The totall summe. Or No danger of damnation vnto Roman Catholiques for any errour in faith nor any hope of saluation for any sectary vvhatsoeuer that doth knovvingly oppose the doctrine of the Roman Church. This is proued by the confessions, and sayings of M. William Chillingvvorth his booke.

THE TOTALL SVMME . OR No danger of Damnation vnto Roman Catholiques for any Errour in Faith : Nor any hope of Saluation for any Sectary whatsoeuer that doth knowingly oppose the Doctrine of the Roman Church .

This is proued by the Confessions , and Sayings of M. William Chillingworth his Booke .

Summa est quae conficitur ex Confessis . Aug. princ . dialect . cap. 3. Vnum est necessarium . Luc. 10. v. 42.

Permissu Superiorum . 1639.

The Preface .

THIS Discourse was intended at first , as the Conclusion and closing vp of the Treatise I termed , The Church Conquerant ouer human Wit : but being when I wrote it , in great doubt , that the sayd Treatise was lost in the transporting therof from one place to another ( which often happens in Countries which are infested with warre ) I resolued to make this Discourse more large , by the discouery of many other Contradictions in this our Aduersary , and with the Refutation of such tergiuersations , as Cauillers might deuise , to stay piously disposed Protestants , from yielding prompt and assured assent to this most important Verity .

And as they who make Bills of Account , when they haue set downe distinctly for their discharge , the particular Summes of expences ; are accustomed in the end in few Cyphers to abbreuiate the Totall Summe ; so this Treatise comming after the former , as the Conclusion thereof ; I haue giuen it the name of Totall Summe , the Argument handled therein being worthy of that stile . For what is the finall marke , the Totall , the All in all (a) (a) Deum time , & mandata eius obserua : hoc est enim omnis homo . Ecclesiastae c. 12. v. 13. of our pious endeauours , labours , cares , sollicitudes in this mortall life , but only to find out the true Religion , wherein one shall be sure of his Saluation , if simply and constantly he belieue the Doctrines , and liue according to the lawes thereof .

Verily this is the pith , the marrow , the Summe , the quintessence of all Controuersies ventilated betwixt Protestants and vs : and in particular it was the sole scope of that short substantiall Treatise Charity mistaken by Protetestants ; which being by D. Potter , in his Want of Charity , impugned , was defended and confirmed by the learned labours and elucubrations of Charity maintayned . For the maine Controuersy debated in these three bookes is , whether Roman Catholiques & Protestants may both be saued in their seuerall Religions : or which comes to the same issue , seing Protestants grant we may be saued in our Religion , because our Errours are not Fundamentall and damnable , whether it is not want of Charity in vs , that we will not requite them with the like mild , gentle , and comfortable doome ; but constantly maintayne , that Saluation cannot be had in any course of Separation , and Opposition against Doctrine proposed by the Roman Church , as matter of faith .

And though this our Catholique determination hath beene in the before named Treatise demonstrated , especially in the two last Chapters thereof ; which shew all Sects & Diuisioners , all Protesters , and Opposers against the Church of Rome , to be guilty of the two most heynous crimes , Schisme , & Heresy : yet I haue thought fit & conuenient , to handle this Totall of Controuersies in a particular short Treatise : wherin omitting the former two heads of proofe , I haue vrged peculiar , and proper Arguments , grounded vpon euident Truths confessed , approued , confirmed euen by this our Aduersary , whose Booke Protestants so much esteeme as they stand thereon against the cleere demonstrations for the Catholique Church brought by Charity maintayned .

If in this very Booke , in which they so much confide ( which beareth the title , The Religion of Protestants a safe way to Saluation ) the happy security of Roman Catholiques , and togeather the vnauoydable danger of their Opposers be proued , and proclamed ; if no safe path to Saluation for English Protestants be shewed in his Treatise ; but they be forced to goe the broad way , wherein the most damned Heretiques that liue vnder the cope of Heauen , not onely Anabaptists and Arians ; but also the new Samosatenians , or Socinians may be saued aswell as they : this being shewed , our Protestants will be compassed about on euery side with the light and euidence of this eternally importing Truth , No hope of saluation out of the Catholique Roman Church .

And then , God forbid , they should not yield vnto so cleere Euictions , but fall into the extreme misery of peeuish obstinacy , whereof S. Augustine sayth , Nihil infelicius homine , Lib 3. contra l●t Petil c. 13. qui non vult cedere veritati , quâ ita concluditur , vt exitum inuenire non possit : Nothing more vnhappy and wretched , then the man that will not yield vnto that truth , wherwith he is so concluded and inclosed , as he knowes not which way to get out .

THE TOTALL SVMME . OR The assured Saluation of Roman Catholiques &c.

An Aduertisement .

IN this treatise as in the other , I haue beene exact , and euen scrupulous , to rehearse fully and largely our Aduersaries formall words : many times also , though they were cited before , repeating them agayne , for the Readers greater ease , and to make this poynt whereon the Totall of our Eternity doth so much depend , cleere and plaine . In the text I cite the Page , Number and Line , or when there is no number in the page , or when the place cited comes before any number , only page and line . I haue also in the margent quoted the Chapter and number , whereby the Reader may find the wordes in the second edition of London .

The first Conuiction .

1. THis is drawne from the concession of Protestants , that Roman Catholiques may be saued in their Religion ; because their errours are but litle on s , not Fundamentall , or in themselues damnable ; wheras Roman Catholiques neyther do , nor can by the principles of their Religion grant the same warrant to any whatsoeuer , that continues vnto death an opposer of the Church of Rome . An argument often vrged by Charity maintayned , grounded on a testimony of D. Potter , which you say he buildeth on , in almost (b) (b) Pag. 279. n. 64. fourty , yea more then in (c) (c) Pag. 397. n 18. an hundred places of his booke : and you , as often at least , striue and struggle with this Argument , labouring to remoue the pressing difficulties thereof , with the same progresse & successe , as Sifiphus (d) (d) Saxum versat neque proficit hilum . is said to make , who to aduance a huge stone vp-hill , striueth eternally in vaine . Your euasions and shiftes , I will particularly refute , and lay open their falshood and vanity ; wherby it shal be made apparent , that both the booke of Charity maintayned resteth hitherto vnanswered , and that this Argument drawne from the confession of Protestants , is altogether vnanswerable . I shall first propose our Argument , strenthened with D. Potters suffrage . Secondly , discouer how impudently you deny D. Potters text . Thirdly , how at last you acknowledge it , & giue an explication therof full of grosse ignorance . Fourthly , how weakly , and in vayne you would seeme to contemne this Argument as poore , and seely . Fiftly , I will declare the force of this Argument , and shew the reason why Protestants ( that be wise , and not distempered with furious zeale ) dare not condemne the Roman Religion & Communion , as damnable of it selfe . Finally , that not only Roman Catholikes , but that you your selues dare not maintaine , that the Religion of Protestants is a safe way to saluation ; yea you grant the same not to be free from errours damnable of themselues .

The Argument propounded . §. 1.

2. THe Argument I set downe in this manner . No man shal be , or can be damned eternally , for errours , which be not damnable of themselues . This is cleere ; Because God being iust , who renders to euery one according to their deserts , cannot punish men more then their offences do of themselues deserue , but rather somewhat vnder their merit . But the errours pretended to be found in the Roman Church , cannot of themselues deserue eternall damnation , being but veniall , but little ones , & not damnable of themselues , as Protestants grant . This Assumption needs no proofe , being notorious ouer all England . For what more dayly and vsuall , what more frequent and familiar , then for Protestants to reproach vs with want of Charity ; because we will not yield their errours not to be damnable nor destructiue of saluation , as they grant ours to be . This is confirmed by the often reiterated confession of D. Potter specially pa. 77. where he hath these words : To forsake the errours of the Roman Church , and not to ioyne with her in those practises we account erroneous , we are forced of necessity . For though in themselues they be not damnanable to them which belieue as they professe ; yet for vs to profese what we belieue not , were without question damnable . And they with their errours ( by the grace of God ) might go to Heauen , when we for our hypocrisy and dissimulation without repentance , should certainly be condemned to Hell . And agayne : To him who in simplicity of heart belieues and professeth them , & withall feareth God and worketh righteousnesse , to him they shall proue veniall : such a one shall by the mercy of God be deliuered from them , or be saued with them . But he that against Fayth and Conscience shall go along with the streame , to professe & practise them , because they are but little-ones , his Case is dangerous , and without repentance desperate . And againe . pag. 19. We belieue the Roman Religion safe , that is , not damnable to some , such as belieue what they professe ; but we belieue it not safe , but very dangerous ( if not certainly damnable ) to such as professe it , when they belieue the contrary .

