Comparison of the Protestant and Catholic Churches Unknown c. 11,455 words Newton Project London 2011 Newton Project, University of Sussex

This metadata is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.

 in English, c. 11,583 words, 16 pp. plus an interleaved fragment.

Excerpts from a purported discussion of the relative merits and claims to authority of the Protestant and Roman Catholic Churches. In fact, the document is a pro-Protestant polemic. Divided under chapter headings but by no means (as the Sotheby catalogue suggests it is) a complete treatise in its own right. A one-page interleaved fragment, consisting of one sentence on organising Mint payments to moneyers and some jottings on 10th-century history, is completely unrelated, unmentioned in the Sotheby catalogue, and probably included only by accident.

 16 pp. plus an interleaved fragment.

in English

 M132/2/7, Stanford University Library, Stanford, California, USA USACaliforniaStanfordStanford University Library M132/2/7 SL259

Bought at the Sotheby sale by 'Hadley' (i.e. de Coppet) for £60 and resold as lot 1,651 at the De Coppet sale on 19 May 1956 to Miss Emily Driscoll of New York for £110.

42

 Not yet dated English Latin Isaac Newton ReligionDoctrine Mint Catalogue information compiled by Rob Iliffe, Peter Spargo & John Young Tagged transcription begun by Micah Anshan Transcription completed by Micah Anshan Checking begun by Catalogue exported to teiHeader by Michael Hawkins Checking completed by John Young Proofed by Robert Iliffe
2

Res doctrines fundamentalls, & not doctrines fundamentals by yethe history decide yethe controversy. For yethe one what particular church which must be judges, or must they appeale to one high Iudge

Before yethe Councill of Florence it was esteemed noe Hæresy in yethe Church; most of the fathers not beleiving it; & those who did, not condemning those of Hæresy who did not nor did some Popes & Councils esteeme them Hereticks.

3 And though yethe Councell of Florence was neither Generall nor free (by reason of yethe dangers Greece was in &c) they onely condemned it as false not hereticall wchwhich those few Grecians in yethe councill afterwards recanted of when they saw yethe Emperors succor from Rome to faile him.

4 Though yethe procession may be true, yet it cannot appeare by either reason or scripture (For yethe spirit may be equall & consubstantiall wthwith yethe sons though not proceeding from it, as well as yethe sons equall & consubstantiall wthwith yethe spirit though not proceeding from it) & therefore not being revealed by God is noe fundamental

And as to yethe addition of Filioqꝫque to yethe Creeds. & sume in yethe Greeks

5 Though this article was acknowledged by some particular churches before yethe difference of yethe Greeke & Latine Churches broke out yet it was added to yethe nicene & Athanasian Creede but about ytthat time by ytthat Pope & therefore not being then received by the Cath.Catholic Church could not make yethe Greeks scismaticks.

6. Why did yethe Pope add yethe Filioqꝫque contrary to yethe former decrees of CoucellsCouncells can the church contradict her selfe at several times? Or if this bee noe addition but only an Explication (wchwhich there is small reason to say either in respect of yethe Councells prohibition extending to declarations too, or of yethe article it selfe being rather an addition) ynthen yethe denying it is not yethe denying an article of faith but an explication only. & Why then made of faith. & wthwith an Anathema to it?

7. Why did yethe Pope &c. wthoutwithout yethe consent of yethe easterne churches make this addition? The presumption therefore of yethe Romans was yethe cause of yethe Scisme.

Chap 2. of Fundamentalls in Generall.

By Fundamentalls are meant, points necessary to bee beleived in order to Salvation; rather then principalls from whence deductions may bee made of Theological Truths.

Quest. 1. Whither any Definitions of yethe Church may bee beleived as articles of faith necessary to salvation; 2. Whither they may bee beleive imposed on others to bee beleived as such, soe ytthat they may bee excluded Catholick communion if they doe not.

Resp: Consider 1A What are yethe Grounds or foundations on wchwhich any thing becomes necessary to Salvation. viz: 1a. In respect of particular persons tis Divine Revelation onely; 1. all men, upon yethe account of Gods veracity, being bound to beleive wtwhat they are persuaded ytthat God hath revealed. I say not all ytthat God hath revealed, but wtwhat they are persuaded ytthat God hath revealed & so far as they are persuaded, bee their judgments true or erroneous, least they count God a lyar. 2 Besides this generall ground Gods veracity wchwhich makes all things, equally known to bee revealed, equally necessary to bee beleived, there is yet a more particular ground wchwhich make some things in themselves more necessary to be beleived than others: viz The end why God revealed them wchwhich makes those most necessary to bee known & beleived wchwhich doe most conduce to that end.

3

Which maine end will appeare both by reason & scripture to bee Gods glory & orour eternall happinesse. The meanes being 1 an hearty assent to yethe doctrine of Christ & 2 a conscientious walking in yethe same according to yethe precepts of it. But to define wtwhat parts of ytthat doctrine are necessary & what not, is unnecessary & must bee gathered by comm left to every man to gather from scripture . Because yethe assent to yethe doctrine of Christ as revealed from God must necessarily carry in it so much as is necessary in order to salvation. And this controversy neede never brake christian societys. 2a. In respect of publick Christian societys To know yethe bonds or conditions of such communion, I consider ytthat a Church is a combination of men together upon yethe beleife of such a doctrine as necessary to Salvation. And yethe communion of Churches is their agreemntagreement in this beleife Hence Cor. 1: The very being of a church supposeth yethe necessity of wtwhat is required to bee beleived in order to salvation, antecedently to its And therefore hath noe power to make things nececssary by its definition. for if it was a Church before those definitions it then beleives all things necessary &c. Cor. 2: Whatsoever church ownes those things wchwhich are antecedently necessary to yethe being of a Church cannot so long cease to bee a true church as it ownes them. For it retains yethe foundation of yethe being of yethe Catholick Church. And this being it may retaine though it loose yethe Noting ytthat its being depends on yethe beleife of necessarys & its perfection on yethe exercise of all acts of communion in it according to ytthat beleife. Cor 3: The union of yethe Catholick church depends upon yethe agreement of it in making yethe foundations of its being to bee yethe magnitude of its communion. Therefore ytthat church as much as shee can breaks yethe union wchwhich imposeth yethe beleif of things as necessary to salvation wchwhich were not so antecedently to yethe being of yethe Cath. Church. & is to bee excomexcommunicated to preserve yethe union of yethe rest. This premised, yethe bonds of communion follow: viz 1b Those things onely wchwhich by yethe judgment of all those societys are antecedently necessary to yethe being of yethe C: Church. (by Cor 3 & 1st). Notwithstanding nationall churches may in time of divisions reforme themselves by making articles of religion & requiring a subscription to ymthem in order to peace but not as necessary to salvation (as orour 27 Art). 2b Those things onely wchwhich may bee evidently propounded to all persons as things wchwhich God did require yethe explicit beleife of. (cor 1) For how should ytthat appeare a necessary article of faith but wtwhat may bee evidently proved to bee revealed by God, & ytthat to bee necessarily beleived by all men in order to salvation And are yethe Popes supremacy, Purgatory, Transubst: &c as manifest as Scripture Christ orour saviorsaviour of Eternall life, Administration of yethe Eucharist &c. 3b Those things onely wchwhich have been received by yethe Cath: Church in all ages. (by Cor 3. 1. & 2). And to know wtwhat these things are Examine 1. Was it admitted into yethe ancient Creeds? And the Fathers testify yethe perfection of yethe Apostolick Creede. 2 Was it always beleived by yethe whole Cath: Church to bee delivered as such by Christ or his Apostles? 3 Was yethe denyall of it univerally opposed & condemned as Heresy by yethe Church.

