use and advantage : and such stewards we are, who have advan
tages infinitely more urgent, and pressing us to an honest, faithful
discharge of our office, than this man in the parable ever had : as,
first, we must of necessity fail, and be cashiered of our office : all
the power of heaven and earth cannot procure us a perpetuity in
it : the case did not stand so with this man, for it was merely his
own fault to deserve discarding ; and, besides, having deserved
that censure, it was his misfortune too, that his lord should come
to the knowledge of it ; for it is no impossible thing, that a stew
ard should thrive by his lord's loss, and yet never be called to an
account for it : and, secondly, upon our behaviour in this our office
depends the everlasting welfare of our souls and bodies ; we shall
for ever be disposed of, according to the honest or unfaithful dis
charge of our place. If ill, Lord, what shall become of us ? Where
shall we appear in that great day of account ? I dare not almost
tell you the issue of it : but if we have carried ourselves as faithful
servants; propose to yourselves your own conditions, give your
thoughts license and scope to be excessive and overflowing in their
desires ; if the whole extension and capacity of your thoughts be not
satisfied and filled to the brim, with measure pressed down and
running over, God himself (which is impossible to imagine) will prove
a deceiving, unfaithful master.
5. These things therefore considered, without question it doth
infinitely concern us to consult, and project, what we mean to do
with our riches; to what employment we intend to put those
honours, and that power, which God hath conferred on us in this
life: whether to receive them as our good things, to go away
contented with them as our rewards, our final rewards, expecting
no other good things from God after them; or, which is our
Saviour's advice, use them as means and helps of attaining bless
ings above all conceivable proportion exceeding them ; so dis
pensing and providently scattering them abroad, that against our
time of need (which sooner or later will undoubtedly come) we
may oblige to ourselves such friends, so gracious, and prevailing
with our Master, who, either by their prayers and intercessions,
or some other way, which we know not, may procure for us ad
mission into our Master's joys, to be no longer stewards and
servants, but friends and sons. Thus, by the help and benefit of
this mammon of unrighteousness in my text, these little things,
even the least blessings that God has to bestow upon us, so called
in the verse following, and in the next but one to that, these
" things of other men," as if they were trifles, not worthy the
owning, if compared with what rewards may be had in exchange
for them, purchasing to ourselves everlasting and glorious re-

616 The Sixth Sermon.
wards ; by the assistance of our riches (in the expression of St Paul)
" laying up for ourselves a foundation of good works against the
time to come, that we may lay hold on eternal life."
6. And this I suppose to be the force and meaning of this
i«fMMiov or moral of the parable, which Christ hath closely contrived
and pressed into these few words : " make to yourselves friends of
the," &c. In which words I shall observe unto you these three
general parts :
1. What we must expect at last, notwithstanding all the riches
and pomps of this world, i. e. " to fail." Christ, you see,
makes no question at all of -it; he takes it for granted, where
he says, " that when ye fail," as implying, that certainly fail
we must.
2. This being supposed, that fail we must, the counsel of Christ
comes in very seasonably, namely, to provide for the main,
to take order, that though we ourselves sink, yet we may pro
cure us friends to support us in our necessities ; and that is, by
making to ourselves " friends of the mammon," &c.
3. The comfortable issue and convenience, which shall accrue
unto us by those friends thus purchased, i. e. by them to be
received " into everlasting," &c. Of these in the order pro
posed.
7. You do not expect, I am sure, that I should go about seri
ously to persuade you, that you shall not live here for ever. For,
whom should I seek to persuade? God forbid, I should be so
uncharitable, as to think, or but suspect, that ever I should find
occasion to make use of any persuasions for such a purpose.
Indeed, a very good man (it was the prophet David) once said in
his prosperity,* " I shall never be removed ; thou, Lord, of thy
goodness hast made my hill so strong." But was this well said
of him, think you ? It seems not ; for presently to confute this
his confidence, " the Lord did but turn his face away from him,
and he was troubled."! Yet surely such a speech as this could
never be spoken upon better grounds ; for this his assurance, it
seems, proceeded not out of any presumptuous confidence of his
own strength or policy ; but only out of consideration of God's
especial providence shewed in his wonderful preservation from
many great and imminent dangers, and in preferring him from a
low, contemptible fortune to the rule and dominion over his
people. 8. There is another fellow in a parable.J who, though he came
short of David, in this his unwarrantable confidence and presump
tion upon that foundation of riches and wealth, which with un
wearied anxiety and care he had laid up, notwithstanding was
more suddenly and unanswerably confuted : for, he did not pro
mise to himself a perpetuity, only he imagined to himself (as he
thought reasonably) that since he had at last obtained that which
he had aimed at, and which had cost him so many years' travail,
it were fit for him now to enjoy the fruit, which he had so dearly
bought. And in a joyful contemplation of this his happiness, he
* Psal. xxx. 6. t Psal. xxx. 7. X Luke xii.

The Sixth Sermon. 617
enters into dialogue with his soul ; " Soul, (saith he) now take thy
rest ;" no more shalt thou be vexed, and even consumed with the
painful and violent thirst after riches, thou hast that laid up for
thee, which shall abundantly satisfy all thy desires. All my busi
ness hereafter, shall be to find out ways how to repay unto my
soul all those pleasures, which heretofore I have denied unto my
self: I have store sufficient for many years' expenses safely laid up
in my barns. Yet for all this man's thus pleasing himself with
assured promises of many years' happiness ; if you will but vouch
safe to inquire after him the very next day after he spoke thus, his
garners, it is likely, you may yet find standing, thronged and op
pressed with the abundance of corn ; but for his soul (for whose sake
all this ado had been kept) the Lord knows what became of that ;
it was hurried away, no man can tell whither.
9. Now the thing that it becomes me to desire at your hands
from the consideration of these two examples, is this: not to re
quire of you to believe that you must once fail, (for that I suppose
were needless) nor yet to dissuade you from allowing to yourselves
a reasonable use of, and moderate lawful pleasures from, that
abundance of blessings wherewith God hath enriched you beyond
all other men; but to beseech you, that this meditation, that cer
tainly you must fail, may be no unwelcome thought to you ; that
when the time shall come, that you must leave these riches and
pleasures, which God has given you here to enjoy, it may not come
upon you as an unexpected misfortune, as a thing you were afraid
of, and would willingly be content to avoid.
10. I confess, this were a meditation sufficient to discourage and
quite dishearten a man, that were resolved to take up his rest in
the pleasures and preferments of this world, that were content to
sit down satisfied with such a slight happiness, as this life is able
to afford him : for one, who would make riches his strong city, a
place of refuge and security, a fortress whereto he would have re
course in all his extremities, and from whence he would expect
safety in all dangers and troubles which may assail him : for what
were that, but to withdraw him from his strong holds, and leave
him unfortified and exposed to any injury and misfortune ? How
could I be more injurious to such a man, than to vex and affright
him with such sad melancholic thoughts as these, that the time
will come, when that strong castle of his, his riches, shall be
undermined and demolished, when he shall be left naked and
defenceless ? At which time, if it were possible for him to retain
his riches, which before he made his bulwark and place of security,
yet he will find them but paper walls, unable to stand the weakest
battery? 11. But I hope better things of you, beloved christians, even
things which accompany salvation : and, indeed, why should I
not ? Who can forbid me to hope so ? for, alas ! I know you not.
I have no reason to assure myself of the contrary. And then I
should be most inexcusably uncharitable, if I should not even re
joice in this my hope. I see God hath plentifully showered down
upon you, almost overwhelmed you, with all the blessings of this

618 The Sixth Sermon.
life. He has moreover given you peaceable times to enjoy them
(blessed be his holy name for it, and a thousand blessings be re
turned into the bosom of his anointed, for his most pious, chris-
tian-like care to confirm this peace, and to preserve it from
interruption !) God, I say, has given you leisure and opportunity
to enjoy and improve these your riches for your everlasting hap
piness: a comfort, which he has denied almost to all other nations;
nothing abroad but wars, and rumours of wars ; no joy nor comfort,
but only in the effusion of precious christian blood ; nothing but
sacking of towns, and invasions of countries, God only knows upon
how just pretensions! But, which is above all other blessings (in
deed, without which all the rest will prove very curses) God has
given you an abundant plentiful use of his blessed word and sacra
ments every week, several times (till now) a worthy and able clergy
to put you in mind, how great an account you are to make to Al
mighty God of these his blessings, and what extraordinary interest
is expected at your hands.
12. Let me not, therefore, I beseech you, be your enemy, if I
prove troublesome to any slumbering lethargic spirit ; if I put
him in mind that the time will come, when sleep shall for ever
depart from his eyes, and that if his slumber last till a trumpet
awake him, darkness he may find, most palpable, Egyptian dark
ness, but not darkness commodious to call on and procure sleep,
not very convenient to take one's rest in. Forgive, I beseech
you, my importunity, if I earnestly desire you frequently to
represent to your minds a time of failing, and presently after that
a severe, inexorable judge, requiring a strict, exact account of
your behaviour in your stewardship : if I beseech you, from the
consideration of the foolish virgins, not to put far from you the
coming of the bridegroom ; not to frame to yourselves reasons and
probabilities, why he is not likely to come yet a good while (for
he himself has told you, he will come as a thief in the night, and
therefore when you are thus secure and slumbering, yourselves
create a night, a fit season for him to come unawares upon you) ;
for, if you be unprovided of oil in your lamps, of good works,
which may shine before men, and the door be once shut, talk not
of any new devised faith, and I know not what assurance ; there
is no possibility of ever having it opened, but you shall be forced
to remain exposed to all dangers, to all manner of misfortunes, not
one shall be found to befriend you, and to receive you into everlast
ing habitations.
13. And, I pray you consider, that if the apprehension of these
things conceived, not as present, but as to be expected, it may be
many years hence, be so distasteful and ominous to flesh and
blood, who will be able to abide the time, when it shall, indeed,
overtake him? If now in these days of leisure and forbearance,
(a season which God out of his glorious mercy hath allowed us
on purpose to spend in such thoughts as these, in projecting
against the evil day) the meditation thereof bring such anguish
and torment along with it ; what terrible, insupportable effects
will it work in us, when we shall find ourselves surprised by it,

The Sixth Sermon. 619
and caught as in a snare ! If a man can no sooner hear such things
related, or but seriously think upon them, though in the height of
his jollity, but straight, as if some ill news had been told him, as if
he had heard some sad tragical story of his own misfortunes, he will
presently recoil from his mirth, pleasure will become troublesome
and distasteful to him ; O with what anguish and vexation of spirit,
with what agony of soul shall they be entertained, when they come
in earnest !
14. Observe, therefore, I beseech you, that our Saviour does not
bid you, when you fail, make to yourselves friends ; no, alas ! that
is not the time to make friends in; then is the season when you are
to expect comfort and assistance from those friends, which you have
gained before, in time, when you were furnished with such good
things, as were likely to oblige men unto you. What title then
can be found out equal to express the folly and madness of such
people, who, as if God had created them on purpose for the plea
sures and vanities of this world, make that the whole business of
their lives ; and, as if the care of their souls' everlasting disposal
were but an employment of an hour's dispatch, will not vouchsafe
so fruitlessly to cast away any part of the time, when their souls
are vigorous and healthful, about such a trifling design ; but destine
their last few hours, when they are unable for any business else, to
settle for themselves an estate of eternity.
15. But because I have not the leisure now to prosecute this
argument as fully as it may deserve, give me leave, I pray you,
in brief, to present to your view, a man brought to such an ex
tremity as this; one fastened and chained unto the bed of sick
ness, one that has already received within himself the messages
of death — death beginning (in the language of the psalmist) to
gnaw upon him. Take the pains, I beseech you, to imagine to
yourselves (and it will require some courage but to consider it)
what unquiet busy thoughts shall then possess him, what terrible
affrighting meditations shall then be suggested to him, when he
shall be forced to apprehend, that now he has but a very small
portion of time left him ; and yet for all that, all the business, for
the dispatching of which he came into the world, is left undone ;
the council and good intention of God, out of which he gave him
his riches, being utterly defeated, scarce one friend made, that
will vouchsafe to look upon him now in his necessity ; but, on the
contrary, many sore enemies procured, that will be ready to cry
for vengeance against him : no account to be found of the dispen
sation of those goods, which God has given him, but such an one
as will serve to feed and nourish the distemper and sickness of
his thoughts; so much (may be) spent in the prosecution and ful
filling of his ungodly lusts, so much in gorgeous raiment and de
licious feeding, yet all this while scarce one poor Lazarus obliged.
Now all the remedy that is to be had in such an exigence as this,
is to have the next preacher sent for, who must instil a little
comfortable divinity into him, to make him sleep ; and so his soul
departs, the Lord knows whither. And yet these are but the

620 The Sixth Sermon.
beginning of sorrows ; but what the end and perfection of them will
be, I confess I have not the courage to tell you.
16. (Obj. 1.) But yet for all this I know men are apt so much
to favour themselves in their security, they will be ready to pro
duce that famous example of the thief on the cross to confute me,
and to testify, that even he that shall at the last push, as it were,
have recourse unto God's mercy, is not altogether hopeless. (Obj.
2.) Besides, did not he, who came the last hour of the day to la
bour in the vineyard, receive the same wages with them who had
suffered the toil and heat of the whole day ?
(So7. 1.) For the thief on the cross, there can lie no exception
against the example. But yet consider, I pray you, that from
the beginning of the world, till the time that the scripture canon
was sealed up, there is not to be found one example more to
equal it. Besides, it was done at the time of Christ's suffering ;
a season, wherein God, in that one act of the redemption of the
world by the death of his Son, expressed the very utmost of his
mercy, and discovered unto the world, as it were in one entire
sum, all the riches and treasures of his goodness. If, therefore,
at such a time, he was pleased to work a miracle of mercy upon
one, who probably having spent his whole life in ungodly forbid
den courses, had not, till then, light upon any extraordinary oppor
tunities and means, able to break in pieces, and melt his flinty ob
durate heart ; can this example, then, be any advantage to you,
who every day, almost, have more than sufficient meaps and offers
of grace, and are continually threatened with the danger of defer
ring your repentance, and of prolonging the time of making up
your accounts ; since you neither do, nor must, know the day nor
hour, when God will expect them at your hands ?
17. (2.) As concerning the man who was called the last hour of
the day to labour in the vineyard, I pray you take notice, that this
man was a labourer; and though he took pains but for a short time,
yet labour he did : whereas he that shall defer his repentance and
amendment of life till his last hour, if he indeed prove sorry for his
sins, yet labour he cannot ; the best that he can do is, to make of
fers and resolutions to work the good work of God, if it shall please
him to spare him life : but that those resolutions of his shall be
accepted with God, instead of real, very labour indeed, I find no
commission to assure you. But I confess, it is something unseason
ably done of me, to stand, so long at least, upon such sullen, me
lancholic meditations as these are ; especially now in the midst of
this solemn, glorious feast : therefore I am resolved even abruptly
to break through them, and hasten to my second general, which
is the counsel, which our Saviour gives upon this consideration,
that necessarily we must fail ; namely, to provide, and seriously
project against that time, by all the means that we can make,
to oblige to ourselves friends in that extremity ; expressed in
these words : " Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of un
righteousness." 18. " Mammon of unrighteousness:" what is that? Shall I deal

The Sixth Sermon. 621
freely and honestly with you? Indeed I will : for woe unto me,
if I should dare to come into this place to flatter you ; and woe
unto me, if I should dare to come into this place to vent my
spleen against any. Then all this, for which there is such ado
kept, not only here, but all the world over ; such making of
friends, nay, such undermining of friends, so many dangers sought
out and despised; this is the "mammon of unrighteousness."
An untoward name, I confess, for a thing so much set by, so
carefully and ambitiously courted, so insatiably thirsted after;
but yet a name of Christ's devising. He has afforded this idol,
riches, no better a title ; and therefore I must and dare call them
so, any where.
19. But may it not be lawful to inquire after, or give some
guesses, at least, at the reasons which might move our Saviour to
put so disgraceful a name upon riches ? Without question, it is
not only lawful to be so curious, but also very useful and expe
dient. A main reason (I have heard) is, because, ordinarily,
riches leave a tincture and infection in the persons who have any
thing to do with them. It is a hard thing, almost impossible, for
a man any ways to meddle with them without sin, ordinarily they
are got with sin, they are possessed with sin, they are spent with
sin. A man (saith Siracides) cannot hasten to be rich without
sin ; and when he has once got them, how unwilling will he be to
let a lust pass unsatisfied ; seeing he is furnished with that to
which (in his opinion at least) nothing can be denied : how un
willing will he be to be worsted, though in the most unjust cause,
seeing he is furnished with that which will blind the eyes of the
prudent, and pervert the understanding of the wise ; for (saith
the same wise man) " as a man's riches, so his anger increaseth."
And upon the same grounds it may be said, that as a man's riches
increase, so likewise his desires and lusts increase. I will under
take to give you one reason more, why riches are called " mammon
of unrighteousness ;" and it is, because they are mammon, riches
indeed, only to unrighteous men ; none beside such will rest con
tented with them, and suffer God to depart from them without a
greater blessing than they can be.
20. But what need I trouble myself about inquiring after rea
sons, why this so universally-adored idol, mammon, is so disho
nourably branded and stigmatized by our Saviour, since himself
in another place hath said enough of it; which may suffice not
only to warrant the reasonableness of this title, but also to make
them, who are apt to glory so much in riches, if they well con
sider it, even to envy the happiness and security of those, who
are not trusted with so dangerous wares. The words were spoken
upon occasion of a sudden great sorrow and melancholy, which
appeared in a young man's countenance, and procured by the
temptations of riches, which made him refuse the most advanta
geous bargain that ever was offered to man. Whereupon, saith
Christ to his disciples, (as his words are recorded by St. Matthew)
" Verily, I say unto you, that a rich man shall hardly enter
into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, that it

622 The Sixth Sermon.
is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a
rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven."* Indeed St. Mark
reports this speech something more largely than it is there ; and,
instead of a "rich man," puts in, "one that trusteth in his riches ;"f
which he does not so much to explain the phrase of the speech, as
to give a reason of the impossibility.
21 . For if our Saviour in saying, " It is impossible for a rich
man to enter into the kingdom of heaven," by a rich man had meant
one that trusteth in his riches, there had been no sufficient ground
for so great an amazement as seized upon the disciples at the
hearing of it ; for that was a thing which they knew well enough
before ; not the most ignorant of his hearers but could have told
him as much. Therefore St. Matthew's and St. Mark's words,
joined together, will make up this sense, (and I make no question
at all but that it was Christ's meaning) namely — That it is even
almost impossible for a rich man to be saved, because he cannot
choose but trust in his riches.
22. And this is more clearly evinced by that satisfaction, which
our Saviour gave to his disciples to recover them from their
astonishment ; where he says, " With men it is impossible, but
not with God ; for with God all things are possible ;" intimating
thus much, that considering the great, almost irresistible, tempta
tions, which riches carry along with the~m, and man's extreme
weakness and natural impotency ; his willing propension, and, to
all ordinary, natural means, most incurable inclination to make
them his place of rest, his strong city, wherein he trusts; it is
impossible, that, these things meeting together, he should not put
his confidence in them, and so make himself incapable of heaven,
between which and riches thus used, there is as large, as impass
able a gulf, as between heaven and hell : " With men (therefore)
these things are impossible, but not with God ; for with him all
things are possible." It is in his power, by the help and assist
ance of that grace, which he showers upon every one of us in
baptism, to cure this hereditary weakness and sickness of our
natures, and to render us healthful and vigorous, powerful enough.
to free ourselves from that bondage and slavery, wherein these
outward, worldly blessings are apt to captivate us, and where-
unto by nature we do willingly submit ourselves: it is in his
power to make these pernicious pleasures, Which riches may pro
mise unto us, to become unwelcome and distasteful unto us : nay,
which is more, it is in his power to make even this " mammon of
unrighteousness," against its own nature, to become a help and
instrument to procure for us the true riches, even those invaluable
treasures, which God hath laid up in heaven for us. Take it not
ill, therefore, I beseech you, if that, for which you are so much
envied and reverenced above other men, be so undervalued by our
Saviour, in comparison with the true riches : be not angry with our
Saviour for it ; but rather endeavour, by trading providently with
them, for your own and others' benefit, to render Christ's language
in this place improper and abusive.
* Matt. xiv. 34, 35. t Mark x. 20, 24.

The Sixth Sermon. 623
23. But now if riches deserve no better a title at our Saviour's
hands, how can it be likely that they can prove fit instruments to
procure friends, and such friends as we stand in need of? " For, do
men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles ?" Indeed, the argu
ment held well on St. Paul's side, when he says, " If we have sowed
to you spiritual things, is it much, if we reap your temporal things ?"
But will the argument hold also on Christ's part? " If ye have not
been faithful in the mammon of unrighteousness, who will trust you
with the true riches ?" Certainly, if it does not, not only this, but
divers chapters besides, might, without any loss, have been left out
of the gospel.
24. And therefore it was a sullen, ill-natured fellow, (he in the
parable, I mean, who received the one talent) and without all
question, a shameless liar, (though I fear there he many, who are
not very averse from his opinion) who with an impudent face durst
tell God, he was austere, reaping where he had not sown, and
gathering where he had not scattered. And though he spake this
with the same confidence, that his proselytes do in these our days,
not as a probable opinion, but as a thing that he is assured of;
(for, says he, " I know thee, that thou art austere," &c.) yet I
beseech you believe him not : no, no, our God is a gracious God,
and requires of us no more than we are able to do. He does not
expect faith, and repentance, and good works, where he has given
no abilities to perform them : nay, doth not God by his prophet
tell us (and Christ repeats it in his parable) that he is so far from
that, that after several years' labour bestowed on his vineyard, and
yet no fruit issuing, yet he was content to expect one year longer,
even till he had done so much, that no more could be done ? He is
at a stay, and asks, what he could have done more ?
25. It were therefore very fit and convenient, that we should,
at least in our own hearts, silence and stifle such opinions con
cerning God as these are ; and believe that he is a well-wisher to
us, when he bestows any means upon us whereby we may do good.
Otherwise we shall, without any comfort or courage, heartlessly,
and even sleepily, go about the performing of what Christ here
counsels us to. If you will not believe me, upon my word, take
the man's own confession : says he, when I had once entertained
this persuasion, that God would expect a more yielding plentiful
harvest, fruitful beyond that proportion of seed which he gave me
to sow, " I was afraid ;" horror and uncomfortable thoughts seized
upon me, and I went and hid my talent in a napkin ; I even sat
still, resolved to put all to an adventure, and to expect what God
would do with me ; for, alas ! how bootless, and to no purpose, would
my weak endeavours be, to procure the favour of such a God, that
would not be content but with a great deal more than lay in my
power to perform.
26. It is true, indeed, Christ told him, that though he had had
such an unworthy prejudicial conceit of him, yet that even from
thence he might have been moved to have made the best and most
advantageous use of that talent, which God had bestowed on him ;
for, says Christ, " If thou knewest I was austere, why didst thou

624 The Sixth Sermon.
not therefore put my money into the exchanger's hands, and trade
with it, that I might have received mine own with increase?"
Why didst thou not at the least do thy best to give satisfaction to
thy hard, austere master? God forbid that I should doubt, but
there are thousands, who, though it may be they have entertained
this man's opinion and conceit of God, yet make better use of it
than he did. But yet the man's own confession shews what ordi
narily and naturally are the fruit and issue of it.
27. That, therefore, which God sows among you, is riches; but
yet riches, most improperly so called : that which he scatters and
strews abroad, is the mammon of unrighteousness. "Now he
which soweth, (saith the apostle) soweth in hope;" and he who
scattereth, scattereth in hope : but what gain or interest, what
a kind of harvest does God hope for after this his seed-time?
Why just such another as the same apostle speaks of (1 Cor. xv.)
where he discourses upon the resurrection and glorious change of
these our bodies : " They are sown (saith he) in corruption, but
are raised in incorruption ; they are sown in dishonour, but are
raised in glory ; they are sown in weakness, but are raised in
power; they are sown natural bodies, but are raised spiritual
heavenly bodies."* In like manner, God sows among you those
riches, which himself, most disgracefully, calls " the mammon of un
righteousness," in hope that he may reap the true riches : he scat
ters among you such small trifles, that many, even heathen men,
have been content to want, for the empty aerial reward of fame ;
nay, that some of them have been content to cast away in a humour ;
and these small things he scatters abroad, in hope that he may
gather (what think you ?) the everlasting salvation of your souls and
bodies. And is this that harsh austere master ?
28. Indeed, if God were such a person as some men have given
him out for ; if he should scatter abroad his riches as snares, on
purpose to fetter and entangle men with them ; if he should be
stow upon any this " mammon of unrighteousness," with an intent
and resolution that it should become unto them the " mammon of
unrighteousness" indeed ; that it should make them indisposed and
incapable of attaining unto the true riches ; there might be some
plea for them to fasten so injurious an accusation upon God. But
can the judge of all the earth deal so with his servants? Can he,
who is goodness and mercy itself, he who rejoices to style himself
the preserver of men, can he be so cruelly bountiful to his creatures,
as bv heaping upon them the vanishing, unsatisfying blessings of
this life, thereby to fatten and cherish them against the day of
slaughter and destruction ? God forbid !
29. I confess, notwithstanding, that such persons there may be,
upon whom God may in his wrath shower down blessings and
riches in his fierce displeasure : but they are only such, as by
living in a continual habitual practice of undervaluing and con
temning the daily offers of grace and favour, have already con
demned themselves, and sealed themselves unto the day of destruc
tion : and such an one was Pharaoh, concerning whom God him-

* 1 Cor. xv. 42—44.

The Sixth Sermon. 625
self testifies, saying, " For this reason I have raised thee up, that
I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be
declared throughout all the earth ;"* that is, since by thy con
tinual rebellions thou hast judged thyself unworthy of life, for this
reason I have raised thee up, I have kept thee alive, and preserved
thee, that none of my former plagues should sweep thee away,
that at last, by an utter destruction of thee, together with the
whole strength and flower of thy kingdom, I may be glorified
throughout the whole world. But I will leave discoursing, and.
come nearer unto you, in the serious application of Christ's counsel
here. 30. It is the property of riches (saith the wise man) to gather
many friends.f Those who are above others in wealth and power,
shall presently be furnished with friends more than they can well
know what to do withal ; but such friends are not concerned at all
in our Saviour's advice in my text ; the friends here intended are
such, who are not here to restore again unto you in the same coin
that they received. Give not to the rich (saith our Saviour) for
fear they repay you. Of all things in the world, take heed of
being paid back again in this life ; beware how you carry your
reward along with you to your grave ; but leave it to be paid in
exchange in another country, where, for using five talents well,
you shall have ten cities given you ; where, for the bounty of a
cup of cold water, you shall receive a prophet's reward. Such a
friend was offered once to the rich man in the gospel ; God sent
him one to his doors, even to crave his friendship; but the rich
man was so busied with the care of his wardrobe and his table,
that he was not at leisure to hearken to so gainless an offer : not
withstanding, the time came afterwards, when he miserably, to his
cost, perceived, what a blessed opportunity he had most negligently
omitted, and even in hell attempted to purchase his favour, and to
obtain from his hand a poor alms (God knows !) but one drop of
water ; but all too late ; the time of making friends was past, and a
great unfordable gulf had divided them from all possible society and
communion for ever.
31. Now consider (I beseech you) that it had been a very easy
matter for God so to have provided for all his creatures, that each
particular should have had enough of his own, without being
beholden to another for supply ; but then two heavenly and divine
virtues had been quite lost : for where had been the poor man's
patience, and the rich man's charity 1 The poor man therefore
wants, that you may have occasion to exercise your liberality ;
and that by losing and diminishing your wealth upon him, ye may
become more full of riches hereafter. So that it is God's great
bounty to you, not only to give you plenty and abundance, but
also to suffer others to languish in penury and want. It may be,
God has suffered himself so long to be robbed of his own posses
sions, his tithes, that you might have the glory and comfort of
restoring them. It may be, God has suffered the ancient, super
stitious, histrionical adorning of his temples to be converted into
* Exod. ix. 16. t Prov. xix. 4.
RR

626 TJte Sixth Sermon.
the late slovenly profaneness (commonly called worshipping in spirit,
but intended to be worship without cost) that you may find a happy
occasion to restore those sacred places, dedicated to his honour, to
that majesty and reverence, as may become houses wherein God
delights that his name should dwell.
32. Now if it be not in my power to persuade you neither to
make God, nor man your debtors by your riches ; yet I beseech
you, make neither of them your enemies by them. Do not make
your riches instruments of war to fight against God himself: for
example, as maintaining an unjust cause by power, a cause which
God abhors ; do not so requite God for his extraordinary liberality
to you, as to make his riches instruments for the devil to wreak
his malice upon those whom God loveth. If I had not a care not
to injure your patience too far, what might not be said upon
this subject? But I perceive it is fit for me to hasten to your
release. 33. But before I quit myself, and ease you, of further prose
cution of this point, I shall desire you all to suffer one word of
exhortation ; and if there be any here, whom it may more nearly
concern, I beseech them, even by the bowels of Jesus Christ, that
they will suffer too a word of most necessary reproof. And though
what I shall say doth not naturally flow from the words in hand,
yet they bear a reasonable resemblance and proportion with them :
so pertinent, I am sure, they are to the auditory, to whom I speak,
that I would choose rather quite to lose my text, than here to leave
them unsaid.
34. It is about making friends too ; indeed, not with the " mam
mon of unrighteousness ;" no, that is a trifle to it : it is about making
friends with not revenging of injuries, with patient bearing and
willing forgiving of offences: a duty so seriously, so incessantly,
sometimes in plain words, sometimes in parables, all manner of
ways, upon all occasions, urged by our Saviour, that we cannot
so much as pray, but we must be forced to acknowledge obe
dience to this law : " Forgive us — as we forgive :" yea, so bound
lessly, and without all restrictions or reservations is it enjoined,
that when as Peter thought it fair to have it limited to a certain
number, and proposed seven, as, in his opinion, reasonable and
convenient ; No, saith our Saviour, forgive not until seven times,
but until four hundred fourscore and ten times. And if he could
have imagined, that it were possible for a man to have exceeded
this number also in injuries, without question he would not have
left there neither.
1 35. But how is this doctrine received in the world? What
counsel would men, and those none of the worst sort, give thee
in such a case ? How would the soberest, discreetest, well-bred
christian advise thee ? Why thus : If thy brother, or thy neigh
bour have offered thee an injury, or an affront, forgive him ? By
no means ; thou art utterly undone, and lost in thy reputation
with the world, if thou dost forgive him. What is to be done
then? Why, let not thy heart take rest, let all other business
and employment be laid aside, till thou hast his blood. How I a

The Sixth Sermon. 627
man's blood for an injurious, passionate speech, for a disdainful
look ? Nay, that is not all : that thou mayest gain among men the
reputation of a discreet, well-tempered murderer, be sure thou
killest him not in passion, when thy blood is hot and boiling with
the provocation ; but proceed with as great temper and settled-
ness of reason, with as much discretion and preparedness, as thou
wouldst to the communion: after some several days' respite, that
it may appear it is thy reason guides thee, and not thy passion,
invite him mildly and courteously into some retired place, and
there let it be determined, whether his blood or thine shall satisfy
the injury.
36. Oh thou holy christian religion ! whence is it that thy
children have sucked this inhuman, poisonous blood, these raging,
fiery spirits? For if we shall inquire of the heathen, they will
say, They have not learned this from us : or of the mahometans,
they will answer, We are not guilty of it. Blessed God ! that it
should become a most sure, settled course for a man to run into
danger and disgrace with the world, if he shall dare to perform
a commandment of Christ, which is as necessary for him to do, if
he have any hopes of attaining heaven, as meat and drink is for
the maintaining of life! that it ever should enter into christian
hearts to walk so curiously and exactly contrary unto the ways of
God ! that whereas he sees himself every day and hour almost,
contemned and despised by thee, who art his servant, his creature,
upon whom he might, without all possible imputation of unright
eousness, pour down all the vials of his wrath and indignation,
yet he notwithstanding is patient and long-suffering towards thee,
hoping that his long-suffering may lead thee to repentance, and
beseeching thee daily by his ministers to be reconciled unto him ;
and yet thou, on the other side, for a distempered, passionate
speech, or less, should take upon thee to send thy neighbour's soul,
or thine own, or likely both, clogged and oppressed with all your
sins unrepented of (for how can repentance possibly consist with
such a resolution ?) before the tribunal-seat of God, to expect your
final sentence ; utterly depriving thyself of all the blessed means
which God has contrived for thy salvation, and putting thyself in
such an estate, that it shall not be in God's power almost, to do
thee any good. Pardon, I beseech you, my earnestness, almost
intemperateness, seeing it hath proceeded from so just, so war
rantable a ground ; and, since it is in your power to give rules of
honour and reputation to the whole kingdom, do not you teach
others to be ashamed of this inseparable badge of your religion,
charity and forgiving of offences ; give men leave to be christians
without danger. or dishonour ; or, if religion will not work with you,
yet let the laws of that.state wherein you live, the earnest desires
and care of your righteous prince, prevail with you. But I have
done, and proceed to my last part, which is the convenience and
gain, which shall accrue unto us by friends obliged with this " mam
mon of unrighteousness," namely, by them to be received "into
everlasting habitations." ,
37. 1 must here again propose another question; but when I
rr2

628 The Sixth Sermon.
have done that, I must be forced to leave it without an answer,
unless you will be content to take a conjecture, a probability, for
an answer : it is, how, or after what manner, those to whom we
have done good here, shall hereafter receive us " into everlasting
habitations?" Whether this is performed only by their prayers
and intercession with God, in the behalf of their benefactors ; or,
whether they are used as instruments and conductors, as it were,
as our Saviour may probably seem to intimate in the parable,
where the Lord speaks to his servants, that they should take
away the one talent from him which had no more, and bestow it
on him which had ten talents ? So uncertain it is, whether this
task shall be performed by them one of these ways, or by some
other unknown course, that St. Augustine ingenuously confesses,
he knows not what to make of it : yet Cardinal Bellarmine says,
he can easily assoil it, and can in these words find out purgatory,
and satisfaction for sin after death, and a great deal more than I
can understand. But truly, if he be able to spy purgatory in this
text, especially such an one as he fancies to himself in his books
of that argument, he has made use of better glasses than ever
Galileo found out. And I would to God those of his party would
consider, how much the weakness of their cause is argued even
from hence, that they are forced to ground most of the points
controverted between us, upon such difficult places as these, of so
ambiguous and uncertain meanings, and therefore equally ob
noxious to any man's interpretation. There may yet be found out
a convenient sense of this place, especially if he will allow an
Hebraism in these words (which is frequent enough in the evan
gelical writings) of putting the third person plural to express a
passive sense ; and then the meaning will be, " That when," &c.
" they may receive you," i. e. that ye may be received " into
everlasting habitations;" parallel to a like phrase in Luke xii. 12,
" Thou fool, this night shall they take away thy soul from thee ;"
i. e. thy soul shall be taken from thee. And if this sense be true,
as it is very likely, many of our Romish adversaries have spent much
pains about this text to no purpose.
38. But to leave quarrelling : It is no very considerable matter,
whether we have light upon the true sense of these words or not :
or whether those, to whom we have done good, have a share in
purchasing for us an admission into these " everlasting habita
tions ;" as long as we may infallibly hence conclude, that though
it should fall out, that Abraham should forget us, and Israel become
ignorant of us ; yet certainly God (who alone is instead of ten thou
sand such friends) he will keep a register of all our good actions,
and will take particular care of us, to give us a just proportion of
reward and harvest of glory, according to our sparingness or libe
rality in sowing.
39. But would Almighty God have us such mercenary servants,
so careful and projecting for our own advantage, that we should
not obey him without a compact and bargain ? Is not he worthy
our serving, unless we first make our condition with him, to be
sure to gain and thrive by him ? Is this a consideration worthy and

The Sixth Sermon. 629
befitting the ingenuity and nobleness of a christian mind, to have
an eye to the " recompense of reward ?" Is Christ also become a
schoolmaster unto us, as well as the law was to the Jews, that we
should have need of thunder, and blackness of smoke, and voices to
affright us, or promises to win and allure us ? Nay, have not your
ears oftentimes heard, from such places as this, an obedience of this
nature disgraced and branded for a servile, slavish obedience ; an
obedience ordinarily made the mark and badge even of a formal
hypocrite, the worst kind of reprobates ?
40. I confess I could shew you a more excellent way than this,
if men were ordinarily fitted and qualified for the receiving of it;
and that is St. Paul's more excellent way of charity ; the keeping
of God's commandments merely out of the love of his goodness, and
consideration of his infinite, inconceivable holiness: and he that can
receive this, let him receive it ; and thrice happy and blessed shall
he be of the Lord : but, in the mean time, let him not be forward
to judge his fellow-servants, if they acknowledge themselves so far
guilty of weakness and imperfections, that they have need to re
ceive strength and encouragement in this their painful and labo
rious race, by looking forward unto the glorious prize of their "high
calling in Jesus Christ."
41. Surely God is wise enough to contrive the surest course, and
to set down the best and likeliest means for persuading us to his
service, and the obedience of his commandments : he is able to in
quire and search into the most retired corners of our wicked, de
ceitful hearts, and, thereby knowing our temper and disposition, he
is best able to prescribe us a method and diet suitable to our con
stitutions. Therefore, if he, out of his infinite wisdom, and the
Consideration of what encouragements we stand in need of, hath
thought it fit to annex, to every precept almost, a promise of hap
piness, or a threatening of unavoidable danger to the transgressors;
whatf art thou, 0 man, that thou darest take upon thee to calum
niate his proceedings, and to prescribe better directions than he has
thought fit?
42. I beseech you therefore, my beloved brethren, by all means
make use of any advantages, which may serve to render you more
earnest, more eager, and resolute, in your obedience to those holy
and perfect commandments, which he hath enjoined you ; if you
cannot find yourselves arrived as yet to that height of perfection,
as that love and charity cannot wrest from you sufficient careful
ness to obey him ; let fear have its operation with you, fear and
horror of that terrible issue, which shall attend the wilful and
habitual transgressors of his laws : and you need not suspect this
course as unwarrantable ; for you shall have St. Paul for your
example, even that Paul, for whose miraculous conversion Christ
was pleased himself in person to descend from his throne of ma
jesty; that Paul, who laboured in the gospel more than all the
rest of the apostles; that Paul, whose joy and heart's comfort it
was to be afflicted for the name of Christ ; lastly, that Paul who
for a time was ravished from the earth to the third heaven, after
a most inexpressible manner, and there heard things that cannot

630 The Sixth Sermon.
be uttered : this Paul, I say, shall be your example; who, after all
these things, found it yet a convenient motive, and received great
encouragement and eagerness to proceed in his most blessed conver
sation, even from this fear, " lest while he preached to others, him
self should become a cast-away."
43. And when fear has done its part, let hope come in ; hope
of that happy communion, which you shall once again have with
those friends which may be purchased in this life at so easy a
rate ; hope of that eternal weight and burden of joy and glory,
which is reserved in heaven for you, if you hold fast " the rejoic
ing of the hope steadfast unto the end."* Let a comfortable medi
tation of these things encourage and hearten you to proceed from
one degree of holiness to another, " till we all come in the unity of
the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a perfect man,
to the measure of the fulness of the stature of Christ :" and for
an example in this, take that whole cloud of witnesses mustered to
gether in Heb. xi. : or, if they will not serve the turn, take an ex
ample above all examples, an example beyond all imaginable ex
ceptions, even our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ himself, concerning
whom the author of the same epistle (it was St. Paul sure) saith,
(chap, xii.) that " for the joy that was set before him, he despised
the shame, and endured the cross," &c.
44. God knows we have need of all manner of encouragements,
and all little enough for us, so sluggish and immovable, so perverse
and obstinate are we : therefore, for God's sake, upon any terms,
continue in the service of Christ, make use of all manner of ad
vantages; and though ye find hope or fear predominant in you
(these servile affections, as they are commonly called), yet for all
that faint not, despair not, but rather give thanks to Almighty God;
and God, who sees such good effect of his promises and threatenings
in you (of which all the scripture is full from one end to the other)
will in his good time fill your hearts full of love, even that "per
fect love which casteth out fear," and of that perfect love, which
shall have no need of hope ; he will perfect that his good work
in you unto the end.
45. To conclude all, whether ye shall perform this command
ment of Christ, or whether ye shall not perform it, it cannot be
avoided, everlasting habitations shall be your reward : only the
difference is whether ye shall have them of your enemies' provid
ing; whether ye will be beholden to the devil and his angels,
your ancient, mortal enemies, to prepare everlasting dwellings
for you (and " who can dwell in everlasting fire ?" saith the pro
phet ; " who can dwell in continual burnings ?") or, whether ye
will expect them from the assistance of those just persons whom
you have by your good works eternally obliged to you ; even
those blessed and glorious habitations, which God the Father
Almighty hath from the beginning of the world provided and
furnished for you ; which God the Son, by his meritorious death
and passion, hath purchased for you ; and for the admission
whereunto, God the Holy Ghost hath sanctified and adorned you,
*Heb. iii. 6.

The Seventh Sermon. 631
that in thankfulness and gratitude you yourselves may become ever
lasting habitations, pure and undefiled temples for him to dwell in
for ever and ever. Now unto these glorious and everlasting habita
tions God of his infinite mercy bring us, even for Jesus Christ's sake :
to whom, with the Father, &c.

SERMON VII.
"And if I have defrauded any man by forged cavillation, I restore
unto him fourfold." — Luke xix. 8.
" The Son of man (saith our Saviour of himself in the end of
this story) is come to seek and save that which was lost ;" (verse
10;) and how careful and solicitous he was in the discharge of this
employment and business, about which his Father sent him, this
story of Zaccheus (out of which my text is taken) will evidently
and lively discover: for here we have a man, that among ten thou
sand, one would think were the most unlikely to become a disciple
of Christ, so indisposed he was for such a change, so unqualified in
all respects; for first, he was rich, as the third verse tells us; and
if that were all his fault, yet in our Saviour's judgment, who was
never uncharitable, being so clogged and burdened with these im
pedimenta, (as even the heathens could call riches) it would be as
hard for him to press through and enter in at the strait gate, with
out uneasing and freeing himself from them, as " for a camel to
go through the eye of a needle."
2. But, secondly, these his riches, as it would seem, were scarce
well and honestly gotten : for his trade and course of life was a
dangerous trade, obnoxious to great, almost irresistible temptations :
a great measure of grace would be requisite to preserve a man in
corrupt and undefiled in that course; and so ill a name he had got
ten himself, that all that afterwards saw Christ's familiarity with
him, were much offended and scandalized at it : for we read in the
seventh verse, that when they all saw it, they murmured, saying,
that he was gone in to lodge with a sinful man ; with one famous
and notorious for a great oppressor.
3. Yet, notwithstanding all this, such was the unspeakable
mercy and goodness of Christ, that even of this stone, so scorned
and rejected of all the people, he raised a son unto Abraham, as
we find in the ninth verse. And, to bring this to pass, he took
occasion even from a vain curiosity of this Zaccheus, a humour of
his, it may be such an one as afterwards possessed Herod, (though
God knows he had not the same success) namely, to see some
strange work performed by Christ, of whom he had heard so
much talk. This opportunity, I say, our Saviour took to perform
an admirable miracle, even upon the man himself; and that he
brought about by as unlikely a course, only with inviting himself
to his house ; by which unexpected affability and courtesy of our
Saviour, this so notorious and famous publican and sinner was so

632 The Seventh Sermon.
surprised with joy and comfort, that presently he gives over all
thought and consideration of his trade, as a thing of no moment ;
and being to receive Christ into his house, and knowing how ill-
agreeing companions Christ and mammon would prove in the same
lodging, he resolves to sweep it, and make it clean for the enter
taining of him ; he empties it of that dross and dung, wherewith
before it was defiled ; half of his estate goes away at a clap upon
the poor, and the remainder, in all likelihood, is in great danger
to be consumed by that noble and generous offer, which he makes
in the words of my text : " Whomsoever I have defrauded by
forged cavillation, I restore," &c.
4. In which words I shall observe unto you these two general
parts: first, a discovery, and, it may be, confession of his be
loved, bosom sin, the sin of his trade, in these words : " If I have
defrauded any man," or "whomsoever I have defrauded." Se
condly, satisfaction tendered in the words following : " I restore
unto him fourfold." In the former general, we may take notice
of two particulars : 1. Zaccheus's willingness and readiness of his
own accord to discover and confess his sin, when he said, " Whom
soever I have defrauded." And, 2. The nature and heinousness
of the crime discovered, which is called a defrauding " by forged
cavillation ;" or, as some translations read, " with false accusa
tion." In the second general, likewise, (which is the satisfac
tion tendered by Zaccheus) there offer themselves two particulars
more; namely, 1. So much of the satisfaction as was necessary
to be performed, by virtue of an indispensable precept, and that
is restitution, in these words: "I restore unto him." 2. That
which was voluntary and extraordinary, namely, the measure
and excess of this restitution, which he professeth should be
" fourfold." Of these two parts, therefore, with their several
particulars, in the same order as they have been proposed,
briefly, and with all the plainness and perspicuity I can imagine.
And, 1. Of the former general, and therein of the first particu
lar, namely, Zaccheus's readiness to confess his sin in these words :
" If I," &c.
5. I said, even now only, it may be, this was a confession of
his crime ; but now I will be more resolute, and tell you peremp
torily, this was a confession ; for, without all question, Zaccheus,
as the case now stood with him, was in no humour of justifying
himself, he had no mind to boast his integrity in his office ; or, if
he had, he might be sure that common fame (if that were all, yet
that alone) might be a sufficient argument, at least too great a
presumption against him, to confute him. But, to put it out of
question, our Saviour himself, by applying the tenth verse of this
chapter to him, acknowledgeth him for a sinful, undone man;
one that had so far lost himself in the wandering mazes of this
wicked world, that unless Christ himself had taken the pains to
search and inquire after him, and, having found him, by the
power and might of his grace to rescue and recover him from the
error of his ways, by restoring him his eyes, whereby he might

The Seventh Sermon. 633
take notice towards what a dangerous precipice he was hastening,
there had been no possibility but at last he must have needs
fallen headlong into the gulf of destruction.
6 Now it being, I suppose, evident, that Zaccheus was guilty,
and that in a high degree, and openly and scandalously guilty of
the crime here discovered ; there is no doubt to be made, but that
he, who was so willing to unlock and disperse his ill-gotten trea
sures, would not begin to divert his covetousness upon his sins ; he
would not hoard them up, but would place his glory even in his
shame ; and whereas he had been the servant and slave of sin, he
would wear his shackles and fetters, as signs of the glorious victory
which through Christ he had won, and emblems of that blessed
change, which he found in himself, being rescued from the basest
slavery that possibly can be imagined, into the glorious liberty of
the sons of God.
7. But it may be you will say, Suppose Zaccheus did freely
and voluntarily confess his sin to Christ, who had authority to
forgive him his sins, though he had never discovered them ; what
collection shall be made from hence ? Zaccheus might be as bold
as he would with himself; but as for us, his example shall be no
rule to us : we thank God, this is popery in these days, and since
we have freed ourselves from this burden, we will not be brought
into bondage to any man ; we will confess our sins, I warrant
you, only to God, who is only able to forgive us them ; as for the
minister, it may be, we will sometimes be beholden to him to
speak some comfortable words now and then to us, when we are
troubled in couscience ; and we have not been taught to go any
further. 8. I confess I find no great inclination in myself, especially
being in the pulpit, to undertake a controversy, even where it
may seem to offer itself, much less to press and strain a text for
it; for I desire to have no adversaries in my preaching, but only
the devil and sin. Only having now mentioned confession, and
considering how much the doctrine of our holy mother the church
hath been traduced, not only by the malice and detraction of our
professed enemies of the church of Rome, but also by the suspi
cious ignorance and partiality of her own children ; who, out of
a liking of the zeal, or rather fury, of some former protestant
writers, have laid this for a ground of stating controversies of our
religion : That that is to be acknowledged for the doctrine of
these reformed churches, which is most opposite and contradicting
to the church of Rome : so that, as the case goes now, controversies
of religion are turned into private quarrels, and it is not so much
the truth that is sought after, as the salving and curing the reputa
tion of particular men.
9. These things therefore considered, truly for my part I dare
not take upon me so much to gratify the papists, as to think my
self obliged to maintain many incommodious speeches of some of
our divines in this point. Hoc Ithacus velit, et magno mercentur
Atrida. They will never be unfurnished of matter to write books
to the world's end, if this shall be the method of stating contro-

634 The Seventh Sermon.
versies. 0 what an impregnable cause should we have against the
church of Rome, if we ourselves did not help to weaken and betray
it, by mixing therewith the interests and conceits of particular
men !
10. Give me therefore leave, I pray you, to give you the state
of the question, and the doctrine of our church, in the words of
one, who both now is, and for ever will worthily be accounted,
the glory of this kingdom. " Be it known (saith he) to our ad
versaries of Rome (I add, also, to our adversaries of even Great
Britain, who sell their private fancies for the doctrine of our
church,) that no kind of confession, either public or private, is
disallowed by our church, that is any way requisite for the due
execution of that ancient power of the keys, which Christ be
stowed upon his church. The thing which we reject, is that new
picklock of sacramental confession, obtruded upon men's consciences,
as a matter necessary to salvation, by the canons of the late con
venticle of Trent, in the 14th session."*
11. And this truth being so evident in scripture, and in the
writings of the ancient, best times of the primitive church, the
safest interpreters of scriptures, I make no question, but there will
not be found one person amongst you, who, when he shall be in
a calm, impartial disposition, will offer to deny it. For, I beseech
you, give yourselves leave impartially to examine your own
thoughts : can any man be so unreasonable, as at once to imagine
with himself, that when our Saviour, after his resurrection, hav
ing received (as himself saith) all power in heaven and earth,
having led captivity captive, came then to bestow gifts upon men ;
when he, I say, in so solemn a manner (having first breathed
upon his disciples, thereby conveying and insinuating the Holy
Ghost into their hearts) renewed unto them, or rather confirmed
and sealed unto them, that glorious commission, which before he
had given to Peter, sustaining, as it were, the person of the whole
church, whereby he delegated to them an authority of binding
and loosing sins upon earth, with a promise, that the proceedings
in the court of heaven should be directed and regulated by theirs
on earth : can any man, I say, think so unworthily of our Saviour,
as to esteem these words of his for no better than compliment?
for nothing but court holy water?
12. Yet so impudent have our adversaries of Rome been in
their dealings with us, that they have dared to lay to our charge,
as if we had so mean a conceit of our Saviour's gift of the keys ;
taking advantage indeed from the unwary expressions of some
particular divines, who, out of too forward a zeal against the
church of Rome, have bended the staff too much the contrary
way ; and, instead of taking away that intolerable burden of a
sacramental, necessary, universal confession, have seemed to void
and frustrate all use and exercise of the keys.
13. Now, that I may apply something of that which hath now
been spoken to your hearts and consciences, matters standing, as
you see they do; since Christ, for your benefit and comfort, hath
* Bp. Usher's Answer to the Jesuit Cap. of Confession, p. 84.