Your impudent deniall of the text . §. 2.

3. YOu acknowledge that Charity maintayned vrgeth this testimony of D. Potter , & builds his discourse theron often : which you say , he doth fraudulently as an egregious Sophister , impudently without conscience or modesty outfacing the truth . For Protestants (e) (e) Pag. 400. n. 28. Cap. 7. n. 2● . you say , neither do , or euer did acknowledge , that our errours are not damnable : and that you for your part , though you were on the rack , should not confesse it . As for D. Potter you deny , that he sayd of the errours he imputeth to the Roman Church , though in themselues they be not damnable ; yea you contest that his words are , though in themselues they be damnable . (f) (f) Cap. 5. n. 58. lin. 8. Pag. 275. lin. 4. D. Potter confesseth no such matter , but only that he hopes that your errours , though in themselues sufficiently damnable , yet by accident did not damne all that held them ; such he meanes , and sayes , as were excusably ignorant of the truth . And (g) (g) Cap. 5. n. 26. lin. 17. pag. 263. n. 26. Where doth D. Potter say any such thing as you pretend &c. He sayth indeed , that though your errours were in themselues damnable , and full of great impiety ; yet he hopes those amongst you who were inuincibly ignorant of the truth , might by Gods great mercy haue their errours pardoned . Thus you . And you repeate it , almost in the same wordes , in an hundred passages of your Booke , still noting these wordes , though in themselues damnable , in a distinct character , as D. Potters formall text , which yet is no where found in any part of his Treatise .

4. And in this denial of the text , in this contestation , that D. Potter said of our Errours , though in themselues they be damnable , you with great shew of confidence persist , till almost the very finishing of your Booke . Then being but three leaues from the end ( as Theeues when they are ready to be cast of the ladder , make true confessions ) strucken with remorse of conscience , you vtter this deposition against your selfe Cap. 7. n. 29. Indeed D. Potter sayes of your errours , though in themselues they be not damnable to them which belieue as they professe ; yet for vs to professe what we belieue not , were without question damnable , Is this true ? Doth D. Potter say of our errous though in themselues they be not damnable ? Hath he these very words indeed ? See then whether the reproach which you cast vnworthily on Charity maintayned , the reproach of outfacing the truth without conscience or modestie , do not fall heauily on your owne head . For now vpon the ending of your Booke you confesse , that D. Potter indeed sayes of our Errours , though in themselues they be not damnable , whereas before you said and repeated it againe and againe , with deepe protestation , and insolent insultation against your Aduersary , that D. Potter said no such thinge ; yea that his wordes were the plaine contradiction , to wit , though in themselues they be damnable , and full of great impiety . How this can be excused from the crime of forgery , I do not see .

5. More cunningly & in shew not so enormously , but indeed no lesse fraudulently & maliciously , do you change the pointing of D. Potters text , and so turne his assertion into the plaine contrary . He pag. 79. in the name of English Protestants sayth of the Roman Religion : We belieue it safe , that is , by Gods great mercy not damnable to some , such as belieue what they professe . Thus he ; and he maketh a Comma between some , and such , to deuide them , and to shew that such is vsed not to limit the some that are not damned ; but to declare who they be , to wit , all such as cordially belieue our Roman Religion and professe it . You reciting his words (h) (h) Pag. 404. lin. 20. Cap. 7. n. 29. leaue out the Comma , and ioyne some and such togeather , making the Doctour say , We belieue her Religion safe , that is by Gods great mercy not damnable to some such as belieue as they professe . As who should say , D. Potter grants our Religion safe , and not damnable to some , who in simplicity of heart belieue and professe it , not to all such , but some such only . Against his expresse Tenet and (i) (i) Pag. 76. lin. 26. text , yea further you vrge this text corrupted by your dispunction thereof as an Argument , that D. Potter holdes our errours damnable in themselues . Pag. 306. lin . 1. (k) (k) Cap. 5. n. 105. lin. 23. It is remarkable , that he confesses your errours to some men not damnable , which cleerely importes , that according to his iudgment they were damnable of themselues , though by accident , to them who liued and dyed in inuincible ignorance , they might proue not damnable . Thus you argue vpon your owne corruption of D. Potters text . For in truth he confesses the errours imputed vnto vs not to be damnable , and our Religion to be safe , not to some such only , but to all such as belieue as they professe , to all such as be not hypocriticall Professours , but professe it in simplicity of heart , belieuing it to be true . Nor doth he say , that vnto such Roman belieuers our errours are not damnable by accident ( as you feigne ) but the expresse contrary , that euen in themselues they be not damnable to them . Behold how opposite is D Potters true sentence , to that you haue forged for him . You make him (l) (l) Pag. 278 lin. 8. cap. 5. n. 61. say , Our errours are euen in themselues damnable , and only by accident pardonable ; whereas he sayth the contrary , they are in themselues but littleons , but venial , and consequently , if any sincere Roman Catholiques be damned , this is by accident , by reason of some extrinsecal damnable circumstance , not by the intrinsecal malignity of their errours , not by the force such errours haue in themselues , and in their owne nature to merit damnation .

6. But some may obiect , that D. Potter doth not say absolutely , Our errours be not in themselues damnable , but only , not in themselues damnable to them that belieue as they professe , which is a different thinge . I answer , this is a subtilty which findeth a difference where there is no diuersity . As to say of a potion , that it is not of it selfe deadly to such as drinke it , & take it into their bowells and heart , is all one as to say , it is deadly to none , but harmelesse and innoxious in it selfe : so to say , our errours are not in themselues damnable to such as heartily belieue and professe them , is as much as to say , they are of themselues damnable vnto none , but absolutely veniall & of their owne nature not destructiue of Saluation . For to whome may they be in themselues damnable , if they be not so to them that take them into their heart by sincere and cordiall beliefe . As none can be damned for sinne , but such as commit sinne ; so none can be damned for erring , but such as erre , and are guilty of erring . Now those that in their heart belieue not errours , do not erre , nor are guilty of erring : wherefore , such neither are , nor can be damned for erring , or holding of errours . For if they hypocritically , professe Errours which they do not belieue , they be damnable indeed ; but not for erring , but for their hypocrisy and dissimulation , as D. Potter truly sayth .

Your ignorant exposition of D. Potter . §. 3.

7. HAuing at last acknowledged D. Potters text , that he said of our errours , though in themselues they be not damnable , you (m) (m) Cap. 7. n. 29. initio . tell vs ; that we mistake his meaning , by taking a supposition of a confession , for a confession , a Rhetoricall concession of the Doctours , for a positiue assertion . For to say , though your Errours be not damnable we may not professe them , is not to say , Your errours are not damnable , but only through they be not : As if you should say ; Though the Church erre in points not fundamental ; yet you may not separate from it ; or , Though we do erre in belieuing Christ really present , yet our errour frees vs from Idolatry . I presume you would not thinke it fayrely done , if any man should interprete these your speaches , as confessions that you do erre in points not fundamentall ; that you erre in belieuing the Real Presence . And therefore you ought not to haue mistaken D Potters wordes , as if he confessed the Errours of your Church not damnable ; when he sayes no more , then this , though they be not damnable , or suppose , or put case they be not damnable . Thus you . Wherein your falshood is notable , Pag. 77. and your ignorance admirable . First , it is false , that D. Potter sayes no more but this , though they be not damnable . For besides this he sayth , that Protestants who belieue them to be errours , must not presume to professe them because they are but littleons . He saith in the name of all Protestants : We belieue the Roman Religion to be safe , that is , not damnable to such as belieue as they professe . We hope and thinke very well of all those holy and deuout soules which informer ages liued and died in the Church of Rome &c. We doubt not but they obtayned pardon of all their ignorances . Nay our Charity reaches further to All those at this day who in simplicity of heart belieue the Roman Religion , and professe it . Be these Rhetoricall Concessions , not Positiue Assertions , that the errours which Protestants impute to the Roman Church are not damnable of themselues ; but onely by accident , when they are hypocritically against conscience professed ?