2A Whither what was not once necessary to salvation may by any meanes afterwards become so? viz: either from yethe matter or expresse command of yethe thing. No sure: For. 1 That is contrary to yethe designe of Christ & his Apostles in making knowne yethe christian religion to yethe world. [Isay 11:9. Iohn 6:45. Iohn 4:25. & 15:15. Acts 20: 20, 21, 27. And If an Angel from heaven preach another Gospel let him be accursed] (Object. These things were declared by yethe Apostles but now they need a further declaration. Resp: Shew us ynthen yethe Apostels declaracation. Or is it lost? Then yethe church was not infallible wchwhich lost it. And a thing once necessary, was afterwards unnecessary & is now necessary againe. And how know ytthat yrthere was such a declaracation). 2 It is contrary to yethe unanimous consent of Antiquity. See the 4 Tabula Suffragiales of Mr Tho. White a Papist.

3A. Whither yethe Church hath power by any proposition or Definition to make any thing become necessary to salvation & to bee beleived as such wchwhich was not so before? And to this tis Answered no, by yethe prcedentprecedent discourse.

Object: Hee ytthat will not heare yethe Church let him bee to them as a Heathen & Publican ytthat is as one guilty of the a person deserving to be excommunicated for Hæresy & Fundamentall errors. Matth 8 17. Resp: Tell us wtwhat church, what hearing, in what cases to bee heard, & what Heathen & Publican there are meant.

Objec: Athanasius his creede is approved in yethe English church in wchwhich some all things conteined are there expressly made necessary to salvation & yet there are some things more necessary in matter commanded (as yethe procession from yethe son) acknowledged not fundamentall in yethe matter. Is is not ynthen yethe churches definition wchwhich makes them necessary?

Answer. Though yethe church make nothing necessary by her definitions (as shee declares in her 19 & 20 articles) & this necessity bee not from yethe matter yet it may bee from cleare conviction ytthat yethe thing is of divine revelation. As Leo 3d said of procession from yethe sonne, to such as can apprehend it tis necessary, to others not.

Object: The churches Definition alters not yethe thing in it selfe but onely quoad nos.

Resp: Then yethe church maksmakes new articles of faith quoad nos.

Quare. Why may not yethe Church diminish as well as increase yethe number of things to be beleived fundamentally?

Chapt 3 The absurditys of yethe Romanists Doctrines of Fundamentals

Arg 1 If yethe sentence of yethe Church in faith is fundamentall tis because her authority is divine; (for wtwhat can bee fundamentall if not knowne to bee revealed by God, & how known so but by divine authority? are there fundamentalls wchwhich have no Divine authority for ymthem? It may bee yethe churches infallibilyinfallibility sufficeth; but whence infallible if not by yethe assistance of Gods spirit? and authority if ytthat assistance bee divine, why not yethe authority also wchwhich flows from it wchwhich is divine infallibly? was yethe Apostles infallityinfallibility more then what you pretend is); But noe church authority since yethe Apostles is simply divine. Ergo.

Arg 2. Fundamentalls in faith are Fundamentalls of yethe Churches being (for it is one by yethe unity of faith) But yethe Church (not being a church before her foundation is laid) cannot lay her owne foundation, Therefore her definitions are not fundamentall.

Object. The definition of yethe Church teaching is yethe foundation of yethe Church taught. Or yethe definition of yethe church representative is yethe found:foundation of yethe church taught diffusive.

Answer. If these Churches bee yethe same fundamentally yethe argument is still good, & yethe church teaching & representative will lay her owne foundation too. Otherwise yethe Church teaching, not beleiving wtwhat shee teaches, beleives not all things necessary to salvation & is therefore noe true church. Or if shee is not obliged to beleive wtwhat shee teaches & nothing is fundamentall but wtwhat shee teaches, ynthen shee is not obliged to beleive any thing A rare church!

Arg 3. If at yethe moment of yethe Churches defining any thing necessary, she beleives it to bee so ynthen it was so before her definition & depends not upon it, but if shee beleives her definition will make it necessary ynthen shee beleives it not to bee necessary till shee hath defined it, & therefore defines ytthat to bee infallibly true & necessary wchwhich shee infallibly beleives to bee untrue & unnecessary. And so defines contrary to her owne judgment & beleife

5
Chap 4. Protestants doctrines of Fundamentalls indicted

A Catalogue of Fundamentalls to private prsonspersons cannot bee had by reason of yethe severall capacitys, prejudices, of education &c for wchwhich God may make an allowance. Are all men found to beleive those things & those onely necessary to salvation wchwhich I thinke to bee so?

A Catalogue of Fundamentalls, as to Church communion is conteined in yethe Creede, adding moreover ytthat yethe scriptures are word of God: for this is yethe foundation of ytthat creede.

The Church of Rome's Excom̄mmunications mg to being against yethe internall acts of the mind things of her infallibility (being upon pain of damnation for not beleiving all shee defines to bee fundamentall & therefore aginst yethe internall acts of yethe mind) if usurped is more unreasonable ynthan yethe English Churche's excommunications for opposing her articles. For her determinations not being made fundamentalls, but onely in order to her peace (for shee is not infallible) men may injoy theire judgments soe they breake not her peace & shee excommunicates onely for yethe externall breach of peace, not for refusing an internall assent to her determinations.

Children are to bee baptized because 1 Not uncapable of yethe subject 2 Not forbidden by Christ &c.

Chap 5. The Romanists way of resolving faith

The resolution of faith into yethe churches infallibility is 1A: Vnreasonable. 1a: Requiring an assent to her as infallible assent from probable grounds or motives of credibility onely. & hath not scripture such? 2a: This runs upon yethe absurditys it would avoyd, viz 1 A better account of faith may be given wthoutwithout them from infallibility, there being sufficient motives of credibility to scripture but not to infallibility. 2 Then noe divine faith but on motives of credibility. 3 Every mans reason herby becomes his judge in choyce of his religion in judging what is a credible motive; & why may hee not judg his way too as well as his guide? 3a: It makes way for scepticism 1b In making ytthat necessary to faith wchwhich was not so wnwhen yethe gospell was revealed. Whence did Christs disciples at his passion beleive the old testament? Was yethe woman of Samaria infallible when shee told yethe discourse twixt Christ & her? &c. seeing, hearing, feeling, report by credible persons was ynthen sufficient, & yethe onely argumntsarguments used by yethe apostles who were as infallible surely as yethe church. 2b In asserting things wchwhich destroy yethe evidence of christian Religion. 1c: as yethe fallacy of sence in Transubstan &c: noe certainty of yethe grounds of faith but from yethe Churches infallibility. Noe Cæsar nor Pompei if Rome say not so? And if yethe church once erre, or her infallibility cannot be proved, farewell religion. 3c: This granted, yet 1 what Church is this? Essentiall? Representative? or virtuall? all christians? all sound christians? Papists? their ecclesiastick governorsgovernours? their Bishops? in yethe Pope? & whither any of these collectivly, or representatively as in a Counsel? 2 What is yethe subject of this infallibility? The pope? or Counsell? or both together? but when? in Cathedrâ? whats that? wthwith some or all his cardinalls about him? These things being controverted among ymselvesthemselves wtwhat must wee trust to? OR! say you these are not de fide because not yet defined. But ynthen how shall wee yet know wtwhat is de fide what not? Why should wee make any thing de fide untill yethe foundations of it bee settled & agreed upon among you? Why is her infallibility de fide not being yet defined so by the Church? & if wee may beleive that, why not other things too without her attestation?

6

3. What kind of infallibility is this? you may prove it yethe same way ytthat Moses, Christ, & his Apostles were proved infallible, but yet it is not yethe same kind of infallibility ytthat they have Tis supernaturall but not : precise but not absolute; by immediate Assistance of yethe Holy Ghost, but not by immediate Revelation. Rarely distinguished! by yethe Holy G yet but in a sort divine nd is yethe Pope spared from fallibility but not from wickedness? Or is yethe spirit of truth a spirit of holinesse?