The Seventh Sermon. 635
given such authority to his ministers, upon your ifhfeigned re
pentance and contrition, to absolve and release you from your
sins ; why should I doubt, or be unwilling to exhort and persuade
you to make your advantage of this gracious promise of our Sa
viour's ? Why should I envy you the participation of so heavenly
a blessing ? Truly, if I should deal thus with you, I should prove
myself a malicious, unchristianlike, malignant preacher ; I should
wickedly and unjustly, against my own conscience, seek to defraud
you of those glorious blessings which our Saviour hath intended for
you. 14. Therefore, in obedience to his gracious will, and as I am
warranted, and even enjoined, by my holy mother the church of
England expressly, in the book of Common Prayer, in the rubric
of visiting the sick, (which doctrine this church hath likewise
embraced so far) I beseech you, that by your practice and use,
you will not suffer that commission, which Christ- hath given to
his ministers, to be a vain form of words, without any sense under
them ; to be an antiquated, expired commission, of no use nor
validity in these days ; but whensoever you find yourselves charged
and oppressed, especially with such crimes as they call peccata
vastantia conscientiam, such as do lay waste and depopulate the
conscience, that you would have recourse to your spiritual physi
cian, and freely disclose the nature and malignancy of your dis
ease, that he may be able, as the cause shall require, to proportion
a remedy, either to search it with corrosives, or comfort and
temper it with oil. And come not to him only with such a mind
as you would go to a learned man experienced in the scriptures,
as one that can speak comfortable, quieting words to you, but as
to one.that hath authority delegated to him from God himself, to
absolve and acquit you of your sins. If you shall do this, assure
your souls, that the understanding of man is not able to conceive
that transport and excess of joy and comfort, which shall accrue to
that man's heart, that is persuaded, that he hath been made par
taker of this blessing, orderly and legally, according as our Saviour
Christ hath prescribed.
15. You see I have dealt honestly and freely with you ; it may
be, more freely than I shall be thanked for: but I should have
sinned against my own soul, if I had done otherwise ; I should
have conspired with our adversaries of Rome against our own
church, in affording them such an advantage to blaspheme our
most holy and undefiled religion. It becomes you now, though you
will not be persuaded to like of the practice of what, out of an
honest heart, I have exhorted you to ; yet for your own sakes, not
to make any uncharitable construction of what hath been spoken.
And here I will acquit you of this unwelcome subject, and from
Zaccheus's confession of his sin, I proceed to my second particular,
namely, the nature and heinousness of the crime confessed, which
is here called a defrauding another " by forged cavillation."
16. The crime here confessed, is called in Greek, sycophancy;
for the words are Ei' <nvos ti t'tfuxoipavTritfa. For the understand
ing of which word in this place, we shall not need so much to be

636 The Seventh Sermon.
beholden to the classical Greek authors, as to the septuagint, who
are the best interpreters of the idiom of the Greek language in the
evangelical writings. Two reasons of the word Suxocpavnis are
given ; the one by Istjier in Atticis, the other by Philomnestus de
Sminthiis Rhodiis, both recorded by Athaeneus in that treasury of
ancient learning, his Deipnosophists in the third book ; which, be
cause they are of no great use for the interpretation of St. Luke, I
willingly omit.
17. Now there are four several words in the Hebrew, which
the seventy interpreters have rendered in the Old Testament by
the word 2uxo<pavrt]£, and the verbal thereof duxofpavriu. One
whereof signifies to abalienate or wrest any thing from another
by fraud and sophistry, opposed to another word in the same
language, which imports, to rob by plain open force and violence.
(Job xxv. 9 ; Psal. cxix. 121 ; Prov. xxviii. 3 ; Eccles. iv. 1 ; as like
wise in Psal. lxxi. 4 ; Prov. xiv. 33.) A second word signifies to
deal captiously and fallaciously with another. (Lev. xxix. 11.) A
third implies a punishment or mulct, which (as the Latin word
mulcta will bear it) is either inflicted on the body or the purse.
And the last signifies, to circumvent, or rather indeed, to roll him
self upon another. Gen. xliii. 18.
18. Out of all which expressions in the Hebrew, compounded
together, we may extract a full sense of the crime here confessed
by Zaccheus, and rendered in the Greek original by rfuxoipavTsu ;
especially if we have respect to Zaccheus's office and trade of life,
which was, to be a master of the publicans in that part of the
country where he lived, i. e. one who had chief authority in re
ceiving the rents and customs due from thence to the empire.
Zaccheus's crime therefore (as may likewise be collected from
that counsel, which St. John the Baptist gave to the publicans,
who came to his baptism ; which was, that they should exact no
more than was their due ;) his crime, I say, was to wring and ex
tort from his poor countrymen, either by fraud and false sugges
tions, or by violence, more than was due from them to the empire;
to enrich his private coffers by the spoils of the miserable inhabi
tants ; to roll himself upon them, and overwhelm them by ex
actions for his private benefit; for that end, pretending the rights
and necessities of state, and thereto tendering and straining to the
uttermost that power and authority, wherewith he was invested
from Rome.
¦ 19. These kind of officers, though they were of good reputation
with the Romans, as we may collect out of several orations of
Cicero, for by their place they had the privilege to be reckoned
among the Equites Romani ; yet in the countries wherein they
lived, especially in Jewry, a tenacious, covetous nation, they were
the most odious persons upon the earth ; insomuch as the very
name of a publican was grown into a proverb, expressing a per
son that deserved at all men's hands infamy and hatred. This
therefore was Zaccheus's crime ; this is that, which he calls by so
odious a name as sycophancy. But to leave this general discourse
of the name (for in your behalfs I am weary of an argument so

The Seventh Sermon. 637
useless to you) I will now try what advantage every one of us may
make from Zaccheus's behaviour in this place.
20. You see here Zaccheus (though he was a man exalted above
the ordinary rank of men, yet he) deals something plainly and
homely with himself, when he can afford himself no better a name
than a sycophant ; a title of so odious and hateful a signification,
that the devil himself has not got so disgraceful a name as that :
for he is called but Satan, or Aia/3oXos, that is, as the Holy Ghost
himself interprets it, " an accuser of the brethren." And though
even that be a sufficient crime, yet it is counted a more plausible,
generous sin, out of hatred, and rancour, and ill-nature, by false
accusations, to endeavour the subversion of one's enemy, than by
base dilating and informing, only for the hope of a little gain to him
self, to procure the overthrow of his neighbour's estate and reputa
tion ; which is the condition of a sycophant.
21. From hence then we may be taught, how differently we
ought to behave ourselves in the discovery of our own, and other
men's sins. If our brother hath offended, we are to soften and
qualify his sin, to think charitably of him notwithstanding, and to
frame to ourselves excuses, that the matter may not be so bad as
is generally supposed ; as likewise hope, that hereafter, by a re
formed life, he may redeem and cancel his forepast transgressions ;
and so we see even John the Baptist himself (though a man of no
plausible, court-like behaviour, yet) giving his advice to these pub
licans, he would only call that an exacting more than was due,
which Zaccheus here in himself most boisterously terms sycophancy :
whereas towards ourselves, we must be tetrical, and almost unchari
table ; we must not break our own heads with precious balm (as
the psalmist speaketh) : that is, by softened, oily excuses, aggravate
and assist our own disease.
22. Secondly, consider that Zaccheus's sin, which he deals so
roughly and discourteously withal here, was his beloved bosom
sin ; the sin of his trade and course of life ; a sin in whose com
pany and society he had always been brought up ; his peccatum,
akspitfraTov, (as St. Paul most elegantly calls it) *" the sin that
doth so easily beset him ;" or rather, that doth so well and fitly
encompass him, that doth so exactly suit with him. For
ordinarily, every man hath some one particular sin, that fits his
humour better, and sits closer to him, like a well-made garment,
than any other. And I think this expression renders St. Paul's
peccatum suirepldrarov, reasonably well. Other sins are either too
strait for him, and do continually vex and gird him, so that he
can take but little comfort in them (and such are sins against a
man's constitution and temper ; as, for example, one act of adultery,
though for the time pleasant, would yet afterwards more torment
and afflict a covetous man's conscience, than the devouring, it may
be, of a whole country) : or else they hang loose about him, so
that though they be easy and delightful sometimes, yet to wear
them continually, would prove tedious and irksome. But his
dearly-respected sin is good company at all times for him ; and
* Heb. xii. 1.

638 The Seventh Sermon.
so he may have leave to enjoy but that, he cares not much what be
comes of all the rest.
23. As, for instance, that I may press a little nearer to your
consciences, put the case, there were any one in this company, a
covetous, oppressing person, such an one as Zaccheus; I'll war
rant, he would have been content, that I should rather have taken
any text in the bible than this ; he would have been pleased, nay,
even rejoiced, to hear me inveigh bitterly against any other sin
besides ; yea, he would willingly in his own thoughts have joined
with me against any man living ; for thereby he would be apt to
justify himself in his own eyes, and to say in his thoughts, the
preacher indeed is very earnest in God's behalf against somebody,
but I thank God I am righteous all this while, I am not at all
concerned in it ; nay, it may be, he would have been content to
have taken my part even against himself too, in any other sin be
sides this.
24. But now that I begin to set myself against his darling, only
favourite sin, the delight of his soul, and, as it were, the breath
of his nostrils, he will by no means endure it. . What ! (thinks
he) is there not room enough in all the Old and New Testament
for this preacher to expa-tiate in ? Are there not a thousand pre
cepts, and almost as many stories in the bible, and must- he needs
single out this? Am I the only person that he must aim at?
Or, if he would needs be meddling with me, could he not spare
me, at least, in this one small sin ? Let him do his worst to the
rest of my sins ; let him draw blood from me in any other place
besides this ; but this is a very sucking of my heart's blood ; is a
rending to my bowels. The Lord surely will be merciful to me
in this sin only : Lo, is it not a little one, and my soul shall live in
pleasure and happiness ? And such thoughts as these would the
lascivious person have entertained, if I had lighted upon his text:
and so the rest.
25. But as for our new convert Zaccheus (and I beseech you
let him be herein your example) he deals not so mercifully, no,
not with his dearly-loved sin of oppression : no, he is so far from
that, as if, in all other respects, he had beep the most innocent, holy
man alive, he cannot remember that his conscience is troubled
with any sin besides: all his aim and spite are directed against
this only sin, which, having rooted out of his heart, he sup
poses he shall then be worthy to entertain his new-invited, blessed
guest. 26. And, to say the truth, if a heart once enlightened by grace,
finds so much courage as to be able to prevail against his pec
catum, s'uffSp/flVa<rov, it will be an easy, secure skirmish and re
sistance, that all the rest will afford him. Hereupon saith our
Saviour to the pharisees, who were covetous, If you give your
riches to the poor, all things shall become pure unto you : as if
he should say, this sin of covetousness is the main chain, where
by the devil holds you captive at his pleasure; strain and force
yourselves only to break this chain, and then you shall be free
indeed in perfect liberty ; all your other sins will be only to you

The Seventh Sermon. 639
as the green withes were to Sampson, even as " threads of tow
that have smelled the fire."
27. Pertinent to this may that saying of our Saviour's be, in
the 13th of St. John's gospel, where giving his disciples a blessed
example of humility, in vouchsafing to wash their feet ; when it
came to Peter's turn, he would by no means endure it. But,
after our Saviour had somewhat sharply rebuked him ; Well,
says he, since thou wilt descend so far, as to wash me, " Lord,
not my feet only, but my hands and my head;"* leave not the
work "imperfect; since thou wilt begin to cleanse and sanctify
me, perfect this thy good work unto the end. Our Saviour re
plies,! "He that is washed, needeth not, save to wash his feet,
but is clean every whit." As if he should say, If thou wilt take
so much care, as to cleanse and purify such parts, as by continual
exercise and travel are most subject to be defiled, it will be an
easy matter to preserve thyself pure through all the rest. Thus
Zaccheus having searched out the head and fountain, whence all
those noisome lusts, which appeared in his life, did flow, he sup
poses he shall sufficiently purify the streams thence issuing, if he
can once cleanse the spring. Which he proceeds to perform, in
my second general; which is the satisfaction by him tendered
in lieu of his former oppressions, in these words : " I restore unto
him fourfold." In the handling of which I will, according to my
promise, begin with the first particular thereof, namely, so much
of this satisfaction as is necessary to be performed by virtue of an
indispensable precept, which is of restitution, in these words: " I
restore unto him."
28. There is a doctrine blown about and dispersed by a sort of
preachers in the reformed churches, and greedily embraced by
their followers and proselytes, because they are persuaded, that
themselves are the most interested in it ; which teacheth, that
no man has any right or property in the goods and riches which
he possesses, unless he be one of God's elect, faithful servants. —
So that those, who are resolved to account themselves in this
number, and to exclude from this society all others, who suit not
with their humours ; such, I say, are apt too forwardly to think
all others no better than usurpers of their patrimony and inherit
ance. The dangerous effects and consequences of which doctrine
(especially where power has not been wanting to make the best
use and advantage of it) was woefully discovered in those tumults,
which not very long since were raised in Germany, especially in
Westphalia, about the city of Munster.
29. This doctrine I suppose was borrowed especially from the
Jesuits, who upon the same grounds have entitled their catholic
king to almost all the western parts of the world; whereby
many millions of poor souls have been most inhumanly and bar
barously massacred, to make way for the supposed right owners,
the Spaniards, as we find testified with horror and detestation,
even by many ingenuous honest-hearted writers of their own
nation. * John xiii. 9. t Verse 10.

640 The Seventh Sermon.
30. Neither the time, nor my text, will allow me leisure to
stand long upon the confuting of this pernicious doctrine; I will
only oppose to it that saying of the psalmist, " The earth is the
Lord's, but he hath given it to the children of men ;" no man
alive hath any right in the goods of this world, but only by a gift
from God ; and by his gift all the children of men, wifhoutexcep-
tion, are instated in it ; so that no pretence of religion or election
can be sufficient for any one to disseize another man of what
condition or quality soever he be, that is once legally possessed
of them.
31. Therefore, whosoever he be, that, whether by fraud, or
violence, or any other title, shall invade, or usurp upon the rights
of another, he does, as much as in him lies, without any warrant
nullify the gift of God, and takes upon him to oppose and thwart
his most wise providence ; setting himself up as it were in God's
seat, and dethroning him, establishing a new order of providence
of his own. And thinkest thou, that doest these things, that thou
shalt escape the judgment of God? Canst thou imagine, that
he will patiently endure to see his judgments* reversed, or his
mercies evacuated by thee ? That whereas he hath said, I will
bless this man, and enlarge his bounds upon the earth; thou
shouldst take upon thee to say, on the other side, Let God deal
as mercifully as he pleaseth to this man, but I know what I am
resolved of ; lam determined to crush and grind him to powder;
I am resolved that his children shall beg at my gates, and not
be satisfied ; they shall bow unto me, and not be regarded ? What
a wretched, unworthy opinion must such an one of necessity en
tertain of God !
32. And I beseech you, do not think that this is only a rheto
rical, forced straining of a point. The Holy Ghost will tell you
as much in express terms, Prov. xiv. 31, and again, Prov. xvii. 5,
" He that oppresseth the poor, reproacheth his Maker." He sets
his mark and brand of infamy almost upon all God's glorious
attributes ; as if God bad not power enough to maintain the poor
man against his adversary ; as if he had not wisely enough dis
pensed his blessings; as if he would not suffer God to extend
his mercies, but upon whom himself shall please ; and so of the
rest. 33. But I will now, for your sakes, transgress something the
limits of my text; and whereas I should only meddle with the
unlawfulness of detaining goods gotten by oppression, and syco
phancy, I will make the subject more general, in this proposition,
which"! beseech you needfully to attend to, and hereafter seri
ously to consider of: this therefore I say and testify, that who
soever he be, whose conscience shall convince him, that he hath
gained anything by an unlawful course, if he resolve not to re
store it, and die in that resolution, it is impossible he should be
saved. For the confirming which proposition, instead of many,
almost infinite, unanswerable reasons, I will only make use of two,
each of them drawn from the impossibility in such a man of per
forming two duties, most necessarily required at every man's hands

TJie Seventh Sermon. 641
that professeth Christianity : the one whereof is prayer ; the second,
repentance. 34. Concerning prayer, I will demonstrate, that he can neither
seriously give God thanks for bestowing upon him those riches,
which he calls blessings ; nor, secondly, desire God's blessing
upon those riches. For the first, without question, if such an one
shall dare to open his mouth to give God thanks for his riches, it
will prove to him a greater sin than the unjust, unlawful gather
ing of them ; as the psalmist saith — his very prayers shall be •
turned into sin ; for thereby he will entitle the just, righteous
God unto his abominable sin. Dares such a man, with any confi
dence, give thanks to Almighty God for suffering him to be his
enemy, in oppressing and persecuting, it may be, God's faithful,
beloved servants ; for suffering him to be an instrument of the
devil's? Therefore, if there be any such, that hear me this day,
(yet I hope, nay, I am almost confident, there is not) but, and if
there be, let me beseech him that, of all things in the world, he
will take heed of giving thanks ; let him rather proceed on blindly
in his sin, and put out of his mind all thought and consideration
of God : for never any heathen could offer him such an indignity as
this, no, not Epicurus nor Diagoras himself.
35. In the second place, how can such an one desire God to
bless unto him, and increase those riches so unjustly gotten?
Will he say, Lord, make it appear unto the world, by blessing
me in these my ungodly courses, that thou likest well of them,
and that thou hast been of conspiracy with me in all mine ungra
cious projects; so shall the godly quickly be rooted out of the
earth, for every one will take advantage to wrong another : if
thou wilt bless me, every one will be ready to tread in my steps ?
We see a man in such a state cannot seriously pray any kind of
prayer, unless he purpose to mock God to his face ; so that he has
defrauded himself of one necessary means of salvation. But that
which follows is of greater importance yet.
36. There is nothing wherein a man (that is resolved not to
part with goods unlawfully gathered) can deal with more despiteful
petulancy and incivility with God, than by offering to pretend to
an unfeigned repentance. It is much like the behaviour of Charles
V. unto God, who caused public prayers and processions to be
made unto God for the delivery of the pope in Spain, whom himself
at the same time detained prisoner in his own castle St. Angelo,
with a resolution, that howsoever those prayers wrought with
God to pity his vicar, yet till he had concluded conditions for his
own advantage with him, he should never be released. Just such
another interlude and fantastical pageant must this man's repent
ance be.
37. He will say, perhaps, Lord, I confess I cannot justify those
ways and courses whereby I procured my wealth : it may be, to
make way for my excess and superfluity, many a poor soul (yet
richer in thy grace and favour than myself) has been forced almost
to starve for penury and want : it may be, there are store of
orphans and widows, that are importunate upon thee for vengeance
s s

642 The Seventh Sermon.
against my unchristian profession ; and I acknowledge, that for
my demerits I am liable to be forced to drink the very dregs of
thy fierce wrath and indignation for ever. I will therefore rely
and cast myself upon thy mercy and pity, which yet if I cannot
purchase without the loss and restitution of my ill-gotten wealth
I will rather adventure upon thy fury; and though I know it
to be a fearful thing, and insupportable misery, to fall into thy
hands, as into the hands of an enemy and pursuer ; yet upon no
manner of conditions will I part with my riches : no, not though
I were now upon my death-bed, being out of all hopes of ever
enjoying any comfort and pleasure myself from them, and within
few hours expecting to be conveyed into my everlasting prison ;
yet rather than my son, or my kinsman (who even after restitution
made of what is unlawfully got, might perhaps have remaining
to him sufficient to maintain him plentifully in this world;) yet
rather than he shall abate any thing of that vanity and super
fluity, which my excess of wealth will be able to bear, I will
endanger the forfeiture of my inheritance in the land of the
living. 38. Obj. 1. But it may be, you will say, that it is an impossible
thing for any man, that pretends to Christianity, to have such
thoughts in him as these. — Sol. I confess, it is a hard thing for a
man to make such a formal, distinct discourse with himself as
this was ; but, consider whether such a man's thoughts, (which at
an exigence like this are confused and tumultuous) yet if they
were reduced into order and method, consider, I say, whether
they would not be digested into a sense and meaning equivalent
unto that which before I expressed ; so that God, who knows the
bent and inclination of his heart (much better than himself) he
will display and discover them distinctly and legibly before his
eyes, and will proceed against him, as if he had behaved himself
towards him after such an unworthy, more than atheistical,
fashion. 39. Obj. 2. But again, it is possible I may be replied upon, and
have the case put, that a man, who hath unrighteously oppressed
or defrauded his neighbour, has not means enough left to make
satisfaction by restoring. And that is no extraordinary example,
that goods ill got should have, by the justice of God, wings
given them to fly away, and escape out of the hands of the pur
chasers : shall such men, because they are not able to restore, be
concluded in such a desperate estate as 1 have mentioned before ?
No, God forbid! — Sol. If in such circumstances a man shall be
unfeignedly sorry for his misdeeds, and withal resolve, if God shall
hereafter bless him with abilities, to make restitution, our merciful
God will accept of that good inclination of his heart, as if he had
perfectly satisfied and restored to each man his due: for, without
all question, God will never condemn any man because he is not
rich. 40. Obj. 3. If it shall be again questioned, and the supposition
made, that a man (for example, a tradesman) cannot possibly call
to remembrance each particular man's name, whom he hath

The Seventh Sermon. 643
wronged, (as, indeed, it is almost impossible he should) what ad
vice shall he take in such a case ? — Sol. I answer, that he must
in this case consider, that by this sin he hath not only wronged
his neighbour, but God also ; therefore, since he cannot find out
the one, let him repay it to the other. Let,him be so charitable,
and do that kindness to God, as to bestow it in alms upon his
poor servants ; or, since God himself is grown so poor and needy
(especially in this kingdom) that he hath not means enough to
repair his own houses, nor scarce to make them habitable, he may
do well to rescue God's churches from being habitations of beasts,
and stables for cattle ; or, lastly, which more concerns you, since
God is here grown so much out of purse, that he has not means
enough to pay his own servants' wages equal to the meanest of
your household servants, let not them any longer be the mocking-
stocks of those Canaanites, your enemies, that so swarm in your
land. Here is a subject fit indeed for your charity : and a miser
able case it is, God knows, that they should be the persons, who of
all conditions of men should stand in greatest need of your mercy
and charity.
41. Oh ! but will some men say, we have found now at what the
preacher aimeth: all this ado about restitution is only to enrich
the clergy. If such thoughts and jealousies as these arise in your
hearts (as I know by experience it is no unlikely thing they should)
O then, I beseech you, for the mercies of God, consider in what
a miserable state the church must needs be, when the most likely
course to keep the ministers of God from starving, must be your
sins: when those, to whom you have committed your souls in
trust, as they that must give God an account for them, shall
through want and penury be rendered so heartless, and low-
spirited, that for fear of your anger, and danger of starving, they
shall not dare to interrupt or binder' you, when you run headlong
in the paths that lead you to destruction : when, out of faint
heartedness, they shall not dare to take notice, no, not of the most
scandalous sins of their patrons ; but, which is worst, be the most
forward, officious parasites to soothe them in their crimes, and cry
peace unto them, when God and their own consciences tell them
that they are utter strangers from it, and neither do, nor are ever
likely to know, the ways of peace. Lastly, when these messen
gers of God shall be the most ready to tell you, that those posses
sions and tithes, which have been wrested out of God's hands, are
none of God's due; that they are none of the church's patrimony;
that their right is nothing but your voluntary alms and charitable
benevolence ; and that they shall think themselves sufficiently and
liberally dealt withal, if you shall account them worthy to be the
companions of the basest and meanest of your servants. I could
almost be silent in this cause, did not our enemies in Gath know of
it, and if it were not published in the streets of Askalon ; insomuch,
that you have given cause to the enemies of God to blaspheme our
glorious and undefiled religion.
42. I will conclude this doctrine of restitution, most necessary
certainly to be prosecuted in these times, only with proposing to
S S <"S

644 The Seventh Sermon.
your considerations two motives, which in all reason ought to per
suade you to the practice of it : the one shall be, that you would do
it for your own sakes ; the other, for your children's sake. For the
former, though I could never be scanted of arguments sufficient to
enforce it, though I should make it the subject of my sermons to my
life's end ; yet because I perceive it is time for me to hasten to your
release, I will only desire you to remember how much I have told
you already, that this doctrine concerns you, since it is impossible
for any man, while he is guilty of the breach of this duty, to put in
practice even the most necessary and indispensable precepts of the
christian religion.
43. But concerning the second motive, which I desire should
induce to the practice of restitution, namely, that you should be
persuaded to it even for your children's sake, I beseech you, take
this seriously into your consideration : that whereas it may be you
may think, that by heaping wealth, howsoever purchased, upon
your heirs, you shall sufficiently provide for them against all
casualties ; yet that God also hath his treasures in store to coun
tervail yours, and to provide so, that your heirs shall take but
little content, God knows, in all their abundance : for, as it is in
Job xx. 8, "God will lay up the iniquity of sinners for their
children ;" i. e. he will not satisfy himself with wreaking ven
geance of other men's wrongs upon your heads, that have done
them, but will take care, also, that your children shall be no
gainers by the bargain : therefore, as you desire the welfare of
those, for whose sake especially you dare adventure to hazard
your own souls, bequeath not to them for a legacy a canker and
moth, that will assuredly consume and devour all your riches :
take pity of those poor souls, who are nothing interested, in their
own persons, in those crimes, wherewith their wealth was purchased,
and leave not unto them a curse from God upon their inheritance.
But I see I must be forced even abruptly to break from this argu
ment of restitution : I come, therefore, briefly, to my last particu
lar, namely, the excess and extraordinary measure of Zaccheus's
restitution, which he professeth shall be fourfold, to be dispatched
in one word.
44. However I found it something a hard task, to clear my first
particular of confession from the danger and neighbourhood of
popery : yet Ifear that, in most men's opinions, it will prove more
difficult to do as much for this : for here is an action performed by
Zaccheus (namely, fourfold restitution,) without all question good
and acceptable to God, and yet not enjoined by virtue of any com
mandment ; and what is that but plain popish supererogation ? For
the judicial law of restoring fourfold, is only in strictness and pro
priety applicable to plain, direct stealing.
45. Sol. I confess that some particular men, for fear of this
consequence, have thought themselves obliged to dissent not only
from St. Paul's distinction of counsels from precepts in the gos
pel, but also from the general, uniform consent of all antiquity;
whereas, if we shall well consider it, they have feared where no
fear was : for our churches never condemned that distinction, as

The Seventh Sermon. 645
if there were danger from thence of making way for popery ; but
this is that abomination of more than pharisaical, self-justifying
pride in the church of Rome, that upon so weak a foundation
they have most inartificially erected their Babel of supererogation,
whereby they teach, that they can, not only through the whole
course of their lives, exactly perform all the commandments of
God, without offending in any one mortal sin; by this means
challenging at God's hands remission of their sins, and everlasting
salvation for themselves; but also by their voluntary, unrequired
obedience unto evangelical counsels, leave God in arrearages unto
•them, and make an extraordinary stock of merits, which shall be
left unto the pope's care and providence to manage and dispense
to any man's use for ready money. This is that doctrine, which
the church of England, in express words, most worthily professeth
a detestation unto, in their fourteenth article, which hath been
transcribed into the five-and-fortieth of this church. And yet,
for all this, neither of these churches have any quarrel to that
distinction of St. Paul, when, speaking of voluntary chastity, he
saith, "I have received no such commandment from the Lord,
yet I give my advice or counsel ;"* as hath been excellently dis
covered by the late incomparable bishop of Winchester, in his
Resp. ad Apologiam.
46. And now, though I have gone through and quite absolved
my text, yet I can scarce think my sermon finished, till I have
endeavoured to make it beneficial unto you, by applying it to
your consciences and practice : but when I should come to that,
I confess I find these times, wherein we live, so indisposed for
such an application, that I know not which way to begin with
you ; for, shall I seriously enjoin you, as by a precept from God,
that where you have unjustly oppressed, or cunningly and closely
defrauded your neighbour, that you should, as Zaccheus did here,
restore unto him fourfold ? No, I dare not adventure so far, 1
have received no such commandment from the Lord ; and, then
I should be guilty of that, which was an unjust accusation laid
upon Moses and Aaron : " Ye take too much upon you, ye sons
of Levi."
47. Shall I then endeavour to persuade you to conform your
selves to this pattern of Zaccheus, as to a counsel ? Alas ! the
times are such, that well were we, if, as some have turned all
counsels into precepts, that the same men would not, at least in
their practice, convert all precepts into counsels : if they would
not think that the moral, legal precepts were antiquated and dis
solved by bringing in the new covenant of grace ; or if not quite
abrogated, yet left so arbitrary, that they should become matters
of no necessary importance and consequence ; duties which, if we
shall perform, we shall thereby approve our gratitude and thank
fulness unto God our Saviour; and yet, if by chance they are left
undone, since they are esteemed no necessary conditions of the
new covenant, there is no great danger, as long as we can keep
a spark of faith alive, as long as we can persuade ourselves, that
* 1 Cor. vii. 25.

646 The Eighth Sermon.
we have a firm persuasion of God's mercy in Christ to ourselves in
particular ; which kind of newly-invented faith an adversary* of
our church pleasantly, and I fear too truly, defines, when he says,
It is nothing but a strong fancy.
48. These things therefore considered, I will leave the appli
cation of Zaccheus's extraordinary restitution to your own con
sciences, according as God and your own souls shall agree together:
only I beseech you not to make a counsel of restitution in general,
but to free yourselves from the burden and weight of other men's
riches, lest they over-leaven and swell you so unmeasurably, that
you shall not be able to press in at that strait gate, which would*
lead you unto those blessings and glorious habitations, which
Christ hath purchased for you, not with these corruptible things
of silver and gold, but with his own precious blood : unto which
habitations God of his infinite mercy bring us all, for the same our
Lord Jesus Christ's sake : to whom with the Father, &c.

SERMON VIII.
" For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by
faith."— Gal. v. 5.
This day the wisdom of the ancient, primitive, and, I think,
apostolic church, hath dedicated to the memory of an epiphany,
or apparition of a miraculous star, which was sent to guide the
magi, or wise men of the east, to the place where our Saviour was
born. But suppose there were such a star seen, and three men of
the east conducted by it ; must all the christian world presently fall
a rejoicing for it ? There was reason, indeed, that they should be
exceeding glad, but shall we therefore lose a whole day's labour by
it ? To say the truth, there is no reason for it ; therefore, either
better grounds must be found out for rejoicing, or it were well done
to make Christmas a day shorter hereafter.
2. But for all this, if we well consider it, we gentiles might
better spare any holiday in the year than this; for there is none,
besides this, properly our own, but the Jews will challenge an
equal interest in it. The appearing of the star then is the least
part of the solemnity of this day : for a greater and more glorious
light, than the star, this day arose unto us, even that, so long ex
pected light which was to lighten the gentiles, which was to give
light to them which sat in darkness, and in the shadow of death,
and to guide our feet in the way of peace. This day, as St. fauf
saith, to?&»> 4 x&gie «0 ®»C (Tit. ii. 11.) There was an epi
phany likewise of the grace of God, to wit, the gospel ; which
now, as on this day, began to bring salvation, not to the Jews
only, but to all men, even to us sinners of the gentiles, of whom
these three wise men were the first fruits. And, to say the truth,
the appearing of Christ himself, unless he had brought with him
this light to lighten the gentiles in his hand, had not been suth-
* Dr. Carrier, in his Epistle to King James.

The Eighth Sermon. 647
cient to make a solemn day for us. The star then was not that
light, but it was sent to bear witness of that light, namely, the
glory whereof fills my text fuller than the majesty of God ever
filled the temple. For here we have the whole nature of the
gospel comprehended and straitened within the narrow compass
of my text, yet no part of it left out; yea, we have not only the
gospel discovered by its own light, as it is in itself, but in com
parison with those twinkling cloudy stars of Jewish ordinances,
and that once glorious, but now eclipsed light, the law of works.
Since then this is the day which the Lord hath made for us, we
will rejoice and be glad in it ; and we will be ready to hearken,
especially to any thing that shall be spoken concerning our epi
phany, concerning that blessed light, for many ages removed out
of our sight, and as on this day beginning to appear in our
horizon. 3. The words of my text I find so full and swelling with ex
pression, so fruitful and abounding in rich sense, that I am almost
sorry I have said so much of them to fit them to this day : but,
in recompense, I will spare the labour of shewing their dependence
and connexion with the preceding part of the epistle, and consider
them as a loose several thesis; in which is contained, not only
the sum and extract of this epistle, but likewise of the christian
religion in general, in opposition both to the mosaical law given
to the Jews, and the law of works, called also the moral, natural
law, which from the beginning of the world hath been assented
to, and written in the hearts of all mankind. The sense of which
words, if they were enlarged, may be this; We christians, by the
tenor and prescript of our religion, expect the hope of righteous
ness, i. e. the reward which we hope for by righteousness ; not as
those vain teachers newly sprung up among you Galatians, would
have us, by obedience unto the carnal, ceremonial law of Moses,
but through the Spirit, i. e. by a spiritual worship; neither by per
forming the old covenant of works, which we are not able to fulfil,
but by faith, by such an obedience as is prescribed unto us in the
gospel: "We through the Spirit wait," &c.
4. In these words then, which comprehend the complete es
sence of the covenant of grace, we may consider, first, the con
ditions on man's part required in these words, " through the Spi
rit," and "by faith." Secondly, upon the performance of our
duty, there follows God's promise, or the condition, which God
will make good unto us: and that is, the "hope of righteousness,"
or justification. In the former part, namely, the obedience which
is required from us christians, we may consider it, first, in oppo
sition to the mosaical law, by these words, " through the Spirit ;"
which import that it is not such an outward, carnal obedience, as
Moses' law required ; but an internal, spiritual worship of the
heart and soul. Secondly, the opposition of this new covenant
to the old covenant of works, in these words, " by faith ;" which
signify, that we do not hope for salvation by the works of the law,
but by the righteousness of faith, or the gospel. In the second
general, we may likewise observe, first, the nature of justification,

648 The Eighth Sermon.
which comprehends the promises which God has been pleased to
propose to us as the reward of our obedience. Secondly, the inter
est which we christians in this life, after we have performed our
duties, may have in these promises, which is hope, expressed in
these words, " We wait for the hope," &c. Of these —
5. First, then, of the covenant of grace, as it is distinguished
from the mosaical law by these words, " through the Spirit."
Where we will consider the nature of the Jewish law, and wherein
it is distinguished from the christian. When Almighty God, with
a high hand and a stretched-out arm, had rescued the people of
Israel from the Egyptian slavery, and brought them in safety into
the wilderness, intending then to settle and reduce them into
good order and government himself; they by common, voluntary
consent, all agreed to submit themselves to whatsoever laws he
should prescribe unto them, as we find Exod. xix. from the third
to the ninth verse: so that afterwards, (Judges viii.) when the
people, after an unexpected, glorious victory obtained by Gideon,
would have made him a king, and have settled the government in
his house : " No (saith Gideon, verse 23,) I will not rule over you,
neither shall my son rule over you, the Lord shall rule over you."
And likewise, afterwards, when Samuel complained to God of
the perverseness of the people, who were weary of his govern
ment, and would have a king, as the nations round about them
had : thou art deceived, saith God, it is my government that they
are weary of: "They have not rejected thee, but they have re
jected me ;" and now are risen up in rebellion against me, to depose
me from that dominion, which with their free consents I assumed :
for which intolerable, base ingratitude of that nation, in his wrath
he gives them a king, he appoints his successor, who revenged those
injuries and indignities offered to Almighty God, to the uttermost
upon them.
6. Now during the time of God's reign over them, never any king
was so careful to provide wholesome laws, both for church and com
monwealth, as he was ; inasmuch as he bids them look about, and
consider the nations round about them, if ever any people was fur
nished with laws and ordinances of such equity and righteousness,
as theirs were ; which laws, because they were ordained by angels,
in the hands of a mediator, namely Moses, are commonly called by
the name of the mosaical law, and are penned down at large by
him in his last four books.
7. The precepts and prohibitions of this law are of several na
tures : for some duties therein enjoined, are such, as in their own
natures have an intrinsical, essential goodness and righteousness
in them ; and the contrary to them are in themselves evil, and
would have been so, though they had never been expressly pro
hibited: such are especially the ten words or precepts written
by God's own finger in the two tables of stone : other precepts
concern matters of their own nature indifferent, and are only to
be termed good, because they were commanded by a positive,
divine law ; such are the ceremonial washings, purifications, sa
crifices, &c. A third sort are of a mixed nature, the objects of

The Eighth Sermon. 649
which are, for the most part, things in their own nature good or
evil; but yet the circumstances annexed unto them are merely
arbitrary and alterable; as namely, those things which are com
manded or forbidden by that which is commonly called the judi
cial law : for example, the law of fourfold restitution of things
stolen. Theft of its own nature is evil, and deserves punishment ;
but that the punishment thereof should be such a kind of restitu
tion, is not in itself necessary, but may be changed either into a
corporal punishment, or it may be, into a civil death, according
as those who have the government of kingdoms and states, shall
think fit and convenient for the dispositions of the times wherein
they live, as we see by experience in the practice of our own
kingdoms. For the due execution of which laws, and punish
ment of transgressors, God appointed judges and rulers; and
where they failed through want of care, or partiality, himself
many times would immediately and personally inflict the punish
ment. 8. Now the general sanction of this whole law is expressed
(Deut. xxvii. 26,) in these words : " Cursed is every one that
continueth not in all the words of this law to do them ;" which
curse, as we find it afterwards at large interpreted, imported a
sudden, violent, untimely death, together with all kind of mis
fortune that could make this life miserable. So that he was liable
to this curse that swerved, in any one point or circumstance,
from what was contained in that law. Notwithstanding, in some
cases, God was pleased to remit the rigour of this curse, and to
accept of certain gifts and offerings, and the expiatory sacrifices
of beasts, as it were in exchange for the lives of the delinquents.
I should but fruitlessly trifle away the time in insisting any longer
upon the nature and quality of the mosaical law. I will now, as I
am required by my text, shew you the extreme difference, and in
comparable excellency of the covenant of grace, or the gospel,
beyond this, in several respects.
9. As, first, the moral duties of the two tables, as they are part
of the mosaical, Jewish law, required only an external obedience
and conformity to the affirmative precepts thereof, and an ab
staining from an outward practice of the negative. They did not
reach unto the conscience, no more than the national laws of other
kingdoms do : so that, for example, where the law of Moses for
bids adultery upon pain of death, he that should in his heart lust
after any woman, could not be accounted a transgressor of Moses'
law, neither was he liable to the punishment therein specified ;
whereas the gospel requires not only an outward, and, as I may
say, corporal obedience to God's commandments, but also an in
ward sanctification of the soul and conscience, upon the same pen
alty of everlasting damnation with the former. And what is now
said of the moral precepts (as they are part of Moses' law) by the
same proportion likewise is to be understood of the judicial.
10. Notwithstanding what hath now been said, yet we must
know that these very Jews, to whom this law was given, being the
children of Abraham, were heirs likewise of the promises which

650 The Eighth Sermon.
were made unto him and his seed ; and the way or means whereby
they were to attain unto these promises, were the very same by
which himself obtained them, namely, faith ; so that this mosai
cal law (whatsoever glorious opinion the Jews had of it) was not
that covenant whereby they were to seek for justification in the
sight of God. Till Christ's coming there was no law given which
could have given life, that is, which could promise everlasting life
unto man ; not the law of works, by reason of man's imperfection
and weakness ; not the law of Moses, by reason of its own weak
ness, as St. Paul clearly demonstrates, especially in the epistle to
the Hebrews.
11. For what end then was the law of Moses given? St. Paul
shall answer the question. (Gal. iii. 19.) " It was added (saith
he) because of transgressions, till the seed should come, to whom
the promises were made." It was added : as if he should say,
after the promises made unto Abraham and his seed, this law was
moreover annexed, not as any new condition, whereby they were
to attain unto the promises, but that, in the mean time, till the
promises were fulfilled, they should be restrained, as it were, and
kept under a strict, outward discipline, from running into any
excess of disobedience ; for those, whom perhaps the goodness and
mercy of God, in affording them those promises, would not by the
hope of them be able to bridle, they notwithstanding, when they
saw punishment even unto death without mercy inflicted upon the
transgressors, would be more careful of their ways. It follows,
" till the seed should come, to whom the promises were made ;"
or, as himself, in Heb. ix. 10, alters the phrase, " till the time of
reformation ;" that is, when Christ, who was that blessed seed
promised to Abraham, should come, he would so clearly and con
vincingly shew unto the world the way of salvation, that they
should no longer need to be kept under their old schoolmaster,
the law ; and therefore, at his coming, the date of the whole
mosaical law should expire. And that may be one reason, why
St. Paul is in this chapter so violent against those that would
urge the observation of the mosaical law ; forasmuch as by enforc
ing it now, when the seed was already come, to whom the pro
mises were made, they did seem to evacuate the coming and gospel
of Christ.
12. Now that the mosaical law was not given to the Jews for this
end, that by the fulfilling thereof they should promise to themselves
the reward of righteousness, everlasting life, is evidently demon
strated, both by our Saviour in the fifth of St. Matthew, and by St.
Paul through all his epistles, but especially in that to the Hebrews.
The force and virtue of whose arguments may in general be reduced
to that issue, which before I mentioned, viz. that the law, by the
performance whereof we may expect life, requires not only an ex
ternal conformity to the outward works, but an inward, spiritual
sanctification also of the soul and heart.
13. But what saith the law of Moses? "It was said, (saith our
Saviour) by them of old,"* i. e. in the law of Moses, " thou shalt
* Matt. v. 21.

The Eighth Sermon. 651
not kill ;" not, thou shalt not be angry, thou shalt not bear ma
lice in thv heart : so that if thou abstainest from murder, thou
fulfillest Moses' law; "and if thou dost kill, thou shalt be in
danger of judgment," j. e. the only punishment which the law of
Moses inflicted upon the transgressors thereof, was the danger to
be condemned to death by the judgment, or bench of judges,
appointed for the execution of this law. " But I say unto you ;"
I, who clearly shew unto you that way wherein you must walk,
before you can promise to yourselves any hope of eternal life ; I
say unto you, not only, "whosoever" shall kill his neighbour, but
whosoever, out of malice or rancour, " shall say unto his brother,
thou fool, shall be in danger of hell-fire."* So, likewise, not only
he who commits adultery! in the outward act, is culpable by my
gospel before God, but also he who looks upon a woman to lust af
ter her in his heart. And so, instead of forswearing.J and break
ing of oaths and vows, which Moses' law forbad, Christ condemns
fruitless and unnecessary, though true, oaths. Instead of the law
of retaliation of injuries,§ Christ commands rather to suffer a se
cond injury, than to revenge the first.
14. But, in the last place, the last example which our Saviour
gives, may seem to destroy this collection which hath been drawn
out of this chapter: for, saith he, verse 43, "You have heard,
that it hath been said of old, thou shalt love thy neighbour, and
hate thine enemy." What ! did Moses' law then permit a man to
bear hatred and malice unto another ? Did I say, permit them ?
Nay, it commanded them so perfectly to hate their enemies, to
wit, the seven nations who possessed that land, which was theirs
by promise, mentioned Exod. xxxiv. 2, Deut. vii. 1, to which
were added the Amalekites, Exod. xxvii. 19, Deut. xxx. 19, that
they were enjoined to destroy them utterly, old and young, men,
women, and children, even to the very cattle, without all pity and
consideration. Insomuch, that Saul, for his unseasonable pity but
of one person, and that a king of the Amalekites, and reserving
the best of the cattle for sacrifice to God, had the kingdom utterly
rent from him and his posterity. Whereas, by our Saviour, in the
words of St. Paul, enmity is slain. No enemies now in Chris
tianity ; but all neighbours, and friends, and brethren ; nay, more,
if any one will needs be your enemy, love him notwithstanding,
saith Christ : " If he curse you, bless him ; if he hate you, do
good unto him ; if he use you despitefully, and persecute you,
pray for him." To conclude this argument from our Saviour's
authority: Christ adds, as a corollary to his discourse, speaking
to his disciples and followers, verse 20, " Except your righteous
ness exceed the righteousness of the scribes and pharisees," i. e.
whereas they content themselves with an outward, carnal obedience
to the law, unless you, besides this, add a spiritual sanctification
of the mind, " ye shall in no wise enter into the kingdom of
heaven." I deny not now, but that there may be a mystical,
spiritual sense even of this law, and an application thereof almost
as perfect as is expressed in the gospel ; which those, who were
* Verse 22. t Verse 27. X Verse 33. § Verse 38.

652 The Eighth Sermon.
guided extraordinarily by the spirit of God, and with help of tra
dition, might collect out of it : as the prophet David, (Psalm xix. 7,)
where he saith, " The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the
soul; the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the
eyes," &c. And in this sense the succeeding prophets endeavoured
to persuade the people to apprehend it : but this was a forced sense
of Moses' law, not primarily intended by the author ; it was no pro
per, natural meaning of it.
15. Proportionably to this" doctrine of our Saviour, St. Paul,
speaking of Moses' law, considered in its proper, natural, and di
rect sense, and as extremely insufficient to justify a man in the
sight of God, calls it aifavY) xa! ittu^o. tjrorxeih, " weak and beggarly
elements." (Gal. iv. 9.) And, No>ov ?% kvroXrjs <rapxix%, " a law of
a carnal commandment;" (Heb. vii. 16 ;) i. e. a law which a carnal
man, one not guided by the Spirit of God, might perform, and a
law, which made no man perfect. (Heb. vii. 19.) Nay more,
saith he, it is not a.p.ipjir<n<;, "not without fault;" (Heb. viii. 7;)
i. e. a man might perform the law of Moses, and yet not be afiSfwroj,
he may be a wicked man still in God's sight ; for all his legal right
eousness, he may remain dead in trespasses and sins. Insomuch, as
the same Paul, speaking of himself before he was converted to
Christianity, says " concerning the righteousness which is of the law,
I was blameless:"* I did so exactly fulfil that measure of righte
ousness, which Moses' law required of me, that in respect of that
law I was a guiltless, innocent person ; I could justify myself; I durst
with confidence oppose myself in judgment to the censure of our
most severe, strict judges.
16. But what then? Durst Paul with this his legal righteous
ness appear before God, as expecting to be justified in his sight,
as claiming any interest in the promises of eternal life, by virtue
of this his inn'ocency ? By no means : No, saith he, though I
were blameless, as concerning this righteousness, which is of the
law ; though I had all the privileges, that any Jew could be ca
pable of, " circumcised the eighth day, of the stock of Israel, of
the tribe of Benjamin, an Hebrew of the Hebrews, according to
the law, a pharisee,"f (i- e. of that sect which had preserved the
law in the greatest integrity) though I were so zealous thereof,
that I persecuted the churches of Christ, which sought to abrogate
it ;J and lastly, though " concerning the righteousness of the law,
I was blameless;" yet, notwithstanding all these, I will have no
better an opinion o"f these privileges than they deserve; I will
account them only outward, carnal privileges; if I at all rejoice
in them, yet this I will account only " a rejoicing in the flesh."
Far be it from me, to think to appear before Christ with such
a righteousness as this is. God forbid I should expect to be
accepted of by him, for these carnal, outward privileges : nay, so
far am I from that, that whatsoever I thought, before I knew him,
to be a gain and a prerogative unto me, now that I have attained
to the excellency of the knowledge of Jesus Christ, " I account as
loss,"§ as things likely to be rather a hindrance unto me ; yea, as
•Phil. iii. 6. t Verse 5. t Verse 6. § Verse 8.

The Eighth Sermon. 653
dross and dung : and desire to be " found in him, not having mine
own righteousness, which is of the law! (for, alas, how mean, and
unworthy will that appear in his eyes) but the righteousness, which
is of faith, the righteousness which is of God by faith." The for
mer righteousness was mine own, and therefore could not stand m
his sight ; but that righteousness, to which faith or the gospel di
rects me, proceeds not from my own strength, but only from God,
who will crown his own graces in me.
17. I have thus far shewed you, both from our Saviour's autho
rity, and St. Paul likewise, that the performing of the moral
duties, as far as they were enforced by virtue of Moses' law,
could not make a man capable of attaining to the promises of the
new covenant. And (that I may add one confirmation of this
more out of the Old Testament) hereupon it is, that God by the
prophet Ezekiel manifestly sheweth, that he gave not the law of
Moses to the Israelites for this end, that they should think, that, the
performance of that law was all the duty which they owed unto
God ; or that that obedience could make them accepted of him unto
eternal life : no, saith he, if you have any such conceit of those or
dinances, " the statutes, which I gave them, were not good, and
the judgments such, as they should not live by them."* I will now
proceed to shew you the weakness and unprofitableness of the cere
monial part of Moses' law likewise, for such a purpose ; and that
by arguments taken from St. Paul, especially out of that his most
divine epistle to the Hebrews.
18. The first argument shall be drawn out of the ninth chapter
of that epistle, the sum whereof is this : " the first covenant,
which" had ordinances of divine service, and a worldly sanctuary ;f
which consisted in meats, and drinks, and divers washings, and
carnal ordinances imposed on them till the time of reformation;
in which also were offered gifts and sacrifices;" yet with all these
ceremonies and formalities, could enter no deeper than the flesh ;
they " could not make him, who did the service, perfect, as per
taining to the conscience ,"J that is, for example, those expiatory
sacrifices, which were to be offered for him which had trans
gressed, they absolved him indeed from a civil, carnal punishment,
but they could not reach to the conscience ; that remained still as
guilty and defiled before God as ever it was. And can it be ima
gined, that a man so qualified, with such an accusing, condemning
conscience, could with any hope or confidence appear before God,
as expecting to be freed from the danger of hell, for the cost or
ceremony of a sacrifice ? Those sacrifices therefore and cere
monies, " the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of a
heifer, sprinkling the unclean, might sanctify a man to the pu
rifying of the flesh,"§ and that is all they could do ; and so far
they could sanctify even the most profane person, or the vilest
hypocrite in the world : but it must be only the " blood of Christ,
who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot unto
God,"|| that is able to " purge our consciences from dead works
to serve the living God."
*Ezek.xx.25. tHeb. ix. 1, 9, 10. X Verse 9. § Verse 13. 11 Verse 14.