8. Secondly , I am amazed that you a Maister of Arts of Oxford , of so long standing are ignorant of the difference in speach , betwixt the Present Tense , and the Preter imperfect , which euery man and woman by common sense doth feele and perceaue . For the particle though , ioyned with a verbe of the Present Tense , doth suppose a thing present , and existing in reality & truth : so that , if you will suppose the existence of a thing by imagination , or in conceyt onely ; you must vse the Preter imperfect . Wherfore neyther the Author of Charity maintayned , nor any Catholique that is intelligent , will say to you in the Present Tense , as you make him , Though the Church do erre in points not fundamentall , yet you must not separate from it ; but in the Preter imperfect ; Though the Church did erre in points fundamentall , yet you were not to separate from her . Nor will he , or any Catholique that is wise , vse that eyther sottish or impious speach you haue penned for him , Though we erre in belieuing Christ really present , yet our errour frees vs from Idolatry . God forbid . This were not a Rhetoricall Concession , but a Diabolical Profession , that our beliefe of the Reall presence is an errour . A true Catholique that can vtter his mind in good English will say , Though we did erre in belieuing the Reall Presence of our Lords Body in the Eucharist ; yet this errour would free vs from Idolatry . Thus the examples you bring of Rhetoricall Concessions make against you , being in deed positiue Assertions , and shew your discourse to be neyther good Logick , nor Rhetoricke , nor Grammer .

9. And I pray you , the Proposition you haue forged for D. Potter , though the errours of the Roman Church be in themselues damnable , and full of great impiety , yet by accident they do not damne all that hold them ; is it not a Positiue Assertion that our doctrines are damnable and full of great impiety in D. Potters opinion ? Wherfore this proposition which is truly D. Potters : though the errours of the Roman Church be not in themselues damnable , yet Protestants who know them to be Errours , may not professe them , is a positiue Assertion , that our supposed errours be not damnable in his iudgement . Should one say to you , though in your iudgement you belieue Christ our Sauiour not to be true God , yet you dare not professe it outwardly for feare of the fagot ; would you take this as a Rhetoricall supposition , not as a Reall accusation , that you are an Infidell in your heart ? Is it possible you should be guilty of so grosse ignorance and non-sense as this ? No verily . But perchance the matter is this : you say (n) (n) Pag. 395. l. 3. If this did appeare , to persuade any man to continue a Protestant , were to persuade him to continue a Foole. that Protestants , to whome the Roman Religion appeareth , though but probably , the safer , cannot continue Protestants , except they continue fooles . Now Protestants by this confession of D. Potter , cannot but see apparently , the Roman Religion to be the safer . Wherfore , that , this notwithstanding , they may continue still Protestants ; you would make them such fooles , as to belieue , that , though , ioyned with a verbe in the Present Tense , doth import onely an imaginary , not a reall supposition . Wherefore if you should say ( as in effect you do say ) though the Religion of Protestants be false and damnable , yet I will do my best to defend it ; Protestants must be such fooles as to take this , not as a positiue assertion , that their Religion is false & damnable in your iudgment ; but as a Rhetoricall Concession , as if you had said ; Imagine , or put case , the Religion of Protestants be false and damnable . I hope Protestants will be wiser then to be made such fooles by you as to continue in a Religion which cannot be maintayned , but by such fopperies as these .

Your Vanity in contemning the foresayd Argument . §. 4.

9. You many times seeme to contemne and scorne the Argument drawne from the confession of Protestants , and the former testimony of D. Potter . You say we rely vpon his priuate Opinion , vpon his vncertaine (o) (o) Pag. 226. n. 63. Charitable hope , that (p) (p) Pag. 116. n. 158. in fine . his thinking so is no reason we should thinke so , except we thinke him infallible , that whosoeuer is moued with his argument is so simple &c. Wherin you may seeme ( which happens very seldome ) to agree with D. Potter , who doth much sleight our arguing from the Confession of our Aduersaries page . 81. If they haue no better ground of their beleefe then their Aduersaries Charitable iudgment of their errours ; they will be so farre from conuincing their Aduersaries of lacke of wisedome , that themselues cannot escape the imputation of folly .

10. Thus the Doctour endeauours to lay the imputation of folly vpon vs , for vrging our aduersaries fauourable iudgement of our errours , as a good argument , that may moue men to imbrace our Religion . But in this charging vs with folly , his owne lacke of wisedome and consideration may be conuinced , by what he writeth some few pages before against zelots : for these he condemneth not onely of want of charity , but also of lacke of wisedome , for iudging so seuerely of our errours as to cut vs of from hope of Saluation . Pag. 76. The Roman Churches communion ( sayth he ) we forsake not , no more then the Body of Christ ; whereof we acknowledge the Church of Rome a member , though corrupted . And this cleeres vs from the imputation of Schisme , whose property it is , to cut of from the Body of Christ , and hope of Saluation , the Church from which it separates . And if any Zelots amongst vs haue proceeded to heauier censures , their zeale may be excused , but their Charity and Wisedome cannot be iustifyed . Thus he . From which words I conclude a double truth ; the one against you , the other against D. Potter himselfe . The first ; that this Charitable iudgement about the Saluation of Roman Catholiques , because their errours are small , and not in themselues damnable , is not the priuate opinion of D. Potter ; but the censure and doome of the whole Protestant english Church , condistinct from zelots , or Puritans . For how can this whole Church be iustified , and cleered from the imputation of Schisme , by reason of her Charitable iudgement of our errours , if this be not the Charitable iudgement of this whole Church , but only the opinion of D. Potter , and of some other few priuate Protestants ? Secondly I gather , that this iudgement is not onely according to Christian Charity ; but also according to Christian Wisedome , and floweth from the rules and Principles of them both . Otherwise what cause or reason hath D. Potter to charge Zelots , who iudge not fauourably of our errours , with want not only of Charity , but also of wisedome : Their Charity ( saith he ) and Wisedome cannot be iustified ? If the iudgment of Protestants so fauorable about our errours be of meere Charity , not wise , not prudent , not solidely grounded on truth ; why may not the wisedome of Zelots , who will not consent thereunto be iustified ? On the other side , if the iudgment of Protestants be conforme to Christian wisedome and Diuine truth , what wisedome is it in D. Potter to charge vs with folly and want of wisedome , for building and relying theron ?

11. Besides , this iugdment of Protestants , that we may be saued in our Religion , our errours not being damnable , if it be voyde of wisdome , and not solidly grounded on truth ; how is it charitable , that is , how can it proceed from true Christian Charity ? If fond loue and affection to the saluation of Creatures , not guided by the rules of Christian truth , be Christian charity ; then the iudgment of Origen were ful of Christian Charity , who extended saluation euen vnto Diuells . Wherfore your iudgment , that we may be saued , because our errours are not damnable , cannot be charitable , vnlesse it be conforme to the rules , and principles of Christian truth and wisdome : on which if it be grounded , why may we not build , and rely theron ? Why may we not without imputation of folly , make this one pillar of our comfort , and constancy in the Roman Communion and Fayth ?

12. Adde hereunto , that it is euen ridiculous in D. Potter and other Protestantes of his stampe , to brag and boast as they doe , that forsooth it is (q) (q) Cap. 4. n. 63. lin. 22. Excesse of charity may make him censure your errours more fauorably , than he should do . excesse of their Charity and good will to the Roman Church , which makes them to iudge so kindly and fauourably of her errours . For , by their wordes and writings , they shew themselues to be voyd of all loue and Charity , and to be full of bitter zeale and passion towardes her ; so farre , that though in their conscience they iudge her free from damnable errours , yet in their passion they hate , & abhorre , rate and reuile her , as if she were the vildest Religion in the world . These speaches of D. Potter against her , she hath many wayes played the Harlot , and in that regard deserued a bill of diuorce from Christ , and the detestation of Christians : the proud and curst Dame of Rome , which takes vpon her to reuell in the house of God : Popery is the contagion and plague of the Church . These speaches I say euery man will presently perceiue , that they are voyd of Charity , wordes of contumely and reproach , proceeding not from cleere and calme iudgment , but from the fuming fornace of passion : you produce them , as if D. Potter by them did ouerthrow what we haue proued to be his iudgment , that our errors be not damnable : But in very truth they be only passionate speaches , vttered without iudgment , reason , or discretion , yea against his owne iudgment ; tokens of his mortall auersion from that Church , in whome he can finde no mortall or damnable errour . It is not then Charity or kind affection , or any good will to Roman Catholiks , which moueth D. Potter , & such other Ministers to maintaine the errours of the Roman Church to be but littleones , and not damnable ; but because they dare not hold the contrary , in regard of the vnchristian absurdities , which they perceiue to be consequent theron , as by the next Section will appeare .

All Christians of former ages damned , if the errours of the Roman Church be damnable of themselues . §. 5.