4 When doth yoryour church define infallibly? How shall ytthat bee known by one who having passed through yethe many things to bee first beleived known & beleived arrives at last to faith in her infallibility? The person infallible must bee a christian, Priest, & Lawfull pope & to but who can bee assured of this since (according to yoryour principles) yethe intention of yethe priest is necessary in yethe administration of yethe sacraments in order to effect them so. By yethe Bull of Pope Iulius 2d (wchwhich yethe Cardinalls sweare to at Elections) hee is no Pope nor can by any means after ytthat become one who hath beene simonically elected but is to bee opposed by the Cardinalls & avoyded as Magitian, Heathen, Publican, or yethe founder of Heresy. Yet such was Sixtus yethe fift. Promising to Cardinall d'Este never to create Ierome Matthew, d'Estes enemy, a Cardinall wchwhich yet doeing, d'Este sent yethe Instrument subscribed by Sixtus his owne hand to Philip 2 K of Spain who (1589) sent yethe Pope notice by yethe Duke of Suisse ytthat hee intended to call a Generall Councell, according to yethe said bull, for declaring this simonicall Election whereupon Sixtus for greife dyed, & so ended yethe business. Was this Pope lawfull or yethe Cardinalls elected by him, or yethe Pope Vrban 7 elected by them, (viz: by Cardinall Montollo his nephew entring yethe Conclave wthwith 40 votes) or any Pope ever after? To passe by yethe Simonical bargaines of Paul 5t. Then where is yethe infallible person? Yet supposing this, & ytthat also we may know when hee defines in Cathedrâ, may they ytthat never saw him doe it beleive hee did it? why may they not beleive yethe Gospell on yethe same account? Nay, may they beleive that see since their sight is fallacious in Transubstantion.

2A It effcts not wtwhat it inter was brought for, it runs in a circle, divine faith or infallible faith cannot bee builded on prudentiall motives whence ynthen wthwith a divine faith doe you beleive yethe churches infallibility, if not from infallible Testimony of Scripture? an thete must know there is a spirit, & ytthat you have its assistance promised & how this without scripture testimony? 2a. You say you onely urge Scripture against others as arguing ad hominem ex concessis princpijs. But 1. yethe question is wtwhat are yethe grounds of yoryour owne faith, not of yoryour arguments to others. 2. in But how will you convince those adversarys ytthat yoryour interpretation of the scriptures you urge against ymthem (as Super hanc petram, pasce oves, dabo tibi claves &c) is infallibly true if not from church infallibility. 3a: Had you used prudentiall motives to prove divine Revelation in yethe church, you would have proved her infallibility independently on scripture. but they being onely to prove divine assistance of yethe Church in delivering former revelations, this is dependent on it; for why is such assistance necessary in or to bee expected from yethe church, if not divinely revealed to bee so, viz: if not promised in Scripture

Object. The Roman Church will appear infallible by yethe same motives of Credibility whereby Moses, Christ & his Appostles did so. viz by miracles & sanct holy life

Resp. Then yethe disbeleife of her infallibility being against yethe same evidence is as sinfull & damnable as the disbeleife of Christ. Do good & vertuous lives make men yethe more infallible? Infallibility can only proceed from Gods immediate directing yethe mind, instilling that is communicating yethe notions of truths to it imperceptibly to others men; wchwhich wee call inspiration & so far a man may bee infallible as hee is inspired Now how shall one inspired make it appeare to others ytthat it is so unlesse by the Testimony of one beleived to be inspired, or by some supernaturall signes wchwhich none but God could effect wchwhich suffice considering ytthat God is good, & will not therefore deceive men either by false inspirations or by assistig assisting ymthem wthwith inspired miracles wchwhich declare wtwhat they are not inspired wthwith. one Nor suffer those men to bee deceived by such signes in confirming wtwhat may bee to their destruction. But where are yoryour miracles? Let yoryour infallible popes shew ymthem, & not in a corner but where yethe people to bee convinced may see them as their end imports. Are not yorsyours yethe lying wonders foretold to bee at yethe coming of antichrist? how shall I know they are not.

But some prophesys are fullfilled in yoryour Church; so shall their bee an Antichrist. Your Popes yet cannot prophesy. YorYour other prudentiall motives are rather yethe markes of a true then infallible church as efficacy purity & Excellency of doctrins, & some of ymthem not soe much as yethe marks of a true church, as sanctity of life, succession of lawfully sent pastorspastours, unity, Antiquity, & yethe very name of Catholick. But are these to bee found in yethe Roman Church onely?

7

Arg: If from ChrurchChurch Tradition onely wee beleive yethe Trinity SaviorSaviour Resurrection, Gospell &c much more must wee ynthen beleive yethe infallibility of yethe Church in her Tradition & testimony.

Resp: Science depends & is proportioned to evidences but faith is a free & voluntary act proceeding rather from yethe consent of yethe will ynthan evidence Rarely distinguished! Beleive wthwith orour wills? And wee know not why but because we will do soe. And yet may wee not bee deceived? Surely evidence is Evidence, be it from Testimony aswell as if it bee from yethe nature of yethe object.

Arg: Church Infallibility must ynthen bee yethe formall object of Divine Faith. 1. Because its onely Foundation can you yoryour faith into divine Revelation Q Where is yethe Revelation extant? And ynthen wtwhat need of yoryour Infallibility. now what is the object & for infallibility 2. Can you make yethe same motives of Credibility to yoryour Infall: as to Div: Rev: & yet there is ytthat same reason for both being formall objects of D. Faith. 3. What but infallibility makes any thing yethe object of faith?

Arg. All yethe Authoritys of Fathers Councells & Scriptures must bee finally resolved into yethe Roman Churches authority. Scripture say you is obscure & wants an Infallible living Iudge; Surely not so as to hinder Gods designes in it, noe more ynthan Os stots hinders its light. But why have wee not a Catologue of these determinations? But if wee had; how must wee know theire sence, being in writing too? as to yethe holy Ghosts assistance of the Church, what is it but inspiration though onely to yethe church declaring wtwhat was before revealed. If God supernaturally assisted yethe understanding of any prophet in declaring a prophesy before revealed, would not this bee a new prophesy? Shee is not divinely infallible but in a manner, in a sorte, then shee is fallible in a manner too

Chap 6. Of yethe Infallibility of Traditions.

1 Not yethe Infallible Testimony of yethe Church as to unwritten traditions, 2 Nor yethe resplendent light of yethe Scripture as such, 3 Nor (in this case, evidence being required ytthat others notice of as well as wee) yethe Testimony of yethe spirit either by speciall revelation or by an act of Divine infused faith, is a sufficient motive to faith. But 4 Reason may inform an Infidell ytthat Christian Religion founded on yethe Scriptures stands upon surer grounds of mature reason, Common equity, & justice ynthan any naturalist hath or can attaine to as far as to yethe matters of fact, or any such morall evidence as yethe nature of yethe thing is capable of, wchwhich is sufficient for yethe assent required. Nay is not reason judge of yethe evidence from Tradition, & Scripture light &c. Rationall motives may persuade a man to reade yethe scripture & yethe reader may thence deduce more rationall motives for it.

Obj: If yethe Church bee fallible ynthen so are particular persons in their faith, & how can I bee assured shee erred not in defining wtwhat is scripture & delivering it down to us.

Resp: By infallibility do you meane Impossibility to bee deceived? That is not congruous to humane nature. Or impossibility of reasonable doubting arising from yethe sufficiency of yethe evidencce of yethe Scripture canon? That every man & yethe church too may have though shee bee fallible in yoryour sence. As to yethe Constitution of ytthat Canon, When yethe Church upon a strict enquiry found ytthat yethe bookes passing under such & such titles were truly authentick & written by persons who gave yethe greatest rationall evidence of their inspiration, Thereupon the (& not because shee was infallible) they being received & acknowledged as such by yethe Vniversall Church were entered into yethe Canon, some sooner, others a greate whiledivers yeares after (as StSaint Iames StSaint Iude, The Epistle to yethe Hebrews, & yethe Apocalyps) for as yethe coppys were more or lesse quickly or publickly dispersed, occasion was ministred to yethe church of examining them. But why must you make yethe Canon, larger ynthan it was in Ruffinus his time?