654 The Eighth Sermon.
19. Obj. But it may be objected, the baptizing and washing of
us christians, and our commemoration of the true sacrifice, are
powerful and effectual, even to the sanctification of the soul and
spirit : and why should not the water of Jordan have as much
virtue in it during Moses' law, as it has had since, or as ours has
now ? Why should not their prefiguration of the true sacrifice
by typical sacrifices be as much worth as our post-commemoration
thereof? For Christ was the same yesterday, and to-day, and for
ever. — Sol. I answer that baptism and the eucharist are proper
instruments, whereby the sacrifice of Christ is applied and made
beneficial unto us, and were instituted for that and no other end;
whereas the proper and direct end of Moses' liturgy and cere
monies were only civil, carnal immunities: and though it be true,
that the legal sacrifices were very apt and commodious, to shadow
forth the oblation and satisfaction of Christ; yet this use of them
was so mystical and reserved, so impossible to be collected out of
the letter of the law, that without a special revelation from God,
the eyes of the Israelites were too weak, to serve them to pierce
through those dark clouds and shadows, and to carry their obser
vation to the substance. So that I conceive those sacrifices of that
law, in this respect, are a great deal more beneficial to us chris
tians; for there is a great difference between sacraments and types:
types are only useful after the anti-type is discovered, for the con
firmation of their faith that follow. As, for example, Abraham's
offering of Isaac by faith, did lively represent the real oblation of
Christ, but in that respect was of little or no use till Christ was
indeed crucified ; it being impossible to make that history a ground
work of their faith in Christ. The like may be said of the legal
sacrifices. 20. My second argument shall be taken out of those words
of St. Paul, (Acts xiii. 38,) where speaking of Christ he saith,
" By him all that believe are justified from all things from
which they could not be justified by the law of Moses :" from
which I infer, that since there were many sins, for which the law
of Moses allowed no sacrifice, no redemption, no satisfaction, no
commutation, in what a fearful, desperate case would a person, that
should commit such sins, be, if he were to expect justification be
fore God by the law of Moses ! For that must needs lead him to
despair : it could shew him no refuge, no sanctuary to fly unto ;—
nothing would remain unto such a person, but " a certain fearful
looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, to consume God's ad
versary : and therefore no marvel, if the same apostle (Heb. vn. 17,
18,) saith, that the former law, for the weakness and unprofitable
ness thereof (i. e. to justification) was to be disannulled, since it
could make nothing perfect.
21. The last argument shall be inferred from that saying ot the
apostle, (Heb. viii. 6.) where, speaking of the new covenant of
grace, he saith, " It was established on better promises," namely,
than the Jewish covenant was: for all the happiness which was
to be expected from Moses' law, was only an exemption from the
inconveniences and curses of this life, long days and peaceable,

Tlie Eighth Sermon. 655
enriched with worldly content and prosperity: whereas the bless
ings which attend the performance of the new covenant, or the
gospel, are unspeakable and glorious; "such as eye hath not
seen," nor indeed, as long as it is mortal can see, neither can the
heart of man conceive them, being eternal in the heavens. Neither
will the ordinary evasion serve the turn, as if these temporal
blessings, or plagues and curses, mentioned in Moses' writings,
should purposely signify the blessed estate of glorified saints, or
woes of the damned ; for then St. Paul's argument would fall to
the ground; and, indeed, that whole epistle to the Hebrews would
be rendered inconcluding, as might easily be demonstrated, if the
time, and throng of matter which follows, would permit.
22. I would not have you so conceive me, as if I would exclude
the Jews of the Old Testament from being partakers of the pro
mises of the gospel : no, God forbid : but that which I have said,
is this, that they attained not unto them by performing Moses'
law, but by the very same means by which we hope to be par
takers of them, namely, by performing the substance of those
duties, which are clearly delivered unto us in the gospel, and may
be found sprinkled in several places, even in Moses' writings, and
no question, but were more fully and completely delivered unto
them by tradition from their fathers. And hereupon, I suppose
it is, that when any were converted to the knowledge and worship
of the true God in those times, they who made them proselytes,
were not curious to enforce upon them the observation of Moses'
ordinances and .ceremonies ; as we find in the behaviour of Elisha
to Naaman the Assyrian, of Jonah to the Ninevites, of Daniel to
Nebuchadnezzar, and of the rest of the prophets to the Tyrians,
Moabites, Egyptians, to whom they wrote, and whose conversion
they sought-: none of which urged upon them the observation
of the mosaical liturgy, as a thing necessary or needful to be
observed by them. Indeed, those who were content to live amongst
the Jews, and enjoy their privileges and immunities, were bound
to undergo the burden and costliness of the offerings and sacrifices,
which, as St. Paul saith, was so great, that they were both to
themselves and their forefathers intolerable.
23. I will conclude this whole point of the difference between
Moses' law, and the law of faith, or the gospel, in God's own
words by the prophet, Jer. xxxi. 31, twice quoted by St. Paul in
Heb. viii. and x. where God saith, " Behold the days come, saith
the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel,
and with the house of Judah : not according to the covenant
which I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by
the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, which my cove
nant they broke, although I was a husband unto them, saith the
Lord : but this shall be the covenant that I will make with them,
after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws in their
hearts, and write them in their inward parts," &c. As if he should
say, The former covenant which I made with them by Moses, was
only written in two tables of stone, as the Roman laws were in

656 The Eighth Sermon.
twelve tables, and required only an outward conformity and obe
dience, for the which they did not need an inward sanctifying,
spiritual grace to enable them, as the new covenant of grace doth.
And, therefore, for the performing of that, I will abundantly afford
and supply them with all the graces of my holy Spirit.
24. But a little to interrupt this text : you will say, What, had
not the Jews God's law written in their hearts also? Did not
they worship him in spirit as well as we? No question: but this
they did, not as commanded by Moses' law, but by that cove
nant made with Abraham, and by him traduced unto them. It
follows, " And I will be their God, and they shall be my people;"
i. e. I will be their God after a more especial manner than I was
unto them in the wilderness; I will not only be their king, to
govern them in peace and tranquillity, out of the danger and fear
of their enemies, the nations about them, and preserve them safe
in the promised land ; but I will keep them from the fury and
malice of their spiritual enemies, that would seek to destroy their
souls ; and I will bring them to a land infinitely exceeding theirs,
and whereof the land of Canaan was but a most unproportionable
type and shadow, even mine own blessed and glorious kingdom,
reserved in. the highest heavens for them who sincerely perform
the conditions of my new covenant. Thus far, as largely as so
small a measure of time would permit me, I have told you the
difference betwixt the covenant of grace and Moses' law, implied
in these words of my text, " through the Spirit." I come now to
my second particular, namely, The distinction of the same cove
nant of grace from the law of works ; wherein I shall proceed by
the same method, i. e. showing you first absolutely the nature of
those laws, and then the several differences betwixt them.
25. The law of works is the same with that, to the obedience
whereof Adam was obliged in paradise, with this exception, that
besides the moral, natural law written in his heart (the substance
whereof is to this day reserved in the minds of all the sons of
Adam), Adam had a second, positive law enjoined him by God,
namely, the forbidding him to eat of the tree of good and evil;
which one precept cannot properly be called a part of the law of
works, or nature, since the action thereby forbidden, was not of
its own nature evil, but only made unlawful by virtue of God's
prohibition. Excepting therefore this one particular precept, the
law which was given to Adam (called the law of works) compre
hended in it all kind of moral duties referred either to God, his
neighbour, or himself, which have in them a natural, essential
goodness, or righteousness; and, by consequence, the prohibition
of all manner of actions, words, or thoughts, which are in them
selves contrary to justice and reason. All these precepts are
generally supposed to be contained in the ten words written by
God's own finger in two tables of stone ; though with submission,
I think, that those two tables contain only directly the moral
duties of man to God and his neighbour ; for it will require much
forcing and straining, to bring the duties and sins of a man to and

The Eighth Sermon. 657
against his own person within that compass ; as temperance,
sobriety, and their opposites, gluttony, drunkenness, self-inconti-
nency, &c.
26. The obligation to this law is so strict, severe, and peremp
tory, that it required not only an universal obedience to whatso
ever is contained in that law, in the full extent, latitude, and
perfection thereof, but that continual, without interruption,
through the whole course of a man's life ; insomuch that he, that
should but once transgress it in the least point or circumstance,
should without redemption, or dispensation, be rendered culpable
as of the breach of the whole law, and remain liable to the male
diction thereof. And to this law in this strictness mentioned, are
all living men obliged, who are out of Christ, and who either
know not of him, or are not willing to submit themselves to his new
covenant. 27. The justification, which was due to the performance of this
law by justice, and as the wages thereof, that is, the condition,
wherein God obliged himself to such as fulfilled it, was the pro
mises of this life, and that which is to come ; long, happy, and
peaceable days in this world, and in their due time a translation
to the joys and glory of heaven. This justification did not com
prehend remission of sins, as ours does ; for the law excluded all
hope of pardon after sin, no promise made to repentance, re
pentance would do no good. The court, wherein they were to be
judged, was a court of mere rigorous justice ; justice rejoiced over
and against mercy, grace, loving-kindness, and all those blessed
and glorious attributes, whereby God, for our Saviour Jesus
Christ's sake, is pleased and delighted to be known unto the
world. 28. This law, in the rigour thereof, might easily have been per
formed by Adam : he had that perfection of grace and holiness
given him, which was exactly equal and commensurable to what
soever duties were enjoined him : but by his wilful, voluntary
(God forbid we should say enforced, or absolutely decreed) preva
rication, he utterly undid both himself and his posterity, leaving
them engaged for his debts, and as much of their own, without
almost any money to pay them. Without Christ we are all
obliged to the same strictness and severity of the law, which by
reason of our poverty and want of grace, is become impossible to
be performed by us ; as the blessed apostle St. Paul hath evidently
proved by induction, in the beginning of his epistle to the Romans :
in the first chapter declaring, that the gentiles neither did, nor
could, perform the law; in the second saying as much of the
Jews; and in the third joining them both together in the same
miserable, desperate estate. The conclusion of his whole discourse
is, " all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God." Thus
much for the law of works.
29. The state of mankind without Christ being so deplored, so
out of all hope, as I told you, Almighty God, out of his infinite
mercy and goodness, by his unspeakable wisdom found out an
atonement, accepting of the voluntary examination and humilia-
T T

658 The Eighth Sermon.
tion of his dearly beloved Son, who submitted himself to be made
flesh, to all our natural infirmities (sin only excepted) and at last
to die that ignominious, accursed death of the cross, for the re
demption of mankind; who in his death made a covenant with
his Father, that those, and only those, who would be willing to
submit themselves to the obedience of a new law, which he would
prescribe unto mankind, should for the merits of his obedience
and death be justified in the sight of God, have their sins forgiven
them, and be made heirs of everlasting glory. Now that Christ's
death was in order of nature, before the giving of the gospel, is
(I think) evident by those words of St. Paul, Heb. ix. 16, 17,
where, comparing the old covenant of the Jews with that of
Christ, he saith, " where a testament is, there must of necessity
be the death of the testator ; for a testament is of force after men
are dead, otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator
liveth. Whereupon neither the first covenant was dedicated with
out blood." " It was necessary therefore (saith he, ver. 23,) that
the patterns of things in heaven should be purified with these ;"
i. e. with the blood of beasts ; " but the heavenly things themselves
with better things than those, namely, with the blood of Christ."
30. Which covenant of Christ (called in scripture the new cove
nant, the covenant of grace, the grace of God, the law of faith),
according to the nature of all covenants, being made between two
parties (at the least) requires conditions on both sides to be per
formed ; and being a covenant of promise, the conditions on man's
part must necessarily go before, otherwise they are no condi
tions at all. Now man's duty is comprehended by St. Paul in this
vrord faith, and God's promise in the word justification. And thus
far we have proceeded upon sure grounds; for we have plain, ex
press words of scripture for that which hath been said: but the main
difficulty remains behind, and that is, the true sense and meaning
of these two words, faith and justification, and what respect and de
pendence they have one of the other. Which difficulty, by God's
assistance, and with your christian, charitable patience, I will now
endeavour to dissolve.
31. For the first, therefore, which is faith, we may consider it
in several respects; to wit, first, as referring us to, and denot
ing the principal object of evangelical faith, which is Christ.
Now if faith be meant in this sense (as by many good writers of
our reformed churches it is understood) then the meaning of that
so often- repeated saying of St. Paul, " we are justified by faith
without the works of the law," must be, we are justified only for
the obedience of Christ, and not for our righteousness of the law ;
which is certainly a most catholic, orthodox sense, and not to be
denied by any christian, though I doubt it does not express all that
St. Paul intended in that proposition. Secondly, faith signifies
the act, or exercise, or duty of faith, as it comprehends all evan
gelical obedience ; called by St. Paul, " the obedience of faith ;"
(Rom. xvi. 26 ;) " the righteousness of faith." (Rom. iv. 13, and
ch. ix. 13 ; and ch. x. 6.) And it is an inherent grace or virtue,
wrought in us by the powerful operation of God's Spirit. Or,

The Eighth Sermon. 659
thirdly, it may be taken for the doctrine of faith, called also by
him, " the word of faith ;" (Rom. x. 8 ;) and " the word of God's
grace ;" (Acts xx. 32 ;) and " the hearing of faith." Gal. iii. 2.)
In which sense of these he meant the word, St. Paul may seem to
resolve us, (Rom. ii. 27,) where he saith, that boasting is excluded
by the law of faith ; which words are extant in the very heat of
the controversy of justification. Now these senses of faith, if they
be applied to that conclusion of St. Paul, we are justified by faith,
come all to one pass ; for in effect it is all one, to say, we are jus
tified by our obedience or righteousness of faith, and to say, we
are justified by the gospel, which prescribes that obedience : as,
on the contrary, to say we are justified by the law, or by works
prescribed by the law, is all one. There is a fourth acceptation
of faith, taken for the single habit or grace of faith, and applied
to this proposition (only of all christians that I have heard of) by
the Belgic remonstrants ; which, though a new-invented fancy,
and therefore unwarrantable, yet I shall hereafter have occasion,
it may be, to say something of it.
32. St. Paul's proposition, I am persuaded, excludes none of
these senses : it is capable of them all. But before I shew you how
they may consist together, I will, in the first place, declare, of
what nature that righteousness is, which God, by virtue of his
new covenant, requires at our hands, before he will make good
his promise unto us. First, then, God requires at our hands a
sincere obedience unto the substance of all moral duties of the old
covenant, and that by the gospel ; and this obedience is so neces
sary, that is impossible any man should be saved without it. The
pressing of this doctrine takes up by much the greatest part
of the evangelical writings. Now, that these duties are not
enforced upon us as conditions of the old covenant of works, is
evident, because by Christ we are freed from the obligation of the
old covenant: God forbids that we should have a thought of ex
pecting the hope of righteousness upon those terms ; for that cove
nant will not admit of any imperfection in our works, and then
in what a miserable case are we ! There is no hope for us, unless
some course be taken, that not only our imperfections, but our
sins, and those of a high nature, be passed by, and overlooked
by Almighty God, as if he had lost his eyes to see them, or his
memory to remember them.
33. The substance then of the moral law is enjoined us by the
new covenant, but with what difference I shall show you presently.
And hereupon it is, that our Saviour saith to the pharisees, who
were willing to make any misconstruction of the doctrine, " Think
you, that I am come to destroy the law ? Ay, by all means, say
we : God forbid else, for unless the old law be destroyed, we are-
undone ; as long as that is alive, we are dead ; if the law of works
have its natural force still, woe be to us. Therefore, that must
not be Christ's meaning : his intent is, as if he should say, Think
you that I am come to destroy the righteousness of the law ? or
disoblige men from the necessity of being good, holy, and virtuous ?
No, by no means ; " I am not come to destroy the law, but to fulfil
tt2

660 The Eighth Sermon.
it:" the righteousness of the law, according to the substance
thereof, shall be as necessarily required by virtue of that new
covenant, which I preach unto you, and to which I exhort you all
to submit yourselves, as ever it was by the old covenant ; only,
because of your weakness and infirmity, I will abate the rigour of
it : those, who, notwithstanding my offer of grace and pardon
upon such easy conditions as I prescribe, will yet continue in an
habitual state of profaneness and irreligion, shall be as culpable,
nay, ten times more miserable, than if they never had heard of
me, for their wilful neglecting so great salvation. " It is easier
for heaven and earth to pass away, than for one tittle of the
laws to fail:" for God would be no loser by the annihilation of
the world, whereas if any part of the moral law should expire,
the very beams and rays of God's essential goodness should be
darkened and destroyed.
34. In like manner saith St. Paul, (Rom. iii. ult.) "Do we
make void the law through faith? God forbid! Yea, we esta
blish the law." Now if a succeeding covenant establisheth any
part of a precedent, especially if there be any alteration made in
the conditions established, all obligation whatsoever is taken from
the old covenant, and those conditions are in force only by virtue
of the new. When the Norman Conqueror was pleased to esta
blish and confirm to the English some of the ancient Saxon laws,
are those laws then become in force as they are Saxon ? No, for
the authority of the Saxons, the authority of those laws, is sup
posed to be extinguished; and, therefore, no power remains in
them to look to the execution of them : but by the confirmation
of the Norman they are become indeed Norman laws, and are
now in force, not because they were first made by the Saxons,
but only by virtue of the succeeding power of the Norman line.
So, likewise, when the gospel enjoins the substance of the same
duties, which the old covenant of works required ; are we christians
enforced to the obedience of them, because they are duties of
the law ? By no means : but only because our Saviour, and
only law-maker, Jesus Christ, commands the same in the law of
faith, 35. Thus far the new covenant is in some terms of agreement
with the old, inasmuch as the same moral duties are enjoined in
them both, as parts of the conditions of both. But the difference
herein is, that the law commands a precise, exact fulfilling of
these precepts (as I told you before) which the gospel, descending
to our infirmities, remits and qualifies much : for in the gospel,
he is accounted to fulfil the moral precepts, that obeys them ac
cording to that measure of grace whiGh God is pleased to allow him;
that obeys God, though not with a perfect, yet with a sincere, up
right heart : that when he is overcome with a temptation to sin,
continues not in it, but recovers himself to his former righteousness
by repentance and new obedience. Thus much then for the moral
precepts, and with what difference they are commanded in the old
and new covenant.
36. In the second place, there is another part of evangelical

The Eighth Sermon. 661
obedience, which is purely evangelical, and which hath no com
merce nor reference at all to the law, and that is, the grace of
repentance : for, saith St. Paul, (Acts xvii. 30,) " But now (that
is, by the gospel) God commands all men every where to repent."
Now, repentance implies a serious consideration and acknowledg
ment of that miserable estate whereunto our sins have brought
us, and thereupon a hearty, unfeigned sorrow for them, a perfect
hatred and detestation of them, inferring a full, peremptory re
solution to break them off, and interrupt the course of them by
new obedience. This, I say, is an obedience purely evangelical,
the law of works did not at all meddle with it, neither indeed
could it. The law condemns a man, as soon as ever he is guilty
of the breach thereof, and makes no promise at all of remission
of sins upon repentance ; but rather quite excludes it. Yet from
the grace of repentance we may gather a forcible argument to
make good that which before we spoke concerning the renewing
of the moral precepts in the new covenant. For no reasonable
man can deny, that repentance is absolutely necessary before a man
can be justified. Now what is that, for which (for example) a
new-converted heathen repents, but the breach of the moral
law? Therefore by this necessity of repentance, he acknow
ledgeth (and so do we) that by such sins he was excluded from
all hope of being justified. Now it were absurd for a man to
say, that any thing excludes a man from being capable of receiv
ing the promises of a covenant, but only the breaking of the con
ditions thereof.
37. The third part of evangelical righteousness is faith; not
moral, but christian : which is, a relying upon Christ, as the only
meritorious cause of whatsoever benefit we obtain by the new
covenant; it being for his sake, both that God bestows upon us
grace, whereby we are enabled to perform his will ; and, after we
have done our duty, that he will freely, and not as wages, bestow
upon us the reward thereof. There is another virtue evangelical,
which is hope, but of that I must speak in my last point. And
thus I have gone through the conditions required on man's part
in the new covenant, all which, I suppose, are implied in this
word faith; which, being taken in so general a sense, may, I
conceive, be thus not improperly defined, viz. to be a receiving
and embracing of the promises made unto us in Christ, upon the
terms and conditions proposed in the gospel.
38. Now follow the conditions on God's part, comprehended
in these words : " the hope of righteousness," which are equi
valent to the term justification ; the nature whereof I shall now
endeavour to discover. Justification, I suppose, imports the
whole treasure of blessings and favours, which God, who is rich
in mercy, will freely bestow on those, whom he accepts as right
eous for his beloved Son our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ's sake ;
which are, first, remission of sins, and an interest in the joys of
heaven in this life, and a full consummation both of grace and
glory in the life to come. Some, I know, think that St. Paul,
when he discourses of justification, thereby intends only remis-

662 The Eighth Sermon.
sion of sins: and the ground of this opinion is taken from St.
Paul quoting those words of David when he states the doctrine
of justification, (Rom. iv. 6 — 8,) where he saith, that "David
describeth the blessedness of the man unto whom God imputeth
righteousness without works, saying, Blessed are they whose
unrighteousness is forgiven, and whose sins are covered ; blessed
is the man unto whom the Lord will not impute sin." But if
this argument out of the epistle to the Romans be of sufficient
force for their sense of justification, then certainly an argu
ment from as express words in the epistle to the Galatians, will
be as concluding for mine (in which epistle he also purposely
states the same questions). The words are, (Gal. iii. 11,) "That
no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident,
for the just shall live by faith." Now, to live, I hope, does not
signify, to have one's sins forgiven him, but to be saved : there
fore, unless St. Paul include a right unto salvation within the
compass of justification, that text might have been spared, as no
thing at all serving for his purpose. Besides, is not salvation as
free, as gracious, as undeserved an act of God, as remission of
sins ? Is it not as much for Christ's sake, that we are saved, as
that our sins are forgiven us ? Thus much for what I suppose is
meant by justification. I will now as briefly and as perspicuously
as I can (without using allegories and metaphorical expressions,
with which this point is ordinarily much obscured) shew you the
combination of these two words, in what sense I suppose St. Paul
may use this proposition, " We are justified by faith, without the
works of the law."
39. In the first place, therefore, I will lay down this conclu
sion, as an infallible, safe foundation, that if we have respect to
the proper, meritorious cause of our justification, we must not
take faith, in that proposition, for any virtue or grace inherent in
us, but only for the proper and principal object thereof, Jesus
Christ and his merits. And the meaning of that proposition must
be, that we are not justified for the merits of any righteousness in
ourselves, whether legal or evangelical, but only for the obedience
and death of our blessed Saviour Jesus Christ. Though this be
most true, yet I suppose, that St. Paul in that proposition had not
a respect to the meritorious cause of our justification ; but to that
formal condition required in us, before we be justified ; as I think
may appear by that which follows.
40. I told you even now, that I would in this point purposely
abstain from using metaphors and figurative allusions ; and the
reason is, because I suppose, and not without reasonable grounds,
that the stating of this point of justification by metaphors, has
made this doctrine, which is set down with greater light and per
spicuity in holy scripture than almost any other, to be a doctrine
of the most scholastical subtilty, the fullest of shadows and clouds
of all the rest. For example, in that fashion and dress of divinity,
as it is now worn, sliced and mangled into theses and distinctions,
we find this point of our justification thus expressed : that faith
is therefore said to justify us, because it is that which makes

The Eighth Sermon. 663
Christ's righteousness ours; it is as it were an instrument or
hand, whereby we receive, lay hold on, and apply Christ unto
ourselves. Here's naught but flowers of rhetoric, figures and
metaphors ; which, though they are capable of a good sense, yet
are very improper to state a controversy withal.
41. But let us examine them a little: we must not, say they,
conceive of faith, as if it were a virtue or grace, or any part of
righteousness inherent in us; for faith, as a grace, has no influ
ence at all in our justification. Mark the coherence of these
things: faith is considered as a hand or an instrument in our
justification, and yet, for all it is a hand, it is nothing in, or of us ;
for it seems hands are not parts of men's bodies. Again, faith
puts on Christ, receives him, lays hold upon him, makes his
righteousness ours, and yet it does nothing for all that. Besides,
how can faith be properly called an instrument of justification?
An instrument is that, which the principal cause, the efficient,
makes use of in his operation. Now justification, in this sense, is
an imminent, internal action of God, in which there is no co
operation of any other agent, nor any real alteration wrought in
man, the object thereof. Does God then use faith as an instru
ment, in producing the act of justification ? No, but it is instru-
mentum passivum, saith one ; that is, a thing never heard of in
nature before ; and the meaning is sure, faith certainly is some
thing, but what a kind of thing we know not. By these means it
comes to pass, that the doctrine of our justification, as some men
have handled it, is become as deep, as unsearchable a mystery, as
that of the Trinity.
42. Without question there is nothing can be more evident to a
man, that shall impartially consider St. Paul's method in his dis
course of justification, than that by faith he intends some opera
tive, working grace in us ; for instance, the apostle proves, that
we christians are to seek for justification the same way that
Abraham attained unto it, namely, by faith ; for, saith the scrip
ture in his quotation, "Abraham believed God, and it was
accounted to him for righteousness." What was that which was
accounted to him ? his believing ; that is, say some, Christ, who
was the object of his belief. This is a forced interpretation cer
tainly, and which a Jew would never have been persuaded to.
But that Christ was not at all intended in that place, it is evident ;
for Abraham's belief there had respect to God's promise made to
him of giving him a son in his old age, and by that son a seed as
innumerable as the stars in heaven, as appears Gen. xv. 4 — 6 ;
whereas the promise of Christ follows three chapters after, to
wit, Gen. xviii. 18. Again, the apostle in many places useth
these words : We are justified by faith in Christ, and by the faith
of Jesus Christ ; which speeches of his will admit of no tolerable
sense, unless by faith he intends some work or obedience per
formed by us. This therefore being taken for granted, that by
faith is meant some condition required at our hands (and yet my
former conclusion of our justification only for the merits of Christ
remaining firm), we will in the next place consider, what kind of

664 The Eighth Sermon.
obedience that of faith is, and in wbat sense it may be said to
justify us.
43. What satisfaction I conceive may be given to this query, I
will set down in this assertion : That since justification, even as it
includes remission of sins, is that promise, to perform which unto
us God has obliged himself in the new covenant ; it must neces
sarily presuppose in the person to be so justified, such an obedience
as the gospel requires ; namely, first, repentance from dead works,
a conversion to a new obedience of those holy, moral commands,
which are ratified in the gospel, and a relying upon Christ as the
only meritorious cause of our justification and salvation, by a
particular, evangelical faith. All this, I say, is prerequired in the
person who is made capable of justification, either in the exercise,
or at least in praparatione cordis, in a full resolution of the heart,
and entire disposition of the mind : so that, though God be the sole,
proper, efficient cause ; and Christ, as mediator, the sole, proper me
ritorious cause of our justification ; yet these inherent dispositions
are exacted on our part as causa sinequibus non, as necessary con
ditions, to be found in us, before God will perform this great work
freely and graciously towards us, and only for the merits of Christ.
44. Reas. 1. This assertion may, I suppose, be demonstrated,
first, from the nature of a covenant : for unless there be pre-requi-
red conditions on man's part to be performed, before God will pro
portion his reward, the very nature of a covenant is destroyed.
And it will not boot to answer, that though there be no qualifica
tions required in a man, before he obtain remission of sins, yet they
are to be found in us before we be made capable of salvation. —
ii?o7. 1. For, as I have shewn before, salvation is as properly a
gracious act of mercy, as free and undeserved a gift, as truly be
stowed on us only for the merits of Christ, as remission of sins ; and
therefore may as well consist without any change in us, as the for
mer. 2. And, secondly, if that proposition of St. Paul, " We are
justified by faith, without the works of the law," exclude all con
ditions to be performed by man ; if it exclude not only the right
eousness of the law (which indeed it doth) but the obedience of
faith, or the gospel likewise, from being necessary dispositions in us,
before we receive remission of sins ; then another saying of his,
parallel to this, will exclude as well the necessity of an evangelical
obedience to our salvation : for, saith St. Paul, (Eph. ii. 8,) " By
grace are ye saved through faith, and that not of yourselves, it is
the gift of God : not of works, lest any man should boast." But I
hope no man will be so unchristianlike, as to exclude the necessity
of our good works to salvation, for all this saying of St. Paul ; there
fore they may as well be prerequired to remission of sins, notwith
standing the former place.
45. Reas. 2. Secondly, if there be no necessity of any predis
position in us before remission of sins, then a man may have his
sins forgiven him, and so become a person accepted of God,
whilst he is a person unregenerate, unsanctified ; whilst he is
(Ephes. ii. 1,) dead in trespasses and sins; whilst he walks accord
ing to the course of this world, according to the prince of the

The Eighth Sermon. 665
power of the air, the spirit that worketh in the children of dis
obedience ; whilst he has his conversation in the lusts of the flesh,
fulfilling the desires of the flesh, and of the mind ; being, notwith
standing his justification, a child of wrath as much as the profanest
heathen, though the veriest reprobate in the world ; lastly, though
he be no child of Abraham, according to faith, that is, not having
in him that faith which was imputed to Abraham for righteousness.
Now whether this divinity be consonant to God's word, let your own
consciences be judges.
46. Reas. 3. A third argument to prove the truth of the for
mer assertion, shall be taken from several texts of scripture, where
justification, even as it is taken for remission of sins, is ascribed
to other virtues besides faith, whether it be taken for a particular
virtue, or for the object thereof. For example, our Saviour saith
expressly, (Matt. xii. 37,) " By thy words thou shalt be justified,
and by thy words thou shalt be condemned :" where we see jus
tification is taken in that proper sense, in which we maintain it
against the papists. Again, (Matt. vi. 14, 15,) " If you forgive
men their trespasses, your heavenly Father will also forgive you ;
but if you forgive not men their trespasses, neither will your
Father forgive your trespasses." Again, our Saviour speaking
concerning Mary, saith, (Luke vii. 47,) Her sins are forgiven her,
because she loveth much. If the time, or your patience, could
suffer me, I might add a fourth reason to prove my former asser
tion, which is the clearness and evidence of agreement and recon
ciliation between St. Paul and St. James in this point, upon these
grounds, without any new-invented justification before men ; which
is a conceit taken up by some men, only to shift off an adversary's
argument, which otherwise would press them too hard, they think:
for St. Paul's faith, taken for the obedience of the gospel, would
easily accord with St. James's (James i. 27,) " holy and undefiled
religion before God," or works, which is all one ; and St. James
would be St. Paul's expositor, without any injury or detraction at
all from the merits of Christ or God's free and undeserved mercy to
us in him. But I must hasten.
47. The full meaning, then, of St. Paul's proposition, " we are
justified by faith, and not by the works of the law ;" and, by con
sequence, the state of the whole controversy of justification, in
brief, may be this: that if we consider the efficient cause of our
justification, it is only God which justifies ; if that, for which we
are justified, that is, the meritorious cause thereof, it is not for any
thing in ourselves, but only for the obedience and satisfaction of
our blessed Saviour, that God will justify us : but if we have re
spect to what kind of conditions are to be found in us, before
Christ will suffer us to be made partakers of the benefit of his
merits, then we must say, that we are not justified by such a
righteousness, so perfect, absolute, and complete, as the law of
works does require ; but by the righteousness of the gospel, by a
righteousness proportionable to that grace which God is pleased
to bestow on us; not by the perfection, but the sincerity, of our
obedience to the new covenant. And the apostle's main argument

666 The Eighth Sermon.
will serve to prove this to any understanding most undeniably.
St. Paul has demonstrated, that if we consider the rigour of the
law, all men, both Jews and gentiles, are concluded under sin, and
most necessarily obnoxious to God's wrath. Which reason of his
would not be at all prevailing, unless, by works of the law, he in
tended only such a perfect obedience as the law requires ; which,
by reason of man's weakness, is become impossible unto him. For
it might easily be replied upon him thus : we confess no man can
fulfil the law ; but the conditions of the gospel are not only possible,
but, by the assistance of God's Spirit, easy to be performed ; so that
though, for this reason, the former righteousness be excluded from
our justification, not only quoad meritum, but also, quoad prasen-
tiam; yet the latter evangelical righteousness is excluded from our
justification, only quoad meritum.
48. Obj. But I perceive an objection ready to assault me ; and
I will impartially assist the force and strength thereof against
myself, with all the advantage I can. It is to this purpose : when
men are disputing in the schools, or discoursing in the pulpit, they
may state this question as they please ; but the fittest time to decide
this point is, when, in a serious contemplation, we present before
our eyes Almighty God, the righteous, impartial judge of heaven
and earth, sitting in his throne, ready to execute judgment, and our
selves arraigned at the bar before him, expecting a final, irreversi
ble sentence. In these circumstances, I would fain see the stoutest-
hearted man alive, that should dare to say unto Almighty God, thou
hast given me a law, which my conscience witnesseth unto me
that I have performed. Therefore I now challenge thee upon
thy truth and faithfulness, that thou perform thy conditions also
with me, and give me remission of my former sins, as a reward of
my obedience.
49. Sol. For answer to this objection : this is confessed by all
christians of all religions, that a profane person, or a hypocrite,
dying in such an estate, shall neither in the last day be acquitted
of his sins, nor saved : therefore, unless a man's heart can witness
unto him, that he hath unfeignedly kept God's commandment,
" God, who is greater than his heart, and knoweth all things,"*
will assuredly condemn him : but then we must know that it is
not a christian's plea, to rely upon his own, though sincere, unhy-
pocritical righteousness, and therefore to challenge heaven. But,
as our Saviour adviseth us,f we, when we have done all we can,
must say, we are unprofitable servants : and not say so in a com
pliment only, but in the truth and sincerity of our hearts. It
is the perfection of evangelical righteousness, to deny our own
righteousness, to disclaim all meritorious efficacy thereof, either
in remission of sins, or salvation. Therefore he that, after he hath
performed God's commandment, shall think to challenge the
reward, as of a debt, or as promised only to his own holiness,
wants the proper, peculiar righteousness of a christian, who must
say, in holy Job's words.J " though I were righteous, yet would I
not answer God, but I would make supplication to my Judge :" I
* 1 John iii. 20. t Luke xvii. 10. X Job ix. 15.

The Eighth Sermon. 667
would say unto him, Lord, look not upon that holiness which is in
me, which yet is not mine neither, for thou wroughtest it in me ;
but look on him, in whom only thou art well pleased : accept of
me in him, and for his sake only, who hath fulfilled all righteous
ness for me; who, through the eternal Spirit, hath offered himself
without spot unto thee, being made sin and a curse for me, that
I might be made the righteousness of God in him. To him only be
glory for ever and ever. The sum of all which I have said, is con
tained, Tit. ii. 11, 14, " The grace of God, which bringeth," &c.
And so I come to the second general, namely, the promise which
God will make good unto us, who sincerely obey him, contained in
these words, " we wait for the hope," &c.
50. Which general I divided into two particulars: 1. The na
ture of the reward promised, which I told you was justification,
containing remission of sins and everlasting life. 2. The interest,
which, during this life, we ordinarily have in that reward, namely
hope, expressed in these words : " we wait for the hope of righ
teousness ;" that is, by hope we expect the reward of righteous
ness. I cannot now enlarge myself in the former particular : some
thing I have already been forced to say of 'it, which must suffice.
I will in few words consider the second particular, namely, the
interest which we have in the promises, which is hope : " we
wait for," &c.
51. I know nothing more effectual to persuade me to search
for, and embrace, divine truth with singleness of heart, and with
out respect of persons, than to consider, that there are no opinions
so unreasonable, so directly contradictory to one another, but the
spirit of contradiction and partiality will make a man easily to
swallow and digest them: as, for example, whereas the papists
most presumptuously maintain, that it is in a man's power, by the
ordinary assistance of grace, so exactly to perform all God's com
mandments, that he shall have no need to say, " Lord, forgive us
our trespasses :" some of their adversaries strive so much to avoid
this assertion on the contrary extreme, that they will not allow
even the best and most holy actions of the most regenerate man
to be such as God requires at our hands : they will not only have
them to be imperfect, but sinful, nay, if strictly examined, sins.
And yet, for all this, they who put it in a man's power to fulfil all
God's commandments, will not suffer any man to have any cer
tainty of their salvation : on the contrary, the others, though they
make a man's best actions to be sins, yet require at his hands an
infallible divine faith of his salvation, not only as an attendant,
but as the very nature and essence of that faith, whereby he shall
be justified.
52. It may be possible, that one of these parties might light
upon the truth, if either of them would be willing to change one
of his opinions with his adversary : but as they have been pleased
to yoke such jarring positions together, I am confidently per
suaded, that both of them have missed of the truth, and left it in
the middle to any third person that will be willing to stand neuter
in a mean betwixt them both. I will not now examine how far

668 The Eighth Sermon.
each side have outrun the truth contrary ways ; only, as I am re
quired by that part of my text which remains, I will lay down two
assertions participating, in some measure, of both opinions ; the first
whereof is this (which I have already touched) : that no man can
justly and reasonably expect or hope for the reward of righteous
ness, but he whose heart and conscience can unfeignedly witness
unto him, that he hath, though not exactly, yet sincerely, and with
out hypocrisy, performed the conditions of the new covenant. The
second, that the interest which such a person ordinarily hath in the
promises, is only hope.
53. Assert. 1. Now concerning the first assertion, namely, that
no man can justly, &c. I would not now be mistaken, as if I said,
that before a man can hope for salvation, he must perform God's
commandments exactly, but only according to the equity of the
gospel; according to that famous saying of St. Augustine, Retractat.
1. i. c. 19, Omnia mandata facta deputantur,quando quicquid non
fit, ignoscitur. Now, that a man may keep God's commandments,
as far as the equity of the gospel expects from him, may, I think,
be thus demonstrated : there is no man that hears me this day, I
am persuaded, but he does often seriously desire of God, that he
would give him the grace to do his will: now all prayer, if it be
right, is to be performed in faith, i. e. with a full persuasion, not
only that it is lawful and warrantable for him to desire that which
he prays for, but also with as full a persuasion, that Almighty
God is not only able, but ready and willing also to grant him his
petitions ; otherwise, it is not only a vain, but a sinful prayer ; it
is a tempting of God, as if we should desire him to do that, which
we know is impossible. Besides, can we think, that God would
command us (and withal add a promise of hearing and granting
our petitions), would he, I say, command us to pray for that,
which we are assured of beforehand cannot, and must not, be
granted? Therefore certainly, some christians have been heard
in these petitions ; some men have been found, who have fulfilled
the righteousness of the gospel.
54. Now till thou hast done this, which thou seest by the as
sistance of God's Spirit (which will never be wanting to them
which desire it) it is possible for thee to do ; nay, I will add further,
it is easy for thee to do (doth not Christ say as much ? " My
yoke is easy, and my burden is light") ; I say, till thou hast done
this, thou canst have no reason in the world to hope for God's
mercy. For, tell me, why dost thou hope, thou that continuest
still in an unrepentant estate, in an habitual opposition to God's
holy commandments? Art thou resolved to hope, because thou
hast a mind to it, upon no ground, when thou oughtest rather to
fear, almost to despair ? or rather, canst thou persuade thyself in
earnest, that this is indeed a hope ? Is it not a fancy of thine own
brain, or rather a temptation of the devil ? Hope, which is hope
indeed, (which is not a fancy and chimera) makes not ashamed,
saith St. Paul :* a man may with confidence, without confusion of
face, profess and maintain it. But such a hope as this is, which
* Rom. v. 5,

The Eighth Sermon. 669
is not a hope in earnest, how it will disgrace a man, and put him
out of countenance, when God shall ask him why he did offer to
hope? 55. Let thy conscience now answer me, whosoever thou art, in
such a state. Thou that knowest how often God hath said, nay,
sworn in his wrath, that none of those, which continue disobe
dient, shall enter into his rest ! That none shall be partakers of
the second resurrection unto glory, but those that have been par
takers of the first unto grace. Canst thou for all this imagine,
that God has such a peculiar, particular affection and respect to
thee, who art yet a slave of the devil's, that he will be content to
strain his truth and veracity, to break his oath for thy company ?
Shall the whole scripture, which promises glory to none but those
who perform the conditions prescribed, for thy sake be turned
into a romance, into a melancholy tale to fright children withal ?
No, no, assure thyself, it is not a conceit of election, which will
save thee; thou must work, and work hard, in fear and trem
bling, before God will raise in thee the good spirit of christian
hope. 56. For to say the truth, of all divine graces, hope is incom
parably the hardest to attain unto : and the reason is evident, be
cause it presupposes the possession of all other graces before it.
And yet, for all this, nothing counted so easy, now-a-days, as
hope, though men both are and resolve to be never so wicked :
nay, and it is well if hope will serve their turn, they must have
an infallible assurance, a divine faith of everlasting glory ; and
no manner of sins, though ever so heinous, ever so oft committed,
shall be able to weaken this their assurance, that they are resolved
of. This they think is a spell strong enough for the devil in all
assails ; when, God knows, the devil is more joyed and comforted,
to see them so vainly delude themselves, than they themselves
possibly can be. This for my first assertion: now follows the
second. 57. Assert. 2. When I say, that the interest, which a christian
ordinarily has in the promises of God, is hope; I mean, it is not
absolute and irrespective, but depending upon conditions, namely,
grace and perseverance therein. And this I took for granted, for
I never heard of any yet, that denied perseverance to be necessary
to salvation. If then his interest be by hope, then it is not yet
by faith, properly so called ; for it is not possible, that the same
object (considered with the same circumstances at the same time)
should be the object both of faith and hope. For example, I be
lieve by a divine faith, i. e. a faith grounded upon God's word,
that there shall be a resurrection of the flesh, even of this flesh of
mine, and I believe it firmly, because God hath said that he will
bring it to pass; neither is there any condition of mine pre-re-
quired to the performance of this promise of God ; for howsoever
1 behave myself here in this world, whether well or ill, it matters
not, my behaviour cannot make God alter his resolution. Now,
if I assuredly believe this, it would be improper and absurd for
me to say, I hope there will be a resurrection of my body ; for

670 The Eighth Sermon.
when I say, I hope any thing, I imply a possibility, in nature, that
such a thing may not be, which in this case I cannot do without in
fidelity. 58. But, on the other side, I hope that God will raise this flesh
of mine unto glory, and I hope this upon safe grounds : therefore,
if it be true that I hope it, I cannot properly be said to believe it,
because my salvation yet depends upon conditions, namely, per
severance. Therefore, let me propose this one question to any
man's conscience : Hast thou such an assurance* of salvation given
thee of God, that hope is quite evacuated in thee ? Is there no
such virtue left in thee as hope ? Surely God hath dealt extraor
dinarily mercifully with thee ; thou art many degrees gone beyond
the state of those believers which St. Paul speaks of, and includes
himself in the number, when he saith, " We live by hope ;" for
thou dost not live by hope, thou art exalted above it. Notwith
standing, I beseech you, consider well upon the matter (for it
concerns you very much) ; be not too hasty to credit fancies, when
conceits of assurance or impeccability shall be suggested to your
minds. There may be great danger of confidence ungrounded ;
a confidence only taken upon trust from other men's words or
opinions. 59. Do I go about now (think you) to bereave you, or cozen
you of any spiritual comfort in this life ? Do I envy any of you
your assurance? Alas! why should I deal so with you? For I
was never injured by you ; or, if I were, surely, of all places, I
would not make choice of this to execute my revenge in : or, if I
thought that such assurance were ordinarily to be had, at least
necessary to the making up of a justifying faith (and have you
never heard it said so ?) would I not, think you, strive and endea
vour to obtain it at any rate, even with the loss of all worldly
comforts? Yes, certainly, I would count them all but as dross
and dung in comparison of it. But I confess unto you, I am yet
contented with enjoying heaven by hope : and I bless Almighty
God, that he hath dealt so graciously with me, that I should dare
to hope for it, and not be ashamed and confounded by my hope :
and if there be any amongst you, that will vouchsafe to content
himself with such a neglected degree of comfort, with only hope,
and no more, I will not enter into comparison with those that are
perfect ; but I dare promise him, that all those troublesome plea
sures, which do so ravish the men of this world, shall be as no
thing; yea, as afflictions .and torments, in comparison of those
spiritual, heavenly joys, which hope, well and legally achieved,
will be able to afford us : no dangers will there be of terrors or
jealousies, as if God would happen to grow weary, or repent him
self of any grace or blessing which he hath bestowed upon us.
60. For, tell me ; do you think that Adam, while he continued
in his innocency, had any grudgings of suspicions or fears ? Was
he not, during that time, in as great a quiet and serenity of mind,
as any of us dare hope for? And yet the most that he could do
then, was to hope that he might continue in that state even to the
end : the event shows, he could not have an infallible faith of his

The Ninth Sermon. 671
perseverance. If then such a contented, settled mind could ac
company Adam in paradise, even when he knew it was in his
power, with but reaching out his hand, and tasting an apple ; yea,
With a sudden, wicked word, or an unsanctified thought, utterly
and irrecoverably to degrade himself from that happy estate ;
surely, we christians have much more reason to rejoice in our
hope, since we know assuredly, that as God has been so gracious
to begin this good work in us, so he will not be wanting to perfect
it even to the end, if we will but perform our parts, which he has
already given us more than sufficient grace to do, and will never
fail to supply us with more, for the asking ; nay, more, (which are
surer grounds to build upon, than ever Adam had) since we know,
that not one, nor ten, nor a hundred sins, shall be able, so irrepara
bly to cast us out of God's favour, but that he will be willing, upon
our repentance, especially calling to mind his old mercies, to restore
us again to our lost happiness.
61. Neither are we utterly excluded from all assurance ; for
there is a irXygoliogiu tSjj iXiriSos, " A full assurance of hope," saith
St. Paul : (Heb. vi. 11:) " This hope we have as a sure anchor of,
the soul," fastened on a rock, ibid. 19. The rock cannot fail us,
the anchor will not ; all the danger is in the cable or chain of spi
ritual graces, whereby we are fastened to this rock : if this chain
but hold, no tempests, no winds, no floods can endanger us. And
part of our hope respects this chain ; for God has promised his will
ingness and readiness to strengthen it every day more and more,
till our state shall be so changed, that there shall be no such things
as tempests known, no tossings of waves, no tumults of winds, nor
fear of leaking or decay in the vessel, but all calmness and security.
And, for the attaining to this happy, unchangeable estate, where
is it that we place our hope ? truly our hope is even in thee, O God,
who, if thou shalt think it convenient or necessary for us, will en
large this our hope into confidence, and add unto that assurance,
and swallow up all in possession : and that not for any merits of
ours, but only for thy free undeserved mercies in our blessed Sa
viour Jesus Christ, in whom alone thou art well pleased : to whom,
with thee, 0 Father, and the blessed Spirit, be ascribed by us, and
thy whole church, the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for
ever and ever. Amen.

SERMON IX.
" God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that
ye are able." — 1 Cor. x. 13.
Whatever punishments befell the disobedient Israelites, who
murmured, and tempted God in the wilderness, " they all hap
pened unto them (saith St. Paul) for ensamples unto us, and are
written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are
come."* This privilege we may have beyond our forefathers, that
* 1 Cor. x. 6,11.

672 The Ninth Sermon.
we may present before our eyes a larger series and history of
God's providence, even since the foundation of the world ; we
may take a view and prospect of his constant, unaltered course of
revenging himself upon sin, in whatsoever persons he finds it ;
and we ought from thence to collect, that whatsoever immunities
and privileges we may conceive to ourselves, whatsoever comfort
able errors we may take up upon trust, yet that God will not (for
our sakes) begin a new frame of polity in the administration of
the world ; but that we also, unless we break off our sins by re
pentance and conversion unto God, we, I say, after the example of
these murmuring Israelites ; as those eighteen, upon whom the
tower of Siloe fell ; as those Galileans, whose blood Pilate mingled
with their sacrifices ; that we also, unless we repent, " shall all
likewise perish." Nay, certainly we (upon whom the ends of the
world are come) shall be much more culpable, our punishment and
stripes shall be more in number, and weightier, if we (notwithstand
ing that larger experience which we may have of God's impartial
dealing with sinners) shall yet promise to ourselves impunity; if
we shall say, " we shall have peace, though we walk in the ima
ginations of our hearts."
2. The same collection we may proportionably make, to our
own benefit and advantage', from God's gracious dealing and beha
viour to any of his beloved faithful servants ; we may appropriate
to ourselves all those blessings and promises, which have been af
forded unto them, if our consciences can assure us, that we do
obey God's commandments in the truth and sincerity of our hearts.
Now, for warrant to this kind of collection, instead of several ex
amples in holy scripture, I will only make use of one taken out
of (I think) this our apostle, where he saith, "Let your conver
sation be without covetousness, and be content with such things
as you have ; for God hath said, I will never leave thee, nor for
sake thee."* Which words by him quoted, as the margins of our
Bibles will direct us, are to be found, Josh. i. 5 ; and, though they
be a particular promise, which God immediately made to Joshua,
thereby to encourage him after the death of Moses, to take upon
him the conducting of the Jews into the land of promise, assuring
unto him a continuation of his extraordinary assistance in the enter
prise ; yet, notwithstanding, St. Paul, we see (as if God had pro
claimed this promise to the whole world) applies these words to all
the faithful among the Hebrews, and by the same proportion to all
christians likewise.
3. Upon which grounds I may as reasonably direct the words
of this verse, out of which my text is taken, to you that now hear
me, as the apostle does to the Corinthians, and say, " there hath
no temptation taken you, but such as is common to man :" for
certainly we will not imagine, that the church or city of Corinth
had any such extraordinary immunity or charter granted them,
whereby they should be exempted from the danger of temptations
above all the christian world besides. Therefore let your me
mories recollect and examine the time past of your lives, and tell
* Heb. xiii. 5.

The Ninth Sermon. 673
me, Did there ever any temptation take hold of you, or assault
you, so powerful and irresistible, that there was no way left for
you but to be overcome by it? Take temptation now in what
sense you please, either for a misfortune and affliction, or else for
a suggestion to sin : was there ever any calamity, any loss, any
pain, any sickness, so violent and impetuous, but that still you
might perceive yourselves notwithstanding (though perhaps in
your outward man unequally matched by it) yet in your spirits
and minds strong enough to conquer the malice thereof, and to
convert it into wholesome physic ? Again, was there ever any
sinful temptation so strongly urged upon you, but that you might,
by the assistance of that grace, which God had already given you,
or at the least, for the asking, would have superadded, you might
easily have dulled and diverted the force thereof? Did not your
consciences, even after you were overcome by such a temptation,
tell you, that it was mere voluntary cowardice in you, to suffer
yourselves to be overcome by it ? that you willingly surrendered,
and betrayed those forces, which already God hath given you ?
4. Now, though I am persuaded this to be so evidently true,
that there is scarce any one here, but his conscience will assure
him as much ; yet, for all this, we must not begin hereupon to
fancy in our minds any extraordinary worth or dignity in our
selves, as though by our own power or holiness we could work
such wonders. No, alas ! nothing less : for take away the assist
ance and guard of our auxiliary forces, God's free and undeserved
graces within us, and his divine assistances, together with the
guard of his blessed angels without us, and there is no temptation
so weak and despicable, which we should not suddenly yield unto ;
nay, we should need no outward tempters to help us to sin, our
own wicked hearts would save the devil that labour ; for nothing
is there so vile and abominable, whereunto, without God's restrain
ing grace, we should not readily and impetuously hasten.
5. Therefore, let us neither defraud God nor ourselves of their
dues ; but as we have spoken of the time past, so likewise of that
which follows; if hereafter we shall overcome any temptation (as
certainly by God's help, if we have but a mind to it, we may) let
us bless Almighty God for assisting us so far, let us give the glory
and trophies of the conquest to him : but, on the contrary side, if
we shall neglect to make use and advantage of those many helps
against sin, which Almighty God is ready to supply unto us ; if,
notwithstanding those many promises of assistance so frequently
set down in holy scripture ; if, notwithstanding those many secret
whisperings and inspirations of his holy Spirit in our souls; if,
notwithstanding God's voice, which (as every day's experience
can witness unto us) continually calls upon us, saying, " This is
the right way, walk in it, and ye shall find rest to your souls ;"
we will yet continue to extinguish those good motions, to deafen
and drown God's voice, and be ready to hearken unto and obey
our own filthy lusts and vile affections ; let us lay the fault where
it is due, even upon our own deceitful, wicked hearts ; or other
wise the time will come, when in hell we shall be evidently con-
vv

674 The Ninth Sermon.
vinced thereof, when the worm of conscience, which never dieth,
shall continually torment and gnaw us. Let God be true and
faithful in his promises, and every man a liar. For, as hitherto
God has been so merciful to you, to preserve you, that no temp
tation should take " you, but such as is common to man ;" so
likewise, for the time following, though perhaps greater trials
may befall you than hitherto you have had experience of; yet of
this you may be confident, that however they may seem grievous,
yet the same God continues faithful and righteous to fulfil his
promises: "He will never suffer you to be tempted above that
you are able.'.'
6. Temptation is a thing of its own nature indifferent, and is
rendered good or evil, from the end and intention of the tempter
especially : it is nothing else but making a trial or experiment.
If good, an assay, whether that good, which seems to be in a
subject, be true and firmly grounded or no (so God may be said
to tempt, as he did Abraham, &c. And this he performs not to
satisfy fiis curiosity, but merely out of a good inclination to the
party ; both hereby to confirm his graces in him, and to reward
them with a greater measure of glory). If evil, temptation is an
assay, whether that good, which seems to be in a man, may not
by some means or other be extinguished, and so the person de
stroyed: so the devil is most properly called the tempter. And
of this nature are the temptations of my text. Now 'these we
find in holy scripture to be twofold : for either they are apt to
draw us from good by way of discouragement (so all manner of
afflictions, misfortunes, persecutions, &c. are called temptations,
because by these a man is inclinable to be frighted from, or at
least discountenanced in, a holy conversation) : or else they allure
us by way of invitation or solicitation to evil : so wicked pleasing
suggestions are said to be temptations, because these are fit to
palliate the unloveliness and deformity of sin, and thereby to
make it desirable unto us. It would be but loss of time to heap
together examples of holy scripture to make good this distinction,
since it is an argument which you daily meet withal discoursed
of in sermons.
7. But, I confess, I find it something difficult to determine,
whether of these two senses, with exclusion of the other, be in
tended by St. Paul in my text: whether, when he says, "God
will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able," his
meaning should be, God by his wisdom and providence will so
contrive businesses for you, that though you are not likely to live in
a continual, uninterrupted course of happiness and security, but
that sometimes you shall dash your foot against a stone, you shall
be disquieted and molested with afflictions of several natures;
notwithstanding, this you may be confident of, that let what mis
fortunes will come, how grievous and even insupportable soever it
may seem unto you, it shall never be so violent and outrageous,
but that God will provide a way for you to escape from it, there
will be a door left open for you to avoid the furiousness and im-
petuousness of it : either God will arm you with patience to bear

Tlie Ninth Sermon. 675
it, and then the comfort, which your souls may feel in the con
sideration of what glorious rewards are promised unto your
patience, shall make your afflictions even matters of rejoicing
unto you; in which respect (as St. James saith) you ought to
" count it all joy, when you fall into divers temptations ;" or, if
those temptations and afflictions reach so far as the destroying of
your lives, yet, notwithstanding all this, they are so unable to
make you miserable, unless you will take part with them against
your own souls, by repining and murmuring under the mighty
hand of God, that when you shall consider that blessed change,
which death shall bring unto you, when all tears shall be wiped
from your eyes, all fear and expectation of misery removed, no
thing but inexpressible and everlasting joys to be expected, you
shall bless the time that ever you were afflicted, and with St.
Paul confess, that the afflictions of this life are not wortlw of that
joy which shall be revealed. This, I say, is a good catholic,
orthodox sense, and which, it is very probable, that St. Paul might
more directly intend in these words of my text.
8. Notwithstanding, I cannot exclude the other sense of the
word temptation from this text ; for, according to the analogy of
faith, and without any wrong done to the dependence and con
nexion of these words, " God will not suffer you to be tempted,"
&c, St. Paul's intent in them might be such, as if it had been thus
spread out more at large : though considering the many disadvan
tages we have in the way of godliness, in respect both of our
powerful, malicious, industrious, and subtle enemy the devil, who
continually waits upon us to entrap us ; in respect of our seeming
flattering friend, the world and vanities thereof, alluring us; but
especially in respect of our own wicked and deceitful hearts, for
ward and desirous enough to embrace the wicked suggestions and
temptations of both, nay, sufficient to destroy us without the
assistance of either ; I say, that though (these things considered)
we may seem to be set, in the expression of the Holy Ghost,
"upon slippery places," where it is almost impossible for us to
keep our footing, and to preserve ourselves from falling danger
ously, and dashing ourselves in pieces :
9. Notwithstanding, if our eyes were opened, as were the eyes
of the prophet Elisha's servant, we should find, as well as he, that
they that be with us, are more than they that be against us: for
God and his holy angels, who are on our side, are both wiser and
stronger than the devil, and more willing to do us good, than the
other can be to hurt us. Besides, the expectations of those glo
rious rewards, which are laid up in heaven for us, are sufficient
even to any reasonable man, to disrelish unto him the vain,
unsatisfying pleasures of this world. And though our own hearts
naturally be never so traitorous and unfaithful, yet by the power
of that grace, which is plentifully showered down upon every one
of us in our baptism, and which is daily increased and supplied
unto us, they may easily be corrected and renewed. So that if
the suggestion of any wicked temptation get the mastery over us,
let us not impute too much to the valour and strength of our
uu2

676 The Ninth Sermon.
enemies ; let us not accuse God of any unwillingness to succour
us; for never any temptation hath or ever shall happen unto us,
but such as is dvfyuirivos, suitable unto the nature of man ; such as
a reasonable, considerate, and a circumspect man, by the ordinary
assistance of God's grace, and careful application of those means,
wherewith we are abundantly furnished out of holy scripture, as
prayer, watchfulness, fasting, and the like, may easily conquer and
subdue. 10. This sense of these words may with as good reason and pro
bability be supposed to be intended by St. Paul in this place, as
the former. And, indeed, unless we enlarge St. Paul's words to
this meaning, also, we shall receive no extraordinary comfort and
encouragement from them: for though indeed it is true, that it
is more than we can deserve at God's hands, to obtain a promise
from him, to secure us, that no temptations, no outward afflictions
of this world, shall be so violent and furious upon us, as to exceed
the strength of reason and grace to withstand them ; yet since sin
is that only enemy, which is able to withdraw God's favour from
us, and make him our enemy ; unless we can be put in some hope,
that there is a possible course for us to prevail against sin also,
and all the dangerous temptations and suggestions thereof, we
should live but an uncomfortable, discontented life ; we should be
continually affrighted with sad, melancholic thoughts, with dis
quieting jealousies and fears, that however we may now and then
please ourselves with conceits of God's favour for the present, yet
since he has passed no promise of securing us for the future, it
may happen, that such a sinful temptation may come upon us,
which may be able, do what we can, to overwhelm us irrecover
ably. Therefore since this latter sense (which I mentioned of
these words) is more profitable and advantageous to us, I will
especially at this time insist upon it, and labour to demonstrate
undeniably to every one of us, that " God is faithful," and will
assuredly make good that promise which he hath made unto us
all, namely, not to suffer us to be tempted, that is, by any sinful
temptation, " above that we are able."
11. Now he is said to be tempted above that he is able, who,
do what he can, though he strain his natural endowments to the
uttermost, and though he endeavour heartily to make use of all
the outward helps and assistances which he finds prescribed unto
him out of God's word ; though he extend that measure of grace,
wherewith he is furnished, to the extremest activity thereof, to
resist such a temptation : yet in the end is forced to yield to the
power of it, utterly fainting and languishing in the combat. So,
on the contrary, that man, who being completely furnished with
all requisite weapons, both for his own defence and encountering
his adversary ; and, besides, having in him both ability of body,
and courage enough, and yet out of a sleepy negligence, or obsti
nate sullenness, will not take the pains to lift up his arm, or other
wise bestir himself to oppose his enemy ; such a man, if over
come, can in no reason be said to be overmatched, but is a mere
traitor to his own safety and reputation.