13. CAn any absurdity be more vast and vnchristian then this contained in the title of this paragraph ? What wonder , if Protestants ( that be moderate , and not carried away with precipitous zeale ) through horrour to be forced vnto this immanity , dare not affirme , that our errours are in themselues damnable ; though otherwise their little loue towardes vs considered , they could do it with all their heart . To proue this vast absurdity to be consequent vpon the said proposition , we must suppose , what no man doth or can deny , that for many ages before Luther , all the famous men for learning and sanctity , who by heroicall actes of Charity , and other Christian vertues , and working of Miracles maintained the credit of the Christian name , held the doctrines of the Roman Church , which Protestants contend to be erroneous . The fame is also euident concerning the Fathers of the more Primitiue times , and is confessed by Protestantes , (a) (a) Defence against the reply of Cartwright pag. 47. namly D. Whitgift late Archbishop of Canterbury : Almost all the Bishops and Writers of the Greeke Church , and of the Latin also , for the most part were spotted with the doctrines of free-will , of Merit , of Inuocation of Saintes , and such like ; So that , if the Doctrines of the Roman Church , which Protestantes traduce as erroneous , be damnable of themselues ; it is consequent , that the most famous Bishops , Doctours and Saints in so many former Christian ages were guilty of errours in themselues , and of themselues damnable : which being so , they should be all certainly damned , without any hope of their Saluation .

14. This consequence I proue by what you by write (r) (r) Cap. 7. n. 26. lin. 30. pag. 403. lin. 30. They that haue vnderstanding and meanes to discouer their errours , and neglect to vse them ; we dare not flatter with so easy a censure as to giue them hope of Saluation . But the eminent Fathers and Christian Saintes of so many ages before Luther , had sufficient vnderstanding , and meanes to discouer their errours ; and yet neuer made vse of them . They had excellent vnderstandings , they were verst in all manner of sciences , & they had the holy Scripture , which you say is the only meanes to know all necessary truth , and to discouer all damnable errours ; a meanes not only sufficient , but also , in your iudgment , most playne , and easy ; so that men not only may , but also cannot but therin discouer which be damnable errours , except they wilfully shut their eyes against the light . Therefore there is no hope of the saluation of the Ancient Fathers , and Saintes of former Christian ages , if your Proposition be true , they who had sufficient vnderstanding and meanes to discouer their errours , and neglected to vse them , there is for them no hope of Saluation . Moreouer , (s) (s) Cap. 6. n. 64. lin 8. pag. 279. num. 64. lin. 8. you say , that which is in it selfe damnable , will actually bring damnation vpon them , that keep themselues in it , by their owne voluntary and auoydable fault ; But the Ancient Fathers and holy Saints in the ages before Luther held the doctrines of the Roman Church which you account damnable , full of great impiety and Idolatry , & they kept themselues in them ( according to your grounds ) by their owne voluntary and auoydable fault : for they had sufficient meanes to discouer their errours , to wit , they had the holy Scripture , wherin ( as you say ) these errours are discouered , not onely with sufficient , but also with abundant clarity , (t) (t) Preface . n. 11. lin. 17. How is it , possible any thing should be plainer forbidden , then the worship of Angels &c. pag. 181. n. 86. Places of scripture against our errours as cleere as the light at noone . that there cannot possibly be greater ; you must therefore of necessity grant , that these damnable and impious errours ( if they be such as you say they are ) brought actually damnation vpon the Fathers and Saints of former ages . Agayne , page 290. lin. 2. of liuing in the Communion of the Roman Church , and approuing her doctrines and practises you say , (u) (u) Cap. 5. n. 86. Though we hope it was pardonable in them who had no meanes to know their errour ; yet of its owne nature , and to them who did or might haue knowne their errour , it was certainely damnable . Now the holy Fathers , and Christian Saints of former ages might haue knowne our errours ( if they be errours ) because they had the holy Scriptures in which , you say , such errours are discouered , & their damnable falshood , so plainly , as nothing can be more : If then you say true , that the Roman Religion , is full of great impiety and damnable doctrines , it is euidently consequent by your principles , that all holy Bishops , Doctours , and Saints who are confessed to haue held the sayd doctrines , are certainly damned for euer , no hope remaining of their saluation . Wherfore the reason why Protestants hold our Religion safe , and a sure way to Heauen , as being free from damnable errour , is not Charity and excesse of good will they beare to our persons , as they pretend ; but feare of the vast absurdity , which they see consequent thereupon , that so many former ages , and worldes of holy Bishops , Doctours , Conuerters of Nations , workers of Miracles , and admirable Saints , are certainly damned .

15. There be many Protestant Ministers that could find in their hearts to grant this dismall position of the damnation of the ancient euer esteemed Saints , if the same would stand them in steed to maintaine the diuision from the Roman Church ; yet they dare not venture cleerly to auerre so much , for feare that this would produce the contrary effect , and moue many of their followers to recoyle back from them . For in the separation made by Luther from the Roman Church , there be many piously inclined mindes , carefull of their future eternity either of weale or woe , cordially desirous to be secure of the happines of the one , and mighty fearefull to fall into the misery of the other . Should Protestant Ministers cleerly deliuer their mindes , that the Roman Religion is damnable euen of it selfe , a direct way to Hell , and that such as walke , or haue walked therein are certainely damded ; these piously disposed and timerous Soules would feele horrour to be of the Protestant Religion , which cannot be the way of saluation , except the Roman Christianity so great , so glorious , so continued from Christ and his Apostles , contayning within her bosome , so many worlds of holy Bishops , learned and pious Pastours , and of admirable Saints be damned , at least all the intelligent Professors therof . The apprehension of this dreadfull and dangerous state amazed euen the stout and curst heart of Luther , when he saw himselfe engaged in a course , out of which he could not issue with saluation , except so many former ages of Saints were damned . (k) (k) Praefat. de abroganda Missa prinatâ , Quoties palpitauit mihi tremulum cor . & reprehendens obiecit illud fortissimum argumentum ; Tu solus sapis , tot ne errant vniuersi ? Tanta saecula ignorauerunt ? How often ( sayth he ) did my heart tremble and pant within my breast , obiecting against me that most stronge argument ; Art thou onely wise ? Did so many Christian worldes in former ages all erre ? What , if perhaps thou thy selfe be in errour , and draw an infinite number of Souls after thee into errour , to be damned eternally with thee ?

16. You say , (l) (l) Pag. 397. n. 17. that your Saluation doth not depend on ours , that you might be saued though we were Turkes and Pagans : this I well belieue . But now that the Roman Church is not Turcisme , nor Iudaisme , but a Kingdome of Christ diffused ouer the earth , the onely Christian Catholique Religion in the world , which is come from our Sauiour by conspicuous linage , and line of succession by the Apostles ; what Christian will not tremble to be in a state , wherein he must expect Saluation from Christ , by damning that Religion , which is so notoriously descended from him ?

17. The innated instinct of Godlinesse , the sparkes of Piety which nature hath hidden within the bowels of euery reasonable soule , moue men to acknowledge and reuerence that Religion , as being of God , which they see marked and adorned with diuine and supernaturall workes , aboue the course and forces of nature . Which Maiesty of miracles shining so gloriously in the Roman Church , can any man that is Religious & fearfull of God , iudge the same damnable , and venture his soule on the damnation thereof ? Wherefore not Loue , not Charity , not Goodwill to the Roman Catholiques is that which moueth Protestants to pronunce her Religion safe , and free from damnable errour ; but the horrour of damning togeather with vs , innumerable millions of holy and heauenly men of former Christian worlds .

18. Finally Protestants vnder pretence of fauouring and comforting vs seeke their owne comfort & solace ; that they may find some shelter of hope of saluation vnder the wings of the Roman Religion , who in their opposition against her find none , or only poore , meagre and miserable hopes . For , laying for ground this truth , that our Religion is safe ; & then assuming this falshood , that theirs is the same with ours for substance and in all necessary points ; they cheere vp many drooping hearts , that can feele no comfort in hoping to be saued by damning the Roman Church : so that care of their owne Sparta , desire to stay the wiser sort of their followers in their course of Diuision from the Roman Church ; this I say is one of the reasons which maketh Ministers to preach the certainty of Saluation in our Church , and to maske themselues with a vizard of Charity and Friendship towards vs .

That Protestant Religion is not safe , euen in your iudgment . §. 6.