8
Chap 7 The Protestant way of Resolving faith.

Lemma 1. Wee here inquire not why wee assent to Divine Revelation (viz: because of gods Veracity) but why we assent ytthat any thing is a Divine Revelation. 2 By faith wee meane a Rationall & discursive act of yethe mind. For Faith is an assent of yethe mind caused by reason Or evidence whereof wee may give an account to others: And yethe giving this account why wee beleive is yethe resolving of faith. Wee meane not heare yethe testimony of yethe spirit & infused habits of grace but rationall inducements to beleive, wthoutwithout wchwhich yethe spirit of Revelation would not bee yethe spirit of wisdome & religion would bee exposed to yethe contempt of unbeleivers. 3 According to yethe different acts of faith there must bee assigned different resolutions of faith. viz

Quest 1. Why I beleive those things to be true as to matter of fact wchwhich are contained in yethe Booke called yethe Scriptures?

Resp: 1. The Bookes being writ while yethe story was new, & when multitudes were willing to have contradicted ymthem if, written amis, & some of ymthem writen by persons acquainted wthwith yethe person & life of him they writ of; Their authors could not bee Ignorant of what they writ. 2 By their simplicity & candor in writing their actions & writings, their contempt of yethe world, yethe hazards they incurred for attesting wtwhat they writt; They could have noe intent to deceive us. 3 The matters in ymthem would mak being of greatest moment would make men inquisitive about ymthem it, & they were received unanimously for such theirs from yethe very first time of their being written (except some few Iames, Iude, Hebrews, Apocalyps) being cited (as we find) by learned christians under their names when it would have beene noe difficult matter to have found many of yethe originall coppys themselves. Therefore these Bookes were written by those men whose names they goe under. How can a thing of this nature have greater evidence? And to require more is unreasonable. For morall certainty is onely weakened by yethe want of some evidence wchwhich yethe nature of yethe thing is capable of

Quest 2. Why I beleive yethe Doctrine conteined in these bookes to be Divine. Resp: 1. Granting yethe matters of fact (by Resp 1) to bee beleived; In ytthat age when yethe doctrine was delivered there was sufficient reason to beleive it Divine, from yethe unparalleld miracles of Christ, & his resurrection from yethe dead. The greatest Infidell, had hee beene an eye witnesse of these things, must have beleived his doctrines to be from God. 2 And therefore in orour age too. Tradition being to us being wtwhat sencse was to ymthem; not yethe motives but yethe meanes of conveying yethe motives for beleife. Wee have all yethe same motives to beleive but not yethe same conveyance of those motives to us. Nay though Tradition it self gives noe credibility to yethe Doctrine, its circumstances may faciliate orour beleife. via such continued tradition evidences yethe efficacy of yethe Doctrine ytthat could engage in it so many in all ages Our case is like theirs in yethe same age but in remote countrys. They could not heare & see Christ being so distant in place nor wee being so distant in time. And if their bee any advantage wee have it; for though Tradition it selfe give no credibility to yethe doctrine, yet its circumstances may facilitate orour beleif above theirs; viz: Such continued Tradition evidences yethe efficacy of yethe doctrine ytthat could engage in it so many in all ages. [Heb 2.3, 4. There sence, wthoutwithout yethe inward testimony of spirit, or externall Church infallibility, sufficed: & so proportionally Tradition now.

Object. All this is no more ynthan morall certainty, wchwhich being fallible wee cannot from thence bee assured ytthat Christian religion is infallibly true.

Resp. 1a: What greater evidence ynthan this had they who lived in yethe time of christ & his Apostles but saw not their miracles? 2a: As morall evidence mathematicall Evidence in Mathematicall things so morall Evidence in morall things may remove all suspition of doubt & ynthen there may bee as firme assent in yethe one as in yethe other. Morall evidence ynthen being a sufficient ground for yethe most firme assent, if yethe matter to bee beleived bee yethe infallible truth of a doctrine upon suitable evidence, though wee have now but morall certainty of ytthat Evidence yethe assent to such may bee firme to such a doctrine as infallible. The mistake lys here, as if wee orour faith was to bee resolved finally into this morall certainty, into eyes & eares & not into miracles. 3a. the greatest assurance wee can desire ytthat any Religion is Infallibly true is from morall certainty, because 1 The grounds of Religion are capable of noe more. viz: yethe being of a God & Imortality of yethe soule; wthoutwithout supposing yethe 1st of wchwhich there is noe infallibility in any thing. 2 The highest evidence of any religion must depend upon it Tell mee why there is not as greate a possibility of deception in Physicall certaintys (hearing, & seeing, & their objects &c) as suspicion of doubt in morall certaintys. Also Gods designe in Religion is not onely for those few which heare & see &c: But also for other far greater numbers distant in age & place. & I would know 9 what they can have more ynthan morall Cetrainty. That wtwhat 3 true gives us sufficient assurance ytthat christian religion is infallib yethe credibility of Christian Religion. And 1 From yethe in upon men an obligation to beleive, for ytthat is yethe end of credibility though possibly yethe (thing it selfe) matter bee false. 2 god haveing the power and to credibilitys; so here there is such obligation to beleive, wee have ytthat yethe matter to bee beleived is infallibly true? Because God cannot a lye. Especially in an invincible : & touching this Now this obligation would bee from God 1 who made us of such a & assent to evident credibilitys. 2 who gave us such credibilitys, or suffered us to have such credibilitys wchwhich wee cannot detect to bee erroneous nor dissent from.

Quest 3 Why I beleive those particular bookes of Scripture to bee yethe

Resp 1 Why I beleive yethe doctrine conteined in those bookes to bee yethe word of God is already answered. 2 Why I beleive yethe books containing those Doctrines to bee Gods word, is 1 yethe Last Resolution of Faith is not into yethe infallibility of yethe instumentinstrument of conveyance but of yethe infallibility of yethe doctrine thereby conveyed to us. For many beleived before yethe word was written, & thus may illiterate ꝑsonspersons resolve theire faith. Note ytthat materiall object is yethe Doctrine, yethe formall object is yethe infall evidence of yethe infallible Testimony of those who delivered this doctrine & yethe Rule of Faith is yethe scriptures wchwhich limit & bound yethe materiall object of orour faith. 2 They who beleive yethe Doctrine of Scripture to bee divine have noe reason to question yethe infallible conveyance of ytthat doctrine to us in those bookes. For 1 If they bee Divine ynthen all yethe promises of Christ were accomplished. As Iohn 16.13. Therefore yethe Apostlells had yethe infallible assistance of yethe spirit of God, in delivering this doctrine to yethe world by writing & preaching, wchwhich they also by miracles testifyed. [Whither in things of no concernment (as Iohn 16:19), in numerous lighter circumstances, or meer historicall passages needed yethe same spirituall assistance ytthat things propheticall & Doctrinall did, is not here told needful to bee inquired, for wtwhat danger if they were not]. 2 these bookes were owned for Divine by those persons & ages who who were most competent Iudges whether they were so or not. The age of yethe Apostells might easily discerne wtwhat was written by Christ & his Apostells & thence wee derive orour knowledge of these bookes by a most unquestionable & universall tradition. Would God permit Would yethe Christian world bee soe besotted as to suffer yethe records of wtwhat they conceived to concerne their eternall welfaire too bee corrupted? when tis notorious how diligent & venterrous they were to preserve ymthem & communicate them to their freinds & posterity.

Arg. Sixtus 5 & 2 years after Clement 8 set forth 2 vulgar latin Bibles differing in 2000 2000 places wchwhich editions they commended too for their corrections by yethe originall.

show us any Tradition so universall as to time & extent as ytthat of Scripture is & wee will beleive you but yethe voyce of yoryour present particular church & ambiguous testimony of 2 or 3 Fathers will not do.

10
Parte yethe 2d. Of Scisme
Chap. 1 Of yethe Vniversall church & of schisme in Generall.

1 The whole number of men professing one Religion wchwhich they know truly tending to Gods glory & their happinesse & being thereby obliged to yethe socyety (or acts in common) in yethe profession & exercises of it as tending to those ends; wee call yethe Catholick Church.

2 For yethe performance of particular acts of Communion there must bee lesser socyetys or particular Churches. The conditions of & obligations to communion wthwith these being yethe same ytthat they are in yethe Catholick Church, as being from yethe same ends & on yethe same grounds (viz: yethe churches foundation). Noe true XtianChristian should bee barred any Christian society.