The Ninth Sermon. 677
12. And, indeed, before I can proceed any farther, I must
either take this for granted, that some men, though (de facto) they
have been overcome by a temptation, yet might have resisted it
by the assistances of that grace wherewith they were enabled ;
or truly I know not what to say. For if this be a good inference,
a man is overcome by a temptation, therefore he could not possibly
have resisted; Adam, for all he was seduced by the devil, is not
so culpable as I took him to be. How can I charge such a man
for not doing his duty ? how can I convince his conscience, that it
was his own fault and negligence, that he did not that, which he
ought and might have done? Is there no man then to be found,
that could possibly have done no more good than actually he has
done ? Does every man improve that talent of grace, which God
has given him, to the uttermost of his power and skill ? or will
any of you, when you confess your sins unto Almighty God, tell
him to this purpose: Lord, I confess, I do daily fall into many
and grievous sins ; but, since they are gone and past, I perceive
there was no remedy for it; it could not be avoided; those sins
must needs have been practised by me ; I did whatsoever I was
enabled to do ; if I had had more strength, I had done better ;
when thou bestowest on me more talents of grace, I shall be a
more profitable servant, and yield thee a greater interest and
advantage by them? If any of you entertain such conceits as
these, I confess you are a great deal more righteous than I thought
you had been.
13. For mine own part, I confess with grief, and shame, and
self-condemnation, that I have offended Almighty God in many
respects, when I might have done otherwise. I have not only hid
my talent in a napkin ; I have not only not improved that stock
of grace which God gave me ; but, on the contrary, notwithstand
ing that, I have been very laborious and abounding in the unfruit
ful works of darkness. I have wilfully grieved the Holy Spirit of
God, and many times quenched his good motions in me. Yea, so
voluntarily and resolvedly have I done all these sins, that I am per
suaded, 1 could easily have chose, whether I would have commit
ted them or no: no necessity at all lay upon me, to compel me there
unto ; God was faithful and righteous in his promises and dealings
with me, and my own wicked heart deceived me. And I think all
of you have been guilty in some measure of betraying and surren
dering the abilities which God has bestowed on you, though I dare
not charge you so deeply as myself.
14. Now that we have heard, who may be said to be able to
resist a temptation, or not ; for my more distinct proceeding in
the confirmation of St. Paul's proposition in my text, I will take
our Saviour's counsel, I will sit down and examine, whether he
that hath but ten thousand, be able to meet him which cometh
against him with twenty thousand. Here are two enemies' camps,
and no doubt great forces on both sides ; but, without question,
disproportionable : it concerns me therefore now, by taking a
survey and muster of each, to demonstrate, that in all respects
the advantage lies on our side. I mentioned before, briefly, that

678 The Ninth Sermon.
we had three especial enemies to deal with; the devil, the world,
and the flesh. We will proceed in this order against them, in the
first place examining the devil's power, and the forces we have to
oppose against him.
15. There are many terrible names, I confess, by which the
devil is described in holy writ: he is called Abaddon, and
'AiroXXiJCdv, the destroyer, as one, whose employment it were to
counter-work against God, who calls himself " the Saviour and
preserver of all men." He is called " a ramping and a roaring
lion, that runs about seeking whom he may devour." He is
called* " the great dragon, the old serpent, the devil, and Satan,
which deceiveth the whole world :" all this in one verse. He is
called " the red fiery dragon." There are extant a great many
more hideous pictures of him in God's word ; but these will serve
our turn sufficiently, to show how dangerous an enemy we have,
and therefore how great ought to be our resolution and wisdom
in encountering with him. And, lest we should think, since he is
named in the forecited places in the singular number, that there
fore there is but one lion, and but one fiery dragon to deal with
all mankind, and thereupon begin to be a little more secure ;
since we should have hard fortune, if it should light upon us to be
singled out- by him, out of so infinite a crowd as the world is;
God knows, it is so far from that, that there is an unutterable
number of them, such an infinite, vast army, that one whole
legion (which are near about four thousand) were at leisure to
possess one man : and St. Paul tells us f" we wrestle not against
flesh and blood ;" as if he should say, these worldly enemies are so
weak and despicable, in comparison of those we are to meet withal,
that they are not to be reckoned of : but, says he, " we wrestle
against principalities and powers, (there are, it seems, many princi
palities and powers) against the rulers of the darkness of this world,
against spiritual wickednesses in high places :" the word is, " in
heavenly places."
16. Now what have we to oppose against such an innumerable
multitude of spirits, whereof each particular, for his excessive
strength, is called a " lion ;" for his fierceness, a " dragon ;" for
his poisonous malice, a " red dragon ;" for the extreme intenseness
of that poisonous malice, a " red fiery dragon ;" and for his wisdom
and cunning to make use of this strength, fierceness, and malice,
he is called " the old serpent ;" one that has been a serpent con
tinually spitting out his poison against us, within very few days
since any creature was : and therefore, if at the first, by his own
natural wit, he was able, upon even terms, to overcome Adam,
then innocent, and therefore not apt to betray himself, as we are,
what may we conceive of him now after above five thousand years'
experience ? I say, what shall we, who are ready to fall into a
swoon, if we see but an apparition of one of them, though he do us
no harm ; how are we likely, think you, to behave ourselves in com
bat against so many thousands of them ?
17. Why truly, God be thanked, notwithstanding all this, we
* Rev. xii. 9. t Eph. vi. 12.

The Ninth Sermon. 679
may do well enough. For we have spiritual armies on our side
too, that are able to contend with all these, and overcome them in
all these advantages which they have against us. Are they many ?
Michael and his angels are more, certainly : which to me is evi
dent by that saying in Daniel, where it is made an expression of
God's glory and majesty, his innumerable multitude of attendants :
the words are, " thousand thousands minister unto him, and ten
thousand times ten thousand stand before him :"* which, surely,
God would not have made choice of, as fit language to express his
power and glory, if the devil had been able to contend with God,
nay, and outvie him too, in this article. Again, are they strong ?
These sure are stronger; for we read of one that slew a hundred
fourscore and five thousand soldiers in one night. We never
heard of such an exploit of the devil's. Are they malicious
against us? These are more loving and careful to do us good.
And certainly, as God is stronger than the devil, so likewise ex
cessive goodness in the angels will easily prevail against extreme
malice in the devil. Now it is the nature of love, to be willing to
take any pains for the good of the person beloved ; whereupon St.
Paul, in that most divine description of the three cardinal chris
tian virtues, thus expresseth -them rf " remembering your work of
faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope, in our Lord Jesus
Christ." I confess, it is the nature of malice too, to be very labori
ous and observant of all advantages against the subject hated ; but
this must needs be granted, that love will conquer malice in the
same degree.
18. Thus you see, we are reasonably well befriended and backed
by these our auxiliary forces of our guardian angels, so that we
need not be disheartened, if we had no more : but, beyond all these,
we have Almighty God to our friend, whose power is so unlimited,
that without any straining of himself, without the bending of his
bow, and drawing his sword, only with unclasping his hand, sub-
tractione manutenentia, with mere letting hold go, all creatures
in heaven and earth would return to nothing. He is, in the lan
guage of the psalmist, " a sun and a shield ;"J that is, in the phrase
of another . psalm, " a light and defence ;" a sun to discover unto
us the secret ambushes and practices of our enemies, and a shield
to protect us from their open force and violence.
19. Obj. Ay, (will some man say) there is no man can make
any question of God's power ; but the difficulty is, how shall we be
sure of his good will ? If that were but once procured, the battle
were as good as at an end. — Sol. Why, for that we have recourse
to God's word; there it is, that we must find upon what terms
businesses stand between him and us. And there certainly we
shall find words, which, at the first sight, to any ordinary reason
able man, would seem to make much for us. There are invitations
to a league with him : desires and requests, as passionate as, I
think, ever poet strained for. There are promises, which look as
if they were serious and unfeigned ; they are confirmed with vows
and solemn oaths of sincerity, and all these seemingly directed to
* Dan. vii. 10. 1 1 These, i. 3. X Psalm lxxxiv. 11.

680 The Ninth Sermon.
every one of us. What can we desire more, especially from Al
mighty God, who stands in no need of our favour, and therefore is
not likely to bespeak our good opinions of him with dissembling and
lies? 20. Obj. Oh, but it is the easiest matter in the world for a
man, with a school subtilty, by an almighty distinction, to cut
off any man's right of entail to those promises ; to appropriate
them only to our own friends, to some two or three that he is
pleased to favour. — Sol. I would to God, that men would but
consider, what end, what project Almighty God should have in
making his poor creatures believe he means well to them, when
there is no such matter. " Would any of you," saith our Saviour,
" when his son shall ask him bread, give him a stone ?" Or in
stead of a fish, to nourish him, a serpent to destroy him ? If then
you (which are evil) know how to give good gifts ; if you would
not have the heart to mock poor children after this manner, how
much rather would not God ? For God's sake, therefore, let there
be but as much sincerity, as much good-nature in Almighty God,
(I will not say as in yourselves, for it may be, that would be too
much for you to grant, but) as our Saviour confesseth, that there
was in the Jews that crucified him : and then we all of us have
right enough to his promises ; we shall have no reason to doubt of
his good intention to help and assist us so far, that unless we de
light in destruction, unless we will turn fugitives, unless we will
fight on our enemy's side ; all the devils in hell shall not be able
to prevail against us. And thus much of the first squadrons,
Michael and his angels opposed to the devil and his angels.
21. The second enemy, which we professed hostility against in
our baptism, was the vain temptations of this world : and so for
cible and prevailing are the temptations thereof, that the devil,
(who for his powerful managing of this weapon, is called the God
of this world) in his encounter with our Saviour, set up his rest
upon it, as supposing, if this would not serve his turn, there were
no more fighting for him : " all this will I give thee," said he. —
And such a value he set upon this stake, that no less than the ex-
tremest degree of horrible idolatry could serve his turn to oppose
against it : " all this will I give thee, if thou wilt fall down and
worship me." And when he saw, that this proffer would not be
accepted, he presently quits the field, despairing utterly of any
success. The more dangerous indeed is this enemy, I may say,
more dangerous to us than the devil himself; because we all ac
knowledge the devil in person to be our enemy ; and therefore not
one of us will be beholden to him for any thing, if he bring us
the gift himself; a sick man would not be healed by him, nor a
poor man made rich ; but scarce one among a thousand has that
opinion of the vain pomps and sinful pleasures of the world. —
Our enemy ! no certainly, it is the best and most comforting friend
we have in this life; all our thoughts are taken up with it, it
possesseth us at all times, we dream of it sleeping, and pursue
it waking : and yet our Saviour saith, " ye cannot serve God and
Mammon." And again, "how can ye believe, who seek honour

The Ninth Sermon. 681
one of another ?" And again, " if any man love the world, the
love of the Father is not in him." What strength then have we to
oppose this enemy ?
22. Why, surely that which would suffice but an ordinary rea
sonable man, and might serve any of us, but that we will needs be
unreasonable only in things which concern our everlasting wel
fare : and that is, the consideration of those unspeakable joys,
which shall attend those who can despise the unsatisfying, vain
pleasures of this life. A philosopher, who but reading Plato's
poetical description of the serenity of that life which a virtuous
soul, delivered from the prison of the body, lives, was so far tran
sported with the conceit of it, though, for aught he knew, there
was no such thing indeed; or if there were, perhaps never in
tended for him ; that he becomes presently weary of this prison,
and by a violent death frees himself from it ; and God only knows
what a change he found : whereas we have God's word for the
certainty of that glorious life which his servants shall live ; yea, a
great deal of pains he hath taken to make it desirable and amiable
unto us, by ransacking all the treasures of this world, the most
costly jewels, the most precious metals, to embellish the description
thereof withal. We have besides the experience of several men,
who have seen and tasted as much of that glory as a mortal crea
ture is capable of; St. Paul, and St. John the Divine. Surely the
consideration hereof might serve our turn, if not quite to disrelish
unto us, and even to make us hate the vain pleasures of this world ;
yet, at least, not to prefer them, when they come in competition
with the other : and I would to God we would suffer them but so
far to prevail upon us. But I cannot stay.
23. I have ranked the three armies of our enemies just after
the Roman fashion, reserving the triaries, the old-experienced
soldiers, to the last. For though in show, the first rank of the
devils appears more terrible ; yet in very deed, all their power is
nothing, unless the lusts of our hearts take part with them, and
give them advantage against us. The lusts of the flesh are those
traitors, which continually keep us company; we cannot be quit of
them ; without the devil's assistance, they are able to captivate us :
what think you then are they able to do, being managed by so
powerful, so wise an enemy ? Without them, all the powers of hell
and darkness are insufficient to withdraw us from our obedience,
and, by consequence, from the love and favour of God. For, sup
pose the devil, for example, present a lustful object to our fancy, as
it were holding a lascivious picture before our eyes ; if we consent
not in our minds to any base delight in such a spectacle ; if we set
tle not our thoughts upon it, as upon a pleasing sight ; it will be so
far from doing us any harm, that it will rather prove a means to
root us more deeply in the favour of God, as persons unwilling to
take pay of his and our enemies.
24. But, alas ! as we are ordinarily so far from this nobleness of
mind, from this bravery of a christian-like spirit, that, as if the
devil were too slow to object such temptations to us, we will not
await his leisure, but on all occasions be ready and desirous to

682 The Ninth Sermon.
raise up, and then settle such unworthy thoughts in our minds;
we will be content to spend many hours sometimes in the acting
of this inward, contemplative adultery. St. Paul, speaking of
those lusts of our flesh, calls them our members, when he saith,
(Coloss. iii. 5,) " Mortify your members, which are on the earth ;
fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection, evil concupiscence,"
&c. And indeed we, by our practice, make good the apostle's ex
pression ; for we account ourselves as lame, imperfect creatures
without them ; we know not what to do with ourselves, especially
when we are alone, unless we set ourselves on work this way, by
acting to ourselves such filthy sins, which perhaps natural bashful-
ness, want of money or opportunity, will not suffer us to put in prac
tice. What strength have we now to oppose to these most pernici
ous enemies, which are so closely cemented, and even incorporated
within us, that they are become, as it were, flesh of our flesh, and
bones of our bones ?
25. Why surely, as naturally we have received this root of bit
terness in our hearts, which is apt to give an infectious tincture
to all the thoughts and actions issuing from thence; so likewise
it hath pleased Almighty God to imprint a new principle in our
minds, to plant, as it were, a new spirit in our souls ; I mean
that active, powerful grace, which, without any co-operation of
our own, he infuses into us, especially in our baptism ; and which
is afterward ava£ utfvgupivov, strengthened and enlivened daily, by
a constant, frequent exercising ourselves in the use of those man
ifold, blessed means of our salvation, the hearing, reading, and
meditating on his holy word, and participation of his heavenly
mysteries. For surely, if reason alone (by the help of those
worthy, grave precepts, which are extant in the treatises of moral
philosophy) hath been able to change many men from the habi
tual practice of several vices to a virtuous (I had like to have
said also a religious) life ; why should any man think so meanly of
God's holy word and sacraments, as to doubt but that much rather
they should be able to make us " new creatures, to make us wise
unto salvation ;" especially considering that continual assistance of
God's Holy Spirit, which infallibly attends the use and exercise of
those his blessed means ? Do you think God is so favourable to the
devil or his instruments (our lusts), that he is unwilling to have
them subdued and mortified in us? And if he be not unwilling,
surely much less is he unable, to perform this great work in us,
even to the end.
26. Therefore, as before, speaking of those outward forces,
God and his holy angels, which are ready to take our parts, and
fight on our sides against the devil and his angels, we applied
that saying of Elisha to his servant, If thine eyes were opened,
thou shouldst perceive that " they which are with us are more
than they which are against us;" so likewise in the case in hand we
may make use of that saying of St. John, " Greater is he which is
in you, than he which is in the world ;" implying, that God is not
only in himself stronger than the devil, but also as considered in
us, i. e. as working in our hearts by his grace : this way, I say, he

The Ninth Sermon. 683
is stronger than the devil ; his Spirit co-operating with the means
of our salvation, is more vigorous and powerful to renew us into
the image of his holiness, if we will but do that which lies in our
own power, than the devil (though taking his advantage of that
concupiscence, which in some measure is continually resident in
us) is or can be to corrupt, and so to destroy us. For his power
is not considerable, unless we be willing to join with him. Thus
you see, though our enemies be allowed all the advantages they
can challenge; yet in exact esteem, without any flattering of
ourselves, we may conclude, that they who are ready, and desirous
to join forces with us, are greater, in all respects, than they
which are against us.
27. But yet, for all this, since the conducting and managing of
those forces is left to our discretion, (for God will not fight single
against the devil in our behalf, unless we lend him our aid and
assistance) and therefore, (Judg. v. 23,) " Curse ye Meroz, saith
the angel of the Lord, (in the victorious song of Deborah,) curse
bitterly the inhabitants thereof:" and why must poor Meroz be
so bitterly cursed ? "Because they came not to the help of the
Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty :" hereupon it
may seem, that Almighty God will not put to his strength in our
defence, unless we join with him ; he will not be our champion to
fight, whilst we sit still, only spectators of the combat. And
therefore this consideration alone may be sufficient to abate that
confidence, which the foregoing discourse might be apt to raise
in us, especially if we be not utter strangers to ourselves, if we
be not ignorant of our own weakness.
28. For satisfaction therefore to this discouragement, I will
now endeavour to demonstrate by proofs drawn from undeniable
reason and experience, that there is no sinful temptation so strong,
but that an ordinary christian may (by the assistance before-men
tioned) easily conquer it. And lest my proceeding herein may
lie open to any manner of exception, let me choose from among
you the weakest, most inexperienced christian, I dare oppose this
man against the sharpest and most furious temptation ; and will
make him confess, that though he be (de facto) subdued by it, yet
that that came to pass merely by his own voluntary and affected
unwatchfulness and cowardice, and that it was truly, in very deed,
in his power to have resisted it. I will make choice to instance in
the sin of uncleanness and fornication ; a sin, that generally finds
such excuse and patronage in the world, because it is supposed to
be so naturally born and bred up with us, that there is no shaking
it off; it is a sin so resolved upon to be unconquerable, that few
men go about to restrain it. The ancient antidotes against this
sin, watching and fasting, are grown out of use with us ; we con
clude they will do us little good against this hereditary evil, and
therefore the best way is to give them clean over.
29. Yet I say, let me suppose an ordinary christian, environed
with all the strongest temptations to this so natural, and therefore
concluded, so excusable a sin; let him have the most charming
beauty, that has the most artificial ways of solicitation, together

684 The Ninth Sermon.
with opportunity, and all circumstances which are not fit to be sup
posed here ; yet for all this, if that man should say he is not able
to resist such a temptation, he lies against his own soul : for if at
that instant a sudden message should interrupt him, a threatening
of death, if he did not free himself from the danger of her filthy
embraces, would he not do it? I desire only, that each one of you
in his heart would answer for him. Then it is clear, he is able to
resist this pretended, irresistible temptation : and why should not
the consideration of the danger of eternal torments be as persuasive
against any sin, as the fear of a momentary death ? But I will not
make my advantage of so frightful an enemy to his pleasure, as
death. Suppose, in all those circumstances before-mentioned, a
good sum of money were but offered him, upon condition he would
abstain but that time from the execution of his filthy lust ; I doubt
not at all, but that upon these terms he would find strength enough
to conquer this temptation. Shall Satan then be able to cast
out Satan, and shall not God much more do it ? Shall one sin be
able to destroy the exercise of another, and shall not grace much
rather ?
30. Besides, if we believe, that generally it is not in our power
to resist any of these temptations ; how dare you, who are fathers,
suffer your daughters, after they are come to years, to live un
married? How dare you expose their souls to such dangers,
unless you think, that ordinarily any man or woman is able to
resist the temptations of the flesh ? How dare you, who are mer
chants, for the hope of a little gain, live in foreign countries, as
if you were divorced from your wives; if you religiously think,
that, were it not for the benefit of marriage, they could not ordi
narily be honest ?
31. Lastly, you may remember, that our Saviour (in his de
scriptions of hell) seidom leaves out this phrase, " where the
worm dieth not;" which worm is generally by interpreters mo
ralized into the sting of conscience, i. e. a continual vexation of
soul in the reprobates, caused by the consideration, how it was
merely their own fault, their wilful folly, which brought them to
that misery. Now this worm would die, and be quite extinguished
in them, if they were of some men's opinions; that the reason
why they sinned, was not because they would sin, but because
they could not choose but to do it ; because they wanted power
to resist all the temptations which were objected to them. Such
a conceit may serve indeed to vex them, but it is not possible it
should trouble their conscience; for by this reason Korah, Da-
than, and Abiram, might with as good reason be tormented in
conscience for falling into hell, when the earth opened under
them, as for their sin of rebellion against Moses; if the reason
why they committed that sin, was the subtraction of divine grace
and assistance, without which it was impossible for them not to
be rebels. But, indeed, why should Almighty God withdraw his
grace from any man ? Because (say some) by falling, they may
experimentally learn their own weakness without his assistance,
and so be discouraged from trusting or relying upon themselves.

The Ninth Sermon. 685
A strange reason, no doubt ! for as long as they have the grace of
God, they will not rely upon themselves ; and when they are desti
tute of his grace, they cannot rely upon him : so that, it seems,
God takes away his grace from a man' for this end, that, wanting
it, he may sin ; and by that means, when he has got that grace
again, he may perceive, that when he is destitute of God's grace,
he cannot choose but sin ! which was a thing which he knew at
the first without all this ado. But there may be a better reason
given, why God should take away his grace from a man ; and that
is, because he negligently omits to make his best use of it, and so
deserves that punishment. But this reason will satisfy as little as
the former : for suppose (for example) a man at this instant in the
state of grace, and so in the favour of God : upon these grounds, it
is impossible that this man should ever sin ; for surely God will not
undeservedly take away his grace from him, till he merit that pun
ishment by his sin ; and till God take away his grace from him, he
cannot sin ; therefore he must never sin. But this discourse, though
it merely concern practice, looks so like a controversy, that I am
weary of it.
32. We are apt enough to slander God with too much mercy
sometimes, as if he bore us so particular an affection, that, notwith
standing our never-so-many sins, yet he will still be merciful unto
us. Oh that we could conceive of his mercy and goodness aright !
as rather willing to prevent our sins, by giving us sufficient preser
vatives against the committing them. I would to God, that instead
of making subtle, scholastical disputes of the power and efficacy
of God's grace, we would magnify the force thereof, by suffering it
to exercise its sway in our lives and conversation ! we should then
easily find, that we are able to " do all things through Christ that
strengtheneth us."

ADDITIONAL DISCOURSES.

A CONFERENCE BETWIXT MR. CHILLINGWORTH AND
MR. LEWGAR.

Thesis. The church of Rome (taken diffusely for all christians com
municating with the bishop of Rome) was the judge of controversies at
that time, when the church of England made an alteration in her tenets.
Arg. She was the judge of controversies at that time, which had an
authority of deciding them : but the church of Rome at that time had the
authority of deciding them : Ergo.
Ans. A limited authority to decide controversies according to the rule
of scripture and universal tradition, and to oblige her own members (so
long as she evidently contradicted not that rule) to obedience, I grant she
had ; but an unlimited, an infallible authority, or such as could not but
proceed according to that rule, and such as should bind all the churches
in the world to obedience, (as the Greek church) I say she had not.
Quest. When our church had decided a controversy, I desire to know
whether any particular church or person hath authority to re-examine her
decision ; whether she hath observed her rule or not ; and free themselves
from the obedience of it, by their particular judgment 1
Ans. If you understand by your church the church catholic, probably
I should answer, no ; but if you understand by your church, that only,
which is in subordination to the see of Rome ; or if you understand a
council of this church, I answer, yea.
Arg. That was the catholic church, which did abide in the root of
apostolic unity : but the church of Rome at that time was the only church
that did abide in the root of apostolic unity : Ergo.
Quest. What mean you by apostolic unity 1
Ans. I mean the unity of that fellowship wherein the apostles lived and
died. Quest. Wherein was this unity 1
Ans. Herein it consisted, that they all professed one faith, obeyed one
supreme tribunal, and communicated together in the same prayers and
sacraments. Solut. Then the church of Rome continued not in this apostolic unity ;
for it continued not in the same faith wherein the apostles lived and died:
for, though it retained so much (in my judgment) as was essential to the
being of a church, yet it degenerated from the church of the apostles'
times, in many things which were very profitable ; as in Latin service,
and communion in one kind.
Arg. Some church did continue in the same faith wherein the apostles
lived and died : but there was no church at that time, which did continue
in the apostles' faith, besides the Roman church : Ergo.
Ans. That some church did continue in the apostles' faith in all things
(686)

A Conference betwixt Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar. 687
necessary, I grant it ; that any did continue in the integrity of it, and in
a perfect conformity with it in all things expedient and profitable, I deny it.
Quest. Is it not necessary to a church's continuing in the apostles' faith,
that she continue in a perfect conformity with it in all things expedient
and profitable ?
Ans. A perfect conformity in all things is necessary to a perfect con
tinuance in the apostles' faith ; but to an imperfect continuance an imper
fect conformity is sufficient ; and such, I grant, the Roman church had.
Quest. Is not a perfect continuance in the apostles' faith necessary to
a church's continuance in the apostolic unity ?
Ans. It is necessary to a perfect continuance in apostolic unity.
Arg. There were some one company of christians at the time of
Luther's rising, which was the catholic church: but there was no other
company at that time, besides the Roman : Ergo, the Roman at that time
was the catholic church.
Ans. There was no one company of christians, which in opposition to,
and exclusion of, all other companies of christians, was the catholic
church. Arg. If the catholic church be some one company of christians in
opposition to, and exclusion of, all other companies, then if there were
some one company, she was in opposition to, and exclusion of, all other
companies : but the catholic church is one company of christians in oppo
sition to, and exclusion of, &c. Ergo, there was then some one company,
which was the catholic church, in opposition to, and exclusion of, all other
companies. The minor is proved by the testimonies of the fathers, both Greek and
Latin, testifying that they understood the church to be one in the sense
alleged. 1. If this unity, which cannot be separated at all, or divided, is also
among heretics, what contend we further ? Why call we them heretics 1 —
S. Cypr. Epist. 75.
2. But if there be but one flock, how can he be accounted of the flock,
who is not within the number of it ? — Id. ibid.
3. When Parmenian commends one church, he condemns all the rest ;
for, besides one, which is the true catholic, other churches are esteemed
to be among heretics, but are not. — S. Optat. lib. i.
4. The church therefore is but one : this cannot be among all heretics
and schismatics. — Ibid.
5. You say, you offer for the church, which is one : this very thing is
part of a lie, to call it one, which you have divided into two. — Id. ibid.
6. The church is one, which cannot be amongst us, and amongst you ;
it remains, then, that it be in one only place. — Id. ibid.
7. Although there be many heresies of christians, and that all would be
called catholics, yet there is always one church, &c. — S. Aug. De Vtil.
Credend. c. 7.
8. The question between us is, where the church is ; whether with us,
or with them ; for she is but one. — Id. De. Unitat. c. 2.
9. The proofs of the catholics prevailed, whereby they evinced the
body of Christ to be with them, and by consequence not to be with the
donatists ; for it is manifest that she is one alone. — Id. Collat. Carihag.
lib. iii.
10. In, Elud Cantic. vi. 7. " There are sixty queens, and eighty con
cubines, and damsels without number ; but my dove is one," &c. He
said not — " My queens are sixty, and my concubines," &c. but he said,
" My dove is but one ;" because all the sects of philosophers, and here-

688 A Conference betwixt
sies of christians, are none of his ; his is but one, to wit, the catholic
church, &c. — S. Epiphan. in fine Panar.
11. A man may not call the conventicles of heretics (I mean the mar-
cionites, manichees, and the rest) churches ; therefore the tradition ap
points you to say, " I believe one holy catholic church," &c. — S. Cyril.
Catech. 18.
And these testimonies, I think, are sufficient to show the judgment of
the ancient church, that this title of the church one, is directly and pro
perly exclusive to all companies besides one ; to wit, that where there are
divers professions of faith, or divers communions, there is but one of these
which can be the catholic church. Upon this ground I desire some com
pany of christians to be named, professing a diverse faith, and holding a
diverse communion from the Roman, which was the catholic church at
the time of Luther's rising : and if no other in this sense can be named,
then was she the catholic church at that time ; and therefore her judg
ment to be rested in, and her communion to be embraced, upon peril of
schism and heresy. Mr. Chillingworth's Answer.
Upon the same ground, if you pleased, you might desire a protestant
to name some company of christians, professing a diverse faith, and hold
ing a diverse communion, from the Greek church, which was the catholic
church at the time of Luther's rising ; and seeing he could name no other
in this sense, conclude, that the Greek church was the catholic church at
that time. Upon the very same grounds you might have concluded for
the church of the Abyssines, or Armenians, or any other society of chris
tians extant before Luther's time. And, seeing this is so, thus I argue
against your ground.
1. That ground which concludes indifferently for both parts of a con
tradiction, must needs be false and deceitful, and conclude for neither
part ; but this ground concludes indifferently for both parts of a contra
diction ; viz. that the Greek church is the catholic church, and not the
Roman ; as well as, the Roman is the catholic church, and not the Greek :
therefore the ground is false and deceitful, seem it never so plausible.
2. I answer, secondly, that you should have taken notice of my answer,
which I then gave you ; which was, that your major, as you then framed
your argument, but as now, your minor, is not always true, if by one you
understand one in external communion ; seeing nothing hindered, in my
judgment, but that one church, excommunicated by another upon an
insufficient cause, might yet remain a true member of the catholic church ;
and that church, which upon the overvaluing this cause, doth excommuni
cate the other, though in fault, may yet remain a member of the catholic
church ; which is evident from the difference about Easter day between
the church of Rome and the churches of Asia ; for which vain matter,
Victor, bishop of Rome, excommunicated the churches of Asia. And
yet I believe you will not say, that either the church excommunicating,
or the church excommunicated, ceased to be a true member of the church
catholic. The case is the same between the Greek and the Roman
church ; for though the difference between them be greater, yet it is not
so great as to be a sufficient ground of excommunication ; and therefore
the excommunication was causeless, and consequently brutum fulmen,
and not ratified or confirmed by God in heaven : and therefore the church
of Greece, at Luther's rising, might be, and was, a true member of the
catholic church.
As concerning the places of fathers, which you allege, I demand first,

Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar. 689
if I can produce you an equal or greater number of fathers, or more
ancient than these, not contradicted by any that lived with them or before
them, for some doctrine condemned by the Roman church, whether you
will subscribe it ? If not, with what face or conscience can you make
use of, and build your whole faith upon, the authority of fathers in some
things, and reject the same authority in others 1
2. Because you urge St. Cyprian's authority, I desire you to tell me,
whether this argument in his time would have concluded a necessity of
resting in the judgment of the Roman church, or not? If not, how
should it come to pass, that it should serve now, and not then ; fit this
time, and not that 1 As if it were like an almanack, that would not serve
for all meridians : if it would, why was it not urged by others upon St.
Cyprian, or represented by St. Cyprian to himself for his direction, when
he differed from the Roman church, and all other that herein conformed
unto her touching the point of rebaptizing heretics ; which the Roman
church held unlawful and damnable ; St. Cyprian not only lawful, but
necessary ; so well did he rest in the judgment of that church : Quid
verba audiam, cum facta videam 1 says he i» the comedy. And Cardi
nal Perron tells you in his epistle to Casaubon, that nothing is more
unreasonable, than to draw consequences from the words of fathers,
against their lively and actual practice.
The same may be said in refutation of the places out of St. Augustine ;
who was so far from concluding from them, or any other, a necessity of
resting in the judgment of the Roman church, that he himself, as your
authors testify, lived and died in opposition of it, even of that main, fun
damental point, upon which Mr. Lewgar hath built the necessity of his
departure from the church of England, and embracing the communion
of the Roman church ; that is, the supreme authority of that church over
other churches, and the power of receiving appeals from them. Mr.
Lewgar, I know, cannot be ignorant of these things ; and therefore I
wonder, with what conscience he can produce their words against us,
whose actions are for us.
If it be said that St. Cyprian and St. Augustine were schismatics for
doing so ; it seems, then, schismatics may not only be members of the
church, against Mr. Lewgar's main conclusion, but canonized saints of
it ; or else St. Augustine and St. Cyprian should be rased out of the Ro
man calendar.
If it be said, that the point of rebaptization was not defined in St.
Cyprian's time ; I say, that in the judgment of the bishop and church of
Rome, and their adherents, it was : for they urged it as an original and
apostolic tradition, and consequently at least of as great force as any
church definition. They excommunicated Firmilianus, and condemned
St. Cyprian as a false Christ, and a false apostle, for holding the contrary;
and urged him tyrannico terrore to conform his judgment to theirs, as he
himself clearly intimates.
If it be said, they differed only from the particular church of Rome,
and not from the Roman church, taking it for the universal society of
christians in communion with that church ; I answer,
1. They knew no such sense of the word, I am sure never used it in
any such ; which whether it had been possible, if the church of Rome
had been in their judgment, to other churches, in spiritual matters, as the
city was to other cities and countries in temporals, I leave it to indifferent
men to judge.
2. Secondly, That they differed not only from the particular Roman
x x

690 A Conference betwixt
church, but also from all other churches that agreed with it in those doc
trines. 3. Thirdly, I desire you would answer me directly, whether the Roman
church, taking it for that particular church, be of necessity to be held
infallible in faith by every Roman catholic, or not? To this question, I
instantly desire a direct answer without tergiversation, that we may at
length get out of the cloud, and you may say, Coram, quern quaritis,
adsum. If you say, they are not bound to believe so ; then it is no article
of faith, nor any certain truth, upon which men may safely rest without
fluctuation, or fear of error : and if so I demand,
1. Why are all your clergy bound to swear, and consequently your
laity, (if they have communion of faith with them,) by your own grounds,
bound to believe, that the Roman church is the mistress of all other
churches ? Where, it is evident, from the relation and opposition of the
Roman to other churches, that the Roman church is there taken for that
particular church.
2. Secondly, Why then do you so often urge that mistaken saying of
Irenseus, Ad hanc ecclesiam necesse est omnem convenire ecclesiam ?
Falsely translating it, as Cardinal Perron in French, and my L. F. in
English — All churches must agree with this church? for convenire ad
signifies not, to agree with, but to come unto ; whereas it is evident, for
the aforesaid reason, that the Roman is here taken for that particular
church. 3. Thirdly, If that particular church be not certainly infallible, but
subject to error in points of faith ; I would know if any division of your
church should happen, in which the church of Rome, either alone, or
with some others, should take one way, the churches of Spain, and
France, and many other churches another, what direction should an igno
rant catholic have then from the pretended guide of faith? How shall he
know which of these companies is the church, seeing all other churches,
distinguished from the Roman, may err, and seeing the Roman church is
now supposed subject to error, and consequently not certain to guard
those men, or those churches, that adhere unto it from erring?
4. Fourthly, If that particular church be not infallible in faith, let us
then suppose, that de facto it does err in faith ; shall we not then have
an heretical head upon a catholic body ? A head of the church, which
were no member of the church ? Which sure were a very strange and
heterogeneous monster ! if to avoid these inconveniences, you will say,
that Roman catholics must of necessity hold that particular church infalli
ble in faith : I suppose it will evidently follow, that St. Augustine and St.
Cyprian (notwithstanding those sentences you pretend out of them) were
no Roman catholics, seeing they lived and died in the contrary belief and
profession. Let me see these absurdities fairly and clearly avoided, and
I will dispute no more, but follow you whithersoever you shall lead.
3. Thirdly, I answer, That the places alleged are utterly impertinent
to the conclusion you should have proved ; which was, that it was im
possible, that two societies of christians, divided upon what cause soever
in external communion, may be in truth, and in God's account, both of
them parts of the catholic church : whereas your testimonies, if we grant
them all, say no more than this ; that the societies of heretics, which are
such as overthrow any doctrine necessary to salvation ; and of schis
matics, which are such as separate from the church's communion, with
out any pretence of error in the church, or unlawfulness in the conditions
of her communion ; I say, they prove only this, that such societies as
these are no parts of the church : which I willingly grant of all such as

Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar. 691
are properly and formally heretics and schismatics; from which number
I think (with St. Augustine) they are to be exempted, Qui quarunt cauta
solicitudine veritatem, corrigi parati, cum invenerint. Whereas I put
the case of two such societies, which not differing indeed in any thing
necessary to salvation, do yet erroneously believe, that the errors, where
with they charge one another, are damnable ; and so, by this opinion of
mutual error, are kept on both sides from being heretics.
Because I desire to bring you and others to the truth, or to be brought to
it by you, I thought good, for your direction in your intended reply, to
acquaint you with these things :
1. That I conceive the rule in your discourse is this : that whensoever
any two societies of christians differ in external communion, one of them
must be of necessity heretical and schismatical. I conceive there is no
such necessity ; and that the stories of Victor, and the bishops of Asia,
St. Cyprian, and Pope Stephen, make it evident ; and therefore I desire you
to produce some convincing argument to the contrary ; and that you may
the better do it, I thought good to inform you what I mean by a heretic,
and what by a schismatic.
A heretic therefore I conceive him, that holds an error against faith with
obstinacy. Obstinate I conceive him, who will not change his opinion,
when his reasons for it are so answered, that he cannot reply ; and when
the reasons against it are so convincing, that he cannot answer them. By
the faith, I understand all those doctrines, and no more, which Christ taught
his apostles, and the apostles the church ; yet I exclude not from this num
ber the certain and evident deductions of them.
A schismatic I account him (and Facundus Hermianensis hath taught
me to do so) who, without any supposition of error in the conditions of a
church's communion, divides himself either from the obedience of that
church to which he owes obedience ; or from the communion of that church
to which he owes communion.
2. Another thing, which I thought fit to acquaint you with, is this : that
you go upon another very false and deceitful supposition ; viz. that if we
will not be protestants, presently we must be papists ; if we forsake the
church of England, we must go presently to the church of Rome : whereas
if your arguments did conclude (as they do .not) that before Luther's time
there was some church of one denomination, which was the catholic church,
I should much rather think it were the church of Greece than the church
of Rome ; and I believe others also would think so as well as I, but for
that reason which one gives, why more men hold the pope above a council,
than a council above a pope ; that is, because councils give no maintenance
or preferment, and the popes do.
Think not yet, I pray, that I say this, as if I conceived this to be your
reason for preferring the Roman church before the Greek (for I protest I.
do not) ; but rather, that conceiving verily you were to leave the church
of England, to avoid trouble, you took the next boat, and went to the church
of Rome, because that bespoke you first.
You impute to me (as I hear) that the way I take is destructive only, and
that I build nothing : which, first, is not a fault, for Christian religion is
not now to be built ; but only I desire to have the rubbish and impertinent
lumber taken off, which you have laid upon it, which hides the glorious
simplicity of it^from them who otherwise would embrace it. Remember,
I pray, Averroe's saying, quandoquidem Christiani adorant quod come-
dunt, sit anima mea cum philosophis : and consider the swarms of atheists
in Italy, and then tell me, whether your unreasonable and contradictious
doctrines, your forged miracles and counterfeit legends, have not, in all
x x 2

692 A Conference betwixt
probability, produced this effect. Secondly, If it be a fault, it is certainly
your own ; for your discourse, intended for the proof of a positive conclu
sion — that we must be papists, proves, in deed and in truth, nothing ; but
even in show and appearance, no more but this negative, that we must not
be protestants. But what we must be, if we must not be protestants, God
knows : you, in this discourse, I am sure, do not shew it.
Mr. Lewgar 's Reply.
§. 1. The minor of Mr. Chillingworth's argument against my ground is
very weak, being framed upon a false supposition, that a protestant could
name no other church professing a diverse faith, &c. from the Greek
church, which was the catholic church : for if he could not indeed name
any other, the title would remain to the Greek church ; but he hath the
Roman to name ; and so my ground cannot conclude either for the Greek,
or Abyssine, or any other besides the Roman ; but for that it does, except
he can name some other.
§. 2. His second answer is weak likewise ; for my minor is always true,
at least they thought it to be so, whose authorities I produce in confirma
tion of it, as it will appear to any one that considers them well, how their
force lies in thesi, not in hypothesi; not that the church was not then
divided into more societies than one, but that she could never be.
§. 3. As for his instance to the contrary, wherein he believes I will not
say the churches excommunicated by Victor, ceased to be true members
of the catholic ; if I say so, I say no more than the ancient fathers said
before me : Irenaeus, when he desired Victor, p? nooxorttia, not to cut off so
many and great churches ; and Ruffinus, Reprehendit eum, quod non bene
fecisset abscindere ab imitate corporis, <SfC.
§. 4. But howsoever the case of excommunication may be, the division
of external communion, which I intended, and the fathers spake of in the
alleged authorities, was that which was made by voluntary separation.
§. 5. Whereby the church (before one society) is divided into several
distinct societies, both claiming to be the church ; of which societies, so
divided, but one can be the catholic; and this is proved by the authorities
alleged ; which authorities must not be answered by disapproving them, as
he does, (for that is to change his adversary, and confute the fathers' say
ings, instead of mine) but by showing their true sense or judgment to be
otherwise than I alleged it.
§. 6. To his demand upon the places alleged, I answer, that I do not
build my whole faith of this conclusion upon the authority of those fathers ;
for I produce them, not for the authority of the thing, but for the exposition.
The thing itself is an article of the creed, unam catholicam, grounded in
express scripture, Columba mea vnica. But because there is a difference
in understanding this prophecy, I produce these authorities to shew the
judgment of the ancient church, how they understood it ; and the proper
answer to this is, either to shew, that these words were not there, or at
least the meaning, and to shew their meaning out of other places more
pregnant. §. 7. And I promise, that whensoever as equal a consent of fathers can
be showed for any thing, as I can shew for this, I will believe it as firmly
as I do this.
§. 8. But this is not the answerer's part, to propound doubts and difficul
ties, but to satisfy the proof objected.
§. 9. And if this course be any more taken, I will save myself all fur
ther labour, in a business so likely to be endless.
^ §.10. His second answer to the places is wholly impertinent ; for

Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar. 693
therein would he disprove them from teaching a necessity of resting in the
judgment of the Roman church ; whereas I produced them only to shew,
that among several societies of Christians, only one can be the catholic ;
and against this his second answer says nothing.
§.11. In his third answer he makes some shew of reply to the authori
ties themselves, but he commits a double error : one, that he imposes upon
me a wrong conclusion to be proved ; as will appear by comparing my
conclusion in my paper, with the conclusion he would appoint me.
§. 12. Another, that he imposes upon the authorities a wrong interpreta
tion, no way grounded in the words themselves, nor in the places whence
they were taken, nor in any other places of the same fathers, but merely
forged out of his own brain. For, first, the places do not only say, that
the societies of heretics and schismatics are no part of the church ; but
that the church cannot be divided into more societies than one : and they
account societies divided, which are either of a diverse faith, or a diverse
communion. Neither do they define heretics or schismatics in that man
ner as he does.
§. 13. For a heretic, in their language, is he that opposeth pertinacious
ly the common faith of the church ; and a schismatic, he that separates
from the catholic communion, never making any mention at all of the
cause. §. 14. And if his definition of a schismatic may stand, then certainly
there was no schismatic ever in the world, nor are there any at this day ;
for none did, none does separate, without some pretence of error, or unlaw
fulness in the conditions of the church's communion.
§. 15. And so I expect both a fuller and director answer to my argu
ment, without excursions or diversions into any other matter, till the judg
ment of antiquity be cleared in this point.
Mr. Chillingworth's Answer.
Ad. §. 1. The minor of my argument, you say, is very weak, being
grounded upon a false supposition, that a protestant could name no other
church professing a diverse faith from the Greek, which was the catholic
church ; and your reason is, because he might name the Roman. But in
earnest, Mr. Lewgar, do you think that a protestant, remaining a protestant,
can esteem the Roman church to be the catholic church? Or do you think
to put tricks upon us, with taking your proposition one while in sensu com-
posito, another while in sensu diviso ? For if your meaning was, that a
protestant, not remaining but ceasing to be a protestant, might name the
Roman for the catholic ; so I say also to your discourse, that a protestant,
ceasing to be a protestant, might name the Greek to be the catholic church ;
and if there were any necessity to find out one church of one denomination,
as the Greek, the Roman, the Abyssine, which one must be the catholic ;
I see no Teason, but he might pitch upon the Greek church, as well as the
Roman; I am sure your discourse proves nothing to the contrary. In
short, this I say, if a Grecian should go about to prove to a protestant,
that his church is the catholic, by saying (as you do for the Roman) some
one was so before Luther, and you can name no other, therefore ours is
so ; whatsoever may be answered to him, may be answered to you. For
as you say, a protestant ceasing to be a protestant, may name to him the
Roman ; so I say, a protestant, ceasing to be a protestant, may name to
you the Grecian. If vou say, a protestant remaining a protestant, can
name no other but the Roman for the catholic; I may (very ridiculously,
I confess, but yet as truly) say, he can name no other but the Grecian. It
you say, he cannot name the Greek church neither, remaining a protest-

694 A Conference betwixt
ant ; I say likewise, neither, remaining a protestant, can he name the
Roman for the catholic. So the argument is equal in all respects on both
sides ; and therefore either concludes for both parts, (which is impossible,
for then contradictions should be both true) or else (which is certain) it
concludes for neither. And therefore, I say, your ground you build on,
That before Luther some church of one denomination was the catholic, (if
it were true, as it is most false) would not prove your intent. It would
destroy perhaps our church, but it would not build yours. It would prove,
peradventure, that we must not be protestants, but it will be far from prov
ing that we must be papists : for, after we have left being protestants, (I
tell you again, that you may not mistake) there is yet no necessity of being
papists ; no more than if I go out of England, there is a necessity of going
to Rome. And thus much to shew the poorness of your ground, if it were
true. Now, in the second place, I say it is false ; neither have you proved
any thing to the contrary.
Ad. §. 2. You say, the authorities you have produced, shew t6 any that
consider them well, that the church could never be divided into more socie
ties than one ; and you mean (I hope) one in external communion, or else
you dally in ambiguities : and then I say, 1 have well considered the alleged
authorities, and they appear to me to say no such thing ; but only, that the
societies of heretics and schismatics are no true members of the church :
whereas I put the case of two such societies, which were divided in exter
nal communion by reason of some overvalued difference between them ;
and yet were neither of them heretical, nor schismatical. To this I know
you could not answer, but only by saying, That this supposition was im
possible : viz. That of two societies divided in external communion,
neither should be heretical nor schismatical ; and therefore I desired you
to prove by one convincing argument, that this is impossible. This you
have not done, nor I believe can do; and, therefore, all your places fall
short of your intended conclusion ; and if you would put them into syllo-
gistical form, you should presently see you conclude from them sophisti-
cally in that fallacy, which is called, a dicto secundum quid, ad dictum
simpliciter. Thus : No two divided societies, whereof one is heretical or
schismatical, can be both members of the catholic church ; therefore sim
ply no two divided societies can be so. The antecedent I grant, which is
all that your places say, as you shall see anon ; but the consequence is
sophistical, and therefore that I deny : it is no better nor worse, than if you
should argue thus : no two divided societies, whereof one is outlawed and
in rebellion, are both members of the same commonwealth ; therefore sim
ply no two divided societies, &c.
But against this you pretend, that the alleged places say, not only that
the societies of heretics and schismatics are no parts of the church, but
that the church cannot be divided into more societies than one ; and they
account societies divided, which are either of a diverse faith, or of a diverse
communion. This is that which I would have proved, but as yet I cannot
see it done. There be eleven quotations in all ; seven of them speak
expressly and formally of division made by heretics and schismatics, viz.
1, 3, 4, 7, 9, 10, 11. Three other of them (viz. 5, 6, 8.) though they
use not the word, yet Mr. Lewgar knows they speak of the donatists, who
were schismatics ; and that by the relative particles you and them are
meant the donatists. And, lastly, the second, Mr. Lewgar knows, says
nothing but this, that a heretic cannot be accounted of that one flock, which
is the church.
But to make the most of them that can be : the first saith, The unity of
the church cannot be separated at all, nor divided. This I grant; but

Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar. 695
then, I say, every difference does not in the sight of God divide this unity :
for then diversity of opinions should do it ; and so the Jesuits and domini
cans would be no longer members of the same church. Or if every dif
ference will not do it, why must it of necessity be always done by differ
ence in communion, upon an insufficient ground, yet mistaken for sufficient ?
For such only I speak of. Sure I am, this place says no such matter.
The next place says, The flock is but one, and all the rest, that the church
is but one; and that heretics and schismatics are not of it: which certainly
was not the thing to be proved ; but that of this one flock, of this one
church, two societies divided, without just cause, in communion, might not
be true and lively members ; both in one body mystical in the sight of God,
though divided in unity in the sight of men. It is true, indeed, whosoever
is shut out from the church on earth, is likewise cut off from it before God
in heaven : but you know it must be clave non errante ; when the cause
of abscission is true and sufficient.
Ad. §. 3. If you say so, you say no more than the fathers : but what
evasions and tergiversations are these ? Why do you put us off with ifs
and ands ? I beseech you tell me, or at least him that desires to reap
some benefit by our conference, directly and categorically — Do you say
so, or do you say, it is not so ? Were the excommunicated churches of
Asia still members of the catholic church (I mean, in God's account), or
were they not 1 but all damned for that horrible heresy of celebrating the
feast of Easter upon a diverse day from the western churches ? If you
mean honestly and fairly, answer directly to this question, and then you
shall see what will come of it. Assure yourself, you have a wolf by the
ears: if you say they were, you overthrow your own conclusions, and say,
that churches divided in communion, may both be members of the catholic :
if they were not, then shall we have saints and martyrs in heaven, which
were no members of the catholic Roman church.
As for Irenaeus's w itpoxo7tnuv, and Ruffinus's abscindere ab unitate
corporis ; they imply no more but this at the most, that Victor (quantum
in se fuit) did cut them off from the external communion of the catholic
church, supposing, that for their obstinacy in their tradition, they had cut
themselves off from the internal communion of it ; but that this sentence
of Victor's was ratified in heaven, and that they were indeed cut off from
the mystical body of Christ, so far was Irenasus from thinking, that he,
and in a manner all the other bishops, reprehended Victor for pronouncing
this sentence on them, upon a cause so insufficient ; which, how they could
say, or possibly think, of a sentence ratified by God in heaven, and not
reprehend God himself, I desire you to inform me : and if they did not
intend to reprehend the sentence of God himself, together with Victor's,
then I believe it will follow unavoidably, that they did not conceive, nor
believe, Victor's sentence to be ratified by God ; and consequently, did not
believe, that these excommunicated churches were not, in God's account,
true members of the body of Christ.
Ad. §. 4.. And here again, we have another subterfuge, by a verbal dis
tinction between excommunication and voluntary separation : as if the
separation which the church of Rome made in Victor's time from the Asian
churches, were not a voluntary separation ; or as if the churches of Asia
did not voluntarily do that, which was the cause of their separation ; or as
if (though they separated not themselves indeed, conceiving the cause to be
insufficient) they did not yet remain voluntarily separated, rather than con
form themselves to the church of Rome : or, lastly, as if the Grecians of
old, or the protestants of late, might not pretend, as justly as the Asian
churches, that their separation too was not voluntary, but of necessity ; for

696 A Conference betwixt
that the church of Rome required of them, under pain of excommunica
tion, such conditions of her communion, as were neither necessary nor
lawful to be performed.
Ad. §. 5. And here again the matter is straitened by another limitation.
Both sides (say you) must claim to be the church : but what then, if one
of them only claim (though vainly) to be the church, and the other content
itself with being a part of it 1 These then it seems (for any thing you
have said to the contrary) may be both members of the catholic church ;
and certainly this is the case now, between the church of England and the
church of Rome ; and, for aught I know, was between the church of Rome
and the church of Greece : for I believe it will hardly be proved, that the
excommunication between them was mutual ; nor that the church of Greece
esteems itself the whole church, and the church of Rome no church ; but
itself a sound member of the church, and that a corrupted one.
Again, whereas you say, the fathers speak of a voluntary separation ;
certainly they speak of any separation by heretics ; and such were (in
Victor's judgment) the churches of Asia, for holding an opinion contrary
to the faith, as he esteemed : or, if he did not, why did he cut them off
from the communion of the church ? But the true difference is, the fathers
speak of those, which by your church are esteemed heretics, and are so ;
whereas the Asian churches were by Victor esteemed heretics, but were
not so.
Ad. §. 6. But their authorities produced, shew no more than what I have
shewed ; that the church is but one, in exclusion of heretics and schis-
matics ; and not that two particular churches divided by mistake upon
some overvalued difference, may not be both parts of the catholic.
Ad. §. 7. But I desire you to tell me, whether you will do this, if the
doctrines, produced and confirmed by such a consent of fathers, happen to
be, in the judgment of the church of Rome, either not catholic, or abso.
lutely heretical. If you will undertake this, you will hear further from
me : but if when their places are produced, you will pretend (as some of
your side do) that surely they are corrupted ; having neither reason, nor
shew of reason for it, unless this may pass for one, (as perhaps it may
where reasons are scarce) that they are against your doctrine ; or if you
will say, they are to be interpreted according to the pleasure of your
church, whether their words will bear it or not ; then I shall but lose my
labour ; for this is not to try your church by the fathers, but the fathers by
your church.
The doctrines which I undertake to justify by a greater consent of fathers
than here you produce, for instance, shall be these :
1. That God's election supposeth prescience of man's faith and perse-
verance. 2. That God doth not predetermine men to all their actions.
3. That the pope hath no power in temporalities over kings, either
directly or indirectly.
4. That the bishop of Rome may err in his public determinations of
matters of faith.
5. That the B. Virgin was guilty of original sin.
6. That the B. Virgin was guilty of actual sin.
7. That the communion was to be administered to the laity in both
kinds. 8. That the reading of the scripture was to be denied to no man.
9. That the opinion of the millenaries is true.
10. That the eucharist is to be administered to infants.

Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar. 697
11. That the substance of bread and wine remains in the eucharist after
consecration. 12. That the souls of the saints departed enjoy not the vision of God
before the last day.
13. That at the day of judgment, all the saints shall pass through a
purging fire. t
All these propositions are held by your church either heretical, or at
least not catholical ; and yet in this promise of yours you have undertaken
to believe them as firmly as you now do this, that two divided societies
cannot be both members of the catholic church.
Ad. §. 8. Is it not then the answerer's part to shew, that the proofs pre
tended are indeed no proofs ? And doth not he prove no proofs (a't least
in your mouth) who undertakes to shew, that an equal or greater number
of the very same witnesses is rejected by yourselves in many other things?
Either the consent of the fathers, in any age or ages, is infallible, and then
you are to reject it in nothing ; or it is not so, and then you are not to urge
it in any thing : as if the fathers' testimonies against us were swords and
spears, and against you bulrushes.
Ad. §. 9. In effect as if you should say, if you answer not as I please,
I will dispute no longer. But you remember the proverb — will think of it
— Occasionem quterit, qui cupit discedere.
Ad. §.10. I pray tell me, is not therefore a note of illation, or a con-
elusion ? And is not your last therefore this — Therefore her judgment is
to be rested in ? Which, though it be not your first conclusion, yet yours
it is, and you may not disclaim it ; and it is so near of kin to the former,
(in your judgment I am sure) that they must stand or fall together; there
fore he that speaks pertinently for the disproving of the one, cannot speak
impertinently towards the disproving the other ; and therefore you cannot
so shift it off, but of necessity you must answer the argument there urged,
or confess it ingenuously to be unanswerable.
Or if you will not answer any thing, where the contradiction of your
first conclusion is not in terms inferred, then take it thus : if St. Cyprian
and St. Augustine did not think it necessary in matters of faith to rest in
the judgment of the Roman church and the adherents of it ; then either
they thought not the catholic church's judgment necessary to be rested on,
or they thought not that the catholic church. But the antecedent is true,
and undeniably proved so by their actions, and the consequence evident ;
therefore the consequent must be true in one or other part : but you will
not say the former is true ; it remains, therefore, the latter must be, and
that is — That St. Augustine and St. Cyprian did not think the church of
Rome, and the adherents of it, to be the catholic church.
Ad. §.11. But I tell you now, and have already told you, that in your
discourse before Mr. Skinner and Dr. Sheldon, I answered your major, as
then you framed your argument, as now your minor, thus : If you under
stand by one company of christians, one in external communion, I deny
your major : for I say, that two several societies of christians, which do
not externally communicate together, may be both parts of the same catho
lic church ; and what difference there is between this, and the conclusion I
told you you should have proved, I do not well understand.
Ad. §. 12. And is it possible you should say so, when every one of the
places carries this sense in its forehead, and seven of the eleven in terms
express it — That they intended only to exclude heretics and schismatics
from being parts of the church ? for if they did not, against whom did
they intend them ? Pagans lay no claim to the church, therefore not
against them : catholics they did not intend to include : I know not who

698 A Conference betwixt
remains besides, but heretics and schismatics. Besides the frequent oppo
sition in them between — One church on the one side, and heretics and
schismatics ; who sees not, that in these places they intend to exclude only
these pretenders out of the church's unity ?
Lastly, Whereas you say, that the places say — That the church cannot
be divided, and that they account those divided who are of a diverse faith,
or a diverse communion : I tell you, that I have read them over and over,
and unless my eyes deceive, they say not one word of a diverse com
munion. Ad. §. 13. Whereas a heretic, in your language, is he that opposeth
pertinaciously the common faith of the church : in mine — He is such an
one, as holds an error against faith with obstinacy : verily a monstrous
difference between these definitions. To oppose, and hold against (I hope)
are all one : faith, and the common faith of the church, sure are not very
different; pertinaciously, and with obstinacy, methinks might pass for
synonymous ; and, seeing the parts agree so well, methinks the total should
not be at great hostility. And for the definition of a schismatic, if you
like not mine (which yet I give you out of a father) I pray take your own ;
and then shew me (if you mean to do any thing) that wheresoever there
are two societies of christians, differing in external communion, one of
them must, of necessity, be either heretical 'or schismatical in your own
sense of these words. To the contrary, I have said already (and say it
now again, that you may not forget it) the Roman and the Asian churches
in Victor's time, and the Roman and the African in St. Stephen's time,
differed in external communion, and yet neither of them was heretical ;
for they did not oppose pertinaciously the common faith of the church ;
neither of them was schismatical, for they did not separate (never making
mention of the case at all) but were separated by the Roman church, and
that upon some cause, though it were not sufficient.
Ad. §. 14. The donatists did so (as Facundus Hermianensis testifies) ;
but you are abused, I believe, with not distinguishing between these two—
They did pretend, that the church required of them some unlawful thing
among the conditions of her communion ; and they did pretend, that it was
unlawful for them to communicate with the church. This I confess they
did pretend ; but it was in regard of some persons in the church, with
whom they thought it unlawful to communicate-; but the former they did
not pretend (I mean while they continued mere schismatics) viz. That there
was any error in the church, or impiety in her public service of God : and
this was my meaning in saying — A schismatic is he, which separates from
the church without pretence of error, or unlawfulness in the conditions of
her communion : yet if I had left out the term unlawfulness, the definition
had been better, and not obnoxious to this cavillation ; and so I did in the
second paper, which I sent you for your direction ; which, if you had dealt
candidly you should have taken notice of.
Ad. §. 15. I have replied (as I think) fully to every part and particle of
your argument ; neither was the history of St. Cyprian's and St. Augus
tine's opposition to the church of Rome, an excursion or diversion, but a
clear demonstration of the contradictory of your conclusion ; viz. That
the Roman church, &c. and therefore her judgment not to be rested upon.
For an answer hereto, I shall be very importunate with you ; and, there
fore, if you desire to avoid trouble, I pray come out of my debt as soon as
may be.
If it be said, that my argument is not contradictory to your conclusion,
because it shews only, that the Roman church, with her adherents, was not
in St. Cyprian's or St. Augustine's time the catholic church, but was at the

Mr. Chillingworth and Mr. Lewgar. 699
time before Luther ; I say, to conclude the one, is to conclude the other.
For certainly, if it were then at Luther's time so, it was always so ; if it
was not always, it was not then : for if it be of the essence, or necessary
to the church (as is pretended) to be a society of christians joined in com
munion with the church and bishop of Rome ; then did it always agree to
the church, and therefore in St. Cyprian's and St. Augustine's time, as well
as at Luther's rising : if it were not always, particularly not in St. Cyprian's
time, of the essence, or necessary to the church to be so ; then it was im
possible the church should acquire this essence, or this property afterwards,
and therefore impossible it should have it at the time of Luther's rising.
Necessarium est, quod non aliquando inest, aliquando non inest ; alicui
inest, alicui non inest ; sed quod semper et omni. — Arist. Post. Analyt.
Again, every sophister knows, that of particulars nothing can be con
cluded ; and therefore he that will shew, that the church of Rome, and the
adherents of it, was the catholic church at Luther's rising, he must argue
thus ; It was always so, therefore then it was so. Now this antecedent is
overthrown by any instance to the contrary ; and so the first antecedent
being proved false, the first consequent cannot but be false : for what rea
son can be imagined, that the church of Rome, and the adherents of it,
was not the whole catholic church at St. Cyprian's time, and was at
Luther's rising ? If you grant, (as I think you cannot deny) that a church
divided from the communion of the Roman, may be still in truth, and in
God's account, a part of the catholic, (which is the thing we speak of) then
I hope Mr. Lewgar's argument from unity of communion is fallen to the
ground ; and it will be no good plea to say,
Some one church, not consisting of divers communions, was the catholic
church at Luther's rising.
No one church can be named to be the catholic church, but the Roman.
Therefore the Roman church was the catholic at Luther's rising.
For Mr. Lewgar hath not, nor can prove the major of this syllogism cer
tainly true ; but to the contrary, I have proved, that it cannot be certainly
true, by shewing divers instances, wherein divers divided communions have
made up the catholic church ; and therefore not the dividing of the com
munions, but the cause and ground of it, is to be regarded, whether it be
just and sufficient, or unjust and insufficient.
Neither is the bishop or church of Rome, with the adherents of it, an
infallible judge thereof; for it is evident, both he and it have erred herein
divers times : which I have evinced already by divers examples, which I
will not repeat ; but add to them one confessed by Mr. Lewgar himself, in
his discourse upon the article of the catholic church, page 84. — St. Atha
nasius being excommunicated, (though by the *whole church) yet might
remain a member of Christ's body (not visible, for that is impossible, that
a person cut off from visible communion, though unjustly, should be a
visible member of the church,t but) by invisible communion, by reason of
the invalidity of the sentence ; which, being unjust, is valid enough to visi
ble excision, but not further.
* How by the whole church, when himself was part of it, and communicated still
with divers other parts of it ?
t What ! not to them who know and believe him to be unjustly excommunicated ?

700 A Discourse against the
II. — A Discourse against the Infallibility of the Roman Church, with an
Answer to all those texts of Scripture that are alleged to prove it.
The condition of communion with the church of Rome, without the
performance whereof no man can be received into it, is this : That he
believes firmly, and without doubting, whatsoever that church requires him
to believe.
It is impossible that any man should certainly believe any thing, unless
that thing be either evident of itself, (as that, twice two are four, that every
whole is greater than a part of itself,) or unless he have some certain rea
son (at least some supposed certain reason) and infallible guide for his
belief thereof.
The doctrines, which the church of Rome requireth to be believed, are
not evident of themselves ; for then every one would grant them at first
hearing without any further proof. He therefore that will believe them,
must have some certain and infallible ground, whereon to build his belief
of them.
There is no other ground for a man's belief of them, especially in many
points, but only an assurance of the infallibility of the church of Rome.
Now this point of that church's infallibility is not evident of itself; for
then no man could choose but in his heart believe it, without further proof.
Secondly, It were, in vain to bring any proof of it, as vain as to light a
candle to shew men the sun. Thirdly, It were impossible to bring any
proof of it, seeing nothing can be more evident, than that which of itself
is evident, and nothing can be brought in proof of any thing, which is not
more evident than that matter to be proved. But now experience teacheth,
that millions there are, who have heard talk of the infallibility of the Roman
church, and yet do not believe, that the defenders of it do not think it either
vain or impossible to go about to prove it ; and from hence it follows plain
ly, that this point is not evident of itself.
Neither is there any other certain ground for any man's belief of it ; or
if there be, I desire it may be produced, as who am ready and most will
ing to submit my judgment to it, fully persuaded that none can be produced,
that will endure a severe and impartial examination.
If it be said, The Roman church is to be believed infallible because the
scripture says it is so ;
1. I demand, how shall I be assured of the texts that be alleged, that
they are indeed scripture, that is, the word of God ? And the answer to
this must be, either because the church tells me so, or some other : if any
other be given, then all is not finally resolved into, and built upon that
church's authority ; and this answer then, I hope a protestant may have
leave to make use of, when he is put to that perilous question, How know
you the scripture to be the scripture 1 If the answer be, Because the
church tells me so ; my reply is ready ; That to believe that church is
infallible, because the scriptures say so ; and that the scripture is the word
of God, because the same church says so ; is nothing else but to believe
the church is infallible, because the church says so, which is infallible.
2. I could never yet, from the beginning of Genesis to the end of the
Apocalypse, find it written so much as once in express terms, or equiva-
lently, that the church, in subordination to the see of Rome, shall be always
infallible. 3. If it be said, That this is drawn by good consequence from scripture
truly interpreted ; I demand, What certain ground have I to warrant me,
that this consequence is good, and this interpretation true ? And if answer

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 70 1
be made, That reason will tell me so : I reply, 1. That this is to build all
upon my own reason and private interpretation. 2. I have great reason to
fear, that reason assures no man, that the infallibility of the church of
Rome may be deduced from scripture by good and firm consequence.
4. If it be said, That a consent of fathers do so interpret the scripture ;
I answer, 1. That this is most false, and cannot, without impudence, be
pretended ; as I am ready to justify to any indifferent hearer. 2. I demand,
Who shall be judge, whether the fathers mean as is pretended ? If it be
said, reason will tell you so ; I say, 1. This is false. 2. This is again to
do that, which is objected to protestants for such a horrid crime, that is, to
build all finally upon reason.
If it be said, they are so interpreted by the catholic church ; I demand,
Whether by the catholic church be meant, That only that is in subordi
nation to the bishop of Rome ; or any other with that, or besides that 1 If
any other, it is false and impudent to pretend that they so understand the
fathers or scripture: if that only, then this is to say, that that church is
infallible, because it may be deduced from scripture that it is so ; and to
prove that it may be deduced from scripture, because the fathers say so ;
and to prove the fathers do say and mean so, because the church of Rome
says they do so. And then what a stir and trouble was here to no pur
pose 1 Why was it not rather said plainly at the beginning, The church
of Rome is certainly infallible, because she herself says so ; and she must
say true, because she is infallible ? And that is as much as to say, unless
you grant me the question, I neither can nor will dispute with you.
If it is said, indeed the fathers do not draw this doctrine from scripture ;
but yet they affirm it with a full consent, as a matter of tradition ; I reply,
1. That this pretence also is false, and that upon trial it will not appear to
have any colour of probability to any, who remembers, that it is the pre
sent Roman church, and not the catholic church, whose infallibility is here
disputed. 2. I demand, who shall be judge, whether the fathers do indeed
affirm this or not ? If reason, then again we are fallen upon that danger
ous rock, that all must be resolved into private reason : if the church, I
ask again, What church is meant? If the church of the Grecians, or
Abyssines, or protestants, or any but the Roman, it is evident they deny
it : if the church of Rome, then we are again very near the head of the
circle; for I ask, how shall I be assured this church will not err and
deceive me in interpreting the fathers? and the answer must be either none,
or this, That the church is infallible.
Obj. If it be said, that the infallibility of the Roman church would yield
the church so many commodities, and that the want of an infallible church
to guide men in the way to heaven would bring so many mischiefs upon
the world, that it cannot be thought, but that God, out of his love to men,
hath appointed this church as an infallible guide to all other churches,
seeing it is so necessary there should be some such guide, and so evident
there is no other.
Ans. I answer, that this argument would serve the church of Greece,
or England, or Geneva, to prove itself infallible, and the guide of all other
churches, would they but take upon them to be so : for every one might
say for itself, it is necessary there should be some guide ; it is evident there
is no other ; Ergo, I am appointed by God to be that guide. The same
argument any man might use, to make himself monarch of any popular
state : for, first he might represent unto them the commodities of a mon
archy, and the mischiefs of a democracy ; then he might say, that God
surely, out of his love to them, hath appointed some remedy for their incon
veniences ; and lastly, that he hath ordained no other to redress them, but

702 A Discourse against the
himself; and then conclude, that he alone must of necessity be the man
appointed to rule over them.
I answer, secondly, that here also we must resolve all into reason and
the private spirit ; or that we are still in the circle. For I demand, how do
you know, that these pretended commodities are to be compassed, and these
pretended mischiefs are to be avoided, only by the infallibility of the church
of Rome, or some other church, and not by any other means which God
hath provided ? If you say, reason tells you so ; I say, 1. This is to make
reason your last and lowest foundation. 2. I assure you, reason tells me
no such matter ; and yet I know, that I am as willing to hear it as you are.
If you say, the church tells you, and she is infallible ; this, I say, is to
prove the church infallible, because she is so.
Thirdly, I demand how it is possible you should know, that these pre
tended commodities might not be gained, and these mischiefs, which you
fear, avoided without any assistance of the church of Rome's infallibility,
if all men in the world did believe the scripture, and live according to it,
and would require no more of others but to do so ? if you say, that not
withstanding this, there would be no unity in doctrine; I answer, 1. It is
impossible you should know this, considering that there are many places in
scripture, which do more than probably import, that the want of piety in
living is the cause of want of unity in believing. 2. That there would be
unity of opinion in all things necessary ; and that in things not necessary,
unity of opinion is not necessary. But lastly, that notwithstanding differ
ences in these things of less importance, there might and would be unity of
communion, unity of charity and affection, which is one of the greatest
blessings which the world is capable of; absolute unify of opinion being a
matter rather to be desired, than hoped for.
Obj. Against this it has been objected, that the scripture cannot be the
guide, because many men have used their best endeavours to follow it, and
yet have fallen, some into Arianism, others into Pelagianism, others into
other damnable heresies ; and how can I secure any man but he may do
the like?
Ans. To this I answer, by distinguishing the persons which are pretend
ed to have made use of this guide, and yet to have fallen into heresy, that
they were either such as did love the truth sincerely, and above all things,
and did seek it diligently, and with all their power, to this intent, that they
might conform their belief and life unto it; such as, following St. Paul's
direction, did first try all things deliberately, and then chose what in their
conscience they thought was best : or they were such as, for want of the
love of the truth, God suffered to fall into strong delusions, to fall to a false
religion, because they brought not forth the fruits of the true ; to make
shipwreck of their faith, because they had cast away a good conscience ;
to have their eyes blinded, and their light taken away, because they made
not the right use of it, but were idle and unprofitable, and set their hearts
upon vanity, and had only a form of religion, but denied the effect of it in
their lives and conversations : in a word, such as were betrayed to their
error, and kept for ever in it ; either by negligence in seeking the truth, or
unwillingness to find it, or by some other voluntary sin ; and for these I
dare not flatter them with hope of pardon. But let me tell you, it is not
the error of the understanding, but the sin of their will, that truly and pro
perly damns them. But for the former, I am confident, that nothing is
more contumelious to the goodness of God, than to think that he will damn
any such ; for he should damn men that truly love him, and desire to serve
him, for doing that, which, all things considered, was impossible for them
not to do.

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 703
Obj. If M is said, That pride of their own understanding made them not
submit to the church of Rome, and to her guidance ; and that for this,
being a voluntary sin, they may be justly damned :
Ans. I answer, That whether the church of Rome be the guide of all
men, is the question ; and therefore not to be begged, but proved : that the
man we speak of, is very willing to follow this guide, could he find any
good ground to believe it is his guide ; and, therefore, the reason he follows
her not, is not pride, but ignorance : that as it is humility to obey those
whom God hath set over us, so it is credulity to follow every one that will
take upon him to lead us : that if the blind lead the blind, not only the
leader, but the follower shall perish : lastly, that the present church of
Rome pretends very little, and indeed nothing of moment, to get the office
of being head and guide of the church, which antichrist, when he cometh,
may not and will not make use of for the very same end and purpose ;
and therefore he had reason not to be too sudden and precipitate in com
mitting himself to the conduct of the pope, for fear of mistaking antichrist
for the vicar of Christ.
Obj. But in all commonwealths, it is necessary there should be not only
a law for men to live by, but also a living and speaking judge to decide
their differences arising about the various interpretations of the law ; and
otherwise controversies would be endless : therefore if such a judge be so
necessary in civil affairs, for the procuring and preserving our temporal
peace and happiness ; how much more necessary is he, for the deciding
of those controversies, that concern the saving and damning of our souls
for ever ?
Ans. Hereunto I answer, 1. That if it were as evident and certain, that
God hath appointed the pope, or church of Rome, to be the guide of faith,
and judge of controversies, as that the king had appointed such an one to
be lord-chief-justice, the having such a guide would be very available, for
to preserve the church in unity, and to. conduct men's souls to heaven ; but
a judge that has no better title or evidence to his place, than the pope has
to that which he pretends to ; a judge that is doubtful, and justly question
able, whether he be the judge or not, is in all probability likely to produce
clean contrary effects, and to be himself one of the apples of strife, one of
the greatest subjects of controversy, and occasion of dissensions.
And to avoid this great inconvenience, if God had intended the pope or
church of Rome for this great office, certainly he would have said so, very
plainly and very frequently ; if not frequently, certainly sometimes, once
at least he would have said so in express terms : but he does not say so, no,
not so much as once, nor any thing from whence it may be collected with
any sure or firm consequence : therefore if it be not certain, certainly it is
very probable he never meant so.
Again, in civil controversies the case can hardly be so put, that there
should be any necessity that the same man should be judge and party : but
in matters of religion, wherein all have equal interest, every man is party,
and engaged to judge, for temporal respects, this way or that way, and
therefore not fit to be a judge. But what then if he, who has, with so much
clamour, and so little reason, vouched for the infallibility of the church of
Rome, do tell you plainly, There is no living judge on earth, appointed by
God, to decide the controversies arising amongst christians, nor any way
to determine them, but by scripture ? His words are express and formal,
and need no other commentary but a true interpretation.
Optat. Melevit. lib. 5, ad princip.
" Vos dicitis, licet ; nos, non licet : inter vestrum licet, et nostrum non

704 A Discourse against the
licet, nutant et remigant animse populorum. Nemo vobis cfedat, nemo
nobis ; omnes contentiosi homines sumus. Quserendi sunt judices. Si
christiani, de utraque parte dari non possunt : de foris qussrendus est judex.
Si paganus, non potest nosse Christiana secreta ; si Judasus, inimicus est
christiani baptismatis. Ergo in terris de hac re nullum poterit reperiri
judicium : de ccelo quserendus est judex. Sed et quid pulsamus ccelum,
cum habeamus hie in evangelio testamentum? Quia hoc loco recte possunt
terrena coelestibus comparari ; tale est, quod quivis hominum habens nume-
rosos fihos : his quamdiu prassens est, ipse imperat singulis ; non est adhuc
necessanum testamentum. Sic et Christus, quamdiu prasens in terris fuit,
(quamvis nee modo desit) pro tempore quicquid necessarium erat, apostolis
imperavit. Sed quomodo terrenus pater, cum se in confinio senserit mortis,
timens ne post mortem suam rupta pace litigent fratres, adhibitis testibus,
voluntatem suam de-pectore morituro transfert in tabulas diu duraturas; et
si fuerit inter fratres contentio nata, non itur adtumulum, sed quasritur testa
mentum ; et qui in tumulo quiescit, tacitis de tabulis loquitur vivus. Is,
cujus est testamentum, in coelo est : ergo voluntas ejus velut in testamento,
sic in evangelio inquiratur."
That is, " You say, such a thing is lawful ; we say, it is unlawful : the
minds of the people are doubtful and wavering between your lawful and
our unlawful. Let no man believe either you or us ; we are all contentious
men. We must seek therefore for judges between us. If christians are
to be our judges, both sides will not afford such : we must seek for a judge
abroad. If he be a pagan, he cannot know the secrets of Christianity : if
he be a Jew, he is an enemy to christian baptism. Therefore there is no
judgment of this matter can be found on earth : we must seek for a judge
from heaven. But to what end do we solicit heaven, when we have here
in the gospel a will and testament ? And because here we may fitly com
pare earthly things with heavenly; the case is just as if a man had many
sons : while he is present with them, he commands every one what he will
have done ; and there is no need as yet of making his last will. So also
Christ, as long as he was present on earth, (though neither now is he want
ing) for a time commanded his apostles whatsoever was necessary. But
just as an earthly father, when he feels his death approaching, fearing lest
after his death the brothers should fall out and quarrel, calls in witnesses,
and translates his will from his dying heart into written tables, that will
continue long after him : now if any controversy arises among the brothers,
they do not go to his tomb, but consult his last will ; and thus he, while he
rests in his grave, does speak to them in those silent tables, as if he were
alive. He whose testament we have, is in heaven ; therefore we are to
inquire his pleasure in the gospel, as in his last will and testament."
It is plain from hence, that he knew not of any living, speaking, audible
judge, furnished with authority and infallibility to decide this controversy.
Had he known any such, assisted with the Spirit of God for this purpose,
it had been horrible impiety against God and the church's peace, to say
there was none such ; or the Spirit of God was not able by his assistance
to keep this judge from being hindered, with partiality, from seeing the
truth. Had he thought the bishop of Rome speaking ex cathedra to be
this judge, now had been the time to have said so ; but he says directly the
contrary, and therefore it is plain he knew of no such authority he had.
Neither is there the like reason for a judge, finally and with authority,
to determine controversies in religion and civil differences : for if the con
troversy be about mine and thine, about land, or money, or any other thing,
it is impossible that both I should hold the possession of it, and my adver-
sary too; and one of us must do injury to the other, which is not fit it

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 705
should be etettial : but in matters of doctrine the case is clean contrary ; I
may hold my opinion, and do my adversary no wrong : and my adversary
may hold his, and do me none.
Texts of Scripture alleged for Infallibility.
The texts alleged for it by Cardinal Perron and Mr. Stratford, are partly
prophecies of the Old Testament, partly promises of the New.
1. (Isa. i. 26.) "Thou shalt be called the city of justice, the faithful
city." 2. (Isa. Iii. 1.) "Through thee shall no more pass any that is uncircum-
cised, or unclean."
3. (Isa. lix. 21.) " As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith the
Lord, my spirit that is upon thee, and my words which I have put in thy
mouth, shall not depart out of thy mouth, nor out of the mouth of thy
seed, nor out of the mouth of thy seed's seed, saith the Lord, from hence
forth and for ever."
4. (Isa. lxii. 6.) " Upon thy walls, Jerusalem, I have appointed watch
men all the day and all the night for ever ; they shall not hold their peace."
5. (Jerem. xxxi. 33.) " This shall be the covenant which I will make
with the house of Israel, saith the Lord : I will give my law in their bowels,
and in their heart I will write it ; and I will be their God, and they shall
be my people."
6. (Ezek. xxxvi. 27.) " I will put my spirit within you, and cause you
to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments and do them."
7. (Ezek. xxxvii. 26.) " I will give my sanctification in the midst of
them for ever."
8. (Hos. ii. 19, 20.) "I will espouse thee to me for ever; and I will
espouse thee to me in justice and judgment, and in mercy and commisera
tions; I will espouse thee to me in faith ; and thou shalt know that I am
the Lord."
9. (Cant. iv. 7.) " Thou art all fair, my love, and there is no spot in
thee." Now before we proceed further, let us reflect upon these places, and
make the most of them for the behoof of the Roman church ; and I believe
it will then appear to any one not veiled with prejudice, that not one of
them reaches home to the conclusion intended, which is, that the Roman
church is infallible.
The first place perhaps would do something, but that there are three
main exceptions against it. 1. That here is no evidence, not so much as
that of probability, that this is here spoken of the church of Rome.
2. That it is certain that it is not spoken of the church of Rome ; but of
the nation of the Jews, after their conversion, as is apparent from that
which follows : " Zion shall be redeemed with judgment, and her converts
with righteousness." 3. That it was no way certain, that whatsoever
society may be called, " the city of righteousness, the faithful city," must
be infallible in all her doctrine ; with a great deal more probability, it
might challenge from hence the privilege of being impeccable : which yet
Roman catholics, I believe, do not pretend to.
The second place is liable to the same exceptions ; the church of Rome
is not spoken of in it, but Zion and Jerusalem ; and it will serve as well,
nay better, to prove impeccability than infallibility.
The third place is the Achilles for this opinion, wherein every writer
triumphs ; but I wonder they should do so, considering the covenant here
spoken of is made, not with the church of Rome, but with Zion, and them
that turn from transgression in Jacob : the words are, " And the Redeemer
Y Y

706 A Discourse against the
shall come out of Zion, and unto them that turn from transgression in
Jacob, saith the Lord. As for me, this is my covenant with them, saith
the Lord ; my Spirit that is in thee, and my words," &c. Now if the
church of Rome be Zion, and they that turn from iniquity in Jacob, they
may have title to this covenant ; if not, they must forbear, and leave it to
the Jews after their conversion ; to whom it is appropriated by a more
infallible interpreter than the pope ; I mean St. Paul. (Rom. xi. 26.) And
it seems, the church of Rome also believes as much ; for otherwise, why
does she, in the margin of her bible, send us to that place of St. Paul for
an exposition.
Read the fourth place, and you shall find nothing can be made of it but
this : that the watchmen of Jerusalem shall never cease importuning God
for the sending of the Messias. To this purpose speaks the prophet in
ver. 1. "For Zion's sake I will not hold my peace, and for Jerusalem's
sake I will not rest, until the righteousness thereof go forth as brightness :"
and the " gentiles shall see thy righteousness." But the words following
these that are- objected, make it most evident, which are, "Ye that make
mention of the Lord, keep not silence, and give him no rest, till he estab
lish, and till he make Jerusalem a praise in the earth."
The fifth place had they set down entirely, for very shame they could
not have urged it for the infallibility of the Roman church. The words
are, " Behold the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new cove
nant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah ; not according
to the covenant which I made with their fathers ; but this shall be the cove
nant that I will make with the house of Israel : after those days, saith the
Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts,
and I will be their God, and they shall be my people ; and they shall teach
no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying,
know the Lord ; for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the
greatest of them, saith the Lord." And now I have transcribed the place,
I think it superfluous to make any other answer.
The same answer, and no other, will I make also to the sixth place,
The words are, " Therefore say unto the house of Israel, thus saith the
Lord God, I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for my holy
name's sake : (Ver. 22.) I will take you from among the heathen, and
gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.
(Ver. 24.) Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you. (Ver. 25.) A
new heart also will I give you. (Ver. 26.) And I will put my Spirit in
you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judg
ments, and do them. (Ver. 27.) And ye shall dwell in the land that I
gave to your fathers : I will also save you from all your uncleannesses,
and I will call for the corn, and will increase it, and lay no famine upon
you. And the desolate land shall be tilled. (Ver. 34.) And they shall
say, this land that was desolate, is become like the garden of Eden."
The seventh place also carries its answer in its forehead : " Thus saith
the Lord God, behold I will take the children of Israel from among the
heathen, whither they be gone ; and I will make them one nation in the
land upon the mountains of Israel, and one king shall be king to them all,
&c. to the end of the chapter. In all which place he that can find a syl
lable of the church of Rome, he must have better eyes than I have.
The next (eighth) place would be very pregnant for the church of Rome,
if of courtesy we would grant, that whatsoever is promised to Israel is
intended to them ; as you may see in the place at large, from ver., 17 to
the end of the chapter.
The ninth and last place, out of the Canticles, had it been urged by a

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 707
protestant, it would have been thought a sufficient answer to have said, that
mystical texts are not fit to argue upon. But if this will not serve, then
we answer, 1. That there is no mention nor intimation of the church of
Rome. 2. That it proves either too much, or nothing at all ; that is, that
the Roman church is impeccable, as well as infallible ; unless we will say,
that errors only are spots, and impieties are not.
Out of the New Testament they allege these Texts.
Matt. xvi. 18. " Upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates
of hell shall not prevail against it."
But this is said of the catholic, not of the Roman church ; nor can it
ever be proved, that the church in communion with the see of Rome, is
the catholic church. Secondly, it says something for the perpetuity of the
church, but not for the infallibility of it ; unless you will take for granted
what can never be proved, that a church that teaches any erroneous doc
trine, is a church no longer ; which is all one as if you should say, a man
that has the stone, or gout, or any other disease, is not a man.
They urge Matt, xxviii. 19, 20.
"And I am with you all days, even unto the consummation of the
world." And here also if we will grant, 1. That by you, is meant you and only
you of the church of Rome : 2. That our Saviour has here obliged him
self to assist, not only sufficienter, but also irresistibiliter ; not only to
preserve in the church a light of sufficient direction, as he provided a star
for the wise men, and a pillar of fire and a cloud for the conduct of the
Israelites ; but also compel, or at least necessitate, them to follow it :
3. That he will be with them, not only to keep them from all damnable
and destructive errors, but absolutely from all erroneous doctrines : If these
things, I say, were granted, some good might be done : but certainly these
are ntyaka Mav aitfifluarfa, too great favours to be looked for by strangers.
And yet if all this be granted, we should run into this inconvenience on
the other side; that if the promise be absolute, not only the whole church
of Rome ; not only a general council ; not the pope alone ; but every
bishop, every priest, every one, who is sent by Christ to baptize and preach
the gospel, might claim this assistance by virtue of Christ's words, and
consequently infallibility. They urge Matt, xviii. 17.
" If he will not hear the church, let him be to thee as the heathen and
the publican."
And here again the church must be the church of Rome, or we are as
far to seek as ever. But what if by it be meant (which is most evident out
of the place) every particular church of christians, whereunto any one
christian, injured by another, may address himself for remedy 1 Certainly
whosoever reads the place without prejudice, I am confident, that he shall
not deny, but that the sense of the words is, that if any christian injure
another, and being first admonished of it by him in private ; then by him
before two or three witnesses ; lastly, by the church he lives in ; and yet,
still proceeds on obstinately in doing injury to his brother, he is to be
esteemed as a heathen or a publican : and then if infallibility may be con
cluded, what a multitude of infallible churches shall we have !
They urge Matt, xviii. 20.
" Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in
the midst of them."
yy2

. '"8 a Conference concerning the
But this also either shoots short, or over ; either proves nothing, or too
much : either it proves not the infallibility of the whole church, or it proves
the infallibility of every part of it : either not the infallibility of general
councils, or the infallibility of particular councils ; for there two or three
at least are assembled in Christ's name. But then, besides, these two or
three, for aught I can see or gather from the text, may as Well be of any
other church as the Roman. They urge Luke x. 16.
^He that heareth you, heareth me ; and he that despiseth you, despiseth

me.

But this will not do you any service, unless of favour we grant, that you
here, is you of the church of Rome : and but very little, if that be granted •
for then every bishop, every priest must be infallible. For there is not the
meanest of the messengers of Christ, but this may be verified of him, That
he that heareth him, heareth Christ ; and he that despiseth him, despiseth
Christ. r
They urge out of John xiv. 15, 16.
" I will ask my Father, and he will give you another Paraclete, that he
may abide with you for ever, even the Spirit of truth."
But here, also, what warrant have we, by you, to understand the church
of Rome? whereas he that compares verse 26 with this, shall easily per
ceive, that our Saviour speaks only of the apostles in their own persons ;
for there he says, going on in the same discourse, " The Holy Ghost, whom
the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring
all things to your remembrance, whatsoever 1 have said to you :" which
cannot agree but to the apostles themselves in person ; and not to their
successors, who had not yet been taught, and therefore had not forgotten
any thing, and therefore could not have them brought to their remembrance.
But what if it had been promised to them and their successors 1 Had they
no successors but them of the Roman church ? This indeed is pretended
and cried up, but for proofs of it, desiderantur.
Again, I would fain know whether there be- any certainty, that every
pope is a good christian, or whether he may not be, in the sense of the
scripture, of the world 1 If not, how was it that Bellarmine should have
cause to think, that such a rank of them went successively together to the
devil ?

HI. — A Conference concerning the infallibility of the Roman church :
proving, that the present church of Rome either errs in her worship
ping the blessed Virgin Mary, or that the ancient church did err in
condemning the Collyridians as heretics.
1. Demand. Whether the infallibility of the Roman church be not
the foundation of their faith, who are members of that church 1
Ans. The infallibility of the church is not the foundation, but a part, of
their faith, who are members of the church. And the Roman church is
held to be the church, by all those who are members of it.
Reply. That which is the last reason, why you believe the scripture to
be the written word of God, and unwritten traditions his unwritten word,
and this or that to be the true sense of scripture, that is to you the founda
tion of your faith ; and such unto you is the infallible authority of the
Roman church. Therefore unto you it is not only a part of your faith,

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 709
but also such a part, as is the foundation of all other parts. Therefore
you are deceived, if you think there is any more opposition between being
a part of the faith, and the foundation of other parts of it, than there is
between being a part of a house, and the foundation of it. But whether
you will have it the foundation of your faith, or only a part of it, for the
present purpose, it is all one.
2. Demand. Whether the infallibility of the Roman church be not abso
lutely overthrown, by proving the present Roman church is in error, or
that the ancient was ?
Ans. It is, if the error be in those things wherein she is affirmed to be
infallible ; viz. in points of faith.
Reply. And this here spoken of, whether it be lawful to offer tapers and
incense to the honour of the blessed Virgin, is, I hope, a question concern
ing a point of faith.
3. Demand. Whether offering a cake to the Virgin Mary, be not as
lawful, as to offer incense, and tapers, and divers other oblations, to the
same Virgin 1
Ans. It is as lawful to offer a cake to her honour, as wax tapers ; but
neither the one, nor the other, may be offered to her, or her honour, as the
term or object of the action. For, to speak properly, nothing is offered to
her, or her honour, but to God in the honour of the blessed Virgin. For
incense, it is a foul slander, that it is offered any way to the blessed Virgin ;
for that incensing, which is used in the time of mass, is ever understood by
all sorts of people to be directed to God only.
Reply. If any thing be offered to her, she is the object of that oblation :
as if I see water, and through water something else, the water is the object
of my sight, though not the last object. If I honour the king's deputy,
and by him the king, the deputy is the object of my action, though not the
final object : and to say these things may be offered to her, but not as to
the object of the action, is to say, they may be offered to her, but not to
her. For what else is meant by the object of an action, but that thing, on
which the action is employed, and to which it is directed ?
If you say, that by the object of the action you mean the final object
only, wherewith the action is terminated ; you should then have spoken
more properly and distinctly, and not have denied her simply to be the
object of this action, when you mean only she is not such a kind of object;
no more than you may deny a man to be a living creature, meaning only
that he is not a horse.
Secondly, I say, it is not required of Roman catholics, when they offer
tapers to the saints, that by an actual intention they direct their action
actually to God ; but it is held sufficient, that they know and believe, that
the saints are in subordination and near relation to God, and that they give
this honour to the saints because of this relation ; and to God himself rather
habitually and interpretative, than actually, expressly, and formally : as
many men honour the king's deputy, without having any present thought
of the king, and yet their action may be interpreted an honour to the king,
being given to his deputy, only because he is his deputy, and for his rela
tion to the king. Thirdly, I say, there is no reason or ground in the world
for any man to think, that the Collyridians did not choose the Virgin Mary
for the object of their worship, rather than any other woman or any other
creature, merely for her relation to Christ ; and, by consequence, there is
no ground to imagine, but that at least habitually and interpretative, they
directed their action unto Christ, if not actually and formally. And ergo,
if that be a sufficient defence for the papists, that they make not the blessed
Virgin the final object of their worship, but worship her, not for her own

' *0 A Conference concerning the
sake^but for her relation unto Christ; Epiphanius surely did ill to dune
the Oollyridians with heresy, having nothing to impute to them, but only
that he was informed, that they offered a cake to the honour of the blessed
Virgin ; which honour yet they might, and without question did, give unto
her for her relation unto Christ, and so made her not the last object and
term of their worship : and from hence it is evident, that he conceived the
very action itself substantially and intrinsically malicious; i. e. he believed
it a sin, that they offered to her at all; and so by their action put her in
the p ace of God, by giv.ng unto her this worship proper to God ; and not
that they termmated their action finally in her, or did in very deed think
her to be Ood, and not a creature.
But, to speak properIy-(you say) nothing is offered to her or to her
honour, but to God in honour of the blessed Virgin.
Belike then, if through Henley I go from hence to London, I may not
be said properly to go to Henley, but only to London: or if through water
1 see the sand, I may not be properly said to see the water, but only the
sand. Away with such shifting sophistry ; either leave your practice of
offering to saints, if it be nought, or colour it not over with such empty
distinctions, if it be good : Christ saith to his apostles in regard of their
relation to him, " He that heareth you, heareth me, and he that despiseth
you, despiseth me ;" and yet who doubts, but they that heard the apostles,
did properly hear them, and they that despised them, did properly despise
them, though their action staid not in them, but reached up to heaven and
to Christ himself? You pray to saints and angels, though you do not ter
minate your prayers in them ; and yet I doubt not but your prayers to
saints may be as properly called prayers, as those you make to God him.
self. For though these be of a more excellent nature than they, yet do
they agree in the general nature, that they are both prayers : as, though
a man be a more excellent living creature than a horse, yet he agrees with
him in this, that both are living creatures. But if nothing be properly
offered to her or to her honour, why do you in your sixth answer say, You
may offer any thing to the Virgin Mary, by way of presents and gifts, by
the doctrine of the Roman church ? Certainly he that offers by way of
gift or present, offers as properly as he that offers by way of sacrifice ; as
a horse is as properly a living creature as a man.
But if it were so, as you say, (which is most false) that you did not
properly offer to the blessed Virgin, but to God in honour of her ; yet in
my judgment, this would not qualify or mend the matter, but make it
worse. For, first, who taught you, that in the time of the gospel (after
the accomplishment of the prediction, " Sacrifice and offering thou wouldst
not, but a body hast thou prepared me ;" after this interpretation of it in
the epistle to the Hebrews, " He taketh away the first, that he may estab
lish the second,") that it is still lawful to offer tapers or incense to
God ? Secondly, in my understanding, to offer to God in honour of the
Virgin, is more derogatory from God's honour, than to offer to her in the
honour of God ; for this is, in my apprehension, to subordinate God to
her, to make her the terminating and final object of the action ; to make
God the way, and her the end, and by and through God to convey the
worship unto her.
But for incense (you say) it is a foul slander, that it is offered any way
to the blessed Virgin.
To this I answer, that your imputing slander to me is itself a slander :
for, 1 . In your fifth answer you have given a clear intimation, that you
have never been out of England ; so that you cannot certainly know what
is the practice of your church in this point beyond sea. And he that lives

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 71 1
amongst you, and has but half an eye open and free from prejudice, can
not but see, that the Roman religion is much more exorbitant in the general
practice of it, than it is in the doctrine published in books of controversy ;
where it is delivered with much caution and moderation, nay, cunning and
dissimulation, that it may be the fitter to win and engage proselytes ; who
being once ensnared, though they be afterwards startled with strange and
unlooked-for practices, yet a hundred to one but they will rather stifle their
conscience, and dash all scruples against the pretended rock of their
church's infallibility, and blindly follow those guides, to whose conduct they
have unadvisedly committed themselves, than come off again with the shame
of being reputed weak and inconstant ; so terrible an idol is this vain
nothing, the opinion and censure of foolish man.
But to return again to you, I say, your ignorance of the practice of the
Roman church beyond the seas does plainly convince, that you have rash
ly, and therefore slanderously, charged me with the crime of slander. As
for your reason you add, consider it again, and you will see it is worth
nothing. For what if incensing in time of mass be understood by all sorts
of people to be directed to God alone, (which yet you cannot possibly know)
yet this I hope hinders not, but that in processions you may incense the
images of the saints, and consequently (according to your doctrine) do this
honour to the saints themselves represented by the images. I myself (un
less I am very much mistaken) was present when this very thing was done
to the picture of St. Bennet or St. Gregory, in the cloister of St. Vedastus
in the monastery in Doway.
But indeed what a ridiculous inconsequence is it to think, that wax tapers
may lawfully be offered to the saints, and incense may not ; or if incense
may not, which you seem to disclaim as impious, that wax tapers may !
4. Demand. Whether the Collyridians were not condemned as heretics
by the ancient church, first, for offering a cake upon an anniversary feast
to the blessed Virgin : secondly, for that they did this, not being priests ?
Ans. The Collyridians were condemned as heretics for two things : first,
for employing women in the place and office of priests to offer a cake (not
in the nature of a gift or present but) in the nature of a sacrifice,* which
was never lawful for any but men,f and those consecrated.:):
Secondly, for offering this sacrifice "* wo,uo,§ in the name of the blessed
Virgin, id est, unto her, herself directly and terminatively, as an act of
divine worship and adoration, || due unto her, as unto a sovereign power
and deity .7
Reply. It seems then these women might offer this cake to the honour
and name of the Virgin Mary, if they had done it as a gift or present, and
* Ut in nomen Virginis Collyridem quandam sacrificarent. Epiph. hmr. 78. Offe-
runt pancm in nomen Maris, omncs autem pane participant.
t Deo enim ab aeterno nullatenus mulier sacrificavit. Idem hares. 79.
X Diaconissarum ordo est in ecclesia, sed non ad sacrificandum ,' nam neque diaconis
«oncreditum est, ut aliquod mysterium perficiant. Id. ibid.
§ Vid. sup. notam.
II Mortuis eultuin divinum prsestantes, Id. ibid. — And again : Revera Virgo erat
honorata, sed non ad adorationetn nobis data, sed ipsa adorans Deum. — And again :
Non ut adoretur Virgo, ncc ut Deum hanc efficeret, &c. Sit in honore Maria? ; Pater,
et Filius, et Spiritus S. adoretur, Mariam nemo adoret. Deo debetur hoc mysterium.
Id. ibid. .
T Pro Deo hanc introducere statoerant. Id. ibid. — Revera sanctum erat Mariae
corpus, non tamen Deus. — And again : Mulierem earn appeilavit Joh. ii. velut prophe-
tans : et ne aliqui nimium admirali sanctam, in hanc hersesin dilabantur. — And again :
-Non tamen aliter genita est prseter hominis naturam, sed sicut omnes ex semine viri et
utero mulieris. Id. ibid.

712 A Conference concerning the
not as a sacrifice. Epiphanius then surely was too hasty to condemn them,
being informed of nothing, but that they offered a cake unto her. Methinks
before he had put them in his catalogue he should have inquired whether
they offered this cake as a gift only, or as a sacrifice. Certainly, had the
practice of offering to saints by way of gifts been the practice of the church
in his time, he would not have been so uncharitable, as to condemn that
action as impious and heretical, which might have received so lawful and
pious a construction. But he, good man ! it seems, could not conceive a
difference between a sacrifice, and the offering a creature by way of con
sumption to the honour of that, to which it is offered. The subtle wits of
our times I hope have found out another definition for it, and I shall under
stand by you what it is. But if you can find no other, then certainly,
though setting up a picture, or hanging up a leg, or eye, or ear, in memory
of some miraculous cure, obtained by a saint's intercession, would be a
gift or present only ; yet offering of incense or burning a taper in the
honour of a saint, daub the matter how you will, will be, without question,
a sacrifice. If you say, that there may be such an offering, and yet no
sacrifice ; I would know, then, how you would prove that the Collyridians'
offering was indeed a sacrifice? All that Epiphanius says of them is but
this — Panem proponunt et in Maries nomen offerunt. And though this
offering of theirs was indeed a sacrifice in the notion of the word, which I
have given it, yet doth he not any where say expressly that they did sacri
fice, or offer it as a sacrifice ; but only and barely that they did offer it ;
not using (as good fortune would have it) any word, which doth of neces
sity, and properly, signify to sacrifice ; and therefore you are fain to help
the dice, and alter every place for your advantage. Epiphanius says not,
as you translate him, ut in nomen Virginis Collyridem quandam sacri-
ficent ; nor sacrificantes offerunt, as Petavius ; but ewtttew, which may
as well signify, to consecrate or offer, as to sacrifice, if there be any dif
ference between them. So the next place, offerunt panem in nomen Maria,
omnes autem pane participant; proves not, I hope, offering, by way of
sacrifice, unless the consumption of the oblation make it a sacrifice; which
if it do, how your tapers can be kept from being sacrifices I cannot ima
gine ; unless again perhaps consumption by way of eating will make it a
sacrifice, and by burning will not ; which cannot be, because the whole
burnt-offerings were sacrifices as well as any other.
Your third place is, Deo autem ab mterno nullatenus mulier sacrtficamt.
But upativa, signifies not to sacrifice, but only to perform the office of a
priest • and so Petavius translates the place, nunquam sacerdotio functa
est mulier. And though sacrificing be one perhaps, yet will you not say
it is the only office of a priest ; as your next and last place would have
declared, had you set it down faithfully ; but in that also you juggle again,
and force it to speak to your purpose thus : diaconissarum ordo est in
ecclesia, sed non ad sacrificandum : but Petavius hath translated it truly
thus : quanquam vero diaconissarum in ecclesia ordo sit, non tamen aa
sacerdotii functionem, aut ullam administrationem institutus est. And
now though, by an usual synecdoche, the name of the genus be given to
the species ; and therefore, had a man fairly and candidly translated
uawttw, by sacrifico, I should not have much condemned him; yet to do
it when the question is, whether this their offering, confessed to be an
offering, were in propriety of speech a sacrifice ; to do it for ends, to shift
off a convincing argument, to palliate over a foul matter, by putting a
verbal difference where there is none indeed, and all that you may impen-
tos rerum in fraudem illicere ; that is— but I forbear you.
But, secondly, it is pretended— they offered this sacrifice «j °"°f«*. m the

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 713
name of the blessed Virgin, i. e. unto her, herself, directly and terminately
as an act of divine worship and adoration due unto her, as unto a sovereign
power and deity. — And, to colour and countenance this strange gloss, many
places are quoted out of Epiphanius, which I will examine in order as
they lie.
The first place is, mortuis cultum divinum prcsstantes, where your mean
ing is, I believe, that Epiphanius says, the Collyridians did so ; but the
truth is, he says only mortuos colentes, as Petavius translates it ; and there
fore here once again you help the dice : yet if he had said so, why should
you rather from cultum divinum collect that, that they thought her God,
than from mortuis, that they thought her dead, and therefore certainly not
a God ? Certainly this can be no warrant to you, that Epiphanius charges
them with so thinking : for protestants, you know, impute to papists, that
they give to saints cultum divinum, and yet they do not impute to them
the heresy of thinking, that the saints are sovereign powers and deities :
but as St. Paul accuseth the gentiles, for that, knowing God to be God,
they did not worship him as God ; so, on the other side, protestants con
demn papists, and Epiphanius, for aught we can see hitherto, might con
demn the Collyridians, for that, knowing the blessed Virgin not to be God,
they yet worshipped her as God : that is, gave her that worship, which is
God's own peculiar ; which yet they might do, not because they thought
her God, but because this worship, which was indeed proper to God, they
might think not proper, but communicable to such creatures as were high
in his favour.
The next place is — Revera Virgo erat honorata, sed non ad adora-
tionem nobis data, sed ipsa adorans Deum, <$pc.
1 answer, that the &c. perhaps conceals something more pertinent to
your purpose, but in the words set down there appears to me just nothing ;
for I can frame out of them no other syllogism but this :
Whatsoever Epiphanius in this place says is not to be adored, that the
Collyridians thought to be God.
But Epiphanius here says, the Virgin is not to be adored : ergo, the
Collyridians thought her God.
Of this syllogism I deny the major proposition, and I believe shall stay
as long for a proof of it, as I have done for an answer to some other dis
courses, which, being written in a few days, have waited now with a long
ing expectation for a promised answer many months. If you say, you
would conclude from these words, that they did adore her, and therefore
thought her God ; I have answered already, that they might do this, not
because they thought her God, but because they thought creatures, high in
God's favour, capable of adoration.
The next place (Non ut adoretur Virgo, nee vt Deum hanc efficeret)
tells us, that Christ took flesh of the Virgin, not that she should be adored,
nor to make her God : and this you think imports that they conceive her
God. Yet if I should, condemning your practice of offering tapers to her,
use the same words, and say, Christ took flesh of the Virgin, not that she
should be adored, or to make her God ; you would not yet conceive, that I
charged you with the heresy of believing her God, but only with the im
piety of giving to her that worship, which was peculiar to God : and why
then might not Epiphanius, having like occasion, use the same words to
the Collyridians, upon the same, and no other ground 1
The next place (Mariam nemo adoret, Deo debelur hoc mysterium) is
so far from proving your imagination, that it strongly confirms my asser
tion, that Epiphanius did not impute to the Collyridians the opinion, that
the Virgin Mary was God. If I should say to a papist, the blessed Virgin

714 A Conference concerning the
is not to be worshipped with the worship of Hyperdulia, because such wor-
ship is due only to the mother of God, would they not say I were mad
and argued against myself, for that they believed she was the mother of
God ? By like reason, if Epiphanius knew that the Collyridians believed
the Virgin Mary to be God, he reasoned as wildly against himself in say
ing — Mariam nemo adoret, Deo debetur hoc mysterium — for it is very
true (might they have said) this service is due to God alone : but you know
our belief and profession that she is God, and therefore by your own rule
capable of this worship.
The next place is — Pro Deo hanc introducere studuerunt. And may
not this be justly said to any man, who to any thing besides God gives that
worship, which is proper and peculiar unto God ? What, if to a man that
should teach — the pope had power to dispense with men for the keeping of
God's laws — I should say, pro Deo papam introducis ; must I of neces
sity mean, that that man did verily believe the pope not a man, but a
sovereign power and deity ? St. Paul tells us that covetousness is idolatry ;
he tells us of some, whose god is their belly ; is it therefore consequent,
that every covetous man doth indeed believe his gold, and every glutton
his belly, to be indeed a sovereign power and deity ? Away with such
fopperies. Whosoever loves, or fears, or trusts, in any thing more than
God, may yet be justly said to make that his god ; and whosoever should
worship any creature with that external worship, which God has appro
priated to himself, might justly be said to bring in that creature for God.
St. Paul tells us of some, " who in words professed God," yet factis nega-
bant, " in their deeds denied him ;" so these, on the contrary, may in their
words deny this creature to be God, and in their hearts not think it so;
yet seeing their actions to it are as if it were God, they may be justly
charged, that with their deeds they make this creature God.
Qui fingit sacros ex auro et marmore vultus,
Non facit ille Deos ; qui colit, ille facit
What, if upon consideration of the strangely enormous worship, which
papists give to the Virgin Mary, (swearing by her name, making vows unto
her, offering tapers to her honour, attributing a kind of communicated
omniscience and almost omnipotence to her, as I can easily make good
they do, partly out of the offices of their church, partly out of private
men's works, but set out with license and approbation) what I say, if upon
this consideration I should affirm, pro Deo ipsam introducere conantur ;
would it therefore be consequent, that I must impute this blasphemy to
them, that they believed and taught her to be a sovereign power and deity ?
I trow not. And therefore Epiphanius might say the same of the Collyri
dians, considering their action, without any intent of imputing to them any
such opinion. This Petavius sure saw well enough, and therefore (as I
shall hereafter demonstrate to the eye) to countenance his marginal anno
tation, Quidam Mariam Deum esse crediderunt, he cunningly abuses and
perverts Epiphanius's text with false translation.— Sic pugnat, sic est
metuendus Ulysses.
The next place is, Revera sanctum, erat Maria corpus non tamen
Deus : the body of Mary was truly holy, but not a God. As much to the
purpose as— Tityre, tu patulm — for what if Epiphanius say, she is not
God, and therefore not to be adored ; does it therefore follow, that the Col
lyridians believed she was a God ? He that knows logic or sense, cannot
but know, that he that will confute an adversary's conclusion, must choose
such principles to do it, to which his adversary consents, and out of that
which he grants, prove that which he denies ; or if his first propositions be

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 715
not agreed to by his adversary, he must prove them in the end by such as
are agreed to ; or else he does nothing. And therefore seeing Epiphanius
thinks it sufficient for the convincing of the Collyridians of the unlawful
ness of the practice, to say she was not God ; it is evident, that so far was
he from imputing to them the belief that she was God, that he seems rather
to take the contrary for a principle agreed upon between them, which it
was sufficient to say, and superfluous to prove. This answer I thought
good to make, while I conceived that here Epiphanius had denied the per
son of the Virgin Mary to be God ; but after, upon better consideration, I
found that Petavius had abused me with adding to Epiphanius of his own
— Illafuit — and that Epiphanius says not here, non tamen Deus (she was
not God) of her person, but of her body ; and as yet I do not understand
that you impute to the Collyridians the belief, that her body was God.
The next place (Mulierem earn appellavit, &c.) says no more but this ;
that our Saviour calls the blessed Virgin, woman, that no man might think
her any thing more than a woman, as it were prophetically refuting the
schisms and heresies which would be in the world ; lest some out of excess
of admiration of her, might fall into the dotage of this heresy. Thus far
Epiphanius : but then the question will be, what was this heresy ? You
say, the belief that she was God. I say, not that she was God, but that
they might lawfully offer to her. And as I deny not but it follows, she is
a woman, therefore not a God ; so I think you will grant it follows as
justly, she is a woman, therefore not to be adored with offerings. And,
therefore, seeing the words lie indifferently between us, and are not express
ly and especially here applied for the refutation of that heresy, which you
pretend they were guilty of, I see no reason why Epiphanius might not as
well intend them for that purpose which I conceive, as for that which you
conceive. The last place alleged tells us, that she was begotten and born as other
men and women are : which, if the Collyridians had thought her God,
eternal and absolutely without beginning, should not have been barely said,
but proved, as being in effect the very point in question ; and, therefore,
seeing Epiphanius contents himself with saying so without proof, it is evi
dent he never thought they would make difficulty to grant it, and conse
quently, that they did not believe her to be God eternal.
But then again, if the rule be good which part of our proofs depend
upon, that whatever Epiphanius denies in this discourse, that the Collyri
dians held (for upon that ground from — Non ut Deum hanc efficeret ; et
non tamen Deus, you conclude they believed her God) ; if, I say, this rule
be good, then you should be constant to it ; and now that he says — Non
tamen aliter genita est prater hominum naturam, (she was not begotten
in a different way from other men) you should infer, that they believed not
that she was God, but that she was otherwise born and begotten than the
ordinary sort of men. And so whereas he says before, Non tamen corpus
de catlo tulit (her body was not from heaven), you should infer, that they
believed her body came from heaven. And again, from those — Sanctum
erat Maria corpus, non tamen Deus, you should collect, that they thought
not only her person, but her body, to be God ; or if these be wild and
weak deductions, then you must acknowledge that I have done yours some
favour in vouchsafing them a particular answer.
5. Demand. Whether in the church of Rome it be not an approved and
perpetually practised worship of the blessed Virgin, that incense, which
was never anciently offered unto any, either by Jews or gentiles, but to the
true, or to a supposed true God, and tapers, and divers other oblations,
should be offered to her honour?