19. YOu say in your Preface n. 39. that you haue not vndertaken the peculiar defence of the doctrine of the Church of England ; nor of any other particular Protestant Church , but the common cause of all Protestants , to maintayne the doctrine of them all ; not that it is absolutely true , ( for , that is impossible seing they hold contradictions ) but that it is free from all impiety and damnable errour . This drift pretended and professed so gloriously in the Title and Preface of your booke , you crosse and contradict in the bosome , and heart thereof , condemning Protestants of errours , euen in themselues , damnable , as I shall make good and cleere by the foure ensuing testimonies . First Pag. 218. lin. 34. I would not be mistaken , as though I thought the errours of some Protestants inconsiderable thinges , and matters of no moment : for the. Truth is , I am very fearfull , that some of their opinions either as they are , or as they are apt to be mistaken , though not of themselues so damnable , but that iust and holy men may be saued with them ; yet are frequent occasions of remisnes , and not seldome of security in sinning &c. Behold you , who in your Preface made all Protestants secure of their Saluation , because free from errours in themselues damnable ; now are very fearfull of them , and dare not acquit them of errours considerable , of moment , in themselues damnable , though not so damnable , but iust and holy men may be saued , with them ; Which qualification of your errours doth not so temper or allay their malignity , as to make them lesse damnable then those you impute to the Roman Church : seing you often acknowledge , that with them , and in them , good holy soules may be saued .

20. Secondly Pag. 21. lin. 39. you write more cleerely to make Protestants , euen millions of them , Answere to the Preface n. 26. in fine . guilty of damnable errours . If any Protestant , or Papist be betrayed into , or kept in errour by any sinne of his will ( as it is to be feared many millions are ) such errour is ( as the cause of it ) sinfull and damnable ; yet not exclusiue of all hope of Saluation , but pardonable , if discouered vpon a particular and explicite repentance ; if not discouered , vpon a generall and implicite repentance &c. Thus you directly accuse Protestants of sinfull and damnable errours , of errours pardonable , and consequently damnable in themselues . For you say pag. 16. n. 21. lin. 15. the very saying they were pardonable , implies , they needed pardon , and therefore were in themselues damnable . This being so , how haue you cleered the Doctrine of all Protestant Sects , though not from all falshood , yet from all errour in it selfe damnable ? How do they all of them goe a safe way to saluation , if millions of them walke in damnable errours , which you say , will bring damnation vpon all them that continue in them by their voluntary fault ? What reason can you bring , why your Booke might not be inscribed ; The Religion of Papists a safe way to Saluation , aswell as , the Religion of Protestants ? For you say Protestants erre damnably aswell as we ; Millions of them aswell as millions of ours ; their errours are damnable in themselues aswell as ours ; Ours pardonable by Gods great mercy aswel as theirs ; they cannot be saued without repentance no more then we ; and we may be saued in our errors by a generall repentance aswell as they ? How then is not our Religion a safe way to Saluation aswell as theirs , euen by your Booke of purpose written to saue them , and damne vs .

21. Thirdly , Pag. 280. n. 95. lin. 19. (z) (z) Cap. 5. n. 91. lin. 19. Though Protestants haue some Errours ; yet seing they are neyther so great as yours , nor imposed with such tyranny , nor maintayned with such obstinacy , he that conceaues &c. In these wordes you suppose , that Protestants haue errours , and great errours imposed with tyranny , maintayned with obstinacy . How then is their Religion a safe way of Saluation ? Can saluation stand with impious errours , imposed vpon others with tiranny , and maintayned with obstinacy vntill death ? But their errours are not ( you say ) so great as ours , nor imposed with such tiranny , nor maintayned with such obstinacy . Were this true ; it would not proue Protestancy to be a good and safe way to Saluation , & not in it selfe damnable ; but only , that ours is more damnable , and a worse way . Besides that our errours be greater then theirs is said by you many times , but not proued so much as once . And seing our errours though ( as you say ) damnable in themselues yet be pardonable by Gods great mercy ; how be the greater then yours , which are also damnable in themselues , and only pardonable by Gods great mercy ? From the number of all Protestants , whose Religion you defend to be a safe Way , I hope Socinians or new Samosatenians are not excluded . These hold , that Christ Iesus is not the Eternall only begotten Sonne of God ; yea that he was , and is a meere man , though an holy man , and a great Prophet . Will you say that this errour which conceaues no more diuinely of Christ then do the very Turkes , is not greater then any we maintayne , not more fundamental , and essentially destructiue of Saluation ? If you do , most Protestants in England will thinke you worthy of the Fagot ?

22. Fourthly , Pag. 290. num. 87. you write , Cap. 5. n. 87. that Protestants , seing they be not free from errours , that it is hardely possible , but they must be guilty of extreme impiety . In that place you endeauour to answere our Argument , that it was great imprudency in Protestants to forsake the whole visible Catholique Church , for errours not fundamentall , seing they confesse , that in their separation against her , they could not be sure of not falling into errours of the like quality and note , yea into greater , to wit fundamental . You are in this point eager , and protest , that Protestants are so farre from acknowledging that they haue no hope to auoyd this mischiefe ( of erring at the least vn-fundamentally ) that they proclaime to all the world , that it is most prone and easy to do so , to all those that feare God and loue the truth ; and hardely possible , for them to do otherwise without supine negligence and extreme impiety . Ponder I pray you this place , and conferre it with other passadges of your booke , & you will see , that you make all Protestants extremely impious . For it is most prone and easy for Protestants that feare God and loue the truth to auoyd all errours , specially such as need pardon , and be damnable in themselues : so that it is hardely possible for them to be in any errour without supine negligence and extreme impiety . Now there are not any Protestants in the world , no not English Protestants by name , whome you dare defend to be free from errours not fundamentall ; and millions of them as you confesse are by the sinne of their will betrayed into , and kept in errours damnable in themselues . Ergo , it is hardly possible ; but all Protestants must be guilty of supine negligence , and extreme impiety about matters of Fayth , Which being so ; how is that Religion a safe way of Saluation , in which hardly any be saued ? yea , how be not their errours vnpardonable , seing you write . Pag 275. lin. 15. that , Cap. 5. n. 58. lin. 18. God is infinitely iust , and therefore ( it is to be feared ) will not pardon Catholiques who might easely haue come to the knowledge of the truth , but through negligence would not ? How then will he pardon Protestants , to whome it was ( you say ) most prone and easy to haue come to the knowledge of the truth , and to haue auoyded all errours , but would not through supine negligence , and extreme impiety ?

23. I haue been the larger in declaring and strenghthening this Argument , and shewing the insuperable , force therof . First , because it is the Argument most vrged by the pithy , and learned Catholique Treatise of Charity mistaken , as also by Charity maintayned , both which bookes by the cleering of this point are shewed to remayne vnanswered . Secondly , because this Argument from the confession of our Aduersaries , as it is cleere , manifest , and conuincing ; so it is within the reach and capacity of euery one . For who so stupide & voyd of sense , as not to see that Religion to be the safer , which is confessed to be safe , euen in her Aduersaries iudgment grounded vpon the neuer fayling principles of Christian Charity , wisdome , and truth ?

The Second Conuiction .

THough we should grant that most vntrue and impossible supposition , that the Roman Church erreth ; yet it would be impossible that Catholiks should be damned for following her errours . The reason is , because their erring cannot but be excused by ignorance inuincible : wheras Protestantes , if they erre damnably ( as without doubt they do ) neither by shelter of Ignorance , nor of Generall Repentance can they be saued .

Three Suppositions . §. 1.

1. TO proue this , we must suppose three thinges , which are knowne and notorious truths . First , that Christians who belieue in Christ the eternall Sonne of God and Sauiour of the world , cannot be damned for any errours of ignorance inuincible , or for any inuoluntary erring . This truth you often affirme in some passages of your booke , and deny it as often in other . Pag. 19. lin. 27. (a) (a) 1. Edit. pag. 19. lin. 9. you say , That if in me alone were a confluence of all such errours of all Protestantes in the world that were thus qualified ( with ignorance inuincible ) I should not be so much afrayd of them all , as I should be to aske pardon for them &c. To aske pardon of simple and purely inuoluntary errours , is tacitely to imply , that God is angry with vs for them , and that were to impute to him the strange tyranny of requiring bricke , when he giues no straw ; of expecting to gather , where he strewed not ; to reape , where he sowed not , of being offended with vs , for not doing what he knowes , we cannot do . Heare you make it a kind of blasphemy to say , that involuntary errours are pardonable , or need pardon ; because the very saying they were pardonable importes they need pardon , and consequently , that God is offended with vs for them . Notwithstanding , that errours purely inuoluntary , or of inuincible ignorance be pardonable , and need pardon from Gods great mercy , you frequently professe speaking of our errours . Pag. 308. lin. 41. We hold your errours damnable in themselues , yet by accident through ignorance inuincible , we hope they were not vnpardonable . Pag. 291. lin. 4. Your erring was we hope pardonable , in them that had no meanes to know their errours . Pag. 263. lin. 27. Your errours were in themselues damnable yet we hope that those amongst you that were inuincibly ignorant of the truth , might by Gods great mercy haue their errours pardoned , and their soules saued . This is your wauering and tottering manner of discoursing ; but the truth is , God is not offended with errours of ignorance inuincible , because God is offended only for sinne , wheras inuoluntary erring cannot be sinne ; because to be voluntary is of the nature and difinition of Sinne.