3. Any one particular XtianChristian society may impose some things to bee beleived or practised repugnant to yethe generall foundation of Christian society

4. The Obligation to Communion wthwith any Church is not absolute & indispensable, but onely so far as shee requires noe such unreasonable conditions of communion as are distractions to yethe ends & grounds of Christian Society. Schisme is a wilfull violation of yethe bounds of XtianChristian societys, i.e. Seperation upon insufficient grounds, or causing seperation by imposing too hard conditions of Communion. The schisme is the causers.

5. The society imposing conditions of Communion is not to bee Iudge whither they bee just or no. In matters of peace conveniency & order (wchwhich touch not her foundation) shee may overule particular persons. But wnwhen her foundation, (her authority too church hood) is questioned, why should yethe party accused bee judge & ytthat against greate bodys of christians.

6. Scripture Reason must bee judge & Tradition must bee Iudge.

7. By how much yethe greater yethe societys are wchwhich agree in not communicating wthwith a Church imposing such conditions, By how much yethe power of those overuling those societys together so agreeing together is greater. By so much yethe more justifyable is yethe Reformation of any Church from these abuses & yethe setling yethe bounds of Christian Communion without them.

The Roman Church not yethe Catholick Church

Papist. Catholick church is taken either 1 Formally, for all particular churches united in one communion under one head. 2 Causally, for yethe Roman church wchwhich as yethe center of Eclesiasticall communion infuses unity (wchwhich is yethe forme of Vniversality) into yethe Catholick Church & thereby causes her universality. 3 Participatively, for every particular church participating of yethe doctrine & Communion of yethe Catholick church.

Protest. The Fathers made yethe Vnion of yethe Cath: Church to consist 1: in Doctrine, shee was called Catholick from yethe Vniversall spread of its Doctrine & agreemntagreement of Particular churches in it. 2: in Government as being a whole (Cath: Church) consisting of Homogeneall parts (particular churches of equall Authority, wthoutwithout subordination or dependence on one head church)

Chap 2. Protestants not Guilty of Schisme.

Pap: If yethe Roman Church was once yethe Right Church it is so still. When was yethe change made?

Prot. She was once a but never yethe Right Church, yethe Catholick church. And as to yethe time of her change I answer 1 Tis an unreasonable question. Math: 13:25. The Tares were sown by yethe enemy wnwhen yethe men slept. When began many things you esteme errors; as necessity of Communicating Infants, no soul departed sees God till yethe Ressurection, Rebaptizing Hereticks &c? When ended many customs of yethe primitive church, as their Discipline in many respe yethe orders of penitents & yethe rites about ymthem, Communicatory Letters betweene churches. &c? 2 Without knowing this wee may judge wchwhich are errors by yethe Rule of Faith brought downe by an uninterrupted tradition & by yethe practise of yethe first ages. 3 They who assert their doctrines & practises Apostolicall should rather shew yethe continued succession of ymthem from yethe Apostles time. Infallibility wthwith yethe rest. 4 You confesse many of yoryour Doctrines & Practises to be of no greate Antiquity. Prayer in an unknown tongue was not in use till yethe latine tongue was out of use wthwith you; nay yoryour Church you say may declare ytthat infallibly necessary in one Age wchwhich was not soe in yethe age before. 5 There are sufficient reasons why yethe beginings of yoryour errors & corruptions have beene so obscure. As because they came in 1 not all at once, 2 Gradually, 3 at first upon good designes, 4 by persons of esteeme whos Example was more regarded ynthan their doctrine, 45 by persons in power, wchwhich hindred them from being, as others had beene, excommunicated for ymthem. 6 being freely practised at yethe first though now made necessary. 7 yethe state of yethe Church altering in severall ages made mens judgments alter too, as to yethe suitablenesse & necessity of things. 8 being as first yethe private opinions & practises of a factions not vehemently opposed at yethe first, because done either by an inson a party inconsiderable or very prevalent in yethe church. 9 By being accompanied by Barbarisme. 6 The time when many of yoryour errors & corruptions were first publickly owned & received may bee traced out by any man who will take yethe paines to doe it.

Papist. 1 If in Luthers time yethe Romane Church was Corrupt 1 There was noe one visible particular Church uncorrupt. 2 nor any times. 3 Then it was necessary to seperate from yethe externall consecration of yethe whole Church.

Prot: 1. Any particular church may erre. Why may not severall nay all of them erre successively? Why not all at once in severall points? Nay why may not all at once in yethe same point? ytthat is, why may not yethe Catholick Church erre? There are to yethe contrary. Onely though particular churches may erre fundamentally so as to their being, yethe Catholick Church cannot soe erre For Christ hath promised ytthat yethe gates of hell shall not prevaile against it. 2 Why might not a Church retaining yethe Faith long after yethe Apostells time faile before Luther's? 3 Should every Church bee in some or all in yethe same Error wee need not seperate from yethe Communion of yethe Catholick Church 1 Becaus perhaps they may not make their errors conditions of Communion & then wee may joyne with them if thereby wee approve not of theire errors. 2 If they doe wee separate not from ymthem as Catholick but as corrupt & erroneous. Every Church hath some things Essential wchwhich are its being, & other things accidentall to it as it is a particular church; Hee ytthat seperates by reason of something Essentiall seperates from yethe Catholick church, but not hee ytthat seperates from yethe Communion of some or every particular Church by reason of some accidentalls to it: Because hee would willingly rejoyne wthwith ymthem after fit reformation or wthwith any other Church he finds not so erroneous. And hee may rather bee said to suspend his communion wthwith ymthem ynthan separate. Thus if all my acquaintance were leprous & I therefore leave them, I (though alone at present) divide not my selfe from mankind, but take care for my prsentpresent safty till I find healthfull prsonspersons wthwith whome I may associate.

Chap 3. Of keeping Faith wwithwith Hereticks

Though yethe Negative is not acknowledged lest that should frustrate its ends, yet it appeares to bee yethe Iesuits & Grandees tenent by the burning Iohn Hus, contrary to yethe Emperors safe conduct, & Ierome of Prage contrary to yethe Concell of Constance's safe conduct & by their salvo-distinctions, & testimonys of theire owne autho party.

Chap 4 The Reformation of yethe Church of England justifyed.

Wee departed not from Rome, but returne by yethe Communion of yethe primitive & Vniversall church. shee first became guilty of Schisme by departing from yethe Communion of yethe Catholick Church (As hee violates yethe union wthwith his neighbours, & their publick & common right in yrtheir common feild, who incloses parte of it wthoutwithout his neighbours consent & deprives yethe dissenters of their right therein. Or hee who puts more stock thereupon then of right hee should, & therefore deprives his neighbour of all because hee will not loose some of his right) by narrowing its bounds of Communion, & ynthen thrusts us from her for disowning such inclosure. Wee differ not as shee is Catholick but as shee is schismaticall. [If a King founds a Society upon certaine indispensable conditions, or Statutes, in order to their communion, A Breach of it can onely bee defined by those Statutes. If yethe whole socyety transgresse, & one at last perceive his error, & bee reformereformed wthoutwithout yethe rest, the breach is theirs not his.]

Pap. You seperated not from Rome but from yethe whole world. Prot. 1 From every particular church but not from yethe whole World because not in any thing wheinwherein yethe whole world was ageedgreed. 2 Not therefore from yethe Catholick Church, for wee retaine whatever she is Catholick in, ytthat is her Fundamentalls wchwhich gives her being & therefore wee still remaine a true church. A man is a man still though hee vary from all yethe world in accidentalls, as cloths, dyed &c: so long as hee consists of yethe Essentiall soule & Body

If yethe Generall Church will not reforme particulars may. Iudah might doe it wthoutwithout Israel Hosea 4.15. Israell was a church (many in her being saved) as well as Iudah & both ynthen wanted Reformation Hosea :3. Hos 1:1. 2 Kings 15;4, 35.10 & 17:19

Particular Churches may as well reforme doctrines amisse if not Catholick as publish & promulgate Doctrines not Catholick, as you did yethe filiall procession.