**6 A Conference concerning the
Ans. A practice of the church of Rome, and approved too by those that
practise it, belongs not to her, except it be a practice of the church and
approved by her. What her practice is abroad, I know not ; here at home
1 see no such practice ; nor do I know any approbation of it in any of her
public declarations : but this I know, that there is nothing in it unlawful
or savouring of the Collyridian superstition, to offer wax tapers, or any
other thing, to the memory of the blessed Virgin, or any other canonized
saint, either as means to procure their intercession, by these outward signs
of the honour and devotion which they bear to them, (as of old we find
by bt. Augustine* they did use to adorn their tombs with flowers) or as
monuments of their thankfulness for some benefits received by their inter
cession as Theodoretf tells us of eyes, and ears, and hands, some of
silver, (hung up in the chapels of the saints) that had been presented as
oblations by those that had recovered health in those members, according
to their vows made to that purpose in times of sickness.
Reply. I do not deny, but a practice may be tolerated in a church, and
not approved ; as the public stews are in Italy, and usury in England : but
it is one thing to tolerate with condemnation, and another to tolerate with
out condemnation, nay, with condemnation of those that should oppose or
condemn it. And such, I doubt not, upon examination, you may find in
this practice, general in the church of Rome, offering tapers to the saints,
and for their honour: I say, not only to God, at the memories of the saints,
as you would mince the matter, which yet were a groundless superstition
(God having appointed no such sacrifice to be offered to him under the
gospel); but to the saints themselves, and to their honour. Prove this
lawful for either of those purposes you mention, either to procure their
intercession, or as monuments of thankfulness for benefits obtained by it,
and then you shall do something. Otherwise you will but trifle, as now
you have done : for instead of telling us what may be done de jure, you
tell us what of old has been done de facto. As if ab antiquo and a prin-
cipio were all one ; or as if the church (as we pretend) being subject to
corruption, part of this corruption might not possibly have come in St.
Augustine's or Theodoret's time : yet this I say, not as if I would decline
the trial of this cause by St. Augustine or Theodoret ; but because I am
sure you will not be tried by the fathers, no, nor the consent of fathers in
all things ; and therefore there is no reason nor equity in the world, that
you should serve yourselves with their authority in any thing.
But now what is it, which was done in St. Augustine's time, that may
justify the practice of the Roman church ? Was there then any approved
offering of wax tapers and incense to the queen of heaven, or any other
saint ? Nil horum : you neither do, nor can, produce any thing out of St.
Augustine to this purpose. But what then is it ? Why forsooth, they were
used to adorn their tombs : Egregiam vero laudem et spolia ampla : of
old in St. Augustine's time, they were used to adorn their tombs with flow
ers, therefore we may offer tapers to them. Truly an excellent enthymeme,
but I fear the concealed proposition, which should make it a syllogism,
hides its head for shame, and dares not appear; yet we will for once make
* Ad aquas Tibilotanas Episcopo ofFerente projecto, reliquias martyris gloriosissimi
Stephani, ad ejus meinoriam veniebat magnae multitudinis concursus et occursus: ibi
caeca mulier, ut ad episcopum portantem pignora sacra ducerelur, oravit : Flores, quos
ferebat, dedit ; recepit, oculis admovet, protinus vidit. August, de Civit. Dei, 1. 22, c.
8. — Abscedens aliquid de oltari (S. Stephani) florum, quod occurrit, tulit Idem,
ibid. &c.
t TheodoretuB de ourandis affect. Grac. 1. 8.

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 717
bold to draw it forth into light, that you may look upon it and tell us how
you like it. This therefore it is —
Whose soever tombs we adorn, to them and to their honour we may
offer wax tapers.
Consider it, I pray you, and if you approve it, then approve also of
offering tapers, not only to canonized saints, but to all christians that may
have monuments in churches. For all their tombs may be adorned with
more precious and lasting ornaments than flowers ; yet if you had proved
but this only, that in St. Augustine's time, they adorned the saints' tombs
with flowers, by these outward signs to procure their intercession ; this,
though not much to the purpose, had been not absolutely to delude us.
But your quoted places prove not so much as this ; and yet I believe you
quoted the best you could find. Nay, they prove not that they did adorn
their tombs with flowers at all, much less that they did it for your pre
tended purpose ; such fools you think to deal with, that will take any thing
for any thing. Your first place, I say, proves it not, unless out of mere
courtesy we understand by ferebat she brought to adorn St. Stephen's
tomb. The second proves it not, unless we give you leave after altari (without
warrant from St. Augustine) to put in S. Stephani ; whereas I am yet to
seek for any place in St. Augustine, where he calls any altar the altar of
such or such a saint ; which yet I think they forbore, not for the unlawful
ness, but for fear of misconstruction.
Then for Theodoret, he tells us indeed of vows made, of monuments of
thankfulness dedicated for benefits obtained by the intercession of the mar
tyrs. But here also I fear your conscience tells you that you abuse us, and
hide yourself in ambiguities. For to whom does Theodoret say these vows
were made? To whom were these monuments of thankfulness dedicated?
What, to the author or procurers of the received favours ? To God, or to
the martyrs? If to the martyrs, that had been something towards, though
not home, to your purpose : for there is a wide difference between offering
of a creature by way of consumption (as was never lawfully done but to
God alone, as a profession that he is Lord of the creature) and erecting a
permanent monument to a saint's honour ; which I doubt not but it may
lawfully be done to a living saint, much more to the memory of a martyr.
But Theodoret in the place hath not so much as this : nay, it is evident that
these gifts he speaks of, were both vowed and paid to God himself. His
words are — Pie precatos ea consequi, <Src. that they who pray piously,
obtain the things which they desire ; they paying of their vowed presents
in the sign of their recovered health, doth abundantly testify. For their
Lord accepts most graciously these presents, how mean soever.
6. Demand. Whether, according to the doctrine of the Roman church,
this may not be done lawfully by women and children, and men that are
not priests ?
Ans. They may offer any thing by way of gifts and presents, by the
doctrine of the Roman church ; but it is contrary to the Roman doctrine,
for any other than priests, to offer any thing by way of sacrifice, as the
Collyridians did.
Reply. Aristotle says most truly, that true definitions (he means I think
of the terms of the conclusion to be demonstrated) are the best principles
of science; and therefore want of them must needs be a cause of error and
confusion in any discourse. Let me therefore here request you to set down
what is a sacrifice, and how distinguished from an oblation by way of gift
or present, and you will quickly see, that if the Collyridians offering a cake
to the blessed Virgin were indeed a sacrifice, your offering a taper to her

718 A Conference concerning the
must likewise be so : for a sacrifice is nothing else (for aught I know) but
the oblation of any creature, by way of consumption, to the honour of that,
whatsoever it is, to which it is offered. For if you include in the defini-
tion, that this offering must be intended to the highest Lord of all ; so is,
as you pretend, your offering of tapers to the blessed Virgin, intended to
God finally, though not immediately : if you say it must be directed im
mediately to him, and is, not only no lawful sacrifice, but simply no sacri
fice unless it be so ; I say, you may as well require to the essence of a
sacrifice, that it be offered by a priest, and from thence conclude, because
the Collyridians were, you say, no priests, their offering was no sacrifice.
For the object of the action is as extrinsical to the essence of it, as the
efficient ; and therefore, if the defect of a due and legitimate offerer cannot
hinder but that an offering may be a true sacrifice, neither will the want of
a due and lawful object be any hindrance, but still it may be so. Secondly,
I say, this is to confound the essence of things with the lawful use of them :
in effect, as if you should say, that a knife, if misemployed, were a knife
no longer. Thirdly, it is to make it not unlawful to offer incense (which
yet you seem somewhat scrupulous of) or burnt-offerings to the Virgin
Mary, or the saints, or even to living men, provided you know and believe
and profess them to be men and not gods. For this once supposed, these
offerings will be no longer sacrifices ; and to offer to creatures offerings
that are not sacrifices, you say, by the doctrine of the Roman church, is
lawful. It is, lastly, to deny (which is most ridiculous) that the pagans
did indeed sacrifice to any of their inferior gods.
7. Demand. If it be said, that this worship, which they give to the
blessed Virgin, is not that of Latria, but that of Dulia or Hyperdulia, for
that they do not esteem her God ; or if it be said, that their worship to her
is not finally terminated neither, but given her for her relation to Christ ;
I demand, whether, as it is in St. Paul's judgment a great crime for him that
knows God, not to worship him as God, so it be not as great a crime for
him that knows her not to be God, yet to worship her (as if she were God)
with the worship which is proper, and hath been always appropriated to
God alone ? Such is the worship of oblations.
Ans. The worship of oblations, as worship is taken largely, for honour,
and oblations for a gift or present, was never appropriated to God alone :
take worship and oblations in any higher sense, and so it is not allowed in
the church of Rome.
Reply. The oblation of things, by way of consumption, is the worship
I spoke of: this is a higher matter than that of gifts and presents, and this
is allowed in the church of Rome to be employed on and directed unto
(though not terminated in) the Virgin Mary and other saints.
8. Demand. Whether any thing can be said for the justifying the doc
trine and practice of the Roman church in this matter which might not also
have been as justly pretended for the justification of the Collyridians in
their opinion and practice ; seeing it was never imputed to them, that they
accounted the blessed Virgin, God, or that they believed in more gods than
one ; and seeing their choosing her out, rather than any other woman, or
any other creature, for the object of their devotion, shows plainly, that they
gave it her for her relation to Christ.
Ans. The Collyridians cpuld not say this, as appears by what has been
said before : and it is a most shameless slander upon God's church, and
such as (without repentance) will lie heavy upon his soul that uttered it,
that the Collyridians might as justly and truly have said all this for them
selves, as papists for themselves.
Reply. To this I reply four things. 1. That to my last and most con-

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 7ig
vincing reason you have answered (as much as you could, I believe, but
yet you have answered) nothing ; and I am well content you should do so ;
for where nothing is to be had, the king himself must lose his right.
2. That if I had thought or spoken better of the Collyridians than they
deserved, yet I cannot see how this had been to slander the church of
Rome. 3. That I did not positively affirm, that the Collyridians might do
so, but desired only it might be inquired into and examined, whether, for
the reasons alleged, they might not do so. 4. And, lastly, upon a thorough
examination of the matter I do now affirm, what before I did not, that the
Collyridians, for aught appears to the contrary, might justly and truly have
said, for the justification of their practice, as much, nay, the very same
things, that the papists do for theirs. For they might have said, We are
christians, and believe the scripture, and believe there is but one God. We
offer not to the blessed Virgin, as believing she is God, but the mother of
God ; our worship of her is not absolute but relative, not terminated in her,
but given to her for her Son's sake : and if our practice may be allowed,
we are content to call our oblation not a sacrifice, but a present; neither is
there any reason, why it should be called a sacrifice, more than the offering
and burning a taper to the honour of the same Virgin. All this the Colly
ridians might have said for themselves ; and therefore, I believe you will
have more cause to repent you for daubing over impiety with untempered
mortar, than I shall have for slandering the Roman church with a matter
of truth.
9. Demand. Whether therefore one of the two must not of necessity
follow ; that either the ancient church erred, in condemning the opinion
and practice of the Collyridians as heretical ; or else that the church of
Rome errs, in approving the same opinion, and the same practice in effect,
which in them was condemned? That is, whether the church of Rome
must not be heretical with the Collyridians, or else the Collyridians catho
lics with the church of Rome 1
Ans. It appears by the former answers, that neither did the ancient
church err in condemning the opinion and practice of the Collyridians, as
heretical, nor doth the church of Rome approve the same opinion, or the
same practice.
Reply. The substance of the former answers is but this : That the
papists offer to the Virgin Mary, and other saints, wax tapers by way of
gift or present, not of sacrifice ; and to her, not as to a god, but as the
mother of God ; but that the Collyridians offered to her by way of sacri
fice, as to a sovereign power and deity. To this I have replied, and provedj
that it no way appears, that the Collyridians did believe the blessed Virgin
to be a sovereign power and deity, or that she was not subordinate to God.
Then, that their offering might be called a gift, as well as the papists', and
the papists' a sacrifice, as well as theirs ; both of them being a consump
tion of a creature in honour of the blessed Virgin, and neither of them
more than so ; and, therefore, either the Collyridians must stand with the
church of Rome or the church of Rome fall with the Collyridians. It had
been perhaps sufficient for me, thus to have vindicated my assertion from
contrary objections, without taking on myself the burden of proving a
negative ; yet to free from all doubt the conformity of the Roman church
with the Collyridians, in this point, I think it will be necessary to shew,
and that by many very probable arguments, that Epiphanius did not im
pute to them the pretended heresy of believing the Virgin Mary, God; for
then that other evasion, that their oblation was a sacrifice, and the papists'
is not, together with this pretence, will of itself fall to the ground.
Now, an opinion may be imputed to a man two ways ; either because

720 A Conference concerning the
he holds and maintains it expressly, and formally, and in terms ; or be
cause it may by a rational deduction be collected from some other opinion,
which he does hold : in this latter sense, I deny not but Epiphanius might
impute this opinion, we speak of, to the Collyridians, as a consequence
upon their practice, which practice they esteemed lawful ; but that they
held it and owned it formally, and in terms ; this, I say, Epiphanius does
not impute to them, which I think for these seven reasons.
My first reason is, because he could not justly do so, and therefore with
out evident proof we may not say he did so ; for this were to be unchari-
table to him, in making him uncharitable to others. Now I say he could
not justly charge them with this opinion, because he was not informed of
any such opinion that they held, but only of their practice, and this prac
tice was no sufficient proof that they held this opinion. That his infor
mation reached no further than their practice, appears out of his own
words : " I have heard (saith he, Hseres. 78,) another thing with great
astonishment, that some being madly affected to the blessed Virgin, endea
vour to bring her in in God's place, being mad and beside themselves : for
they report, that certain women in Arabia have devised this vanity, to have
meetings, and offer a cake to the blessed Virgin." The same practice he
sets down, Hasres. 79. But that he was informed of any such opinion that
they held, he has not a word or syllable to any such purpose ; and yet if
he had been informed of any, here had been the place to set it down ;
which certainly, writing his book rather of heretical opinions than prac
tices, he would not have omitted to do, if there had been occasion : his
silence therefore is a sufficient argument, that he was not informed of any
such opinion that they held.
Now that their practice was no assurance that they held this opinion, it
is manifest ; because they might ground it, not upon this opinion, that she
was God, but upon another as false, though not altogether so impious, that
the worship of oblations was not proper to God alone. And therefore,
though Epiphanius might think, or fear, that possibly they might ground
their practice upon that other impious opinion, and therefore out of abund
ant caution confute that also, as he doth obliquely and in a word, and once
only in all his long discourse, by telling them that our Saviour called her
woman ; yet he had no ground from their practice to assure himself, that
certainly they did hold so. Nay, justice and reason and charity would,
that he should incline himself to believe, that they grounded their practice
upon that other opinion, which had less impiety in it ; that is, that this wor
ship of oblations was not proper to God, but communicable to creatures
high in his favour.
My second is, because, if Epiphanius had known, that these Collyridians
held the blessed Virgin to be a supreme power and deity, this being a far
greater matter than offering a cake to her, should in all probability rather
have given them their denomination ; at least when he sets down what their
heresy was, he would have made this part of it, that they did believe so :
but to the contrary, in his Anacephalaeosis, p. 130, he thus describes them :
" they that offer to the name of the blessed Virgin cakes, who are called
Collyridians." And again, p. 105, " they that offer to the blessed Virgin
cakes, who are called Collyridians :" so to the seventy-ninth heresy he
gives this title, " against the Collyridians, who offer to Mary :" so Hseres.
78 and 79, he sets down what he heard of them ; but no where, that they
held this opinion of her. I conclude, therefore, that he never conceived
this opinion to be a part of their heresy, and they were no further charge
able with it, than as a probable consequent upon their practice.
My third is, because, had the Collyridians held her God, they would

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 721
have worshipped her all the year long, and not only once a year at a solemn
time, as Epiphanius says they did.
My fourth is, because, if Epiphanius had known, that they held her God,
he would questionless have urged them with those attributes which are
given to God in scripture, as eternity, immortality, impassibility, omnipo
tence, &c. and shewed them, that if they believed the scripture, they could
not think of her any of those things ; if they did not, they had no reason
to think of her any thing more than of an ordinary woman.
My fifth is, because, had their opinion been, that the blessed Virgin was
God, a great part of Epiphanius's discourse were plainly ridiculous ; both
where he says only without proof, she was not a god, but a mortal crea
ture, which to them that held the contrary should not have been said, but
proved ; but especially where he speaks to this purpose, (as he does very
frequently) that the honour of oblations was not to be given to angels or
men, much less to women, but only to God : for what had that been to the
Collyridians, if they thought her (as is pretended) a sovereign power and
deity ? To what purpose was it for Epiphanius to ask, Quis propheta ?
"What prophet ever permitted, that a man, much less a woman, should be
adored, though he be yet alive? Nor John, nor Tecla, nor any other saint.
For neither shall the old superstition have dominion over us, that, leaving
the living God, we should adore his creatures :" to what end, I say, was all
this, if they thought her not a saint, nor creature, but God himself, and the
Lord of all ? How did this argument touch them ? Ne angelos quidem
— " He suffers not the very angels to be adored, how much less the daugh
ter of Anna." If they thought her not the daughter of Anna, but God
eternal, in vain had it been to say to them — not to a woman, no, nor to a
man, but to God alone, is this mystery (of oblation) due. — So that the
angels themselves are not fit subjects for such an honour. Or again :
" Let the creature be turned to the Creator : let shame at length compel
you to .worship God alone." Or, lastly, that so often repeated : " Let
Mary be honoured, but the Lord only adored." For they might have
answered all this in a word, saying, all this discourse sits beside the cushion,
and concerns us and our offerings nothing at all : for we believe the bless
ed Virgin, to whom we offer, neither man, nor woman, nor angel, nor
creature, but a deity.
A sixth reason let it be this : If Epiphanius did indeed say of the Colly
ridians, as is pretended, that they held the Virgin Mary God, and so dif
ference their practice from the papists ; then the author of this answer, and
Petavius in his translation, needed not to have directed to him what he
should say, nor make him say so, whether he will or not : but it is evident
they do so, as of the author of this answer I have already shewn ; and,
for Petavius's part, I will so present it to your view, that if you will not
shut your eyes, you shall not choose but see it.
First, then, Hseres. 78, prope finem, he (Petavius) sets in his margin,
quidam Deum Mariam esse crediderunt ; and, to countenance this with a
loquuntur of his own putting in, makes them speak of her like mad men,
i. e. they said she was God ; whereas in Epiphanius's Greek they say just
nothing. Secondly, to fasten the pretended opinion on them, he translates xtvofavtiua,
novum dogma ; presuming, it seems, xtvo^omiua. would easily be mistaken
for xmm^um)pa ; and therefore means nothing by it, but a vanity or folly.
Thirdly, he translates tovtoyt, illud ; and so makes it look backward to
that pretended novum dogma of the Collyridians ; whereas it signifies there
(and), and looks forward to their practice.
Fourthly, With the help of a colon, he stops the sense at commentas
z z

722 A Conference concerning Infallibility of the Roman Church.
fuisse ; whereas in Epiphanius there is but a comma, and the sense goes
on without suspension.
Fifthly, With an adeo vt, he brings in their action, as an effect of their
former opinion ; whereas Epiphanius lays nothing to their charge but their
action only: so that, whereas Epiphanius's words truly translated run
thus, " Another thing I have received with great astonishment, that others
being mad concerning the blessed Virgin, have and do go about to bring
her in the place of God ; being mad, I say, and beside themselves : for
they report, that certain women in Arabia, have brought this vanity of
offering a cake to her name :" Petavius makes them thus : " Not without
admiration we have heard another thing, that some in these things that
concern the most holy Virgin, have proceeded to that degree of madness,
that they would obtrude her upon us for a god, and speak of her as mad-
men : for they report, that certain women in Arabia have invented that
new opinion ; so that to the Virgin's name and honour they offer by way
of sacrifice a cake or wreath of bread."
Again, in the same hasres. «pouy£«< 8m ywaauav he translates advantage
ously, per mulieres sacrificia facere. Whereas upovyew is more general
than sacrificia facere, and signifies sacris operari, or sacros ritus pera-
gere. Again, in the same place, whereas Epiphanius says, simply and abso
lutely, " let no man offer to her name ;" he makes it, " let no man offer
sacrifice to her name;" as if you might lawfully offer any thing, provided
you do not call it a sacrifice.
So again, hseres. 79, besides his putting cunningly — ipsa fuit — which
before we took notice of; he makes no scruple to put in dogma and sacri-
ficium, wheresoever it may be for his purpose. Epiphanius's title to this
heresy is, Against the Collyridians, who offer to Mary — Petavius puts in —
sacrifice. Again, in the same page, before D. he puts in his own illo dogmate ;
and whereas Epiphanius says — in all this, (he makes it) in all this opinion.
Page 1061. ¦to BijiMftjs vitovoms, he translates, this womanish opinion;
whereas wtoroia, though perhaps it may signify a thought, or act of think
ing, yet I believe it never signifies an opinion, which we hold.
Ibid, at B. ¦tomvto, this, he renders, this opinion.
Page 1064, at C. " Nor that we should offer to her name," simply and
absolutely : he makes it, " Nor that we should offer sacrifice to her name."
So many times is he fain to corrupt, and translate him partially, lest in
condemning the Collyridians, he might seem to have involved the practice
of the Roman church in the same condemnation.
My seventh and last reason is this : had Epiphanius known, that the
Collyridians held the Virgin Mary to be a sovereign power and deity, then
he could not have doubted, whether this their offering was to her, or to God
for her ; whereof yet he seems doubtful and not fully resolved, as his own
words intimate, haores. 79, ad fin. Quam multa, &c. " How many things
may be objected against this heresy ! For idle women, either worshipping
the blessed Virgin, offer unto her a cake, or else they take upon them to
offer for her this foresaid ridiculous oblation. Now both are foolish, and
from the devil."
These arguments, I suppose, do abundantly demonstrate to any man not
veiled with prejudice, that Epiphanius imputed not to the Collyridians the
heresy of believing the Virgin Mary God ; and if they did not think her
God, there is then no reason imaginable, why their oblation of a cake
should not be thought a present, as well as the papists offering a taper ; or
that the papists' offering a taper, should not be thought a sacrifice, as well

An Argument from communicating Infants. 723
as their offering a cake : and seeing this was the difference pretended
between them, this being vanished, there remains none at all : so that my
first conclusion stands yet firm ; that either the ancient church erred in
condemning the Collyridians, or the present errs in approving and prac
tising the same worship.

IV.— An Argument drawn from the admitting Infants to the Eucharist,
as without which they could not be saved, against the Church's Infal
libility.
The condition, without the performance whereof no man can be admit
ted to the communion of the church of Rome, is this : that he believe
firmly, and without doubting, whatsoever the church requires him to believe.
More distinctly and particularly thus :
He must believe all that to be Divine revelation, which that church
teaches to be such ; as the doctrine of the Trinity ; the hypostatical union
of two natures in the person of Christ ; the procession of the Holy Ghost
from the Father and the Son ; the doctrine of Transubstantiation, and such
like. Whatsoever that church teaches to be necessary, he must believe to be
necessary : as baptism for infants ; faith in Christ, for those that are
capable of faith ; penance for those that have committed mortal sin after
baptism, &c.
Whatsoever that church declares expedient and profitable, he must believe
to be expedient and profitable : as monastical life ; prayer to saints ; prayer
for the dead ; going on pilgrimages ; the use of pardons ; veneration of
holy images and relics ; Latin service, where the people understand it not ;
communicating the laity in one kind, and such like.
Whatsoever that church holdeth lawful, he must believe lawful : as to
marry ; to make distinction of meats, as if some were clean and others
unclean ; to fly in time of persecution ; for them that serve at the altar, to
live by the altar ; to testify a truth by oath, when a lawful magistrate shall
require it ; to possess riches, &c.
Now it is impossible, that any man should certainly believe any thing,
unless either it be evident of itself, or he have some certain reason (at least
some supposed certain reason) and infallible ground for his belief. Now
the doctrines, which the church of Rome teacheth, it is evident and unde
niable that they are not evident of themselves, neither evidently true, nor
evidently credible. He therefore that will believe them, must of" necessity
have some certain and infallible ground, whereon to build his belief of
them. There is no other ground for a man's belief of them, especially in many
points, but only an assurance of the infallibility of the church of Rome.
No man can be assured, that that church is infallible, and cannot err,
whereof he may be assured that she hath erred, unless she had some new
promise of Divine assistance, which might for the future secure her from
danger of erring ; but the church of Rome pretends to none such.
Nothing is more certain than that that church hath erred, which hath
believed and taught irreconcilable contradictions, one whereof must of
necessity be an error.
That the receiving the sacrament of the eucharist is necessary for infants,
and that the receiving thereof is not necessary for them ; that it is the will
of God, that the church should administer the sacrament to them, and that
zz2

724 An Argument from communicating Infants,
it is not the will of God, that the church should do so, are manifest and
irreconcilable contradictions ; supposing only (that which is most evident)
that the eucharist is the same thing, of the same virtue and efficacy now,
as it was in the primitive church ; that infants are the same things they
were, have as much need, are capable of as much benefit by the eucharist
now, as then ; as subject to irreverent carriages then, as now ; and, lastly,
that the present church is as much bound to provide for the spiritual good
of infants, as the ancient church was : I say, these things supposed, the
propositions before set down are plain and irreconcilable contradictions ;
whereof the present Roman church doth hold the negative, and the ancient
church of Rome did hold the affirmative : and therefore it is evident, that
either the present church doth err, in holding something not necessary,
which is so ; or that the ancient church did err in holding something neces
sary, which was not so.
For the negative proposition, viz. That the eucharist is not necessary for
infants ; that it is the doctrine of the present church of Rome, it is most
manifest, first, from the disuse, and abolition, and prohibition, of the con
trary ancient practice. For if the church did conceive it necessary for
them, either simply for their salvation, or else for their increase or con
firmation in grace, and advancement to a higher degree of glory, (unless
she could supply some other way their damage in this thing, which evi
dently she cannot) what an uncharitable sacrilege is it, to debar and defraud
them of the necessary means of their so great spiritual benefit! Especially
seeing the administration of it might be so ordered, that irreverent casual
ties might easily be prevented ; which yet, should they fall out, against the
church's and pastor's intention^ certainly could not offend God, and in rea
son should not offend man ! Or if the church do believe, that upon such
a vain fear of irreverence (which we see moved not the ancient church at
all) she may lawfully forbid such a general, perpetual, and necessary
charity, certainly herein she commits a far greater error than the former.
Secondly, from the council of Trent's anathema, denounced on all that
hold the contrary, in these words ; " if any man say, that the receiving of
the eucharist is necessary for little children, hefore they come to years of
discretion, let him be anathema." Concil. Trid. Sess. 21. De communione
parvulorum, Cant. 4.
Now for the affirmative part of the contradiction, to make it evident that
that was the doctrine of the ancient church, I will prove it, first, from the
general practice of the ancient church, for several ages. Secondly, by the
direct and formal testimonies of the fathers of those times. Thirdly, by
the confession of the most learned antiquaries of the Roman church. My
first argument I form thus : If to communicate infants was the general
practice of the ancient church for many ages, then certainly the church
then believed, that the eucharist was necessary for them, and very avail
able for their spiritual benefit ; but it is certain, that the communicating of
infants was the general practice of the church for many ages ; therefore
the church of those times thought it necessary for them. To deny the
consequence of the proposition is to charge the church with extreme folly,
wilful superstition, and perpetual profanation of the blessed sacrament. As
for the assumption, it is fully confirmed by Clemens Rom. Constit. Apost.
1. 3, c. 20 ; Dionysius Areopagita De Eccles. Hierar. cap. ult. ; S. Cy
prian, and a council of African bishops with him, Ep. 59, ad Fidum; and
in his treatise De lapsis. p. 137, edit. Pamel. ; Paulinus, bishop of Nola,
in Italy, an. 353, in Ep. 12, ad Senem: out of Ordo Romanus, cited by
Alcuinus, S. Bede's scholar, and master to Charlemain, in his book De
Divinis Officiis, cap. De Sab. Sancto Pasc. Gennadius MassUiensis De

against the Infallibility of the Roman Church. 725
Ecchs. Dogmatibus, c. 52, Concil. Toletanum, 2 Can. 11. It continued
in the western church unto the days of Lewis the Debonnaire, witness
Cardinal Perron Des Passages de St. Augustine, p. 100. Some footsteps
of it remained there in the time of Hugo de S. Victore, as you may see,
lib. 1. De Sacram. etCerem. cap. 20. It was the practice of the church
of the Armenians in Waldensis' time, as he relates out of Guido, the Car-
melite, tom. 11. De. Sacr. c. 91, De erroribus Armenorum. It is still in
force m the church of the Abyssines, witness Franc. Alvarez, Hist. Mthiop.
c. 22, et Thomas a Jesu de procuranda salute omnium gentium. It has
continued without any interruption in the Greek church unto this present
age, as may be evidently gathered out of Lyranus, in ch. vi. John ; Arcu-
dius, 1. i. c. 14, et 1. iii. c. 40, De Concord. Eccles. Orient, et Occident.
in Sacram. Administratione ; Card. Perron Des Passages de S. Augus
tine, p. 100. Where he also assures us of the primitive church in general,
that she gave infants the eucharist as soon as they were baptized ; and that
the custom of giving this sacrament to little infants the church then observ
ed; and before, p. 21, that in those ages it was always given to infants
together with baptism. The same is likewise acknowledged by"Contzen in
John vi. ver. 54, and by Thomas a Jesu de procuranda salute omnium
gentium. So that this matter of the practice of the ancient church is suf
ficiently cleared. Seeing therefore the ancient church did use this custom,
and could have no other ground for it, but their belief that this sacrament
was necessary for infants ; it follows necessarily, that the church then did
believe it necessary.
But deductions, though never so evident, are superfluous, and may be set
aside, where there is such abundance of direct and formal authentical testi
monies ; whereof some spoke in thesi, of the necessity of the eucharist for
all men, others in hypothesi, of the necessity of it for infants.
My second argument, from the testimonies of the fathers of those times,
I form thus : That doctrine in the affirmative whereof the most eminent
fathers of the ancient church agree, and which none of their contempora
ries have opposed or condemned, ought to be taken for the catholic doc
trine* of the church of those times ; but the most eminent fathers of the
ancient church agree in the affirmation of this doctrine, that the eucharist
is necessary for infants, and none of their contemporaries have opposed or
condemned it ; ergo, it ought to be taken for the catholic doctrine of the
church of their times. The major of this syllogism is delivered and fully
proved by Cardinal Perron, in his letter to Casaubon, 5 obs. and is.indeed
so reasonable a postulate, that none but a contentious spirit can reject it.
For confirmation of the minor, I will allege, first, their sentences, which
in thesi affirm the eucharist to be generally necessary for all, and therefore
for infants ; and then their suffrages, who in hypothesi avouch the neces
sity of it for infants.
The most pregnant testimonies of the first rank are these : of Irena?us,
lib. iv. cont. hares, c. 34, where he makes our union to Christ by the
eucharist the foundation of the hope of our resurrection, in these words :
" As the bread of earth, after the invocation of God, is now not common
* The reader, when he meets with the phrase, catholic doctrine, in this and the fol
lowing discourse, must remember, that it does not signify articles of faith determined
in any general councils, which might be looked upon as the faith of the whole church;
but the current and common opinion of the age, which obtained in it without any
known opposition and contradiction. Neither need this be wondered at, since they are
about matters far removed from the common faith of christians, and have no necessary
influence upon good life and manners, whatsoever necessity by mistake of some scrip-
tures might be put upon them.

726 An Argument from communicating Infants,
bread, but the eucharist, consisting of two things, an earthly, and a hea
venly ; so our bodies receiving the eucharist, are not now corruptible (for
ever) but have hope of resurrection." The like he hath, lib. v. c. 2. And
hence in probability it is, that the Nicene council styled this sacrament,
Symbolum Resurrectionis, the pledge of our resurrection : and Ignatius,
Ep. ad Eph. — Pharmacum immortalitatis, the medicine of immortality.
Cyril. Alex. lib. iv. in Joan. " They shall never partake, nor so much
as taste the life of holiness and happiness, which receive not the Son in the
mystical benediction." Cyril, lib. x. in Joan. c. xiii. et lib. xi. c. 27. " This
corruptible nature of our body could not otherwise be brought to life and
immortality, unless this body of natural life were conjoined to it." The
very same things saith Gregory Nyssen. Orat. Catech. c. 37. And that
they both speak of our conjunction with Christ by the eucharist, the ante
cedents and consequents do fully manifest, and it is a thing confessed by
learned catholics.
Cyprian, De ccena Domini, and Tertullian, De resur. carnis, speak to
the same purpose : but I have not their books by me, and therefore cannot
set down their words. St. Chrysostom, Horn. 47, in Joh. on these words :
Nisi manducaveritis, has many pregnant and plain speeches to our pur
pose. As, " The words here spoken are very terrible : verily, saith he, if
a man eat not my flesh, and drink not my blood, he hath no life in him :
for whereas they said before, this could not be done, he shews it not only
not impossible, but also very necessary." And, a little after : " He often
iterates his speech concerning the holy mysteries, shewing the necessity of
the thing, and that by all means it must be done." And again : " What
means that, which he says, My flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink
indeed : either that this is the true meat, that saves the soul ; or to confirm
them in the faith of what he had spoken, that they should not think he
spoke enigmatically, or parabolically ; but know, that by all means they
must eat his body."
But most clear and unanswerable is that place, lib. iii. De sacerdotio,
where he saith, " If a man cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven, unless
he be born again of water and the Holy Spirit ; and if he which eats not
the flesh of our Lord, and drinks not his blood, is cast out of eternal life ;
and all these things cannot be done by any other, but only by those holy
hands, the hands, I say, of the priest ; how then, without their help, can
any man either avoid the fire of hell, or obtain the crowns laid up for us?"
Theophylact. in vi. Joan. " When therefore we hear, that unless we
eat the flesh of the Son of man, we cannot have life, we must have faith
without doubting in the receiving of the divine mysteries, and never inquire
how : for the natural man, that is, he which followeth human, that is,
natural reasons, receives not the things which are above nature, and
spiritual ; as also he understands not the spiritual meat of the flesh of our
Lord, which they that receive not, shall not be partakers of eternal life, as
not receiving Jesus, who is the true life." S. Augustine De pec. mor. et
remis. c. 24. " Very well do the puny christians call baptism nothing else
but salvation, and the sacrament of Christ's body nothing else but life.
From whence should this be, but as I believe, from the ancient and apostoli
cal tradition, by which this doctrine is implanted into the churches of Christ,
that only by baptism and the participation of the Lord's table any man can
attain either to the kingdom of God, or to salvation, or to eternal life."
Now we are taught by the learned cardinal, that when the fathers speak
not as doctors, but as witnesses of the customs of the church of their times ;
and do not say I believe this should be so holden, or so understood, or so
observed; but that the church from one end of the earth to the other

against the Infallibility of the Roman Church. 727
believes it so, or observes it so ; then we no longer hold what they say, for
a thing said by them, but as a thing said by the whole church ; and princi
pally when it is in points, whereof they could not be ignorant, either because
of the condition of the things, as in matters of fact ; or because of the suf
ficiency of the persons : and, in this case, we argue no more upon their
words probably, as we do when they speak in the quality of particular
doctors, but we argue thereupon demonstratively.
For example : St. Augustine, the sufficientest person which the church of
his time had, speaking of a point wherein he could not be ignorant, says :
" Not that I believe the eucharist to be necessary to salvation ; but the
churches of Christ believe so, and have received this doctrine from aposto
lical tradition :" therefore I argue upon his words not probably, but demon
stratively, that this was the catholic doctrine of the church of his time.
And thus much for the thesis, that the eucharist was held generally neces
sary for all. Now for the hypothesis, that the eucharist was held neces
sary for infants in particular. Witnesses hereof are St. Cyprian, Pope
Innocentius I. and Eusebius Emissenus, with St. Augustine, • together with
the author of the book, entitled Hypognostica.
Cyprian indeed does not in terms affirm it, but we have a very clear
intimation of it in his epistle to Fidus. For whereas he, and a council of
bishops together with him, had ordered, that infants might be baptized and
sacrificed, that is, communicated, before the eighth day, though that were
the day appointed fbr circumcision by the old law ; there he sets down this
as the reason of their decree — that the mercy and grace of God was to be
denied to no man.
Pope Innocent I. in Ep. ad Episc. Cone. Milev. qua est inter August.
93, concludes against the pelagians, that infants could not attain eternal
life without baptism, because without baptism they were incapable of the
eucharist, and without the eucharist could not have eternal life. His words
are: "But that which your fraternity affirms them to preach, that infants
without the grace of baptism may have the rewards of eternal life, is cer
tainly most foolish ; for unless they eat the flesh of the Son of man, and
drink his blood, they shall have no life in them."
Now that this sense, which I have given his words, is indeed the true
sense of them, and that his judgment upon the point was as I have said,
it is acknowledged by Maldonate in Joan. vi. ver. 54 ; by Binnius upon
the Councils, tom. i. p. 624 ; by Sanctesius, Repet. vi. c. 7 ; and it is
affirmed by St. Augustine, who was his contemporary, held correspondence
by letters with him, and therefore in all probability could not be ignorant
of his meaning. I say he affirms it as a matter out of question, Ep. 106,
and contr. Julian, 1. i. c. 4, where he tells us that Pelagius, in denying
this, did dispute contra sedis apostolica authoritatem, against the authority
of the see apostolic. And after: "But if they yield to the see apostolic,
or rather to the Master himself and Lord of the apostles, who says that
they shall not have life in them, unless they eat the flesh of the Son of
man, and drink his blood, which none may do but those that are baptized ;
then at length they will confess, that infants not baptized cannot have
life." Now I suppose no man will doubt, but the belief of the apostolic see was
then (as St. Augustine assures us, 1. i. cont. Jul. c. 4,) the belief of the
church of Rome, taking it for a particular church ; and then it will pre
sently follow, that either other churches do not think themselves bound to
conformity of belief with the Roman church, notwithstanding Irenseus^s
necesse est ad hanc ecclesiam omnem convenire ecclesiam ; or that this
was then the doctrine of the catholic church. For Eusebius Emissenus, I

728 An Argument from communicating Infants,
cannot quote any particular proof out of him : but his belief in this point
is acknowledged by Sanctes. Repet. vi. c. 7 ; likewise for St. Augustine,
the same Sanctesius, and Binnius, and Maldonate, either not mindful or not
regardful of the anathema of the council of Trent, acknowledge (in the
places above quoted) that he was also of the same belief: and, indeed, he
professeth it so plainly and so frequently, that he must be a mere stranger
to him that knows it not, and very impudent that denies it. Eucharistiam
infantibus putat necessariam Augustinus, say also the divines of Lou-
vaine, in their index to their edition of St. Augustine ; and they refer us in
their index only to tom. ii. p. 185 ; that is, to the 106th Epist. (the words
whereof I have already quoted, to shew the meaning of Innocentius) and
to tom. vii. p. 282 ; that is, 1. i. De pec. mor. et remis. c. 20, where his
words are : " Let then all doubt be taken away : let us hear our Lord, (I
say) saying, not of the sacrament of holy baptism, but of the sacrament
of his table (to which none may lawfully come, but he which has been
baptized) unless you eat the flesh of the Son, and drink his blood, you
shall have no* life in you. What seek we any further ? What can be
answered hereunto ? What, will any man dare to say, that this appertains
not to little children ; and that without the participation of his body and
blood, they may have life 1" &c. with much more to the same effect. Which
places are indeed so plain and pregnant for that purpose, that I believe they
thought it needless to add more ; otherwise, had they pleased they might
have furnished their index with many more references to this point ; as,
De pec. mor. et rem. 1. i. c. 24 ; where of baptism and the eucharist he
tells us, that Salus et vita aterna sine his frusta promittitur parvulis.
The same he has Cont. 2, Epist. Pelag. ad Bonifaciam, I. i. c. 22, (which
yet by Gracian, De confec. D. 3, c. Nulli, and by T. Aquinas, p. 3, q. 3,
art. 9, ad tertiam, is strangely corrupted, and made to say the contrary)
and 1. iv. c. 4, the same Cont. Julian. 1. i. c. 4, and 1. iii. c. 11, 12, Cont.
Pelag. et Celest. 1. ii. c. 8, de Pradest. Sanctorum ad Prosp. et Hilar.
1. i. c. 14. Neither doth he retract or contradict this opinion any where,
or mitigate any one of his sentences touching this matter, in this book of
Retractations. Sanctesius indeed tells us, that he seems to have departed
from his opinion in his works against the donatists ; but I would he had
shewed some probable reason to make it seem so to others ; which seeing
he does not, we have reason to take time to believe him. For as touching
the place mentioned by Beda in 1 ad Corinth, x. as taken out of a ser
mon of St. Augustine's ad infantes ad altare ; besides that it is very
strange St. Augustine should make a. sermon to infants, and that there is no
such sermon extant in his works, nor any memory of any such in Possi-
dius, St. Augustine's scholar's catalogue of his works, nor in his book of
Retractations ; setting aside all this, I say, first, that it is no way certain
that he speaks there of infants, seeing in propriety of speech ^(as St. Augus
tine himself teacheth us, Ep. xxiii.) infants were not fideles, of whom St.
Augustine in that supposed sermon speaks. Secondly, admit he does speak
of infants, where he assures us, that in baptism every faithful man is made
partaker of Christ's body and blood, and that he shall not be alienated
from the benefit of the bread and cup, although he depart this life before
he eat of that bread and drink of that cup: all this concludes no more,
but that the actual participation of the eucharist is not a means simply
necessary to attain salvation, so that no impossibility shall excuse the fail
ing of it ; whereas all that I aim at is but this — that in the judgment of the
ancient church it was believed necessary, in case of possibility ; necessary,
not in actu, but in voto ecclesia ; not necessary to salvation simply, but
necessary for the increase of grace and glory : and therefore, lastly, though

against the Infallibility of the Roman Church. 729
not necessary by necessity of means, for infants to receive it; yet neces
sary by necessity of precepts, for the church to give it.
Ihe last witness I promised, was the author of the work against the
pelagians, called Hypognostica, who (I. v. c. 5,) asks the pelagians, « See
ing he himself hath said, Unless you eat the flesh, &c. how dare you pro-
mise eternal life to little children, not regenerate of water and the Holy
Ghost ; not having eaten his flesh, nor drunk his blood ?" And, a little
after: "Behold then, he that is not baptized, and he that is destitute of the
bread and cup of life, is separated from the kingdom of heaven."
To the same purpose he speaks 1. vi. c. 6. But it is superfluous to
recite his words ; for either this is enough, or nothing.
The third kind of proof, whereby I undertook to shew the belief of the
ancient church in this point, was the confession of the learnedest writers
and best versed in the church of Rome ; who, what the council of Trent
forbids under an anathema, that any man should say of any ancient father,
are not yet afraid, nor make any scruple to say it in plain terms of the
whole church for many ages together, viz. that she believed the eucharist
necessary for infants. So doth Maldonate in Joan vi. Mitto Augustini et
Innocentii sententiam (qua etiam viguit in ecclesia per sexcentos annos)
eucharistiam etiam infantibus necessarium. " I say nothing (says he)
of St. Augustine's and Innocentius's opinion, that the eucharist was neces
sary even for infants ; which doctrine flourished in the church for six hun
dred years."
The same almost in terms hath Binnius, in his Notes on the Councils,
p. 624. Hinc constat Innocentii sententia (qua sexcentos circiter annos
viguit in ecclesia, quam Augustinus sectatus est) eucharistiam etiam
infantibus necessariam fuisse.
Lastly, That treasury of antiquity^Cardinal Perron, though he speaks
not so home as the rest do, yet he says enough for my purpose. Des
Passages de St. Aug. c. 10, p. 101. " The custom of giving the eucha
rist to infants the church then observed as profitable." This, I say, is
enough for my purpose : for what more contradictious, than that the eucha
rist, being the same without alteration, to infants should then be profitable,
and now unprofitable? Then, all things considered, expedient to be used,
if not necessary, and therefore commanded ; and now, though there be no
variety in the case, all things considered, not necessary, nor expedient, and
therefore forbidden ?
The issue of all this discourse, for aught I can see, must be this : That
either both parts of a contradiction must be true, and consequently nothing
can be false, seeing that which contradicts truth, is not so ; or else, that the
ancient church did err in believing something expedient, which was not so
(and, if so, why may not the present church err in thinking Latin service
and communion in one kind expedient ?) or that the present church doth
err, in thinking something not expedient, which is so. And, if so, why
may she not err, in thinking communicating the laity in both kinds, and
service in vulgar languages, not expedient ?