2. Secondly , we suppose , that the Roman doctrines , which Protestants accuse to be errours , are definitions of Generals Councells , and were for many ages the publike receiued doctrine in the whole visible Christian Church ; for which reason you say (b) (b) Pag. 279. n. 64. lin. 8. cap. 5. n. 64. lin. 8. That euen the visible Church , is not free from damnable errours . Thirdly , we suppose that it is vnlawfull and damnable for any man to depart from the Roman Church , to forsake her doctrine , or to oppose the definition of a Generall Councell , except he haue apparent and euident reasons which demonstrate that the truth standeth on his side . This you teach , pag. 272. n. 53. (c) (c) Cap. 5. n. 53. It concernes euery man , that separates from any Churches Communion , euen as much as his Saluation is worth , to looke most carefully , that the cause of his separation be iust and necessary . And pag. 200. lin. 25. (d) (d) Cap. 3. n. 18. infine . I willingly confesse the iudgment of a Councell , though not infallible ; yet is so far directiue and obliging , that without apparent reason of the contrary , it may be sinne to reiect it ; at least not to afford it an outward submission . But D. Potter (e) (e) D. Potter pag. 166. more cleerly and fully affirmeth , That Generall Councels , are the highest Tribunals which the Church hath vpon earth ; that their authority is immediatly deriued & delegated from Christ ; that no Christian is exempted from their censures , and iurisdiction ; that their decrees bind all persons to externall obedience , and may not be questioned , but vpon euident reasons .

That the belieuers of the Roman Church cannot erre , but through Ignorance inuincible . §. 2.

3. FOr the title of this Section I argue thus : Those errours are vnauoydable and inuincible , which cannot be auoyded without damnable sinne : But Roman Catholiques cannot auoyd the errous of the Roman Church ( if she haue any ) without damnable sinne : Therfore their errours ( if they do erre ) must of necessity be ignorances inuincible , and vnauoydable , such as they cannot shake of without damning themselues . The Minor , or assumption of this argument I proue ; because Roman Catholiques that be sincere and cordiall belieuers of the doctrine of the Roman Church , cannot haue necessary & forcing reasons , nor euident demonstrations , that the Roman Church is in errour . This is cleere : For if they haue necessary and inforcing reasons , and euident demonstrations whereby they are conuicted in conscience , that the Roman Church erreth , they be now no more Roman Catholiques nor belieuers of the Roman Church , but Protestants , and her Aduersaries in their iudgment . It is therefore impossible , that Roman Catholiques , so longe as they be sincere and Cordiall belieuers of the Roman Doctrine , should haue euident demonstrations , that the Roman Church erreth : And if the● haue not euident demonstrations , it were damnable for them to forsake her doctrines , which Protestants account erroneous nor can they do it without damning their soules . Who then doth not see , that their erring ( if they erre ) is enforced , vn auoydable , proceeding from ignorance inuincible , for which sort of ignorance it is impossible they should be damned .

4. You to auoyde the force of this Argument contend , that though your reasons are necessary , enforcing , as cleere as the light at noone ; yet we are not conuicted by them in conscience ; not that they want euidence , but that we are obstinately peruerse . This your shift & cauill , is easily shewed to be friuolous and false . Friuolous , because you only say without any proofe , that we are obstinately peruerse , and if to say it without proofe be inough , then the same answere will serue , and doth de facto serue euery Heretique , euery Sect-maister , euery forger of new Monsters ; for when he findeth himselfe in straytes , and not able to bring so much as a probable reason for his new deuised impieties ; he falleth presently to cry , that his Texts of Scripture are as cleere as the sunne ; his Arguments euident demonstrations ; that the reason Catholiques neglect and reiect him , is not want of euidence in his arguing ; but that we are wilfully blind , obstinately peruerse , men that haue eyes to see and will not see , giuen ouer to stronge delusions , and vnto a reprobate sense . And what is this but to change schollership into scolding , reasoning into rayling , disputing into clamorous and contumelious wrangling ; wherin he getteth the victory who is the stoufest Stentor , and can crye loudest against his Aduersaries , You are willfully blind , you are obstinately peruerse . In which kind of arguing (f) (f) See pag. 380. n. 72. cap. 6. n. 72. you are very eloquent , according to the stile of heretiques , quorum doctrina ( sayth (g) (g) In cap. 22. Jsaiae . S. Hierome ) non in sensu , sed in multiloquio & elamore consistit .

5. Secondly it is false : because necessary and enforcing reasons , or euident demonstrations presented vnto the vnderstanding , necessitate the said Vnderstanding , and compell the Conscience to assent , let the Will be neuer so peruerse . The peruersity of Will may make a man deny with his mouth , what in Conscience he knoweth to be true ; it may make him hate & impugne knowne truth , but it cannot possibly make him not see , what by the light of euident demonstration is made cleere to his vnderstanding . This I proue by your owne sayings , as pag. 370. n. 50. (h) (h) Cap. 6. n. 50. Apparent arguments necessitate the vnderstanding to assent . and Pag. 371. n. 81. You contend , that Protestants hold not that it is euidently certaine , that these bookes in particular are the word of God . For ( say (i) (i) Cap. 6. n. 81. you ) they are not , eyther so fond as to be ignorant , nor so vaine as to pretend , that all men do assent to it ; which they would , if they were euidently certain : or so ridiculous as to imagine that an Indian that had neuer heard of Christ or Christianity , reading the Bible in his owne language , would without miracle belieue it to be the word of God , which yet he could NOT CHOOSE but do , if it were euidently certaine . Heere you affirme , that all men in the world would belieue the Christian Bible to be the word of God , yea they could not choose but assent vnto it as vnto Diuine truth , if it did shew it selfe to be such with euident certainty . And yet there be millions in the world that be obstinately peruerse against the Christian Bible . Ergo demonstrations which shew a truth to the vnderstanding with euident certainty , necessitate the Vnderstanding to assent , (k) (k) This is auerred also by M. Hooker , Eccles. Pol. Preface pag. 29. lin. 26. An argument necessary , and demonstratiue , being proposed to ANY MAN & vnderstood ; the mind cannot choose but inwardly assent . though the Will be obstinately peruerse . But Catholiques though they vnderstand , ponder , and consider your pretended euident demonstrations , and texts of Scripture as cleere as the sunne , can dissent from them , & rest persuaded in their conscience against your conclusions by pious constancy of fayth . Wherefore your Arguments be not euident demonstrations , and consequently no man can be moued with them to forsake the Roman Church , and her Doctrine of Generall Councels without committing damnable sinne : yea they are so farre from being irresistable , as they are vaine , weake , contemptible , euen those which you pretend to be so cleere as none can possibly be cleerer , as I haue shewed in the former Treatise Cap. 6. Conuict . 6. n. 29.

That Protestants if they erre , cannot be saued by ignorance , or generall repentance . §. 3.

6. THe first part of the Title , that they cannot be saued by ignorance , I proue thus . Either Protestants haue demonstrations & euident certainty , that the Roman Church erreth , that her definitions which they forsake , and keep themselues in opposition against them , be false and impious ; or they haue not . If they haue , they be not ignorant , but full of cleere and manifest certainty about all those points wherein they forsake the Roman Church . If they haue not , they are indeed in ignorance ; but in such ignorance as will not saue them , but rather make them more damnable , to wit , in the ignorance of Pride . For is it not damnable , and execrable Pride , for a simple and ignorant man , to abandon the Roman Church , adorned with so many glorious markes of the true Christian Church ; to reiect the definition of Generall Councels without any necessary and inforing reasons , without any sure ground , or euident certainty that they be errours ? No doubt such an one , the more ignorant that he is , the more damnable wretch he is ; and by so much is his pride more detestable . Wherfore Protestants , if in their vndertaking and venturing to reiect the definition of Councels , and the receaued Traditions of so many former Christian ages , they chance to erre , though but out of simplicity and ignorance , this simplicity and ignorance , will not excuse and mitigate , but rather accuse and aggrauate the crime of their erring presumption and pride .