Pap. yoryour Reformation was against fundamentalls, because in things generally held by yethe whole Church at yethe Reformation. Prot: Then 1 wee might reforme in things not generally held by as Popes Supremacy, Infallibility, necessity of Cœlibate in yethe Clergy, Communion in one kind, prayer in an unknown tongue, Indulgences &c: 2 All yoryour doctrines were not universally held, for ynthen yethe Greeks & Abyssine Churches &c were, wthwith you, orthodox; Nay yethe Church of Rome did not then hold any thing Catholick in wchwhich wee reformed. Some of them were private opiniōon of some factions in her, & it may bee owned by such prevailing factions that yethe opposers durst not appeare publickly against ymthem (as Transubst: Purgato &c) wchwhich might make them seme generally held, but never were they att decreed defined, or generallgenerally held to bee fundamentall till Trent Councell. And wtwhat made yethe reformation so ready but ytthat there were many wchwhich wanted rather power ynthan will to oppose ymthem. 3 What if they were generally held then, were they soe up to yethe times of yethe Apostells?

Pap: YorYour Reformation was not done by a lawfull power nor in a lawfull manner.

Prot: In yethe 1st yeare of Eliz: II seas were vacant. There being but 15 Bishops ynthen living in England & 26 sees. And those 15 Bishops were lawfully deprived all but Kitchin of Landaffe of their Bishopricks too in ytthat yeare for refusing yethe oath of Supremacy, wchwhich they as Bishops or preists had before taken to Henry 8. (some or all of wchwhich refused to assist her at her coronation, & some threatning her excommunication, instead of disputing at Westminster as they had solemnly engaged). Now then yethe sees being thus lawfully voyd, their successors were noe intruders, but lawfully (having also canonicall & just vocations, mission & jurisdiction) Governors of yethe English church. Then why might not ytthat synod bee a lawfull nationall Councell wchwhich was called by yethe Queene Eliz, anno Regni 5, 1562, Consisting of a Synod of Bishops wwith yethe lower house of Convocation to settle yethe church. What Articles were confirmed by acts of state & Royall assent. If there have beene any erroserrors not so much in opinion as fact (Sacreledg too often pretending to reforme Superstition ytthat is yethe crime of yethe Reformers not of yethe Reformation, & they are gone to God to answer it.

Chap 5. Of yethe Roman Churches Authority

Particular Churches may so far condemne others of errors in faith as is necessary to their owne Reformation

The 3d Canon of yethe Councell of Nice [sicqꝫque præest Patriarcha ijs omnibus qui sub ejus potestate sunt, sicut ille qui tenet sedem Romæ caput est & Princeps omnium Patriacharum, &c] Or rather yethe 39th canon in yethe Arabick Edition of ytthat counsells Canons is a fourgery for ytthat Counsell made but 20 Canons.

All Patriarchs were equall in authority in in yethe first ages (see yethe 6t canon of yethe Nicene Councell [Let yethe ancient customes prevaile: according to wchwhich let yethe Bishop of Alexandria have power over ymthem who are in Egypt Lybia & Pentapolis; because this was likewise yethe custome for yethe Bishop of Rome. & And accordingly in Antioch & other Provinces let yethe privileges be preserved to yethe Churches.], & other testimony.

The Popes confirmation of new Elected Patriarchs was noe token of Iurisdiction, but of his receiving into communion, & consent to yethe consecration already performed, & yethe like was done to new elected Bishops of Rome by yethe communicatory letters of other Patriarchs. Nor had they power to depose or restore Patriarchs.

See yethe Case of yethe Donatists. The 100 yeares schisme twixt Rome & yethe Affrican Bishops for opposing Appeals to Rome. Wilfride Arch Bishop of Yorke's Appeale to Rome proves nothing. The Primacy in England not from Augustine yethe Monke.

When yethe Emperor became Christian, for setting yethe Vnity of yethe Church, it was agreed ytthat precedency of honour in yethe Church should follow ytthat of yethe state. This gave advantages to yethe B: of Rome & Alexandria, The Popes wachfulnessewatchfulnesse raised him by degrees, stiling ymselvesthemselves Vindices canonum last Pelagius & being therefore calldcalled arrogant by yethe Easterne Bishops. At last Pelagius 2d by yethe necessity of yethe times tooke yethe Popedome wthoutwithout yethe Emperors leave & sent St Gregory a Deacon embasador to excuse it. Anno 579 wnwhen Italy was on fire wthwith yethe Lombards. And, these broyles making yethe Emperors protection & popes Homage useless, the Pope was left to play his owne game till A.D. 710 hee was able to confront yethe Emperor. But yethe Lombards pinching close yethe Pope desires yethe aid of Charles Martell, who drove ymthem out of Italy & whose sonne X his father tooke from yethe Lombards (whose kingdome had stoode 204 yeares in Italy) Now was yethe Pope greate indeed & (when Charles yethe greate set up yethe Western Empire) he d assumed yethe EmperorsEmperours power of governing yethe Church, calling Councells, ordering Papall Elections, wchwhich yethe Emperor enjoyed in Greg 7's time. For Greg 7 was confirmed in yethe Popedome by Henry 4, whome he afterwards deposed.

Chap 6 Of yethe Title of Vniversall Bishop.

An Vniversall Bishop denotes either, 1: a Generall care & solitudesolicitude over all yethe Churches of yethe Christian World & Thus is Every Patriarch an V: B: & may interpose in other Seas for preserving yethe churches unity. 2: A pecuciall dignity over yethe churches wthinwithin yethe Empire (as of Rome &c). Thus when Constantinople flourished its Patriarch Nestorius was stiled (by Theodoret Hæret: Fabul: l 4. c 12. p 245 To 4. ope.) Governour of yethe Catholick church of yethe Orthodox at Constantinople & thereby of yethe whole world. yethe like of others. 3 Vniversall Iurisdiction over all churches. And this no Patriarch ever had. Mauritius yethe Emperor gave this title to Iohn Patriarch of Constantinople being sowerly opposed by Pelagius & St Gregory. But Mauritius being deposed & murdered by Phocas, hee gives Boniface 3d ytthat same title wchwhich his two predecessorspredecessours had declared against as monstrous & Blasphemous if not Heretical. Ireneus opposed Victor in Excommunicating yethe Asian Bishops.

Severall of yethe Popes decrees have contradicted each other (see Vigorius com: in ep: synod consil: Basilis c. 7 p: 63). Boniface 8 decrees, De necessitate salutis est subesse Romano Pontifici. Innocent yethe 3d, ytthat The King of France hath no superior on Earth.

Peeter had noe preeminence in power but order onely over yethe other Apostles, Nay Iames is rather preferred in yethe chaire, Epiph Hæres 29. p: 199. & 78. p: 1039. Hee is there called 1st if not cheife Bish & yethe lord committed to him Θρόνον ἀυτου ἑπὶ τῆς γῆς, yethe principality of yethe church [Ierusalem (after his ascension) is never called his Throne on Earth]

Chap 7. The Popes Authority not proved from scripture.

Luc 22.32. Against this, Vigorius in ep: Synod: consil: Basil: c. 7. sec 3. sayth, ytthat those Canons decreed ytthat Popes might bee deposed for Hæresy. (Twas a Counsell of yoryour owne). Iohn 21:15, 16, 17. Tis noe commission but exhortation to his duty. Is this a commision for King Killing? Butchers? or Shepherds.

Pap: But 1 A living Iudg is requisite in states, 2 & Monarchy is yethe best government.

Prot: 1 Bishops & counsells answer to judges & Parliaments. 2 The church is too large for one Monarchy, nor was it so by Christs apointment or primitive practise as their communicatory letters testify. Nehat history of a Monarchy mentions noe acts ytthat denotes Royalty? Eph 4:11. No Monarch there. Soe ytthat Aristocrasy is yethe proper Government of yethe church. Besides Vniversall church Monarchy would but weakly bee united out of severall state Monarchys.