V. — An Argument drawn from the doctrine of the Millenaries against
Infallibility.
The doctrine of the millenaries was, that before the world's end Christ
should reign upon earth for a thousand years, and that the saints should
live under him in all holiness and happiness. That this doctrine is by

730 An Argument from the Millenaries against the
the present Roman church held false and heretical, I think no man will
deny. That the same doctrine was by the church of the next age after the
apostles held true and catholic, I prove by these two reasons :
The first reason. Whatsoever doctrine is believed and taught by the
most eminent fathers of any age of the church, and by none of their con
temporaries opposed or condemned, that is to be esteemed the catholic doc
trine of the church of those times ; but the doctrine of the millenaries was
believed and taught by the most eminent fathers of the age next after the
apostles, and by none of that age opposed or condemned ; therefore it was
the catholic doctrine of the church of those times.
The proposition of this syllogism is Cardinal Perron's rule (in his epistle
to Casaubon, 5 obs.) and is indeed one of the main pillars, upon which the
great fabric of his answer to King James doth stand, and with which it
cannot but fall ; and therefore I will spend no time in the proof of it.
But the assumption thus I prove.
That doctrine, which was believed and taught by Papias, bishop of
Hierapolis, the disciple of the apostles' disciples (according to Eusebius, who
lived in the times of the apostles, saith he ; by Justin Martyr, doctor of the
church, and martyr ; by Melito, bishop of Sardis, who had the gift of pro
phecy, witness Tert. and whom Bellarmine acknowledges a saint ; by St.
Irenseus, bishop of Lyons, and martyr ; and was not opposed or condemned
by any one doctor of the church of those times ; that doctrine was believed
and taught by the most eminent fathers of that age next to the apostles, and
opposed by none.
But the former part of the proposition is true ; ergo, the latter is true also.
The major of this syllogism and the latter part of the minor, I suppose
will need no proof with them that consider, that these here mentioned were
equal in number to all the other ecclesiastical writers of that age, of whom
there is any memory remaining, and in weight and worth infinitely beyond
them : they were Athenagoras, Theophilus Antiochenus, Egesippus, and
Hippolitus ; of whose contradiction to this doctrine there is not extant,
either in their works, or in story, any print or footstep ; which if they, or
any of them had opposed, it had been impossible, considering the eccle
siastical story of their time is written by the professed enemies of the mil
lenaries' doctrine, who, could they have found any thing in the monuments
of antiquity to have put in the balance against Justin Martyr and Irenseus,
no doubt would not have buried it in silence; which yet they do, neither
vouching for their opinion any one of more antiquity than Dionysius Alex-
andrinus, who lived with Eusebius, nostra atate (in our age) but certainly
in the latter part of the third century. For Tatianus, because a heretic, I
reckon not in this number. And if any man say, that before his fall he
wrote many books ; I say it is true ; but withal would have it remembered,
that he was Justin Martyr's scholar, and therefore in all probability of his
master's faith, rather than against it. All that is extant of him one way
or other, is but this in St. Jerome De Script. Eccles. " Justini Martyris
sectator fuit."
Now for the other part of the minor, that the forementioned fathers did
believe and teach this doctrine. And first for Papias, that he taught it, is
confessed by Eusebius, the enemy of this doctrine (1. iii. Hist. Eccl. c.
33,) in these words : " Other things besides the same author (Papias) de
clares that they came to him as it were by unwritten tradition, wherein he
affirms, that after the resurrection of all flesh from the dead, there shall be
a kingdom of Christ continued and established for a thousand years upon
earth, after a human and corporeal manner." The same is confessed by

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 731
St. Jerome, another enemy to this opinion (De Script. Eccles. s. 29) ¦—
"Papias, the auditor of John, bishop of Hierapolis, is said to have taught
the -judical tradition of a thousand years, whom Irenaeus and Appolina-
nus followed. And in his preface upon the commentaries of Victorin us
upon the Apocalypse, thus he writes: » Before him Papias, bishop of Hier
apolis, and Nepos, bishop in the parts of Egypt, taught as Victorinus does,
touching the kingdom of the thousand years."
The same is testified by Irenseus (1. v. cont. bar. c. 33,) where having
at large set forth this doctrine, he confirms it by the authority of Papias, in
these words: " Papias, also, the auditor of John, the familiar friend of Poly-
carpus, an ancient man, hath testified by writing these things in the fourth
of his books ; for he hath written five." And concerning Papias thus much.
That Justin Martyr was of the same belief, is confessed by Sixtus Senen-
sis Biblioth. Sta. 1. vi. An. 437,) by Faverdentius, in his premonition be
fore the last five chapters of the fifth book of Irenseus ; and by Pamelius
in Antidoto ad Tertul. parad. paradox. 14.
That S. Melito, bishop of Sardis, held the same doctrine, is confessed by
Pamelius, in the same place : and thereupon it is, that Gennadius Mus-
siliensis, in his book De Eccles. Dogmatibus, calls the followers of this
opinion, Melitani ; as the same Pamelius testifies in his notes upon that
fragment of Tertullian, De spe Fidelium.
Irenseus's faith in this point is likewise confessed by Eusebius in the
place before quoted, in these words : " He (Papias) was the author of the
like error to most of the writers of the church, who alleged the antiquity
of the man for a defence of their side, as to Irenseus, and whosoever else
seemed to be of the same opinion with him. By S. Jerome, in the place
above cited De Script. Eccles. s. 29. Again, in lib. Ezek. xi. in these
words : " For neither do we expect from heaven a golden Jerusalem (ac
cording to the Jewish tales, which they call Deuterosis) which also many
of our own have followed ;" especially Tertullian, in his book De spe
Fidelium ; and Lactantius in his seventh book of Institutions, and the fre
quent expositions of Victorinus Pictavionensis ; and of late Severius, in his
dialogue, which he calls Gallus ; and to name the Greeks and to join
together the first and last, Irenaeus and Apollinarius." Where we see he
acknowledges Irenseus to be of this opinion ; but that he was the first that
held it, I believe that that is more a christian untruth, than Irenseus's opin
ion a judaical fable. For he himself acknowledges in the place above
cited, that Irenaeus followed Papias ; and it is certain and confessed, that
Justin Martyr believed it long before him : and Irenseus himself derives it
from — Presbyteri, qui Johannem discipulum Domini viderunt ; from
priests, which saw John, the disciple of the Lord. Lastly, by Pamelius,
Sixtus Senensis, ,and Faverdentius, in the places above quoted.
Seeing, therefore, it is certain, even to the confession of the adversaries,
that Papias, Justin Martyr, Melito, and Irenaeus, the most considerable and
eminent men of their age, did believe and teach this doctrine ; and, seeing
it has been proved as evidently as a thing of this nature can be, that none
of their contemporaries opposed or condemned it ; it remains, according to
Cardinal Perron's first rule, that this is to be esteemed the doctrine of the
church of that age. *
My second reason I form thus : Whatsoever doctrine is taught by the
fathers of any age, not as doctors, but as witnesses of the tradition of the
church (that is, not as their own opinion, but as the doctrine of the church
of their times) that is undoubtedly to be so esteemed, especially if none
contradicted them in it ; but the fathers above cited teach this doctrine, not
as their own private opinion, but as the christian tradition, and as the doc-

732 An Argument from the Millenaries against the
trine of the church, neither did any contradict them in it ; ergo, it is
undoubtedly to be so esteemed.
The major of this syllogism is Cardinal Perron's second rule and way
of finding out the doctrine of the ancient church in any age ; and if it be
not a sure rule, farewell the use of all antiquity. And for the minor, there
will be little doubt of it to him that considers, that Papias professes himself
to have received this doctrine by unwritten tradition, though not from the
apostles themselves immediately, yet from their scholars, as appears by
Eusebius in the forecited third book, chapter 33.
That Irenseus grounded it upon evident scripture, and professes that he
learned it (whether mediately or immediately, I cannot tell) from presby.
ters, qui Johannem discipulum Domini viderunt, priests or elders, who
saw John the Lord's disciple, and- heard of him what our Lord taught of
those times (of the thousand years) ; and also, as he says after, from
Papias, the auditor of John, the chamber-fellow of Polycarpus, an ancient
man, who recorded it in writing.
Faverdentius's note upon this place is very notable. Hinc apparet
(saith he), &c. From hence it appears, that Irenseus neither first invented
this opinion, nor held it as proper to himself, but got this blot and blemish
from certain fathers. Papias, I suppose, and some other inglorious fellows,
the familiar friends of Irenseus, are here intended.
I hope then, if the fathers, which lived with the apostles, had their blots
and blemishes, it is no such horrid crime for Calvin and the century writers
to impute the same to their great-grand-children. JEtas parentum pejor
avis progeniem fert vitiodorem. But yet these inglorious disciples of the
apostles, though perhaps not so learned as Faverdentius, were yet certainly
so honest, as not to invent lies, and deliver them as apostolic tradition. Or,
if they were not, what confidence can we place in any other unwritten tra
dition ?
Lastly, that Justin Martyr grounds it upon plain prophecies of the Old
Testament, and express words of the New. He professeth, that he, and
all other christians, of a right belief in all things, believe it ; joins them
who believe it not, with them who deny the resurrection ; or else says, that
none denied this, but the same who denied the resurrection ; and that indeed
they were called christians, but in deed and in truth were none.
Whosoever, I say, considers these things, will easily grant, that they held
it not as their own opinion, but as the doctrine of the church, and the faith
of christians.
Hereupon I conclude, whatsoever they held, not as their private opinion,
but as the faith of the church, that was the faith of the church of their
time; but this doctrine they held, not as their private opinion, but as the
faith of the church ; ergo, it was and is to be esteemed the faith of the
church. Trypho. Do ye confess, that before ye expect the coming of Christ,
this place Jerusalem shall be again restored, and that your people shall be
congregated, and rejoice together with Christ, and the patriarchs, and the
prophets? &c.
Justin Martyr. I have confessed to you before, that both I and many
others do believe, as you well know, that this shall be ; but that many
again, who are not of the pure and holy opinion of christians, do not
acknowledge this, I have also signified unto you ; for I have declared unto
you, that some called christians, but being indeed atheists and impious
heretics, do generally teach blasphemous, and atheistical, and foolish things.
But that you might know that I speak not this to you only, I will make a
book, as near as I can, of these our disputations, where I will profess in

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 733
Writing that which I say before you ; for I resolve to follow not men, and
the doctrines of men, but God, and the doctrine of God. For although
you chance to meet with some that are called christians, which do not con-
less this, but dare to blaspheme the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac,
and the God of Jacob ; which also say there is no resurrection of the dead,
but that as soon as they die, their souls are received into heaven ; do not
you yet think them christians : as neither, if a man consider rightly, will
he account the sadducees, and other sectaries and heretics, as the genistae,
and the meristse, and galileans, and pharisees, and hellenians, and baptists,
and other such, to be Jews ; but only that they are called Jews, and the
children of Abraham, and such as with their lips confess God (as God
himself cries out) but have their hearts far from him. But I, and all chris
tians, that in all things believe aright, both know that there shall be a resur
rection of the flesh, and a thousand years in Jerusalem restored, and
adorned, and enlarged ; according as the prophets Ezekiel and Isaiah, and
others do testify : for thus saith Isaiah of the time of this thousand years :
" For there shall be a new heaven, and a new earth, and they shall not
remember the former," (fee. And after : " A certain man amongst us,
whose name was John, one of the twelve apostles of Christ, in that reve
lation which was exhibited unto him, hath foretold — that they which believe
our Christ, shall live in Jerusalem a thousand years, and that after, the
universal and everlasting resurrection and judgment shall be."
I have presumed in the beginning of Justin Martyr's answer to substi
tute (not) instead of (also) because I am confident, that either by chance,
or the fraud of some ill-willers to the millenaries' opinion, the place has
been corrupted, and ov turned into xu, not into also. For, if we retain the
usual reading — but that many, who are also of the pure and holy opinion
of christians, do not acknowledge this, I have also signified unto you —
then we must conclude, that Justin Martyr himself did believe the opinion
of them which denied the thousand years to be the pure and holy opinion
of christians : and, if so, why did he not himself believe it ? Nay, how
could he but believe it to be true, professing it (as he does, if the place be
right) to be the pure and holy opinion of christians ? For how a false doc
trine can be the pure and holy opinion of christians, what christian can
conceive ? Or, if it may be so, how can the contrary avoid being untrue,
unholy, and not the opinion of christians ?
Again, if we read the place thus — that many, who are also of the pure
and holy opinion of christians, do not acknowledge this, I have also signi
fied — certainly there will be neither sense nor reason, neither coherence
nor consequence in the words following — for I have told you of many
called christians, but being indeed atheists and heretics, that they altogether
teach blasphemous, and impious, and foolish things. For how is this a
confirmation or reason of, or any way pertinent unto, what went before, if
there he speak of none but such as were pura picsque christianorum sen-
tentia, of the pure and holy opinion of christians ? And therefore, to dis
guise this inconsequence, the translator has thought fit to make use of a
false translation, and instead of — for I have told you, to make it — besides
I have told you of many, <fec. Again, if Justin Martyr had thought this
the pure and holy opinion of christians, or them good and holy christians
that held it; why does he rank them with them that denied the resurrec
tion ? Why does he say afterward, although you chance to meet with some
that are called christians, which do not confess this, do not ye think them
christians? Lastly, what sense is there in saying, as he does, I, and all
christians, that are of a right belief in all things, believe the doctrine of the
thousand years ; and that the scriptures both of the Old and New Testa-

734 An Argument from the Millenaries against the
ment teach it ; and yet say — that many, of the pure and holy opinion of
christians, do not believe it ? Upon these reasons I suppose it is evident,
that the place has been corrupted, and it is to be corrected, according as I
have corrected it, by substituting ov in the place of xm, of not instead of
also. Neither need any man think it strange, that this misfortune of the
change of a syllable should befall this place, who considers, that in this
place Justin Martyr tells us that he had said the same things before, whereas
nothing to this purpose appears now in him. And that in Victorinus's com
ment on the Revelations, wherein (by St. Jerome's acknowledgment) this
doctrine was strongly maintained, there now appears nothing at all for it,
but rather against it. And now from the place thus restored, these obser
vations offer themselves unto us.
1. That Justin Martyr speaks not as a doctor, but as a witness of the
doctrine of the church of his time. I (saith he) and all christians, that are
of a right belief in all things, hold this. And therefore, from hence, accord
ing to Cardinal Perron's rule, we are to conclude, not probably, but demon
stratively, that this was the doctrine of the church of that time.
2. That they held it as a necessary matter, so far as to hold them no
christians that held the contrary. Though you chance to meet with some
called christians, that do not confess this, but dare to blaspheme the God of
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, &c. yet do not ye think them christians. Now
if Bellarmine's rule be true, that councils then determine any things as
matters of faith, when they pronounce them heretics that hold the contrary :
sure then Justin Martyr held this doctrine as a matter of faith, seeing he
pronounceth them no christians that contradict it.
3. That the doctrine is grounded upon the scripture of the Old and New
Testament, and the Revelation of St. John, and that by a doctor and martyr
of the church, and such an one as was converted to Christianity within
thirty years after the death of St. John, when in all probability there were
many alive, that had heard him expound his own words, and teach this
doctrine. And if probabilities will not be admitted, this is certain out of
the most authentical records of the church, that Papias, the disciple of the
apostle's disciples, taught it the church, professing that he had received it
from them that learned it from the apostles : and if, after all this, the church
of those times might err in a doctrine so clearly derived, and authentically
delivered, how, without extreme impudence, can any church in after-times
pretend to infallibility?
The millenaries' doctrine was overborne, by imputing to them that which
they held not ; by abrogating the authority of St. John's Revelation, as some
did ; or by derogating from it, as others ; ascribing it not to St. John, the
apostle, but to some other John, they knew not who : which — Dionysius,
the first known adversary of this doctrine, and his followers ; against the
tradition of Irenseus, Justin Martyr, and all the fathers their antecessors;
by calling it a Judaical opinion, and yet allowing it as probable, by cor
rupting the authors for it ; as Justin, Victorinus Severus.

VI. — A Letter relating to the same subject.
Sir, — I pray remember, that if a consent of fathers either constitute or
declare a truth to be necessary, or shew the opinion of the church of their
time ; then that opinion of the Jesuits, concerning predestination upon pre
science (which had no opposer before St. Augustine) must be so, and the

Infallibility of the Roman Church. 735
ZancTenf ,W "T*?8 ^^ ' a"d the preSent church differe *°™
me ancient, in not esteeming of it as they did.
sneakTs wiin^7 rpeme?ber'that * the fathers be infallible (when they
7Z thPrT Lf Ufd}tl0^ t0 Shew the °Pinion °f the church of their
of RomeTwasllnT °I-the Chi'rtS (Which "ow is a heresy in the church
of Rome) was once tradition ,n the opinion of the church.
Thirdly, Since St. Augustine had an opinion, that of whatsoever no
beg.nn.ng was known, that came from the apostles, many fathers might
say things to be trad.t.on upon that ground only; but of this opinion of the
Chil.asts, one of the ancientest fathers, Irenseus, says not only, that it was
tradition, but sets down Christ's own words when he taught it, and the
pedigree of the opinion from Christ to John his disciple; from him to
several priests (whereof Papias was one, who put it in writing) and so
downwards ; which can be shewn from no other father, for no other opin
ion, either controverted or uncontroverted.
Fourthly, That if Papias, either by his own error, or a desire to deceive,
could cozen the fathers of the purest age in this, why not also in other
things? Why not in twenty as well as one? Why not twenty others as
well as he ?
Fifthly, That if the fathers could be cozened, how could general councils
escape, who, you say, made tradition one of their rules, which can only be
known from the fathers ?
Sixthly, If they object, how could errors come in, and no beginning of
them known ? I pray remember to ask them the same question concern
ing the millenaries, which lasted uncontradicted until Dionysius Alexandri-
nus, two hundred and fifty years after Christ ; and if they tell you, that
Papias was the first beginner, look in Irenaeus, and he will tell you the con
trary, loco citato, 1. 5. c. 33.
Seventhly, Remember that, if I ought not to condemn the church of
Rome out of scripture, because my interpretation may deceive me ; then
they ought not to build their infallibility upon it (and less upon her own
word) because theirs may deceive them ; unless the same thing may be a
wall, when you lean upon it, and a bulrush when we do.
Eighthly, Remember that they cannot say, they trust not their interpre
tation in this, but a consent- of fathers ; because the fathers are not said to
be infallible, but as they tell the opinion of the church of their time, which
is infallible : therefore they must first prove out of scripture that she is
infallible, or else she (who is herself the subject of the question) cannot be
allowed till then to give a verdict for herself.
Ninthly, Remember the Roman church claims no notes of the church,
but what agree with the Grecian too (as antiquity, succession, miracles,
&c.) but only communion with the pope and splendour ; both which made
for the Arians in Liberius's time ; and it were a hard case, that because
the Greeks are poor upon earth, they should be shut out of heaven.
Tenthly, Remember, that if we have an infallible way, we have no use
(at least no necessity) of an infallible guide ; for if we may be saved by
following the scripture as near as we can (though we err) it is as good as
any interpreter to keep unity in charity (which is only needful) though not
in opinion : and this cannot be ridiculous, because they say, if any man
misinterpret the council of Trent, it shall not damn him ; and why (with
out more ado) may not the same be said of scripture ?

736 Contradictions in the Doctrine of Transubstantiation,
VII. — An Argument against the Infallibility of the present church of
Rome, taken from the contradictions in your doctrine of Transubstan
tiation.Mr. Chillingworth. That church is not infallible which teacheth contra
dictions ; but the church of Rome teacheth contradictions : therefore the
church of Rome is not infallible.
Mr. Daniel. I deny the minor.
Chill. That church teacheth contradictions, which teacheth such a doc
trine as contains contradictions ; but the church of Rome teacheth such a
doctrine : therefore the church of Rome teacheth contradictions.
Dan. I deny the minor.
Chill. The doctrine of transubstantiation contains contradictions ; but
the church of Rome teacheth the doctrine of transubstantiation : therefore
the church of Rome teacheth such a doctrine as contains contradictions.
Dan. I deny the major.
Chill. That the same thing, at the same time, should have the true
figure of a man's body, and should not have the true figure of a man's
body, is a contradiction ; but in the doctrine of transubstantiation it is
taught, that the same thing (viz. our Saviour present in the sacrament) has
the true figure of a man's body, and has not the true figure of a man's
body, at the same time : therefore the doctrine of transubstantiation con
tains contradictions.
Dan. The major, though not having all rules required to a contradic
tion (as boys in logic know) yet let it pass.
Chill. Boys in logic know no more conditions required to a contradic
tion, but that the same thing should be affirmed and denied of the same
thing at the same time. For my meaning was, that that should not be
accounted the same thing, which was considered after divers manners.
Dan. I deny the minor of your syllogism.
Chill. I prove it, according to the several parts of it : and, first, fbr the
first part. He must have the figure of a man's body in the eucharist, who
is there without any real alteration or difference from the natural body of a
man ; but our Saviour, according to the Romish doctrine of transubstantia
tion, is in the sacrament without any real alteration or difference from the
natural body of a man : therefore, according to this doctrine, he must there
have the figure of a man's body. To the second part, that he must not
have the figure of a man's body, in the sacrament, according to this doc
trine, thus I prove it. He must not have the figure of a man's body in the
eucharist, which must not have extension there ; but our Saviour's body,
according to the doctrine of transubstantiation, must not have extension
there : therefore, according to this doctrine, he must not have the figure of
a man's body there. The major of this syllogism I proved, because the
figure of a man's body could not be without extension. The minor I
proved thus : that must not have extension in the eucharist, whose every
part is together in one and the same point ; but, according to this doctrine,
every part of our Saviour's body must be here in one and the same point :
therefore here it must not have extension.
Mr. Dan. answered, by distinguishing the major of the first syllogism,
and said ; that he must not have the true figure of a man's body, accord
ing to the reason of a figure taken in its essential consideration, which is
to have positionem partium sic et sic extra partes ; but not the accidental
consideration, which is in ordine ad locum. And this answer he applied
for the solution of the minor, saying thus : Our Saviour is there without

an Argument against Infallibility of the Roman Church. 737
any real alteration intrinsical, but not extrinsical ; for he is not changed in
order to himself, but in order to place : or otherwise, he is not altered in
his continual existence, which is only modus essentia, and inseparable
even by divine power, though altered in modo existendi, which is situation,
and required to figure taken in order to place.
Chill. Against this it was replied by Chillingworth, that the distinction
of a man s body, as considered in itself, and as considered in reference to
place, is vain, and no solution of the argument : and thus he proved it : If
it be impossible, that any thing should have several parts one out of another
in order and reference of each to other, without having these parts in
several places ; then the distinction is vain ; but it is impossible, that any
thing should have several parts one out of another, without having these
parts in several places : therefore the distinction is vain.
The major of this syllogism he took for granted.
The minor he proved thus : Whatsoever body is in the proper place of
another body, must of necessity be in that very body, by possessing the
dimensions of it : therefore, whatsoever hath several parts one out of the
other, must of necessity have them one out of the place of the other ; and
consequently in several places. *
For illustration of this argument he said : If my head, and belly, and
thighs, and legs, and feet, be all in the very same place, of necessity my
head must be in my belly, and my belly in my thighs, and my thighs in
my legs, and all of them in my feet, and my feet in all of them ; and
therefore, if my head be out of my belly, it must be out of the place where
my belly is ; and if it be not out of the place where my belly is, it is not
out of my belly, but in it.
Again, to shew that, according to the doctrine of transubstantiation, our
Saviour's body in the eucharist hath not the several parts of it out of one
another, he disputed thus : Wheresoever there is a body, having several
parts one out of the other, there must be some middle parts severing the
extreme parts ; but here, according to this doctrine, the extreme parts are
not severed, but altogether in the same point ; therefore, here our Saviour's
body cannot have parts one out of the other.
Mr. Dan. To all this (for want of a better answer) gave only this : Let
all scholars peruse these. After, upon better consideration, he wrote by
the side of the last syllogism this : Quoad entitatem verum est, non quoad
locum ; that is, according to entity it is true, but not according to place.
And to (let all scholars peruse these) he caused this to be added — and
weigh whether there is any new matter worth a new answer.
Chillingworth replied, that to say the extreme parts of a body are
severed by the middle parts according to their entity, but not according to
place, is ridiculous. His reasons are, first, because severing of things is
nothing else but putting or keeping them in several places, as every silly
woman knows ; and therefore to say, they are severed, but not according
to place, is as if you should say, they are heated, but not according to
heat ; they are cooled, but not according to cold ; indeed it is to say, they
are severed, but not severed.

VIII. — An Account of what moved the Author to turn Papist, with his
own Confutation of the Arguments that persuaded him thereto.
I reconciled myself to the church of Rome, because I thought myself
to have sufficient reason to believe, that there was, and must be, always in
3 a

738 The Author's Confutation of the Arguments
the world some church that could not err; and, consequently, seeing all
other churches disclaimed this privilege of not being subject to error, the
church of Rome must be that church which cannot err.
I was put into doubt of this way which I had chosen, by Dr. Stapleton
and others, who limit the church's freedom from error to things necessary
only, and such as without which the church can be a church no longer ;
but granted it subject to error in things that were not necessary : hereupon
considering, that most of the differences between protestants and Roman
catholics were not touching things necessary, but only profitable or lawful ;
I concluded that I had not sufficient ground to believe the Roman church
either could not or did not err in any thing, and therefore no ground to be
a Roman catholic.
Against this again I was persuaded, that it was not sufficient to believe
the church to be an infallible believer of all doctrines necessary, but it must
also be granted an infallible teacher of what is necessary ; that is, that we
must believe not only that the church teacheth all things necessary, but
that all is necessary to be believed, which the church teacheth to be so ; in
effect, that the church is our guide in the way to heaven.
Now to believe that the church was an infallible guide, and to be believed
in all things which she requires us to believe, I was induced, first, because
there was nothing that could reasonably contest with the church about this
office, but the scripture, and that the scripture was this guide, I was willing
to believe ; but I saw not how it could be made good, without depending
upon the church's authority.
1 . That scripture is the word of God.
2. That the scripture is a perfect rule of our duty.
3. That the scripture is so plain in those things which concern our duty,
that whosoever desires and endeavours to find the will of God there, he
shall either find it, or at least not dangerously mistake it.
Secondly, I was drawn to this belief, because I conceived that it was evi
dent, out of the Epistle to the Ephesians, that there must be unto the world's
end a succession of pastors, by adhering to whom men might be kept from
wavering in matters of faith, and from being carried up and down with
every wind of false doctrine.
That no succession of pastors could guard their adherents from danger
and error, if themselves were subject unto error, either in teaching that to
be necessary, which is not so, or denying that to be necessary, which is so:
and therefore, that there was, and must be some succession of pastors,
which was an infallible guide in the way of heaven, and which could not
possibly teach any thing to be necessary, which was not so ; nor any thing
not necessary, which was so. Upon this ground I concluded, that seeing
there must be such a succession of pastors as was an infallible guide, and
there was no other~(but that of the church of Rome) even by the confes
sion of all other societies of pastors in the world ; that therefore that suc
cession of pastors is that infallible guide of faith, which all men must
follow. '
Upon these grounds I thought it necessary for my salvation to believe
the Roman church, in all that she thought to be, and proposed as neces
sary. Against these arguments it hath been demonstrated unto me; and first
against the first, that the reason why we are to believe the scripture to be
the word of God, neither is nor can be the authority of the present church
of Rome, which cannot make good her authority any other way, but by
pretence of scripture; and, therefore, stands not unto scripture (no, not in
respect of us) in the relation of a foundation to a building, but of a build-

that persuaded him to turn Papist. 739
IS? LBp5indttti0n '' d,°th not suPP°rt ^^lure, but is supported by it. But
the genera consent of christians of all nations and ages, a far greltercom
pany than that of the church of Rome, and delivering universally the Sc™
ture for the word of God, is the ordinary external reason why we believe
it; whereun to the test.monies of the Jews, enemies of Christ, add no small
moment lor the authority of some part of it.
That, whatsoever stood upon the same ground of universal tradition with
scripture, might justly challenge belief as well as scripture; but that no
doctrine, not written m scripture, could justly pretend to as full tradition as
the scripture, and therefore we had no reason to believe it with that degree
of faith, wherewith we believe the scripture.
That it is unreasonable to think, that he that reads the scripture, and
uses all means appointed for this purpose, with an earnest desire, and with
no other end, but to find the will of God, and to obey it, if he mistake the
meaning of some doubtful places, and fall unwillingly into some errors,
unto which no v|>ice or passion betrays him, and is willing to hear reason
from any man that will undertake to shew him his error ; I say, that it is
unreasonable to think that a God of goodness will impute such an error to
such a man.
Against the second it was demonstrated unto me, that the place I built
on so confidently, was no argument at all for the infallibility of the suc
cession of pastors in the Roman church, but a very strong argument
against it.
First, no argument for it, because it is not certain, nor can ever be proved,
that St. Paul speaks there of any succession, Ephes. iv. 11 — 13. For let
that be granted, which is desired, that in ver. 13, by (until we all meet) is
meant, until all the children of God meet in the unity iof faith, that is, unto
the world's end ; yet it is not said there, that " he gave apostles and pro
phets," &c. which should continue, &c. " until we all meet," by connect
ing ver. 13 to ver. 11. But he gave (then upon his ascension, and mira
culously endowed) apostles and prophets, &c. for the work of the ministry,
for the consummating of the saints, for the edification of the body of
Christ, until we all meet, that is, if you will, unto the world's end. Nei
ther is there any incongruity, but that the apostles, and prophets, &c. which
lived then, may in good sense be said now at this time, and ever hereafter,
to do those things which they are said to do. For who can deny but St.
Paul, the apostle and doctor of the gentiles, and St. John the evangelist and
prophet, do at this very time (by their writings, though not by their per
sons) do the work of the ministry, consummate the saints, and edify the
body of Christ?
Secondly, it cannot be shewn or proved from hence, that there is, or was,
to be any such succession ; because St. Paul here tells us, only, that he
gave such in the time past, not that he promised such in the time to come.
Thirdly, it is evident, that God promised no such succession, because it
is not certain that he hath made good any such promise : for who is so
impudent as to pretend, that there are now, and have been in all ages since
Christ, some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some
pastors and teachers : especially such as he here speaks of, that is, endow
ed with such gifts as Christ gave upon his ascension ; of which he speaks
in ver. 8, saying, " He led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto men."
And that those gifts were men — endowed with extraordinary power and
supernatural gifts — it is apparent, because these words, " and he gave some
apostles, some prophets," &c. are added by way of explication and illus
tration of what was said before — and he gave gifts unto men. And if any
man except hereunto, that though the apostles, and prophets, and evange-
3a2

740 An Answer to some Passages
lists were extraordinary, and for the plantation of the gospel, yet pastors
were ordinary, and for continuance ; I answer, it is true, some pastors are
ordinary, and for continuance, but not such as are here spoken of; not
such as are endowed with the strange and heavenly gifts, which Christ
gave not only to the apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, but to the
inferior pastors and doctors of his church, at the first plantation of it. And
therefore St. Paul, in 1 Cor. xii. 28, (to which place we are referred by the
margin of the vulgar translation, for the explication of this) places this
gift of teaching amongst, and prefers it before, many other miraculous gifts
of the Holy Ghost. Pastors there are still in the church, but not such as
Titus, and Timothy, and Apollos, and Barnabas : not such as can justly
pretend to immediate inspiration and illumination of the Holy Ghost. And,
therefore, seeing there neither are, nor have been, for many ages in the
church, such apostles, and prophets, &c. as here are spoken of, it is certain
he promised none ; or otherwise we must blasphemously charge him with
breach of his promise.
Secondly, I answer, that if by dedit, he gave, he meant, promisit, he
promised, for ever ; then all were promised, and all should have continued.
If by dedit be not meant promisit, then he promised none such, nor may
we expect any such by virtue of or warrant from this text that is here
alleged. And thus much for the first assumpt, which was, that the place
was no argument for an infallible succession in the church of Rome.
Now for the second, that it is a strong argument against it, thus I make
it good. The apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, and pastors, which our
Saviour gave upon his ascension, were given by him, that they might con
summate the saints, do the work of the ministry, edify the body of Christ,
until we all come into the unity of faith, that we be not " like children,
wavering and carried up and down with every wind of doctrine." The
apostles, and prophets, &c. that then were, do not now in their own per
sons, and by oral instruction, do the work of the ministry, to the intent we
may be kept from wavering, and being carried up and down with every
wind of doctrine : therefore they do this some other way. Now there is
no other way by which they can do it, but by their writings ; and there
fore by their writings they do it : therefore by their writings, and believing
of them, we are to be kept from wavering in matters of faith : therefore
the scriptures of the apostles, and prophets, and evangelists, are our guides :
therefore not the church of Rome.

An Answer to some Passages in Rushworth's Dialogues, beginning at
the Third Dialogue, § XII. jp. 181. Ed. Paris, 1654, about Tradi
tions. Uncle. Do you think there is such a city as Rome or Constantinople ?
Nephew. That I do : I would I knew what I ask as well.
Chillingworth.
First, I should have answered, that in propriety of speech I could not
say that I knew it, but that I did as undoubtedly believe it, as those things
which I did know. For though (as I conceive) we may be properly said
to believe that which we know, yet we cannot say truly, that we know
that which we only believe upon report and hearsay, be it never so con-

in Rushworth's Dialogues. 741
stant, never so general : for seeing the generality of men is made up of
particulars, and every particular man may deceive and be deceived, it is
not impossible, though exceedingly improbable, that all men should con-
spire to do so. Yet I deny not that the popular phrase of speech will very
well bear, that we may say we know that, which in truth we only believe,
provided the grounds of our belief be morally certain.
Neither do I take any exception to the nephew's answers made to his
uncle's 2, 3, 4, and 5, interrogatories. But grant willingly as to the first,
that it is not much material, whether I remember or not any particular
author of such a general and constant report. Then, that the testimony
of one or two witnesses, though never so credible, could add nothing to that
belief which is already at the height ; nay, perhaps, that my own seeing
these cities would make no accession, add no degree to the strength and
firmness of my faith concerning this matter, only it would change the kind
of my assent, and make me know that which formerly I did but believe.
To the fourth, that seeming reasons are not much to be regarded against
sense or experience, and moral certainties (but withal I should have told
my uncle, that I fear his supposition is hardly possible, and that the nature
of the thing will not admit, that there should be any great, nay, any pro
bable reasons invented, to persuade me that there was never such a city as
London) ; and therefore, if any man should go about to persuade me that
there was never such, a city as London ; that there were no such men as
called themselves, or were called by others, protestants, in England, in the
days of Queen Elizabeth ; perhaps such a man's wit might delight me, but
his reasons sure would never persuade me.
Hitherto we should have gone hand in hand together : but whereas in the
next place he says, In like manner then you do not doubt, but a catholic,
living in a catholic country, may undoubtedly know what was the public
religion of his country in his father's days, and that so assuredly, that it
were mere madness for him to doubt thereof; I should have craved leave
to tell my uncle, that he presumed too far upon his nephew's yielding dis
position. For that as it is a far more easy thing to know, and more authen
tically testified, that there were some men called protestants by themselves
and others, than what opinions these protestants held, divers men hold
divers things, which yet were all called by this name ; so is it far more
easy for a Roman catholic to know, that in his father's days there were
some men, for their outward communion with, and subordination to, the
bishop of Rome, called Roman catholics, than to -know what was the
religion of those men who went under this name : for they might be as dif
ferent one from another in their belief, as some protestants are from others.
As for example, had I lived before the Lateran council, which condemn
ed Berengarius, possibly I might have known, that the belief of the real
presence of Christ in the sacrament was part of the public doctrine of my
country ; but whether the real absence of the bread and wine after conse
cration, and their transubstantiation into Christ's body, were likewise catho
lic doctrines at that time, that I could not have known, seeing that all men
were at liberty to hold it was so, or it was not so.
Moreover, I should have told my uncle, that living now, I know it is •
catholic doctrine, that the souls of the blessed enjoy the vision of God : but
if I had lived in the reign of Pope John XXII. I should not have known
that then it was so, considering that many good catholics before that time
had believed, and then even the pope himself did believe the contrary : and
he is warranted by Bellarmine for doing so, because the church had not
then defined it. . ., ... „ „. .• „
I should have told him further, that either catholics of the present time

742 An Answer to some Passages
do so differ in their belief, that what some hold lawful and pious, otherg
condemn as unlawful and impious ; or else, that all now consent, and con
sequently make it catholic doctrine, that it is not unlawful to make the
usual pictures of the trinity, and to set them in churches to be adored.
But had I lived in St. Augustine's time, I should then have been taught
another lesson ; to wit, that this doctrine and practice was impious, and the
contrary doctrine catholic.
I should have told him, that now I was taught that the doctrine of indul
gences was an apostolic tradition : but had I lived six hundred years since,
and found that in all antiquity there was no use of them ; I should either
have thought the primitive church no faithful steward in defrauding men's
souls of this treasure intended by God to them, and so necessary for them,
or rather that the doctrine of indulgences, now practised in the church of
Rome, was not then catholic.
I should have told him, that the general practice of Roman catholics
now taught me, that it was a pious thing to offer incense and tapers to the
saints and to their pictures : but had I lived in the primitive church, I
should, with the church, have condemned it in the Collyridians as here
tical. I should have represented to him Erasmus's complaint against the pro
testants, whose departing from the Roman church occasioned the determin
ing and exacting the belief of many points as necessary, wherein, before
Luther, men enjoyed the liberties of their judgments, and tongues, and
pens. "Antea, (says he) licebat varias agitare qusestiones, de potestate
pontificis, de condonationibus, de restituendo, de purgatorio ; nunc tutum
non est hiscere, ne de his quidem, quse pie vereque dicuntur. Et credere
cogimur, quod homo gignit ex se opera meritoria, quod benefactis meretur
vitam aeternam, etiam de condigno, quod B. Virgo potest imperare Filio
cum Patre regnanti, ut exaudiat hujus aut illius preces, aliaque permulta,
ad quae pise mentes inhorrescunt." And from hence I should have collect
ed, as I think very probably, that it was not then such a known and cer
tain thing, what was the catholic faith in many points, which now are
determined ; but that divers men who held external communion with that
church, which now holds these as matters of faith, conceived themselves
no ways bound to do so, but at liberty to hold as they saw reason.
I should have shewed him, by the confession of another learned catholic,
that through the negligence of the bishops in former ages, and the indis
creet devotion of the people, many opinions and practices were brought
into the church, which at first perhaps were but winked at, after tolerated,
then approved, and at length, after they had spread themselves into a seem
ing generality, confirmed for good and catholic ; and that therefore there
was no certainty that they came from the beginning, whose beginning was
not known.
I should have remembered him, that even by the acknowledgment of the
council of Trent, many corruptions and superstitions had by insensible
degrees insinuated themselves into the very mass and offices of the church,
which they thought fit to cast out ; and, therefore, seeing that some abuses
have come in, God knows how, and have been cast out again, who can
ascertain me, that some errors have not got in, and while men slept (for it
is apparent they did sleep) gathered such strength, got such deep root, and
so incorporated themselves, like ivy in a wall, in the state and polity of the
Roman church, that to pull them up had been to pull them down, by razing
the foundation on which it stands, to wit, the church's infallibility ? Besides,
as much water passes under the mill, which the miller sees not; so who
can warrant me, that some old corruptions might not escape from them,

in Rushworth's Dialogues. 743
and pass for original and apostolical traditions? I say, might not, though
they had been as studious to reduce all to the primitive state, as thiy
were to preserve them in the present state; as diligent to cast out
all postnate and introduced opinions, as they were to persuade men that
there were none such, but all as truly catholic and apostolic, as they were
Roman. I should have declared unto him, that many things reckoned up in the
roll of traditions, are now grown out of fashion, and out of use, in the
church of Rome ; and therefore, that either they believe them not, what
ever they pretend, or were not so obedient to the apostle's command, as
they themselves interpret it, " keep the traditions which ye have received,
whether by word, or by our epistle."
And seeing there have been so many vicissitudes and changes in the
Roman church ; catholic doctrines growing exolete, and being degraded
from their Catholicism, and perhaps depressed into the number of heresies ;
points of indifference, or at least aliens from the faith, getting first to be
inmates, after procuring to be made denizens, and in process of time neces
sary members of the body of the faith ; nay, old heresies, sometimes, like
old snakes, casting their skin and their poison together, and becoming
wholesome and catholic doctrines ; I must have desired pardon of my
uncle, if I were not so undoubtedly certain, what was and what was not
catholic doctrine in the days of my fathers.
Nay, perhaps I should have gone farther, and told him, that I was not
fully assured, what was the catholic doctrine in some points, no, not at this
present time. For instance (to lay the axe to the root of the tree) the
infallibility of the present church of Rome, in determining controversies
of faith, is esteemed indeed by divers that I have met with, not only an
article of faith, but a foundation of all other articles. But how do I know
there are not, nay, why should I think there are not, in the world divers
good catholics, of the same mind touching this matter, which Mirandula,
Panormitan, Cusanus, Florentinus, Clemangis, Waldensis, Occham, and
divers others were of; who were so far from holding this doctrine the foun
dation of faith, that they would not allow it any place in the fabric ?
Now Bellarmine hath taught us, that no doctrine is catholic, nor the con
trary heretical, that is denied to be so by some good catholics. From
hence I collect, that in the time of the forenamed authors this was not
catholic doctrine, nor the contrary heretical ; and, being then not so, how
it could since become so, I cannot well understand. If it be said, that it
has since been defined by a general council; I say, first, this is false: no
council has been so foolish as to define, that a council is infallible ; for
unless it were presumed to be infallible before, who or what could assure
us of the truth of this definition ? Secondly, if it were true, it were ridicu-
lous : for he that would question the infallibility of all councils in all their
decrees, would as well question the infallibility of this council in this decree.
This therefore was not, is not, nor ever can be, an article of faith, unless
God himself would be pleased (which is not very likely) to make some
new revelation of it from heaven.
The rtpatov fyvSos, the fountain of the error in this matter is this, that the
whole religion of the Roman church, and every point of it, is conceived or
pretended to have issued originally out of the fountain of apostolic tradi
tion, either in themselves or in the principles, from which they are evident.
ly deducible; whereas it is evident, that many of their doctrines may be
originally derived from the decrees of councils, many from papal defini
tions, many from the authority of some great man ; to which purpose
it is very remarkable what Gregory Nazianzen says of Athanasius :

744 An Answer to some Passages
* " What pleased him was a law to men ; what did not please him, was a
thing prohibited by law : his decrees were to them like Moses' tables, and
he had a greater veneration paid him, than seems to be due from men to
saints." And as memorable, that in the late great controversy about predetermi
nation and free-will, disputed before Pope Clement VII. by the Jesuits and
dominicans, the pope's resolution was, if he had determined the matter, to
define for that opinion, what was most agreeable, not to scripture, not to
apostolic tradition, nor to a consent of fathers, but to the doctrine of St.
Augustine : so that if the pope had made an article of faith of this contro
versy, it is evident St. Augustine had been the rule of it. _
Sometimes upon erroneous grounds customs have been brought in, God
knows how, and after have spread themselves through the whole church.
Thus Gordonius Huntleius confesses, that because baptism and the eucha
rist had been anciently given both together to men of ripe years, when
they were converted to Christianity ; afterwards by error, when infants
were baptized, they gave the eucharist also to infants. This custom in
short time grew universal, and in St. Augustine's time passed currently for
an apostolic tradition, and the eucharist was thought as necessary for them
as baptism. This custom the church of Rome hath again cast out, and in
so doing, professed either her disregard to the traditions of the apostles, or
that this was none of that number. But yet she cannot possibly avoid,
but that this example is a proof sufficient, that many things may get in by
error into the church, and by degrees obtain the esteem and place of apos
tolic traditions, which yet are not so.
The custom of denying the laity the sacramental cup, and the doctrine
that it is lawful to do so, who can pretend to derive from apostolic tradition ?
Especially when the council of Constance,f the patron of it, confesses, that
Christ's institution was under both kinds, and that the faithful in the primi
tive church received it in both. Licet Christus, &c. " Although Christ
after his supper instituted and administered this venerable sacrament under
both kinds ; although in the primitive church this sacrament was received
by the faithful under both kinds — Non obstante, &c. Yet all this notwith
standing, this custom, for the avoiding of scandals (to which the primitive
church was as obnoxious as the present is) was upon just reason brought
in, that laics should receive only under one kind."
Brought in therefore it was, and so is one of those doctrines, which
Lerinensis calls inducta non tradita, inventa non accepta, &c. therefore
all the doctrine of the Roman church does not descend from apostolic tra
dition. But if this custom came not from the apostles, from what original may
we think that it descended ? Certainly from no other than from the belief
of the substantial presence of the whole Christ under either kind. For this
opinion being once settled in the people's minds, that they had as much by
one kind as by both ; both priest and people quickly began to think it super
fluous, to do the same thing twice at the same time; and thereupon, being
(as I suppose) the custom required, that the bread should be received first,
having received that, they were contented that the priest should save the
pains, and the parish the charges, of unnecessary reiteration. This is my
conjecture, which I submit to better judgments ; but whether it be true or
* Tovto yp> vopjoi autfocj o tt, sxecvu sSoxst,, xo& tfoutfo ajtutpotov jiaXw, o pjiq eooxsc' xat,
TlXaxti Muuffeios avtois to, ixewov Soypata, xoa, rt%iu>v to difiaf rj rtapa ai'dpurtuv tfotj
ayioij oijca.er'a*. Orat. xxi. in laudem Athan.
t Sess. xiii.

in Rushworth's Dialogues. 745
false, one thing from hence is certain, that immemorial customs may by
degrees prevail upon the church, such as have no known beginning nor
author ; of which yet this may be evidently known, that their beginning,
whensoever it was, was many years, nay, many ages after the apostles.
St. Paul commands,* that nothing be done in the church, but for edifica
tion. He says, and if that be not enough, he proves, in the same place,
that it is not for edification, that either public prayers, thanksgiving, and
hymns to God, or doctrine to the people, should be in any language, which
the assistants generally understand not; and thereupon forbids any such
practice, though it were in a language miraculously infused into the speaker
by the Holy Ghost, unless he himself, or some other present, could and
would interpret it. He tells us, that to do otherwise is to speak into the
air ; that it is, to play the barbarians to one another ; that to such blessings
and thanksgivings the ignorant, for want of understanding, cannot say
Amen. He clearly intimates, that to think otherwise is to be children in
understanding. Lastly, in the end of the chapter he tells all that were
prophets and spiritual among the Corinthians, that the things written by
him are the commandments of God. Hereupon Lyranus upon the place
acknowledgeth, that in the primitive church blessings and all other service
were done in the vulgar tongue. Cardinal Cajetan likewise upon the place
tells us, that out of this doctrine of St. Paul, it is consequent that it were
better for the edification of the church, that the public prayers, which are
said in the people's hearing, should be delivered in a language common
both to the clergy and the people. And I am confident that the learnedest
antiquary of the Roman church cannot, nay, that Baronius himself, were
he alive again, could not, produce so much as one example of any one
church, one city, one parish, in all the christian world, for five hundred
years after Christ, where the sermons to the people were in one language,
and the service in another. Now it is confessed on all hands to be against
sense and reason, that sermons should be made to the people in any lan
guage not understood by them ; and therefore it follows of necessity, that
their service likewise was in those tongues which the people of the place
understood. But what talk we of five hundred years after Christ? when even the
Lateran council held in the year 1215, makes this decree: Quoniam in
plerisque, <fcc. " Because in many parts within the same city and diocese,
people are mixed of divers languages, having under one faith divers rites
and fashions, we strictly command that the bishops of the said cities or
dioceses provide fit and able men, who according to the diversities of their
rites and languages may celebrate divine services, and administer the sacra
ments of the church, instructing them both in word and example."
Now after all this, if any man will still maintain, that the divine service
in unknown tongues is a matter of apostolic tradition, I must needs think
the world is grown very impudent.
There are divers doctrines in the Roman church, which have not yet
arrived to the honour to be donata civitate, to be received into the number
of articles of faith ; which yet press very hard for it, and through the im
portunity and multitude of their attorneys that plead for them, in process
of time may very probably be admitted. Of this rank are the blessed
Virgin's immaculate conception, the pope's infallibility in determining con
troversies, his superiority to councils, his indirect power over princes m
temporalities, &c. Now as these are not yet matters of faith and apostolic
traditions, yet in after ages, in the days of our great grandchildren, may
» 1 Cor. xiv. 26—28 ; ix. 11, 16, 20, 27.

746 An Answer to some Passages
very probably become so : why should we not fear and suspect, that many
things now pass currently, as points of faith, which Ecclesia ab apostolisy
apostoli a Christo, Christus a Deo recepit, which perhaps in the days of
our great grandfathers had no such reputation.
Cardinal Perron teaches us two rules, whereby to know the doctrine of
the church in any age. The first is, when the most eminent fathers of any
age agree in the affirmation of any doctrine, and none of their contempo
raries oppose or condemn them, that is to be accounted the doctrine of the
church. The second, when one or more of these eminent fathers speak of
any doctrine, not as doctors, but as witnesses, and say, not, I think so, or
hold so, but the church holds and believes this to be truth ; this is to be
accounted the doctrine of the church. Now if neither of these rules be
good and certain, then we are destitute of all means to know what was the
public doctrine of the church in the days of our fathers ,- but, on the other
side, if either of them be true, we run into a worse inconvenience ; for
then surely the doctrine of the millenaries must be acknowledged to have
been the doctrine of the church in the very next age after the apostles.
For both the most eminent fathers of that time, and even all whose monu
ments are extant, or mention made of them, viz. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus,
Tertullian, Melito Sardensis, agree in the affirmation of this point, and
none of their contemporary writers oppose or condemn it. And, besides,
they speak not as doctors, but as witnesses ; not as of their own private
opinion, but as apostolic tradition, and the doctrine of the church.
Horatius, and out of him Franciscus a Sancta Clara, teaches us, that
under the gospel there is no where extant any precept of invocating saints ;
and tells us, that the apostles' reason of their giving no such precept was,
lest the converted gentiles might think themselves drawn over from one
kind of idolatry to another. If this reason be good, I hope then the posi
tion, whereof it is the reason, is true, viz. that the apostles did neither com
mand, nor teach, nor advise, nor persuade the converted gentiles to invo
cate saints (for the reason here rendered serves for all alike), and if they
did not, and for this reason did not so ; how then, in God's name, comes
invocation of saints to be an apostolic tradition ?
The doctrines of purgatory, indulgences, and prayer to deliver souls out
of purgatory, are so closely conjoined, that they must either stand or fall
together; at least, the first being the foundation of the other two, if that be
not apostolic tradition, the rest cannot be so. And if that be so, what
meant the author of the Book of Wisdom to tell us, that (after death) "the
souls of the righteous are in the hand of God, and there shall no torment
touch them ?" What means St. John to teach us, that they are blessed
which die in the Lord, for that they rest from their labours? But above all,
what meant Bishop Fisher, in his confutation of Luther's assertion, so to
prevaricate, as to me he seems to do, in the 8th Art. in saying, Multosfor-
tasse movet ? &c. " Peradventure many are moved not to place too great
faith in indulgences, because the use of them may seem not of long stand
ing in the church, and a very late invention among christians. To whom
I answer, that it is not certain by whom they began first to be taught.*
Yet some use there was of them, (as they say) very ancient among the
Romans, which we are given to understand by the stations, which were so
frequented in that city. Moreover they say Gregory I. granted some in
his time." And after : Caterum, ut dicere capimus, &c. " But, as we
were saying, there are many things of which in the primitive church no
* Therefore it is not true, that all the Roman doctrines were taught by Christ and
bis apostles.

in Rushworth's Dialogues. 747
mention was made, which yet, upon doubts arising, are become perspicu-
ous through the diligence of after-times. Certainly (to return to our busi-
ness) no orthodox man now doubts whether there be a purgatory, of which
yet among the ancients there was made very rare or no mention. More-
over the Greeks to this very day believe not purgatory. Whoso will, let
him read the writings of the ancient Greeks, and I think he shall find no
speech of purgatory, or else very rarely. The Latins also received not
this verity all at once, but by little and little. Neither was the faith, whe
ther of purgatory or indulgences, so necessary in the primitive church, as
now it is ; for then charity was so fervent, that every one was most ready
to die for Christ. Crimes were very rare, and those which were, were
punished by the canons with great severity. But now a great part of the
people would rather put off Christianity, than suffer the rigour of the canons.
That not without the great wisdom of the Holy Spirit, it hath come to pass,
that after the course of so many years the faith of purgatory, and the use
of indulgences, hath been by the orthodox generally received. As long as
there was no care of purgatory, no man looked after indulgences, for all
the credit of indulgences depends on that. Take away purgatory, and
what need is there of indulgences? We therefore considering, that purga
tory was a long while unknown ; that after, partly upon revelations, partly
upon scripture, it was believed by some, and that so at length the faith of
it was most generally received by the orthodox church, shall easily find out
some reason of indulgences. Seeing therefore it was so late ere purgatory
was known and received by the universal church, who now can wonder,
touching indulgences, that in the primitive church there was no use of them ?
Indulgences therefore began after men had trembled awhile at the torments
of purgatory. For then, it is credible, the holy fathers began to think more
carefully, by what means they might provide for their flocks a remedy
against those torments, for them especially, who had not time enough to
fulfil the penance which the canons enjoined."
Erasmus tells us of himself, that though he did certainly know, and
could prove that auricular confession such as is in use in the Roman church
was not of divine institution ; yet he would not say so, because he conceiv
ed confession a great restraint from sin, and very profitable for the times
he lived in ; and therefore thought it expedient, that men should rather by
error hold that necessary and commanded which was only profitable and
advised, than by believing, though truly, the non-necessity of it, neglect the
use of that, as by experience we see most men do, which was so beneficial.
If he thought so of confession, and yet thought it not fit to speak his mind,
why might he not think the like of other points, and yet out of discretion
and charity hold his peace ? and why might not others of his time do so
as well as he ? and, if so, how shall I be assured, that in the ages before
him there was not other men alike minded, who, though they knew and
saw errors and corruptions in the church, yet conceiving more danger in
the remedy, than harm in the disease, were contented hoc Catone — to let
things alone as they were, lest by attempting to pluck the ivy out of the
wall, they might pull down the wall itself, with which the ivy was so incor-
porated ?
Sir Edwin Sandys relates, that in his travels he met with divers men,
who, though they believed the pope to be antichrist, and his church anti-
christian, yet thought themselves not bound to separate from the communion
of it; nay, thought themselves bound not to do so, because the true church
was 'to be the seat of antichrist, from the communion whereof no man
might divide himself upon any pretence whatsoever.
And much to this purpose is that which Charron tells us in his third

748 An Answer to some Passages
Verite, cap. iv. §. 13, 15. That although all that, which the protestants
say falsely of the church of Rome, were true, yet for all this they must
not depart from it. And again : though the pope were antichrist, and the
estate of the church were such (that is, as corrupt both in discipline and
doctrine) as they (protestants) pretend, yet they must not go out of it.
Both these assertions he proves at large in the above-cited paragraphs, with
very many and very plausible reasons ; which I believe would prove his
intent, had not the corruptions of the Roman church possessed and infected
even the public service of God among them, in which their communion was
required ; and did not the church of Rome require the belief of all her
errors, as the condition of her communion. But howsoever, be his reasons
conclusive or not conclusive, certainly this was the professed opinion of him
and divers others ; as, by name, Cassander and Baldwin ; who, though
they thought as ill of the doctrine of the most prevailing part of the church
of Rome, as protestants do, yet thought it their duty not to separate from
her communion. And if there were any considerable number of consider
able men thus minded (as I know not why any man should think there was
not), then it is made not only a most difficult, but even an impossible thing,
to know what was the catholic judgment of our fathers in the points of con
troversy ; seeing they might be joined in communion, and yet very far
divided in opinion : they might all live in obedience to the pope, and yet
some think him head of the church by divine right ; others (as a great part
of the French church at this day) by ecclesiastical constitution ; others by
neither, but by practice and usurpation, wherein yet, because he had pre
scription of many ages for him, he might not justly be disturbed.
All might go to confession, and yet some only think it necessary, others
only profitable. All might go to mass and the other services of the church,
and some both like and approve the language of it, others only tolerate it
and wish it altered if it might be without greater inconvenience. All might
receive the sacrament, and yet some believe it to be the body and blood of
Christ, others only a sacrament of it. Some that the mass was a true and
proper sacrifice, others only a commemorative sacrifice or the commemora
tion of a sacrifice. Some, that it was lawful for the clergy to deny the
laity the sacramental cup ; others, that it was lawful for them to receive it
in one kind only, seeing they could not in both. Some might adore Christ
as present there according to his humanity, others as present according to
his divine nature only. Some might pray for the dead, as believing them
in purgatory ; others, upon no certain ground, but only that they should
rather have their prayers and charity, which wanted them not, than that
they, which did want them, should not have them. Some might pray to
saints, upon a belief that tbey heard their prayers and knew their hearts ;
others might pray to them, meaning nothing but to pray by them, that God
for their sakes would grant their prayers : others, thirdly, might not pray
to them at all, as thinking it unnecessary ; others, as fearing it unlawful ;
yet, because they were not fully resolved, only forbearing it themselves,
and not condemning it in others.
Uncle. I pray you then remember also what it is that protestants do
, commonly taunt and check catholics with ; is it not, that they believe tra
ditions ?
Nephew. It is a mere calumny, that protestants condemn all kinds of
traditions, who subscribe very willingly to that of Vincentius Lerinensis,
that christian religion is res tradita, non inventa ; a matter of tradition,
not of man's invention ; is what the church received from the apostles (and
by consequence what the apostles delivered to the church) and the apostles
from Christ, and Christ from God. Chemnitius, in his Examen of the

in Rushworth's Dialogues. 740
Council of Trent, hath liberally granted seven sorts of traditions, and nro-
testants find no fault with him for it. Prove therefore any tradition to be
apostolic, which is not written ; shew that there is some known word of
God, which we are commanded to believe, that is not contained in the
books of the Old and New Testament, and we shall quickly shew, that we
believe God s word, because it is God's, and not because it is written. If
there were any thing not written, which had come down to us with as full
and universal a tradition, as the unquestioned books of canonical scripture,
that thing should I believe as well as the scripture ; but I have long sought
for some such thing, and yet I am to seek; nay, I am confident no one
point in controversy between papists and protestants can go in upon half
so fair cards, for to gain the esteem of an apostolic tradition, as those things,
which are now decried on all hands ; I mean the opinion of the chiliasts,
and the communicating infants. The latter, by the confession of Cardinal
Perron, Maldonate, and Binius, was the custom of the church for 600
years at least : it is expressly and in terms vouched by St. Augustine for
the doctrine of the church, and an apostolic tradition : it was never insti
tuted by a general council, but in the use of the church, as long before the
first general council as St. Cyprian before that council ; there is no known
author of the beginning of it : all which are the catholic marks of an
apostolic tradition ; and yet this you say is not so, or, if it be, why have
you abolished it? the former lineally derives its pedigree from our Saviour
to St. John ; from St. John to Papias ; from Papias to Justin Martyr,
Irenseus, Melito Sardensis, Tertullian, and others of the two first ages ;
who, as they generally agree in the affirmation of this doctrine, and are
not contradicted by any of their predecessors, so some of them at least
speak to the point, not as doctors, but as witnesses, and deliver it for the
doctrine of the church and apostolic tradition, and condemn the contrary
as heresy ; and, therefore, if there be any unwritten traditions, these cer
tainly must be admitted first ; or, if these which have so fair pretence to
it, must yet be rejected, I hope then we shall have the like liberty to put
back purgatory and indulgences, and transubstantiation, and the Latin ser
vice, and the communion in one kind, &c. none of which is of age enough
to be page to either of the forenamed doctrines, especially the opinion of
the millenaries.
Uncle. What think you means this word tradition 1 No other thing
certainly, but that we confute all our adversaries by the testimony of the
former church ; saying unto them, this was the belief of our fathers ; thus
were we taught by them, and they by others, without stop or stay till you
come to Christ.
Nephew. We confute our adversaries by saying thus — truly a very easy
confutation. But saying and proving are two men's offices ; and therefore,
though you be excellent in the former, I fear, when it comes to the trial,
you will be found defective in the latter.
Uncle. And this no other but the Roman church did or could ever pre
tend to, which being in truth undeniable, and they cannot choose but grant
the thing, their last refuge is to laugh, and say, that both fathers and coun
cils did err, because they were men, as if protestants themselves were more..
Is it not so as I tell you ?
Nephew. No indeed it is not, by your leave, good uncle. For, first, the
Greek church, as every body knows, pretends to perpetual succession of
doctrine, and undertakes to derive it from Christ and his apostles, as con
fidently as we do ours. Neither is there any word in all this discourse,
but might have been urged as fairly and as probably for the Greek church,
as for the Roman. And, therefore, seeing your arguments fight for both

750 An Answer to some Passages
alike, they must either conclude for both, which is a direct impossibility,
for then contradictions should be both true ; or else, which is most certain,
they conclude for neither, and are not demonstrations, as you pretend (for
never any demonstration could prove both parts of a contradiction) but
mere sophisms and captions, as the progress of our answer shall justify.
Secondly, it is so far from protestants to grant the thing you speak of,
to wit, that the controverted doctrines of the Roman church came from
apostolic tradition, that they verily believe, should the apostles now live
again, they would hardly be able to find amongst you the doctrine which
they taught, by reason of abundance of trash and rubbish which you have
laid upon it.
And, lastly, they pretend not, that fathers and councils may err, and
they cannot ; nor that they were men, and themselves are not ; but that
you do most unjustly and vainly to father your inventions of yesterday
upon the fathers and councils.
Uncle. I know that we catholics do reverence traditions as much as
scripture itself; neither do I see why we should be blamed for it ; for the
words, which Christ and his apostles spake, must needs be as infallible as
those which were written.
Nephew. True. But still the question depends, whether Christ and his
apostles did indeed speak those words you pretend they did. We say with
Irenaeus, Praconiaverunt primum, scripserunt postea ; what they preach
ed first they wrote afterwards. We say with Tertullian (ecclesias) apos-
toli condiderunt, ipsi eis pradicando, tam viva, quod aiunt, voce, quam
per epistolas postea : the apostles founded the churches by their preaching
to them, first by word of mouth, then after by their writings. If you can
prove the contrary, do so, and we yield ; but hitherto you do nothing.
Uncle. And as for the keeping of it, I see the scripture itself is beholden
to tradition (God's providence presupposed) for the integrity both of the
letter and the sense. Of the letter it is confessed ; of the sense manifest.
For the sense being a distinct thing from the naked letter, and rather fetch
ed out by force of consequence, than in express and formal terms contain
ed (which is most true, whether we speak of protestant sense or the catho
lic) it belongeth rather to tradition than express texts of scripture 
Nephew. That which you desire to conclude, is, that we must be beholden
to tradition for the sense of scripture ; and your reason to conclude this, is,
because the sense is fetched out by force of consequence. This of some
places of scripture is not truei especially those which belong to faith and
good manners, which carry their meaning in their foreheads. Of others it
is true, but nothing to the purpose in hand, but rather directly against it.
For who will not say, if I collect the sense of scripture by reason, then I
have it not from authority 1 That is, unless I am mistaken, if I fetch it out
by force of consequence, then I am not beholden to tradition for it. But
the letter of scripture hath been preserved by tradition, and therefore why
should we not receive other things upon tradition as well as scripture ? I
answer, the Jews' tradition preserved the books of the Old Testament, and
why then doth our Saviour receive these upon their tradition, and yet con-
.derrm other things, which they suggested as matters of tradition ? If you
say, it was because these traditions came not from Moses, as they were pre
tended ; I say, also, that yours are only pretended, and not proved to come
from the apostles. Prove your tradition of these additions as well as you
prove the tradition of scripture, and assure yourselves, we then, according
to the injunction of the council of Trent, shall receive both with equal
reverence. Uncle. As it may appear by the sense of these few words, Hoc est cor-

in Rushworth's Dialogues. 751
pus meum, whether you take the protestant or the catholic sense : for the
same text cannot have two contrary senses of itself, but as they are fetched
Out by force of argument; and therefore, what sense hath best tradition to
shew for itself, that 's the truth.
Nephew. This is neither protestant nor catholic sense ; but if we may
speak the truth, direct nonsense. For what if the same text cannot have
contrary senses, is there therefore no means but tradition to determine
which is the true sense ? What connexion, or what relation, is there between
this antecedent and this consequent ? Certainly they are mere strangers to
one another, and until they met by chance in this argument, never saw
each other before. He that can find a third proposition to join them
together in a good syllogism, I profess unto you, erit mihi magnus Apollo.
But what if of these two contrary senses, the one, that is the literal, draw
after it a long train of absurdities ; the other, that is, the figurative, do not
so, have we not reason enough, without advising with tradition about the
matter, to reject the literal sense, and embrace the spiritual ? St. Augustine
certainly thought we had ; for he gives us this direction in his book, De
Doctrina Christiana; and the first and fittest text that he could choose to
exemplify his rule, what think you is it? Even the cousin-german to that
which you have made choice of: " Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of
man," &c. Here, saith he, the letter seems to command impiety : jigura
est ergo; therefore it is a figure, commanding to feed devoutly upon the
passion of our Lord, and to lay up in our memory, that Christ was cruci
fied for us.
Uncle. These particulars, peradventure, would require a farther discus
sion ; and now I will take nothing but what is undeniable. As this is, to
wit, that what points are in controversy betwixt us and protestants, we
believe to have been delivered by Christ and his apostles to our forefathers,
and by them delivered from hand to hand to our fathers, whom we know
to have delivered them for such to us, and to have received and believed
them for such themselves. Chillingworth.
Certainly, though ink and paper cannot blush, yet I dare say you were
fain to rub your forehead over and over before you committed this to
writing. Say what you list ; for my part, I am so far from believing you,
that I verily believe you do not believe yourselves, when you pretend that
you believe those_points of your doctrine, which are in controversy, to have
been delivered to your forefathers by Christ and his apostles. Is it possi
ble, that any sober man, who has read the New Testament, should believe,
that Christ and his apostles taught christians, that it was fit and lawful to
deny the laity the sacramental cup? that it was expedient, and for the
edification of the church, thatthe scripture should be read,. and the public
worship of God perpetually celebrated in a language which they under-
stand not, and to which, for want of understanding (unless St. Paul deceive
us) they cannot say amen? or is it reasonable you should desire us to
believe you, when your own men, your own champions, your own coun
cils, confess the contrary ? .
Does not the council of Constance acknowledge plainly, that the custom,
which they ratified, was contrary to Christ's institution, and the custom of
the primitive church? And how then was it taught by Christ and his
^Donot Cajetan and Lyranus confess ingenuously, that it follows evident-
ly from St. Paul, that it is more for edification, that the liturgy of the church
should be in such a language as the assistants understand?