7. This truth , that Protestants cannot be saued by ignorance ( as Roman Catholiques may , ) you seeme to acknowledge pag. 285. lin. 7. We assure our selues , if our liues be answerable , we shall be saued by our knowledge . And we hope ( and I tell you agayne , spes est rei incertae nomen ) that some of you may possibly be saued by occasion of their vnaffected ignorance . Behold the way of saluation by Ignorance you leaue vnto vs , and in your great excesse of charity hope , that some of vs may possibly be saued throgh ignorance . But you Protestants are sure to be saued by your knowledge , by your euident certainty , that the truth standes on your side , against the definition of former Christian worlds . Now , if this be the case of Protestants , that they must be saued by their owne knowledge , by being sure they haue such euident certainty of truth as may counter poyse the authority of so many Christian ages and Councels ; how pittifull and lamentable is their case ? They cannot be saued except they be furnisht with knowledge , and euident certainty , that they haue truth on their side : For if they want this knowledge , they cannot prudently nor without execrable Pride oppose Generall Councels , which stand for the Roman Doctrines . But Protestants , at least millions of them , are as sure and certayne as they liue , that they haue no such knowledge , no such euident demonstration or certainty , that the Roman Church and Councels erre : Therefore they cannot ( except they be stupide and senselesse ) but be sure they are in a damnable state , and shall certainly be damned except they change their course .

8. The second part of this Section that Protestants , if they erre cannot be saued from their sinfull & damnable errours by general repentance is proued ; Because Generall Repentance doth extend only to those things , wherein the Penitent may lawfully , and with a safe conscience apprehend , 2. Edit. pag. 20. lin. 33. and feare there may be sinne . For as you say pag. 20. lin. 45. Generall repentance is vniuersall sorow for all their sinnes , both which they know they haue committed , or which they feare they may haue . But Protestants belieue their Religion against the Church of Rome to be the Gospell , to be the word of God , to be most infallible Christian truth , and so do not feare any fault or sinne in their beliefe ; yea they cannot with a safe conscience so much as apprehend that their beliefe may be sinfull , false , or vncertayne . For ( as you say cap. 5. n. 107. ) this were to doubt of the certainty of the Gospell . Ergo , the Generall repentance of Protestants neyther doth , nor can extend it selfe to recall virtually and implicitely the Doctrine they hold against the Roman Church ; no more then they repent of the Doctrine they hold against Iewes and Turkes . For they hold both these Doctrines , as much the one as the other , to be the word of God ; and therefore not to be doubted of , much lesse repented as though it might be sinfull errour . Moreouer it is not possible , that a man should at the same time repent himselfe of a thing , and together detest from his heart all repenting thereof . But Protestants abhorre & detest as impious all doubting , and much more all repenting of their Religion , as it is opposed against the pretended Superstitions , Impieties , Idolatries of the Church of Rome ; for they thinke it holy Scripture , Diuine Reuelation as certayne as the Gospell . Wherfore it is impossible , that Protestants should repent of their opposing the Church of Rome , so long as they be Protestants , and belieue the doctrine of Protestancy to be the Gospell , and the Roman Religion to be full of Impiety and Idolatry . There is no hope such Protestants can be saued , except God send into their heart , the light of his Spirit , and make them see their Religion , so farre as it is opposite to the Roman , to be but a masse of old damned Heresies , and moue them to repent and to recall , and detest them in particular .

Your impudent slandering of Charity Maintayned that he granteth Saluation vnto any Protestant that is ignorant , or repentant . §. 4.

9. YOu are much vexed that the Roman Religion is proclaimed safe euen by her Aduersaries ; and that yours is wholly destitute of such comfortable testimonies . Wherfore the warrant you cannot obtayne by truth and fayre dealing , you seeke to get by falshood , fraud , and forgery , euen of our Maintayner to whome you speake in this manner pag. 31. lin. 12. That which you do say doth plainely inough affoard vs these Corollaries . Cap. 1. n. 3. 1. That whatsoeuer Protestant wanteth capacity , or hauing it , wanteth sufficient meanes of instruction to conuince his conscience of the falshood of his owne , & the truth of the Roman Religion ; by the confession of his most rigide Aduersaries , may be saued , notwithstanding any errour in his Religion . 2. That nothing hinders , but that a Protestant dying a Protestant , may dye with Contrition for all his sinnes . 3. That if he dye with Contrition , he may , and shall be saued . All these acknowledgements we haue from you , whiles you are ( as you say ) stating , but , as I conceaue , granting the very point in question ; which was ( as I haue already proued out of C. M. ) whether without vncharitablenesse you may pronounce , that Protestants dying in their Religion , and without particular repentance and dereliction of it , cannot possibly be saued .

16. Thus without shame you falsify the Tenet of your Aduersary & the doctrine of our Church . Where doth our Maintayner say , that whatsoeuer Protestant notwithstanding any errour ? Socinians be Protestants in your account because they hold the Bible , the Bible , and only the Bible , who maintayne Christ Iesus not to be the eternall Sonne of God incarnated . Where doth our Maintayner affirme , that these Protestants may be saued in this so vild errour , vpon any condition ? yea where doth he say of any Protestant , that he may be saued in any errour , which the maintaynes knowingly against the Roman Religion , if he want sufficient meanes of instruction to conuince his conscience of the falshood of his owne , and truth of the Roman ? He hath no such wordes , and his wordes from which you pretend to draw this wine of Comfort for Protestants , haue not any the least relish of that sense . These they are : when any man esteemed Protestant , leaueth to liue in this world , we do not instantly with precipitation auouch , that he is lodged in Hell . For we are not alwayes acquainted with what sufficiency of meanes he was furnished for instruction ; we do not penetrate his capacity to vnderstand his Catechist ; we haue no reuelation what light might haue cleered his errours , or Contrition retracted his sinnes in the last moment before death . Here our Maintayner requires sufficient meanes of instruction that a man be bound to belieue : but he sayth not , as you make him say , that this instruction must conuince his conscience , that his owne Religion is false , and the Roman true . If a Protestant be thus farre instructed as to perceaue , that the Roman Religion is by the full consent of former Christian ages , and by the definition of Generall Councels deliuered as the doctrine of Christ Iesus , and his Apostles ; if I say , any Protestant be thus farre instructed , he is so sufficiently instructed , that if he refuse to belieue he is certainly damned . Do not you professe , that to forsake any Church without necessary causes , is as much as a mans saluation is worth ? Doth not D. Potter auouch , that it is not lawfull to goe against the definition of Generall Councels without euident reasons ? Wherefore Protestants that haue abandoned the Roman Church , are by your principles conuinced to be in a damnable state , if they know the Roman Religion to be the Christian tradition of their Ancestours , the definition of Catholique Councels . Nor is it necessary , that they be conuinced in conscience , that the Roman Religion is true , it sufficeth they haue no conuictiue demonstrations against it . Wherefore it is extreme want of conscience in you to say , that our Maintayner , and the most rigide Aduersaries of Protestancy affirme , that no Protestant shall be damned for any errour whatsoeuer he holdes against the Roman Church ; except he be conuicted in conscience , that his owne Religion is false , and the Roman true .

11. And yet not content to haue brought this falshood as a Corollary from his wordes , you make it his formal saying , and set it downe in a distinct Character as his verball and formall assertion . Pag. 31. n. 4. lin. 6. Charity mistaken affirmed vniuersally , Cap. 1. n. 4. lin. 6. and without any limitation , that Protestants that dye in the beliefe of their Religion , without particular repentance , cannot be saued : But this presumption of his you qualify by SAYING ; that this sentence cannot be pronounced truly , and therefore not charitably , neyther of those Protestants , that want meanes sufficient to conuince them of the truth of your Religion , and falshood of their owne ; nor of those , who , though they haue neglected the meanes they might haue had , dyed with Contrition , that is , with a sorrow for all their sinnes , proceeding from the loue of God . Thus you : shewing the Adamantinall hardnes of your Socinian for head and Samosatenian conscience . For this long sentence which you set downe , charactered as the saying of Charity Maintayned with a direct affirmation , that it is his saying , is forged and feigned by your selfe from the first to the last syllable thereof : not only against his meaning in that place , but also the whole drift of his Treatise . For what is the drift thereof , but only to shew , that the Roman is the true Church ; and that her proposing of a doctrine to be belieued is sufficient to bind men to belieue it , without any other Conuiction besides the authority of her infallible word ?