The civill power may bee supreame in yethe Church too: Custodes utriusqꝫque Tabulæ. Rom 13:1 Deutr 17.18. Hezekiah & Iosiah Reformed & commanded yethe Priests to it. Theodosius, Iustinian, Charlemaine &c medled not now & ynthen onely but enacted laws to yethe great settlemntsettlement & increase of Religiōon

Chap 8 Of yethe Councell of Trent.

The Councell of Trent was not legall. 1: making prsentpresent Tradition as well as Scripture its Rule of faith, contrary to yethe foundation of Ancient Councells, whose Rule was yethe Scriptures. 2: In ytthat yethe Pope yethe cheife person to bee reformed sate as President & Iudge in his owne case &c wthwith what right? for it was not so in yethe 3 first Generall councells nor manifestly in yethe 2 next.

Nor was it a free Councell, for 1 yethe place Trent was too neare yethe Popes dominion, amidst yethe Alps in a barren & woody soyle. 2 None had suffrage but who were sworne to yethe Popes & Roman interest & against all Reformation; whereas tis not apparent any oaths were primitively imposed, & when they came into use (as is first mentioned of yethe 4th Councell of Toledo AD. 675) they onely bound themselves to observe yethe Cath: Faith & onely their superiours. 3: The Pope declared yethe Appellants Hereticks before yethe Councell condemned them. 4 yethe Number of Bishops was too small yethe Popes summons not being Generall, yethe Greek & English Church having no representatives 5 yethe Popes party was too numerous 187 Italians to 83 of all other Nations, & votes went by yethe number of persons, not of churches as anciently. 6: All things were first consulted on at Rome, 7 Nothing might bee propounded but by yethe Popes Legats, though formerly every Bishop had yethe Liberty. 8 When nothing else would doe they flouted & scoffed yethe spanish Bishops & all ytthat durst speake freely, & created fresh swarmes of Italian Bishops to out vote them

Object The Arrians may say as much against yethe Councell of Nice. Resp: Nay That was called by yethe Emperour, who sat in person in it to keepe regulate disorders, this by yethe Pope who presided in it by his direction legats ytthat ordered all things by his directions; the Arrians had free votes, not wee. There yethe Bishops debated here they gave theire placedt to yethe divines debates; There none dyed for greife of checks; &c:

Object. The French Spanish & Greeks differed from yethe Protestants as to wtwhat yethe Counsell defind Resp: That Cannot bee knowne wthoutwithout a free & faire debate: And yethe Patriarch Ieremias & much more Cyrill declared their likings of almost all yethe Articles of Faith prsentedpresented to them by yetheProtestants.

Object: In yethe 1st 4 Generall Councells yethe most were Roman Bishops & but few in all, & yethe Popes summons at Nice was Generall. Resp: Not yethe multitud of Bishops nor Generall summons make a Generall Councell, but a generall acknowledmentacknowledgment of its decrees in all Churches upon Publication; as in yethe 1st Councell

Part 3. Of Particular controversys. Chap 1. Of Infallibility of Generall Councells

1 If they bee Infallible, what signifys ytthat to yethe Churches peace wthoutwithout evidence ytthat 1. They may bee so? 1 Not because they are representatives of yethe church. For they were not instituted by yethe same divine Authority: being but yethe EmperorsEmperor Constantines invention. And ynthen they can have noe more infallibility ynthan shee, wchwhich they may have without yethe Popes confirmation. 2 Not by Resoning (for so they are men) nor by Divine Assistance in their Conclusions: For wtwhat is Revelation if that bee not, & ynthen wtwhat need of debating? 3 Is yethe Councell in determining or Pope in confirming infallible if yethe Coun: ynthen what need confirmation? but if yethe Councell may erre without P's Confirmacion, ynthen yethe Pope is infallible & what neede of a Councell?

2 They are so? 1 Was it a Lawfull Counsell? Lawfull Pope & Bishops? who knows yethe intention of yethe Preists at their Consecration? 2 What decrees past & did yethe Pope infallibly confirme ymthem? who infallibly knows it? 3 Did yethe Councell proceed lawfully & orderly? 4 What meane yethe decrees? May not, may have not theire sense (even of Trent Councel) beene doubted as well as Scripture? 4 Did yethe Pope & Bishops determinations agree with their infallible judgments, or interests? They have beene wicked & some Hereticall. & why may not such bely their knowledg for advantage?

Chap 2 Of yethe Vse & Authority of Generall Councells.

The Determinations of any Councell (called & ordered lawfully, proceeding freely & wthoutwithout wiles, & according to Gods rule) binds no man in his judgment & faith, but onely to externall obedience. And if it happen there bee really or pretendedly some scripture or Demonstration urged against yethe former councells proceedings by any church, Let there bee a new councell moved for to repeal consider of it & repeale what was before amis, In the meane while so far submitting to yethe i1st councell as not to breake yethe churches peace by opposing it. Now ynthen though a counsell may erre yet it can rarely erre if guided by yethe prmisespremises, yet where it hath evident scripture or demonstration for what it determins, or rectifys of another Councell, wee may bee certaine it did not erre. And if shee doe erre it obligeth onely to peace, & because a church may erre, may shee not therefore governe? If you ask who must Bee judg of yethe Lawfull calling & proceeding in the counsell? I answer, If it bee such, there will not want sufficient morall certainty of it; as an universall acknowledgment, without complaints, of it; & submission to it.

Tis like yethe supreme civill power in a state: The acts of both may erre in acting, revoke former acts, exact obedience to ymthem &c: Both have yethe same conveniences & inconveniences.

The Church collective cannot in reason give more power to its body Representative ynthan a binding power upon it selfe & all particulars: wthwith this reservation ytthat it would call againe & reforme or whatever its representative failed in either as to trust or truth and yethe rather shee is as infallible yetheas her representative, & more surely so.

To erre in supposing a Fallible Councell to bee infallible, takes away all hope of reforming her errors wchwhich must needs makmake irreconcilable rents in yethe Church, but to suppose an infallible councell fallible, can only occasion yethe calling of new councells to rectify yethe supposed errors of former ones, & if they bee infallible they will never clash.

Chap 3. Of yethe Errors of prtendedpretended Generall Councells

That of Constance & Trent decreed yethe necessity of yethe Preists intention in yethe Sacraments (viz: Generall Intention (though his thoughts may waver. Which being wanting or expressly contrary to wtwhat it should bee 1 you adore yethe bread in yethe Eucharist in stead of christs body wchwhich is Idolatry, 2 None can bee sure ytthat they are baptized or did communicate, or ytthat yethe Pope is so & therefore Peeters infallible successor

If Noe Counsell bee secure from error till yethe Pope confirme & hee cannot confirme wtwhat they may erre in Then hee alone is infallible.

The Counsell of Lateran 1st decreed Transubstantiation, contrary to sense, nor wthwith consent of yethe Fathers or Scripture. As, This [bread] is my (real) body. Is ytthat sense?

That of Constance decreed yethe Communion in one kind, contrary to yethe Practis of yethe Apostles Church for 1000 yeares & more, & contrary to Christ's Institution, For Christs Celebration of it was not arbitrary but voluntary obligatory to yethe Apostles not as such but as beleivers & therefore to all BelevrsBelevers also: And yethe things commanded [Take, eate, drinke, doe this in remembrance of mee] doe equally oblige. The meaning of [this doe as oft &c set after yethe cup] is eplainedexplained by comparing 1 Corinth 11:25, 26 together; see also Luck 22:19. But you say ytthat [Luck 22:19] (doe this) make ymthem Preists, wchwhich is twixt yethe Bread & Cup. Soe ytthat they had not yethe cup till they were preists. But ynthen 1 why doth yethe consecatingconsecrating Preist onely receive yethe cup. &c 2 What power have they to consecrate yethe cup. &c Some make Doe this to relate to yethe sacrifice not sacraments But ynthen 1 by wtwhat authority doe they administer yethe Sacrament. 2: why is not (Doe this) set last, both bread & wine being necessary to yethe Sacrifice. Others say tis but a Positive Comand in Generall & bind onely in cases of necessity. And yethe Church thinks it not necessary. Then 1 may shee prohibit it? 2 may shee not dispence wthwith Baptisme too?