752 An Answer to some Passages
The like confession we have from others concerning purgatory and indul
gences. Others acknowledge the apostles never taught invocation of saints.
Rhenanus says as much touching auricular confession.
It is evident from Peter Lombard, that the doctrine of transubstantiation
was not a point of faith in his time.
From Picus Mirandula, that the infallibility of the church was no article,
much less a foundation of faith in his time.
Bellarmine acknowledges, that the saints enjoying the vision of God
before the day of judgment, was no article of faith in the time of Pope
John XXII. v
But as the proverb is— When thieves fall out, true men recover their
goods ; so how small and heartless the reverence of the church of Rome
is to ancient tradition, cannot be more plainly discovered, than by the
quarrels which her champions have amongst themselves, especially about-
the immaculate conception of the blessed Virgin.
The patrons of the negative opinion, Cajetan, Bannes, Bandellus, and
Canus, allege for it, first, a whole army of scriptures, councils and fathers,
agreeing unanimously in this doctrine, that only Christ was free from sin.
Then an innumerable multitude of fathers expressly affirming the very
point in question, not contradicted by any of their contemporaries or pre
decessors, or indeed of their successors for many ages.
All the holy fathers agree in this, that the Virgin Mary was conceived in
original sin. So Bannes.*
Cajetan brings for it fifteen fathers, in his judgment irrefragable ; others
produce two hundred ; Bandellus almost three hundred. Thus Salmeron.f
That all the holy fathers, who have fallen upon the mention of this mat
ter, with one mouth affirm, that the blessed Virgin was conceived in original
sin. So Canus4
And after, that the contrary doctrine has neither scripture nor tradition
for it. For (saith he) no traditions can be derived unto us, but by the
bishops and holy fathers, the successors of the apostles ; and it is certain
that those ancient writers received it not from their predecessors.
Now, against this stream of ancient' writers, when the contrary new
doctrine came in, and how it prevailed, it will be worth the considering.
The first that set it abroach was Richardus de Sancto Victore, as his
countryman Johannes Major testifies of him : § "He was expressly the first
that held the Virgin Mary free from original sin : or, he was the first that
expressly held so." So after, upon this false ground, which had already
taken deep root in the heart of christians, that it was impossible to give too
much honour to her that was the mother of the Saviour of the world, like
an ill weed, it grew and spread apace. So that in the council of Basil ||
(which Binius tells us was reprobated but in part, to wit, in the point of the
authority of councils, and in the deposition of Eugenius, the pope) it was
defined and declared to be holy doctrine, and consonant to the worship of
the church, to the catholic faith, to right reason, and the holy scripture,
and to be approved, held, and embraced by all catholics ; and that it should
-be lawful for no man for the time to come to preach or teach the contrary.
The custom also of keeping the feast of her holy conception, which before
* In Part, prima, 1. Art viii. Dub. 3. t Disp. 51, in Ep. ad Rom.
J Lib. vii. Lor. cap. i. cap. iii. n. 9.
§ Omnium expresse primus Christiferam virginem originalis noxoe expertem tenuit.
De estis Scotorum, iii, 12.
II Sess. 36.

in Rushworth's Dialogues. 753
z£tei^to£^^™ othr churchef' and> * ««•.
ed to be celehraw a renewed and made universal, and command
ConceDtfon kS'' nom™ Conceptions -under the name of ti£e
nTZfeast ^ Zm k mtrg'"ain°te tells us indeed' that they ceIebrate
Tse , Tonciliabulum \l 1°* R°T' by virtue of this ^novation, cum
vent ck ve he Z'^f g w ?*? 'he &Ct not of a counci1' but °f * «°«-
Bas andto 1,1 Tw V * mdf S7les h the ecumenical council of
Basil, and tells us that it was reprobated only in two points, of which this
In h" rndeS" "*"* ** ™ ^ ? Bi"'US in h's m-gfn, or BinS
Yet in after times Pope Sixtus IV. and Pius V. thought not this decree
so binding, but that they might and did again put life £to the condemned
opinion giving liberty by their constitutions to all men to hold and mab-
tain either part; either that the blessed Virgin was conceived with oS
s.n, or was not. Which constitution of Sixtus IV. the council of Trent
renewed and confirmed.*
But the wheel again turning, and the negative opinion prevailing, the
affirmative was banished, first by a decree of Paul V. from all public ser
mons, lectures, conclusions, and all public acts whatsoever ; and since by
another decree of Gregory XV. from all private writings, and private con-
ferences. But yet all this contents not the university of Paris. They, as Salme-
ron tells us, admit none to the degree of doctor of divinity, unless they
first bind themselves by solemn oath to maintain the immaculate conception
of the blessed Virgin.
Now I beseech you Mr. R. consider your courses with some indifference.
First, You take authority upon you, against the universal, constant, un
opposed tradition of the church for many ages, to set up, as a rival, a new,
upstart, yesterday's invention, and to give all men liberty to hold what they
please. So Pope Sixtus IV. the council of Trent, and Pius V. That is,
you make it lawful to hold the ancient faith, or not to hold it, nay, to hold
the contrary. This is high presumption : but you stay not here, for,
Secondly, The ancient doctrine you cloister and book up within the nar
row, close, and dark rooms, of the thoughts and brains of the defenders of
it, forbidding them, upon pain of damnation, so much as to whisper it in
their private discourses and writings ; and in the mean time the new doc
trine you set at full liberty, and give leave, nay, countenance and encour
agement, to all men to employ their time, and wits, and tongues, and pens,
in the maintenance and propagation of it. Thus Paul V. and Gregory
XV. Yet this is not all : for,
Thirdly, You bind men by oaths to defend the new opinion and to oppose
the ancient. So the university of Paris. Yet still you proceed farther :
for, Fourthly, By your general councils, confirmed by your popes, you have
declared and defined, that this new invention is agreeable, and consequent
ly that the ancient doctrine is repugnant, to the catholic faith, to reason, to
the Holy Scripture. So the council of Basil.
These things I entreat you to weigh well in your consideration, and put
not into the scale above a just allowance, not above three grains of par
tiality, and then tell me, whether you can with reason or with modesty sup
pose or desire, that we should believe, or think that you believe, that all the
points of doctrine, which you contest against us, were delivered at first by
* Sess. 5.
3b

'/'•si An Answer to some Passages
Christ and his apostles, and have ever since by the succession of bishops
and pastors been preserved inviolate, and propagated unto you.
The patrons, I confess, of this new invention set not much by the decree
of the council of Basil for it, but plead very hard for a full and final defini
tion of it from the see apostolic : and finding the conspiring opposition of
the ancient fathers to be the main impediment of their purpose, it is strange
to see how confidently they ride over them.
" First, (says Salmeron in the place forecited*) they press us with a mul
titude of doctors, of whom we must not say that they err in a matter of
such moment.
" We answer, (says he) out of St. Augustine,f and the doctrine of St.
Thomas, that the argument drawn from authority is weak. Then to that
multitude of doctors we oppose another multitude.
" Thirdly, we object to the contrary the efficacy of reasons which are
more excellent than any authority.
" Some of them reckon two hundred fathers; others, as Bandellus, almost
three hundred ; Cajetan fifteen, but those, as he says, irrefragable. But as
a wise shepherd said, Pauperis est numerare pecus. Some of those, whom
they produce, are of an exolete authority, and scarce worthy of memory.
" Lastly, Against this objected multitude we answer with the word of
God,:): ' Thou shalt not follow a multitude to do evil ; neither shalt thou in
judgment yield to the sentence of many to depart from the truth.' For
when the donatists gloried in the multitude of their authors, St. Augustine
answered, It was a sign of a cause destitute of truth, to rely only upon the
authority of many men, who may err.
" It falls out sometimes also, that from some one doctor, especially if he
be famous, proceeds a multitude of followers of his opinion ; and some,
taken with an humble and pious fear, choose rather to follow the opinion
of another against their mind, than to bring out of their own wit any thing
new, lest they should so bring any new thing into the church. Whose
humility, as it is to be praised, so the confidence of others is not to be con
demned, who for the love of truth fear not to bring in better things. Thus
St. Jerome, in his sermon of the assumption (if it be his) fears to affirm, that
the Virgin Mary is assumed into heaven, and thinks it rather to be piously
desired, than rashly defined. But St. Augustine§ more happily dared to
affirm it, and settle it with many arguments, by which adventure the church
hath gained this, that persuaded by his reasons she hath believed it, and
celebrates it in her worship.
" But they fetch their arguments from the antiquity of the doctors, to
which always greater honour was given than to novelties. But I answer,
old men are praisers of ancient times, but we affirm, the younger the doctors
are, the more perspicuous. Moreover we say, that although they were
ancient, yet they were men, and themselves held under the darkness of ori
ginal sin, and might err. But go to, who are these ancients 1 Are they
apostles, are they Ambrose, or Jerome, or Augustine ? But none of them
discussed this controversy on purpose.
" Chrysostom is opposed in his commentary on St. Matthew, where he
saith, ' though Christ were not a sinner, yet he has human nature from a
sinner.' Understand (says Salmeron) from her, who, of herself, and ac
cording to the condition of nature, was a sinner. Thomas says that Chry
sostom speaks exorbitantly, for he constitutes the Virgin tinder actual sin ;
* Disp. 51, in Epist ad Rom. t De moribus Ecclesiae, 1. 1. cap. ii. } Exod. xxiii. 9.
§ In the margin here he says, " The doctrine of St. Augustine alone hath brought
into the church the worship of the blessed Virgin's assumption."

in RushwQrth's Dialogues. 75g
or that the commentaries, which go up and down under his name, are not
*uS ' °r'j i these Passages are adjectitious ; or, if they be indeed his, with
the good leave and favour of so great a man, they are to be rejected
Neither ought any man to marvel, that he, and Bernard, and Thomas, and
Bonaventure, and Alexander of Ales, and Albert, and Durand, and Egidius,
and, lastly, the greater part followed that opinion; both because they were
men, and because in progress of time new mysteries are revealed, which
before were unknown. For as holiness of life purgeth no man from sin, so
it frees no man from danger of error. Every age finds out some verities
proper to itself, which the former ages were ignorant of." And there in
the margin, "every age hath its peculiar divine revelations."
Thus far Salmeron : by whom we may see, that protestants are not the
only men, who say, that the fathers may err ; but that Roman catholics
too can and dare valiantly break through and tread under their feet, (though
perhaps with cap in hand, and some show of reverence) and even ride over
whole bands of fathers, when they stand in their way.
Another great Achilles for the same opinion is one Joannes Baptista
Porta, a Jesuit, and professor of divinity at Cornplutum. He, in his fourth
book of his Elucidarium Deipara, pleads very earnestly to have it defined,
and labours very lustily to remove all exceptions to the contrary, but above
all, those many ones, that there is no tradition for it ; that the stream of
ancient tradition is against it, and therefore well and worthily may it be
condemned for a heresy ; but, to be canonized among the articles of faith,
it can with no reason expect.
To the second exception he brings two answers, which Salmeron, it
seems, forgot, in the prosecution whereof he hath many excellent passages,
which I have thought good to cull out of him, to evidence the wonderful
reverence and constant regard of the present church of Rome to the tradi
tion of the ancients.
The first, That it is possible, the writings of the fathers, out of which
these testimonies against the immaculate conception are taken, may be cor
rupted. But to show it probable they are so in these places, he speaks not
one word of sense, nor so much as any colourable reason, unless this may
pass for one (as perhaps it may where reasons are scarce) — no proposition
which contradicts the common judgment of the fathers, can be probable :
but it is defide, that our opinion is probable ;* for the council of Trent hath
made it so, by giving liberty to all to hold it : therefore without doubt we
must hold, that it is not (whatsoever it seems) against the common judg
ment of the fathers. This argument, saith he, doth most illustriously con
vince the followers of the contrary opinion, that they ought not to dare
affirm hereafter, that their opinion flows from the common judgment and
writings of the ancient doctors.
His second answer is, That whereas Bandillus, and Cajetan,&c. produce
general sayings of Irenffius, Origen, Athanasius, Theophilus Alexandnnus,
Greg. Nyssen, Basil, Greg. Naz. Cyprian, Jerome, Fulgentius, and in a
manner of all the ancient fathers, exempting Christ alone from, and con
sequently concluding the Virgin Mary under original sin, which argument
must needs conclude, if the Virgin Mary be not Christ : his answer, I say,
is, These testimonies have little or no strength ; for did they conclude, we
must then (let us in God's name) say, that the Virgin Mary committed also
many venial sins : for the scriptures, fathers, and councils set forth in pro
positions as universal, that there is no man, but Christ, who is not often
* I should rather subsume— but this does so; therefore not probable.
3b2

756 An Answer to some Passages
defiled, at least with smaller sins, and who may not justly say that petition
of our Lord's Prayer, Demitte nobis debita nostra.
An answer, I confess, as fit as a napkin, to stop the mouths of his
domestic adversaries, though no way fit to satisfy their reason. But this
man little thought there were protestants in the world, as well as domini
cans, who will not much be troubled by thieves falling out, to recover more
of their goods than they expected, and to see a prevaricating Jesuit, instead
of stopping one breach in their ruinous cause, to make two. For whereas
this man argues from the destruction of the consequent to the destruction of
the antecedent thus : — If these testimonies were good and concluding, then
the Virgin Mary should have been guilty, not only of original, but also of
actual, sin : but the consequent is false and blasphemous ; therefore the
antecedent is not true : they on the other side argue, and sure with much
more reason, and much more conformity to the ancient tradition, from the
assertion of the antecedent to the assertion of the consequent, thus: — If
these testimonies be good and concluding, then the blessed Virgin was
guilty both of original sin and actual : but the testimonies are good and
concluding ; therefore she was guilty even of actual sins, and therefore
much more of original.
His third answer is, That their church hath or may define many other
things, against which (if their works be not depraved) there lies a greater
consent of fathers, than against the immaculate conception ; and therefore,
why not this ?
The instances he gives are four.
1. That the blessed Virgin committed no actual sin.
2. That the angels were not created before the visible world.
3. That the angels are incorporeal.
4. That the souls of saints departed are made happy by the vision of God
before the day of judgment.
Against the first opinion he alleges direct places out of Origen, which
he says admit no exposition, though Pamelius upon Tertullian, and Sixtus
Sinensis labour in vain to put a good sense on them ; out of Euthymius, and
Theophylact ; out of St. Chrysostom divers pregnant testimonies, and St.
Thomas's confession touching one of them ; out of the author of the ques
tions of the New and Old Testament, in St. Augustine, cap. Ixxv. ; out of
St. Hilary upon Psa. cxviii. which words yet, says he, Tolet has drawn to
a good construction, yet so much difficulty still remains in them ; out of
Tertullian, De came Christi, cap. vii. which he tells us will not be salved
by Pamelius's gloss ; out of Athanasius ; out of Irenseus, iii. 18, out of St.
.Augustine, lib. ii. De Symbolo ad Catech. cap. v. whose words yet, because
they admit, says Poza, some exposition, I thought fit to suppress, though
some think they are very hard to be avoided ; out of Greg. Nyssen ; out
of St. Cyprian in his sermon on the passion, whose words, says he, though
they may by some means be eluded, yet will always be very difficult, if
we examine the antecedents and consequents ; out of Anselm, Rich, de St.
Victor, St. Ambrose, St. Andrew of Jerusalem, and St. Bede; and then tells
us, there are many other testimonies much resembling these, and besides,
many fathers and texts of scripture, which exempt Christ only from actual
sin ; and, lastly, many suspicious sayings against her immunity in them,
who use to say, that at the angel's annunciation she was cleansed, and
purged, and expiated from all faults committed by her free-will ; which,
saith he, though Canisius and others explicate in a pious sense, yet at least
they show, that either those alleged against the immaculate conception are

in Rushworth's Dialogues. 757
jSfifaV^°krati7 t0 be exPounded, or, we must say, that a verity may be
defined by the see apostolic against the judgment of some fathers.
1. jc1 -tllese tmngs> says he, is drawn an unanswerable reason, that, for
the defining of the purity of the conception, nothing now is wanting. For
seeing notwithstanding, more and more convincing testimonies of fathers,
who either did, or did seem, to ascribe actual sin to the blessed Virgin ; not
withstanding the universal sayings of scriptures and councils, bringing all,
except Christ, under sin.; lastly, notwithstanding the silence of the scrip
tures and councils, touching her immunity from actual sin ; seeing, not
withstanding all this, the council of Trent* hath either decreed, or hath
confirmed, it being before decreed by the consent of the faithful, that the
blessed Virgin never was guilty of any voluntary, no, not the least sin ; it
follows certainly, that the apostolic see hath as good, nay, better ground,
to enrol amongst her articles the Virgin's immaculate conception. The
reason is clear : for neither are there so many, nor so evident sentences of
fathers, which impute any fault or blemish to the conception of the mother
of God, as there are in appearance to charge her with actual offences ;
neither are there fewer universal propositions in scripture, by which it may
be proved, that only Jesus was free from actual sin, and therefore, that the
Virgin Mary fell into it ; neither can there at this time be desired a greater
consent of the faithful, nor a more ardent desire than there now is, that
this verity should be defined, and that the contrary opinion should be ana
thematized for erroneous and heretical. The words of the council of Trent,
on which this reason is grounded, are these: "If any man say, that a man
all his life long may avoid all, even venial sins, unless by special privileges
from God, as the church holds of the blessed Virgin, let him be anathema."
But if the consent of the church hath prevailed against more clear testi
monies of ancient fathers, even for that which is favoured with no express
authority of scriptures or councils ; and if the council of Trent, upon this
consent of the faithful, hath either defined this immunity of the Virgin from
all actual sin, or declared it to be defined ; who then can deny, but that the
church hath immediate power to define among the articles of faith, the pious
opinion of the immaculate conception ?
His second example, by which he declares the power of their church to
define articles against a multitude of fathers, (and, consequently, not only
without, but against tradition) is the opinion, that angels were not created
before the corporeal world was created ; which, saith he, is or may be
defined, though there were more testimonies of fathers against it, than
against the immaculate conception. So he says in the argument of his fifth
chapter. And in the end of the same chapter, the council of Lateran hath
defined this against the express judgment of twenty fathers ; of which
Nazianzen, Basil, Chrysostom, Cyril, Jerome, Ambrose, and Hilary, are
part. His third example to the same purpose is the opinion, that angels are
incorporeal ; against which, saith he, in the argument of his sixth chapter,
there are more testimonies of the fathers, than against the immaculate con
ception ; and yet it is, or at least may be, defined by the church. And in
the end of the chapter, I have for this opinion cited twenty-three fathers,
which, as most men think, is now condemned in the Lateran council ;f or
at least, as Suarez^: proves, is to be rejected as manifestly temerarious.
His fourth and last example to the same purpose is the opinion, that the
souls of saints departed enjoy the vision of God before the resurrection ;
* Sess, vi. c. 23. De justificat. tFirm. De summa Trinitate. X De Angelis, 1. vi.

758 An Answer to some Passages in Rushworth's Dialogues.
against which, he tells us, in the first place, was the judgment of Pope John
XXI. though not as a pope, but as a private doctor. Then he musters up
against it a great multitude of Greek and Latin fathers, touching which he
says: All these testimonies when Vasques has related,* at length he
answers, f that they might be so explained, as to say nothing against the
true and catholic doctrine ; yet, if they could not be so explained, their
authority ought not to hinder us from embracing that, which the church
hath defined. The same argument I make, says Poza : the fathers and
ancient doctors, who are objected against the pious opinion of the conception
of the Virgin, may be commodiously explicated, or at least so handled that
they shall not hurt ; notwithstanding, though some of them cannot be so
explicated, their testimonies ought not to hinder, but that the see apostolic
may define the blessed Virgin's preservation from original sin. In fine, for
the close of this argument, he adds, Nolo per plura, I will not run through
more examples ; these that I have reckoned are sufficient, and admonish
learned men to bring together other like proofs, whereby they may promote
the desired determination. * 1, 2. D. 29, cap. i. tCap. iii.

A TABLE

PRINCIPAL MATTERS IN CHARITY MAINTAINED, &c.

JVofff.— The figures within the parentheses refer to the paragraph, and thoae which follow to the vase.

Protestants agree in more things than
they differ in, by believing the scripture,
(49, 50) 289, 290. We have as many ra-
tional means of agreement as the papists,
(7, 8) 293. Papists pretend to means of
agreement and do not agree, (3 — 6) 192,
193. Not necessary to find a church agree-
ing with protestants in all points, (19) 58,
(27) 354. Antiquity vainly pleaded for
Romish doctrines and practices, since many
errors are more ancient than some of their
doctrines, (19) 350. Apostles erred after
the sending of the Holy Ghost, (33) 208.
The apostolic church an infallible guide, to
which we may resort, being present to us by
her writings, (69, 80) 235, 242. That the
church has power to make new articles of
faith, asserted by the Romish doctors, (18)
270. This one article — I believe the Ro
man catholic church to be infallible — if their
doctrines were true, would secure against
heresy more than the whole creed, (77 — 79)
303, 304, (83) 305. Assent, evidence the
cause thereof, (51)476. Christ's assistance
promised to the church, to lead her into
more than necessary truths, (61, 62) 368,
370. Assistance, Divine, who shall have it,
(88) 382. Atheism and irreligion spring
easily from some Romish doctrines and
practices, (7, 8) 51, 52. Attrition, what,
(4) 76. St. Augustine's saying, Evangelio
non crederem, &c, how to be understood,
(54) 127, (97—99) 142, 143. St. Augus
tine's testimony against the donatists not
cogent against protestants, (163) 173. St.
Augustine's words, no necessity to divide
unity, explained, (10) 346. The author's
vindication from suspicion of heresy, (28)
66. The author's motives to turn a papist,
with answers to them, (42, 43) 37.
B.
Baptism, what, (7) 497. Baptizing of
children not provable by scripture, (7) 497.

Belief: things worthy to be believed not
always necessary to be believed, (46) 217 ;
things necessary to be believed, what, (17)
58, (101) 144, (5) 192, (13) 196. Belief
in Christ, what, (13) 196. Bible only is
the religion of protestants, (56) 480. The
bible, which is the religion of protestants,
to be preferred before the way of Romish
religion, showed at large, (56 — 72) 480 —
485. C.
The calvinists' rigid doctrine of prede
termination unjustly reproached by papists,
who communicate with those that hold the
same, (30) 513. To give a catalogue of our
fundamentals not necessary nor possible,
(27) 64, (13) 196, (53) 224. Want of such
a catalogue leaves us not uncertain in our
faith, (14) 198. Papists as much bound to
give a catalogue of the church's proposals,
which are their fundamentals, and yet do it
not, (53) 224. Our general catalogue of
fundamentals as theirs, (12) 266, (35) 516.
Catholic church : — I believe in the catholic
church — what it signifies, (41) 359. Cere
monies, (42) 214. Moral certainty a
sufficient foundation of faith, (154) 167.
Certainty, actual, may be without absolute
infallibility, (26) 203. What certainty re-
quired, (154) 167. A protestant may have
certainty, though disagreeing protestants
all pretend to like certainty, (13) 504. What
charity papists allow to us protestants, and
we to them, (1, 3—5) 74, 75—78. A cha
ritable judgment should be made of such as
err, but lead good lives, (33) 515. Pro
testant charity to ignorant papists no com
fort to them that will not see their errors,
(76) 376. Christianity must be known be
fore the church, (53) 291. Church, by
what constituted, ibid. True visible, whaV
(19) 58. Its visibility may cease, (13) 348..
Visible church in some cases may be re*
sisted, (164) 173. Where to be hearkenedi
(759)

760

THE TABLE.

to, (3) 49. What errors free from, (64) 370.
It may err, (11) 195, (70) 236. How far
to be obeyed, (58) 230. Its communion
when to be separated from, (11) 195. What
authority it hath to decide controversies of
faith, (162) 172. No particular church se
cured from erring in fundamentals,(55)217.
The same church, what, (11) 195. Not
judge of controversies, (20) 440. Its per
petuity not necessary ,(13)436. The church
how furnished with means to determine con
troversies, (7, 11) 79, 83. Church of Rome,
how a true church, (20) 440. Not infallible,
nor our guide, (29) 511. We may be a true
church, though deriving ordination, and re
ceiving scripture from a false one, (54) 478.
Circumstances of worship, how far to be
taken from the church, (42) 214. Com
mands in scripture to hear the church, and
obey it, suppose it not infallible, (41) 214.
Common truths believed, may preserve them
good, that otherwise err, (38) 515. Con
cord in damned errors worse than disagree
ment in controverted points, (72) 374.
Conscience, how far it justifies disobedience
to superiors, (108) 399. The consequence
of men's opinions may be unjustly charged
upon them, (12) 84, (30) 513. Contradic
tions a man may believe, (46) 285. Con
troversies in religion not necessary to be all
determined, (7) 79, (88) 246. Means of
ending them, (7, 8) 193. How controver
sies about scripture itself are to be decided,
(27) 1 1 6. Controversies not necessary to be
decided by a judicial sentence, without any
appeal, (85) 138. Creed, how it contains
the credenda necessary to be proposed, (12)
266, and believed, (1) 74, (81, &c.) 273,
(65) 299, (73) 302. All the points in it not
fundamental, (69) 300, and why, (75) 302.
That the creed contains all necessary points,
and how to be understood, (23) 274, (73,
74) 302. Not necessary, that our creed
should be larger than that of the apostles,
(67) 300, (70—72) 301. D.
Damnable, (21) 59, (26) 60. Defining is
no more than declaring what the word sig
nifies, (22) 351. St. Dennis of Alexandria's
saying explained, about not dividing the
church, (12) 348. To deny <i truth wit.
nessed by God, whether always damnable,
(9)53. The apostles' depositing truth w ith
the church, no argument that she should
alwayskeep it sincere and entire, (148) 164.
Of disagreeing protestants, though one side
must err, yet both may hope for salvation,
(22) 59, (10) 82, (13) 85, (17) 87. Two
may disagree in a matter of faith, and yet
neither be chargeable with denying a de
clared truth of God, (10) 54. Differences
among protestants vainly objected against
them, (2, 3, 5) 192. No reason to reproach
them for their differences about necessary
truths and damnable errors, (52) 222. Dis

belief, when a fault, (9) 53. What is re
quisite to convince a man that a doctrine
comes from God, (8) 52. Believing the
doctrine of scripture, a man may be saved,
though he did not believe it to be the word
of God, (159) 170. The donatists' error
about the catholic church, what it was and
was not, (64) 232. The donatists' case and
ours not alike, (101) 393. The Roman
church guilty of the donatists' error, in per
suading men, as good not to be christians,
as not Roman catholics, (64) 232. Papists
liker to the donatists than we, by their un
charitable denying of salvation out of their
church, (21, 22) 508, (27) 510.
E.
English divines vindicated from inclin
ing to popery, and for want of skill in school
divinity, (19) 58. Errors damnable, what
and how, (6, 7) 51, (26) 60, (29) 66, (4)
76, (12) 84, (12) 111, (11) 195, (17) 199,
(52) 222, (14) 269, (49) 289. Dangerous,
ib. Fundamental, (21) 59, (9) 294. Sin
ful, (26) 60. Venial, (29) 511. Security
from fundamental errors, how, (56) 227.
In what case errors damnable may not damn
those that hold them, (58) 230, (14) 269.
In what case errors not damnable may be
damnable to those that hold them, (66) 372.
No man to be reproached for quitting his
errors, (103) 394. Though we may pardon
the Roman church for her errors, yet we
may not sin with it, (70) 373. Errors of
the Roman church that endanger salvation
to be forsaken, though they are not destruc
tive of it, (6) 496. Erring persons, that
lead good lives, should be judged of cha
ritably, (33)515. A man may learn of the
church to confute its errors, (40) 214. We
did well to forsalte the Roman church for
her errors, though we afterwards may err
out of it, (63—65) 370, 371, (67) 372, (87)
381, (92) 385. We must not adhere to a
church in professing the least errors, lest we
should not profess with her necessary doc
trine, (56) 227. Eucharist given to infants,
accounted an apostolic tradition by St
Augustine, &c. (10) 54, (42) 214. The ex
amples of those, that, forsaking popish
errors, have denied necessary truths, no ar
gument against protestants, (63) 231. Ex
ternal communion of a church may be left
without leaving a church, (32) 356, (45)
360, (47) 360.

Faith, what (8) 81. It is not knowledge,
(2) 428. Articles of faith necessary to be be
lieved, (17) 58, (144) 162, (159) 1 70,(2) 192.
Faith certain, how required, (9) 82. Matter
of faith (10) 82. Scripture the sole and
adequate object of faith, (101) 144. Faith
in Christ, what, (13) 196. Faith no new
article, (28) 205. No article of faith can be

THE TABLE.

^!,dLCLdeClrJd Vy any one' wl»<* was
not made and declared before U81 270
r^wr/^ ^ deStr°^ hy'din^ing70,;
MQ^nfi T^ b,? G°d' (25) 60- (49) ^2,
(19) 506. The objects of faith, of two sorts
essential and occasional, (3) 264. Certainty
of faith, less than the highest degree, may
please God, and save a man, (8) 81, (3— 5)
428—430. Faith, less than infallibly cer
tain, may resist temptations and difficulties,
(5) 430. There may be faith, where the
church and its infallibility begets it not, (49)
125. Faith does not go before scripture,
but follows its efficacy, (48) 124. Protes
tants have sufficient means to know the cer
tainty of their faith, (152) 166. In the Ro
man church, the last resolution of faith is
into motives of credibility, (1 54) 1 67. The
fathers declared their judgment of articles,
but did not require their declarations to be
received under anathema, (18) 270. Pro
testants did not forsake the church, though
they forsook its errors, (1 1) 295. Sufficient
foundation for faith without infallible cer
tainty, (6) 431, (45) 470. Fundamentals,
what, (20,21) 200, (51) 222, (52) 291. Dif
ferences in fundamentals, (19) 200, (13)
196, (19) 271. Not necessary to have a list
of them, (53) 224. Who secure from erring
in them, (64) 370. No infallible guide in
fundamentals (39) 213. Fundamental
errors twofold (88) 382. To be unerring
in fundamentals can be said of no church
of one denomination, (55) 226. To say,
that there shall always be a church not
erring in fundamentals, is to say, that there
shall be always a church, (35) 211. A
church is not safe, though retaining funda
mentals, when it builds hay and stubble on
the foundation, and neglects to reform her
errors, (61) 368. Ignorance of what points
in particular are fundamental, does not
make it uncertain whether we do not err
fundamentally, or differ in fundamentals
among ourselves, (14) 504. In what sense
the church of Rome errs not fundamental-
ly, (20) 58. G.
The four gospels contain all necessary
doctrines, (40—43) 281, 283. An infallible
guide not necessary for avoiding heresy,
(127) 156. The apostolic church an infal
lible guide, to which we may resort, (69)
235. The church may not be an infallible
guide in fundamentals, though it be infalli
ble in fundamentals, (39) 213. That the
Roman church should be the only infallible
guide of faith, and the scriptures say nothing
concerning it, is incredible, (20) 440.
H.
Heresy, what, (8) 52, (127) 156, (18) 270,
(51) 362, (11) 435, (38) 461. No mark of
heresy to want succession of bishops hold
ing the same doctrine, (38) 461, (41) 467.

761

Heretics, who, (127) 156. We are not
heretics for opposing things propounded
by the church of Rome for divine truth
(11, 12) 435. Holy Ghost, its motions,
(95) 141. Hooker's fundamentals, (49)
289. Whether protestants schismatically
cut off the Roman church from hopes of
salvation, (38) 357.

Jewish church had in it no infallible di
rection, (124) 155, (141) 160. The im-
posing a necessity of professing known
errors, and practising known corruptions,
is a just cause of separating from a church,
(31) 356, (36) 357, (40) 358, (50) 362, (59,
60) 366, 367, (68, 69) 373. Indifferency
to all religions falsely charged upon pro
testants, (3) 49, (12) 196. The belief of
the church's infallibility makes way for
heresy, (10) 54. An infallible guide not
needful for avoiding heresies, (127) 156.
The church's infallibility has not the same
evidence as there is for the scriptures, (30)
206, (31) 207. The church's infallibility
can no way be better assured to us, than
the scriptures' incorruption, (25) 116, (27)
204. The church's infallibility is not
proved from the promise, that the gates of
hell shall not prevail against it, (70) 236.
Nor from the promise of the Spirit's lead
ing into all truth, which was made only to
the apostles, (71) 236, (72) 237. The
church's infallibility not proved from
Ephes. iv. 11 — 13, He gave some apostles,
&c. till we all come in the unity of the
faith, &e., (79, 80) 241, 242. That God
has appointed an infallible judge of contro
versies, because such a one is desirable and
useful, is a weak conclusion, (128 — 136)
157, 158. Infallibility in fundamentals no
warrant to adhere to a church in all that
she proposes, (57) 229. Infallible interpre
tations of scripture vainly boasted of by the
Roman church, (93—95) 140, 141. Whe
ther the denial of the church's infallibility
leaves men to their private spirit, reason,
and discourse, and what is the harm of it,
(12, 13) 56. Traditional interpretations of
scripture how ill preserved, (10) 109, In
terpretations of scripture, which private
men make for themselves (not pretending
to prescribe their sense to others) though
false, or seditious, endanger only them
selves, (122) 154. Allow the pope or Ro
man church to be a decisive interpreter of
Christ's laws, and she can evacuate them,
and make what laws she pleases, (10, 11)
54, 56, (1) 105. Interpretations of scrip.
ture may not be imposed, (16) 269. Men
may declare their sense, but cannot impose
it, (18) 270. Interpreter of scripture, every
man for himself, (110) 149. Not the Ro-
man church, (80) 136. St. Irenseus's ac
count of tradition favours not popery, (144
— 146) 162—164. His saying, that no

762

THE TABLE.

reformation can countervail the danger of
a schism, explained, (11) 347. A living
judge to end controversies about the sense
of scripture, not necessary, (12, 13) 111,
112. If Christ had intended such a judge
in religion, he would have named him,
which he has not done, (23) 115,(69) 134,
(20) 440. Though a living judge be neces
sary to determine civil causes, yet not ne
cessary for religious causes, (14—22) 113,
114. If there be a judge of controversies,
no necessity he should be of the Roman
church, (69) 235. Roman catholics set up
as many judges in religion, as protestants,
(116) 151,(118) 152, (153) 166. Judge of
controversies none, (10) 109, (13, &c.) 112,
(85) 138, (103) 146, (69) 235. In religion
every one for himself, (11) 110, (116) 151,
(153, &c.) 166, (87) 246. Justification,
verbal disputes about it, (30, &c.) 513.
K.
Our obligation to know any divine truth
arises from God's manifest revealing of it,
(19) 200. L.
How we are assured, in what language
the scripture is uncorrupted, (55 — 57) 127
— 129. To leave a church, and to leave the
external communion of a church, is not the
same thing, (32) 458, (35) 460, (47) 470.
Love, what requires different degrees of it,
(5) 496. Luther's separation not like that
of the donatists, and why, (33) 356, (101)
393. Luther and his followers did not di
vide from the whole church, being a part
of it, but only reformed themselves, for
saking the corrupt part, (56) 364. Luther's
opposing himself to all in his reformation,
no objection against him, (89, 90) 383. We
are not bound to justify all that Luther said
and did, no more than papists are bound to
justify what several popes have said and
done, (112) 404. M.
They may be members of the catholic
church, that are not united in external com-
munion, (9) 346. Merit, how denied, (35)
279. Millennium, a matter of faith to
Irenreus and Justin Martyr, (10) 54. The
mischiefs that followed the Reformation,
not imputable to it, (92) 385. The author's
motives to change his religion, with an
swers to them, (42, 43) 37. The faith of
papists resolved at last into the motives of
credibility, (154) 167. N.
Necessary to salvation, what, (26) 60.
Necessary simply to salvation, (52, 53) 222,
224. Necessary to be believed, what, ibid.
(49) 289. Necessary, the evil of making
that necessary, which God has not made
necessary to salvation, (64) 232. Necessary
truths, what, (1, &c.) 264, (41) 282. What
makes any truth necessary to be believed,

(4, &c.) 265. To be believed, and not to be
disbelieved, the same, (11) 266. To be be
lieved absolutely, and necessary to be be.
lieved upon a supposition, ibid. Necessary
to be known that they are revealed, and
why to be believed when they are revealed,
and known to be so, (30, &c.) 277. Ne
cessary doctrines, all to be found in each
evangelist, (40) 281. Necessary simply,
how to be known, (144) 162. What makes
points necessary to be believed, (11) 266.
No more is necessary to be believed by us
than by the apostles, (27, &c.) 277. Papists
make many things necessary to salvation,
which God never made so, (7) 497. All
necessary points of faith are contained in
the creed, (73, 74) 301, 302. Why some
points not so necessary were put into the
creed, (75, 76) 302, 303. Protestants may
agree in necessary points, though they may
overvalue some things they hold, (34) 516.
To impose a necessity of professing known
errors, and practising known corruptions,
is a just cause of separation, (31) 356, (36)
357, (40) 358, (50) 362, (59) 366, (60) 367,
(68, 69) 373 O.
A blind obedience is not due to ecclesias
tical decisions, though our practice must be
determined by the sentence of superiors, in
doubtful cases, (110) 402. A probable opin
ion may be followed (according to the Ro
man doctors) though it be not the safest
way for avoiding sin, (8) 499. Optatus's
saying impertinently urged against protes
tants, (99, 100) 391, 392. Ordination, (39)
462, (15) 505. Though we receive ordi
nation and scripture from a false church,
yet we may be a true church, (54) 478.
P.
Whether papists or protestants most ha
zard their souls on probabilities, (57) 295.
What we believe concerning the perpetuity
of the visible church, (18) 58. Peter had
no authority over the other apostles, (100)
392. Whether 1 Tim. iii. 15, The pillar
and ground of truth, belong to Timothy, or
the church, (76) 240. If those words belong
to the church, whether they may not signify
her duty, and yet that she may err in ne
glecting it, (77) 241. A possibility of being
deceived argues not an uncertainty in all
we believe, (26) 203, (50) 221, (107) 399,
(47) 470. By joining in the prayers of the
Roman church, we must join in her unlaw
ful practices, (11) 195. Preaching the word
and administering the sacraments, how they
are inseparable notes of the church, and
how they make it visible, (19) 350. Private
judgment, how not to be opposed to the
public, (109) 400. Private spirit, how we
are to understand it, (110) 149. Private
spirit is not appealed to, («. e. to dictates
pretending to come from God's Spirit) when
controversies are referred to scripture,(110)
149. Whether one is left to his private

THE TABLE
spirit, reason and discourse, by denying- the
f ' 17 0) 149" The Jesuits' doctrine
of probability exposed, (8) 499. Proposed
sufficiently, what, (9) 22. It is hard for
papists to resolve what is a sufficient pro-
posal of the church, (54) 225. Protestants
are on the surer side for avoiding sin, and
papists on the more dangerous side to com
mit sin, showed in instances, (9) 502.
R.
Everyman by reason must judge both of
scripture and the church, (111 — 113) 149
150, (118) 152, (120) 153, (122) 154. Rea
son and judgment of discretion is not to be
reproached for the private spirit, (100) 144.
If men must not follow their reason, what
they are to follow, (114, 115) 150, 151.
Some kind of reformation may be so neces
sary, as to justify separation from a corrupt
church, though every pretence of reforma
tion will not, (53) 363. Nothing is more
against religion, than using violence to intro
duce it,(9 6) 388. The religion of protestants
(which is the belief of the Bible) a wiser and
safer way than that of the Roman church,
showed at large, (56—72) 480 — 485. All
protestants require repentance to remission
of sins, and remission of sins to justification
(31) 514. Revelation unequal, (24) 201.
No revelations, known to be so, may be re
jected as not fundamental, (11) 266. A di
vine revelation may be ignorantly disbeliev
ed by a church, and yet it may continue a
Church, (20) 200. Papists cannot have reve
rence for the scripture, whilst they advance
so many things contrary to it, (1) 205. No
argument of their reverence to it, that they
have preserved it entire, (2) 106. The Ro
man church, when Luther separated, was
not the visible church, though h visible
church, and part of the catholic, (26, 27)
354. The present Roman church has lost
all authority to recommend what we are to
believe in religion, (101) 144. The proper
ties of a perfect rule, (5—7) 107, 108.
Whether the popish rule of fundamentals,
or ours, is the safest, (83) 305.
S.
Right administration of sacraments un
certain in the Roman church (63 — 68) 130
— 132. Salvation, the conditions of it (5)
51, (159) 170 ; the sure way to it, (53) 291,
(€3) 298 ; great uncertainty of it in the
church of Rome, (63) 130. Schism, what,
(3) 49, (22) 59, (22) 351, (28, &c.) 355, (51)
362, (56) 364, (102) 394 ; trial of schism,
(22) 59 ; the only fountain thereof, (1 6) 269.
He may be no schismatic, that forsakes a
church fbr errors not damnable, (2) 48.
They may not be schismatics, that continue
the separation from Rome, though, Luther,
that began it, had been a schismatic, (4)
345, (14) 436. Scripture, a perfect rule of
faith, (5) 107 ; its meaning, (84) 138 ; proofs
of its divine authority, (53) 291 j it is suf-

763
ficient to guard us from error, and keen us
in unity of faith, (80) 242 ; the incorruption
thereof known by consent of copies, (27)
204 ; received from universal'tradition, (36)
212 ; the certainty of understanding it in
some places, (50) 221 ; what canonical, de
terminable only by the testimony of the an
cient churches, (27) 116, (33, &c.) 120;
translations, how to be examined or depend.
ed on, (27) 116, (55) 137, (72) 134, (83)
137 ; internal arguments for the authority
of the scriptures, (47) 123 ; not received
?S?n,A authority of the Roman church,
(91) 140 ; but universal tradition, (27) 204 ;
church of Rome not the infallible interpre
ter of scripture, (97) 142, received from uni
versal tradition, (101) 144, (62) 231 ; a suf
ficient rule to judge what is necessary to
be believed, (104) 146 ; intelligible in all
necessaries, (105) 147 ; scripture received
only by the authority of universal tradition,
(114) 150 ; obscure places, what matter of
faith they contain, (127) 156 ; plain places
may be certainly understood, (150) 165 ;
the only rule to judge all controversies by,
(155) 168 ; its incorruption more secured
by providence than the Roman church's
vigilancy, (24) 115; when made the rule
of controversies, those that concern itself,
are to be excepted, (8) 109, (27) 116, (156)
169 ; it contains all necessary material ob
jects of faith, of which the scripture itself
is none, but the means of conveying them
to us, (32) 120, (159) 170 ; it must deter-
mine some controversies, else those about
thechurch and its notes are undeterminable,
(3) 107; is unjustly charged with increasing
controversies and contentions, (4) 107. The
scripture is a sufficient means for discover
ing heresies,(127) 166. When controversies
are referred to scripture, it is not referring
them to the private spirit, understanding it
of a persuasion pretending to come from the
Spirit of God, (10) 109. Protestants, that
believe scripture, agree in more things than
they differ in, and their differences are not
material, (49) 289, (50) 290. Private men,
if they interpret scriptures amiss, and to ill
purposes, endanger only themselves, when
they do not pretend to prescribe to others,
(122) 154. The protestants' security of the
way to happiness, (53) 127. Want of skill
in school divinity foolishly objected against
English divines, (19) 28. Separation from
a church, (56) 364 ; grounds thereof, (56)
227, (57) 229 ; how far lawful, (71) 373,
(66) 233 ; it is justifiable from the profes
sion of what seems false, (64) 370. Separa
tion from a church erring in fundamentals,
or that requires the profession of any error,
is not schism, (75) 375. The principles of
the church of England's separating from
Rome will not serve to justify schismatics,
(71) 373, (74) 374, (80) 377, (81, 82) 378,
(85) 380, (86) 381. Socinianism and other
heresies countenanced by Romish writers,
who have undermined the doctrine of the

764

THE TABLE.

Trinity, (17, 18) 26. Spirit teaches suf
ficiently, not irresistibly, (71) 236. The
promise of the Spirit's leading into all truth,
proves not infallibility, ib. The promise
of the Spirit's abiding' with them for ever,
may be personal, (74) 239 ; and it being a
conditional promise, cuts off the Roman
church's pretence to infallibility, (75) 239.
Succession of men orthodox not necessary,
(38) 460, (41) 467. In what sense succes
sion is by the fathers made a mark of the
true church, (40) 465. Papists cannot
prove a perpetual succession of professors
of their doctrine, (41) 467. Sufficienter et
efficaciter, (34) 209. Superstitions not to
be tolerated, (40) 214. T.
Toleration, (85) 138 ; the way to truth,
(13) 267, (39) 281. The church may tole-
rate many things, which she does not allow,
(47) 218. Tradition, what, (147, 148) 164.
Tradition mistaken, (44) 215, (45) 217;
good as written, (46) 217 ; how urged by
the fathers, (40) 465. Tradition proves the
books of scripture to be canonical, not the
authority of the present church, (25) 116,
, (53) 127, (90, 91, 92) 139, 140, (27) 204.
Traditional interpretationsofscripture,how
ill preserved by the Roman church, (10) 109,
(46) 217. No traditional interpretations of
scripture, though if there were any remain
ing, we are ready to receive them, (88, 89)
139, (46) 217. The traditions, distinct from
scripture, which Iremeus mentions, do not
favour popery, (144) 162, (145, 146) 164.
The asserting unwritten traditions, though
not inconsistent with the truth of scripture,
yet disparages it as a perfect rule, (10) 109.
Though our translations of the Bible are
subject to error, yet our salvation is not
thereby made uncertain, (68) 132, (73) 135.
Different translations of scripture may as
well be objected to the ancient church, as to
protestants, (58, 59) 129. The vulgar trans
lation is not pure and uncorrupted, (75, 76,
&c.) 135. Transubstantiation, contradic
tions contained in it, (46) 285. The doctrine
of the Trinity undermined by Roman doc
tors, (17, 18) 26. Truth necessary to be
known, (20, 21) 200. Truths revealed, what
necessary to be believed, (9) 22. Truths suf
ficiently propounded, (25) 31. Truths de
livered in scripture, because they were ne
cessary to be believed, what, (17) 26. Truth
in scripture, not necessary, (13) 85. Truths
revealed, how they may be innocently de
nied, (16) 198. God's truths not question
ed by protestants, though they deny points
professed by the church, (12) 84. Protes
tants question not God's truth, though

denying some truth revealed by him, if they
know it not to be revealed, (16) 198. The
truth of the present church depends not up
on the visibility or perpetuity of the church
in all ages, (21) 351, (20) 507. The apostles'
depositing truth with the church, is no argu
ment that she should always keep it entire
and sincere, (148) 164. The promise of
being led into all truth, agrees not equally
to the apostles, and to the church, (34) 209.
A trial of religion by scripture may well be
refused by papists, (3) 107.
U.
Violence and force to introduce religion,
is against the nature of religion, and un
justly charged upon protestants, (96) 388.
What visible church was before Luther,
disagreeing from the Roman, (19) 58, (27)
354. That there should be always a visible
unerring church, of one denomination, is
not necessary, (27) 354. The visible church
may not cease, though it may cease to be
visible (13, 14) 348, 349, (41) 359. The
church may not be visible in the popish
sense, and yet may not dissemble, but pro
fess her faith (18) 349. The great uncer
tainties salvation in the Roman church de
pends on, (63—72) 130—134. Their un-
certainty of the right administration of
sacraments, (63 — 68) 130 — 132. Unity
how to be obtained, (81, &c.) 243, (39, &c.)
281. Unity of the church, (58) 482. The
church's unity, by what means best pre
served, (81) 243, (13) 267, (16) 269, (40)
281. Pretence of infallibility a ridiculous
means to unity, when that is the chief ques
tion to be determined, (8) 81. Unity of
external communion not necessary to the
being a member of the catholic church, (9)
346. Universality of a doctrine no certain
sign that it came from the apostles, (44)
215. Want of universality of place proves
not protestants to be heretics, and may as
well be objected against the Roman church,
(42) 467, (55) 479. We would receive un
written traditions derived from the apos
tles, if we knew what they were, (46)217.
The vulgar translation not pure and un-
corrupted, (75, 76, &c.) 135.
W.
The whole doctrine of Christ was taught
by the apostles, and an anathema denounc
ed against any that should bring in new
doctrines, (18) 270. The wisdom of pro
testants justified in forsaking the errors of
the Roman church, (53, 54) 478. The
wisdom of protestants shewed at large
against the papists, in making the Bible
their religion, (56—72) 480—485.

THE END.

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 02435 2412