The counsell of Trent decreed yethe Invocation of Saints ytthat wee may have yethe assistance of their merits as weellwell as prayers to God for us, (as yethe Trent=Roman=Chatechisme shews t 3. p: 504, & also consil: Trident: Sess: ult:). Whereas in yethe 3 first centurys there is not yethe least shew for it & yethe answers of christians to Pagans objecting it doe wholly make against it; denying any kind of worship as well inferiour & Relative as cheife & absolute to any but God when as yethe Pagans (like yethe Papists) would have yethe cheifest worship given to yethe supreme Deity, & inferior worship to Deifyed Emperors & Hero's & other inferiour Deitys. And why yethe worship of inferior beings should bee Idolatry in a Heathen & not in a Papist I know not. After yethe first 300 yeares when Persecutions ceased, devotion abated; wchwhich made yethe Fathers (Basil Gr Naz: Cypr: Athan: Gr Nyssen &c) use their Rhetorick largely to perswade yethe people to imitation of yethe Martyrs, for wchwhich end they perswaded ymthem to frequent their memorialls wchwhich in time rather caused honour to yethe Martyrs ynthan devotion to God: wchwhich at length (by reason of some pretended extaticall dreames or visions or occurances in those places) turned to superstitious Devotion, & at last to solemne Invocation. The Fathers at yethe first countenancing small miscarriages in hopes ytthat all would end in zeales wchwhich at yethe end of yethe 4th century was a faire tendency to invocation. When any prayer was made in yethe name of Abraham or David &c (as, Psal 132:10, 11. & Exodus 32:13 &c) it was wthwith respect to Gods covenant & promis to ymthem. Christs divinity is proved (by Athanasians) by worship done to him. Is not yethe Invocation derogatory to Christs merits? As if his merits were not sufficient. Nay yethe saints ymselvesthemselves must surely receive a full reward for their owne merits, & what more can bee desired on ytthat account.

The Counsell of Nice 900 yeares since & ytthat of Trent decreed yethe worshiping of Images. Whereas in ancient churches yethe very art of Painting was therefore condemned, saith Clem: Alexandinus. And HeaHeathens place no more Divinity in Images ynthan Papists doe.

Chap 4. Of yethe Possibility of Salvation in yethe Roman Church.

Wee grant a Possibility of Salvation in yethe Roman Church not as Roman but as Retaining something Catholick & fundamentall & Christian (as yethe Creed) not to mean retaining its errors against their knowledge resolving no laws made in ytthat church but to such who her superstionssuperstitions abolished wchwhich they know & pray God to forgive their errors they know not (if such bee Papists) not by her sacrament of Pennance &c: but a Christian godly life faith, hope, repentance &c. They deny salvation to us, all but invincibly ignorants, & ytthat cheifly for wanting yethe sacrament of Pennance at orour death,(Oh uncharitable faction!) which is noe fundamentall point to their church. Thus it was twixt yethe Donatists & Church of old. Nay you grant a possibility of salvation to Heathens, they deny it to you by Christ, therefore Hethenisme is safer ynthan popery. But this principle, tis safest choosing ytthat in wchwhich both partys are agreed is but a contingent proposition & guided onely by yethe matter as, all christians men grant one god & ytthat christ is a man yethe church says adds there are 3 persons, & Christ is God, wchwhich notwithstanding is the safer side. Nay this principle will make for us more ynthan them. As thus: wee both agree in Christs reall presence in the Eucharist, in his descention into hell, christs institution of who Sacraments, matter & forme of Sacraments ytthat there is no positive error in orour Liturgis. Truth of Scriptures &c: Wee deny deny Transubstantiation assert noe particular Explanation of yethe Descention, we deny maimed SacramntsSacraments, yethe Preists intention, & wee assert yethe grosse & dangerous Errors of your masse. Therefore tis safest holding wthwith us in these.

The Possibility of Salv: in yethe Ro: Church, Not being made a fundamentall nor so much a doctrine of yethe English church but onely yethe charitable opinion of some private men can bee noe ground of dissenting from her, because it may bee false though shee bee true

Chap 5 Of yethe Safty of yethe Protestant faith.

Papist. The Protestants rather ynthan yethe Catholicks are to prove their Religion agreeable to yethe Primitive Church. Because the Papists are in full & quiet possession of their faith, Religion & Church, by immemoriall Tradition & succession &c.

Prot Right depends not on possession but title, Therefore 1a: hath noe antecedntantecedent law determined contrary to wtwhat you possesse? If you say Church possession argues it was yethe will of christ; I aske can yethe Church come into noe possession but wtwhat was first given her by yethe Legislator? Is yethe prsentpresent voyce of yethe Church an infallible oral Tradition from orour SaviorsSaviours days? Then 1 How may I bee sure ytthat prsentpresent Church obliges its membrsmembers to beleive nothing but what & so far as it received it from yethe former Church nay I see things made now de fide wchwhich were not so before. 2 What security have I ytthat in noe age of yethe Church noe new practises should come in. Though it may bee, they could not bee deceived in knowing their fathers practises, ded yet did they think themselves obliged to do nothing but what their forefathers did? 3 There is sufficient evidence ytthat all many of her Traditions are neither uninterruptedly continued from yethe Apostells times nor universally beleived by the prsentpresent Roman Church. And men strive in vaine to demonstrate yethe impossibility of motion so long as wee see yethe Contrary.

2a: What meanemeane you by yoryour possession? ytthat you beleive yoryour owne doctrins? You may still keep in ytthat possessiōon. Or ytthat you would have us beleive ymthem? But why so? are wee bound to beleive as you doe? Wee must first know wtwhat this Possession is whither of truths or fictions. When wee understand it to bee of truth wee will consent wthwith you: But if it bee of fictions, why do you tell us of Possession? can there bee a possession of meere nothings? (of Infallibility, Purgatory, Transubst: &c)

Chap 6. Of Purgatory.

Some of yethe Fathers assert a receptacle for Soules till yethe day of Iudgment & therefore pray for yethe mitigation of their tedious, vehement & tormenting expectation of yethe day of Iudgment to perfect their felicity (Thus doe yethe Greek Church) Or supposing yethe 1000 yeares of Temporall Reigne on Earth to bee yethe day of Iudgment, in yethe beginning of wchwhich yethe most perfect Christians shall rise first & so gradually untill yethe most imperfect arise at yethe latter end of it. They therefore pray for yethe earlier ressurection of yethe dead saints in ytthat day. Thus perhaps through Tertullian.

And that the Moneyers p shall be appointed them by the said MmMaster & WrWorker

920 or 921 Atreus moritur.

929 Hyllus Eusytheum occidit. is regnat

924 Hyllus Peloponnesum invadendo occiditur ab Echenus.

943 Pelops moritur Euristheus regnat. v

Sthenelus Persei filius regnat in Mycene 948

Others have held ytthat all soules shall bee purged conflagration & attaine to Happiness (at Origen, Lactantius, St Augustin, Hilary, Ambrose, &c.)

Others have thought ytthat yethe prayers of yethe church will advance yethe happiness of yethe blessed & yethe the Anointed (if not prevaile for their salvation) but not before yethe day of Iudgment.

But none of them (before Greg 1 ) held ytthat in dye in Gods & wthwith their onely portent of yethe remitted eternall punishment suffer temporall punishment in Purgatory but they did not suffer for it in their lives) for yethe satisfying for & purging ymthem from yethe guilt of their sin befor they are come to heaven. And ytthat those thus punished may bee releived by yethe prayers of yethe faithfull or Sacrifice of yethe Altar.

And wtwhat yethe Fathers may seeme to say for this, respects either Commemoration of & Oblations for yethe dead for yethe instruction of yethe living or yethe day of Resurrection; or Conflagration; or purging of yethe wicked or Purgation in this life by punitions & afflictions. But none respects yethe purging of yethe Body by fire before yethe day of Iudgment.