12. Also the second assertion you impute to him , That nothing hinders , but that a Protestant dying a Protestant , may dye with contrition for all his sinnes , is an impudent vntruth : no such acknowledgment in all his book . You seeke to gather it from these wordes , We haue no reuelation , what light may haue cleered his errours ; or Contrition haue retracted his sinnes . This reason ( say you ) or contrition haue retracted his sinnes , being distinct from the former , and deuided from it by the disiunctiue particle ( or ) insinuates , that though no light did cleere the errours of a dying Protestant , yet Contrition might , for ought you know , retract his sinnes . This is a fond & voluntary inference : for the clause ( or contrition retracted his sinnes ) was not added to signify , that a Protestant may haue contrition of all his sinnes , though his vnderstanding be not cleered from his errours : but to declare , that though his vnderstanding be cleered from errours ; yet this will not suffice that he be saued , except after the abiuration of his errours , he do further conceaue hearty sorow & Contrition for the deadly and damnable sinnes of affection and action he may haue committed .

13. For , that a Protestant cannot be truly penitent of all his sinnes , vntill his vnderstanding be cleered , or at least his zeale allayed , that he become remisse in his Religion and doubtfull ; this reason doth inuincibly conclude . It is impossible , that a man should repent of a thinge , at that time , when he is in actual or habitual heat of affection vnto it . But Protestants ( so long as they are Protestants , and their Vnderstandings not cleered from their errours , or their zeale allayed with cold doubtfulnes ) are alwayes either actually , or habitually in the heat of condemning the Roman Church for Impieties and Idolatries ; in the heat of presumptuous Pride , whereby they preferre their seely conceits about the sense of Scripture , before the iudgement of the Church , and her Generall Councels . Ergo , it is impossible , that a Protestant persisting stiffely in his Religion , should be penitent of all his sinnes knowne and vnknowne .

The third Conuiction .

IN this Conuiction I am to proue three things : first , that Roman Catholiques hold all fundamentall truth , and so are secure from damnation . Secondly , that it is madnesse to persuade any man to leaue the Roman Church . Thirdly , that it is impossible , that Protestants should be sure they belieue all Fundamentall truths .

That Roman Catholiques are free from all Fundamentall Errours , and your Contradictions herein . §. 1.

1. HE that belieues all Fundamentals , cannot be damned for any errour in fayth ; though he belieue more , or lesse to be Fundamentall then is so . This is your formall assertion in so many wordes , pag. 207. n. 34. (k) (k) Cap. 4. n. 34. lin. 2. which supposed I assume : But Roman Catholiques belieue all Fundamentals , that is , all necessary truth : Ergo , they cannot be damned for any errour in fayth . The assumption of this argument might be proued , by many testimonies from your Booke . I will insist vpon two , the one in this Section , the other in the next . Pag. 16. lin. 8. We grant the Roman Church was a part of the whole Church . And if she were a true part of the Church , she retayned those truths , which were simply necessary to saluation . For this is precisely necessary to constitute any man , or Church a member of the Church Catholique . In our sense therefore of the word Fundamentall , we hope she erred not fundamentally . Thus you , who (l) (l) Cap. 5. n. 95. pag. 280. n. 95. say the playne contrary , that our errours are fundamentall . And pag. 289. nu. 86. (m) (m) Cap. 5. n. 86. that our Church not onely might , but also did fall into substantiall errours .

2. I know , that to salue this Contradiction , and to put the terme of fundamentall Errours vpon our Church you haue coyned a distinction of two kinds of fundamentall errours . (n) (n) Cap. 5. n. 88. Pag. 290. n. 88. Fundamentall Errours ( say you ) may signifie , eyther such as are repugnant to Gods command , and so in their owne nature damnable ; though to those that out of ignorance inuincible practise them not vnpardonable : and such as are not onely meritoriously , but remedilessely pernicious and destructiue of Saluation . According to this distinction you grant , that the Roman Religion hath fundamentall errours of the first kind , though as you hope none of the second . But this distinction ( to omit that you ouerthrow the same in both the members thereof as will afterward appeare ) will not serue your turne , nor reconcile your contradiction . For when you say we belieue all Fundamentals , you professe to take the word in your owne sense . But in your sense the word Fundamentall signifies all kind of necessary truth ; for so you warne vs (o) (o) Cap. 4. n. 52. in fine . pag. 220. lin. 5. May it please you to take notice now at last , that by fundamentall , we meane All , and onely that which is necessary ; and then I hope you will grant , that we may safely expect Saluation in a Church which hath all things fundamentall to Saluation . Thus you : which is as much as if you had sayd , that by Fundamentall you vnderstand , not only the things which are remedilessely and indispensably necessary ; but also those that be necessary onely because commanded . For how can men safely expect Saluation without those things , which by the commandement of God are necessary to Saluation ? Though men with fundamentall errours of the first kind may ( in your doctrine ) possibly be saued ; yet you say their state is not safe , but (p) (p) Pag. 133. Their state is dangerous though not desperate . dangerous . Now such as haue all truth Fundamentall to Saluation , they not onely may possibly be saued ; but also safely expect Saluation , as you contend . Ergo , when you say our Church retaynes all Fundamentals to Saluation and erres not Fundamentally , you will haue vs take notice , that you meane , she is free not onely from such damnable errours , as absolutely destroy , but also from those which endanger Saluation . Consequently , when you say absolutely ( as euery where you do ) that our errours are Fundamentall , or substantiall , or damnable , or dangerous , you contradict your other assertion , that we retayned all things simply necessary to saluation , and erred not Fundamentally .

3. Besides in the frontispice of your booke , you haue printed this sentence of our late King Iames , Things simply necessary to Saluation be those , which eyther the Word of God doth expressely command to be belieued or done ; or those which the Ancient Church did by necessary consequence draw out of the Word of God . Now you grant in expresse termes , that the Roman Church retayned all things (q) (q) Pag. 16. lin. 7. simply necessary to Saluation . Ergo , you must grant , that she retayned all those things , which eyther the word of God doth expressely command to be belieued or done ; or which from the Word of God , the Ancient Church deduced , and so can want nothing necessary by Diuine command , nor haue errours fundamentall , so much as of the first kind .

4. The reason you are about this point so various and continually contentious and fighting with your selfe , is the inward combat of your vnruly passions . On the one side , you are incited with fury to damne vs , and make our Religion damnable ; on the other , vexed and galled , that neither euidence of truth , no nor D. Potter himselfe will giue you full freedome to do it . Hence your waue and wander , you say and vnsay , you runne this way and that way vpon aduerse and contrary assertions ; so much , as euen in the same short sentence , you plainely contradict your selfe pag. 16. n. 21. lin. 11. 2. Edit. pag. 16. n. 8. Though we say the errours of the Roman Church were not destructiue of Saluation , but pardonable , euen to them that dyed in them vpon a generall Repentance , yet we deny not but in themselues they were damnable . Do not you perceaue , that this speach destroyeth it selfe , that our errours are not destructiue of Saluation , and yet are in themselues damnable ? what is destructiue of Saluation , but that which of it selfe , and in its nature is apt and sufficient to destroy Saluation , and to bring damnation on men ? And is not damnable the very same ? How then can our errours be in themselues damnable , and yet not destructiue of Saluation ? You say , a poyson may be deadly in it selfe and yet not kill him , who togeather with it takes an antidote . Very true : but can poyson be in it selfe deadly , & not in itselfe destructiue of life ? Can it be of it selfe apt to cause death & not apt to destroy life ? How then are our errours not destructiue of Saluation , and yet damnable and apt to bring damnation on vs ?

5. In like manner you professe very often , that the Roman Church retayned the substance and essence of a Christian Church ; that you do not cut her off from the hope of Saluation . And yet at other times being enraged with the title of Catholique giuen her by the consent of mankind ; you protest , that (r) (r) Pag. 362. li. 8. Cap. 6. n. 40. lin. 4● . she is Catholique to herselfe alone , and Hereticall to all the rest of Christian Churches . Which is as much as if you had said ; she wantes the very essence of a Christian Church . For pag. 332. n. 11. (s) (s) Cap. 6. n. 11. you write : It is not Heresy to oppose any truth propounded by the Church ; but only such a truth as is an essential part of the Ghospell of Christ . Wherefore the Roman Church ( if she be hereticall ) opposes some essentiall , part of the Ghospell of Christ , and consequently she wantes fayth of some essentiall part of the Ghospell . What is consequent hereupon ? That the Roman Church , not only is not an incorrupt Church , but not a Christian Church so much as for substance and essence . The Consequence is manifest . For that cannot be a Christian Church for substance & essence , which doth not hold the Gospell of Christ the Christian Religion for substance and essence , as the Roman Church doth not if she be Heretical , as you say she is . For as that cannot be a man which wantes an essential part of a man : so that cannot be the Gospell of Christ , nor the Christian Religion for essence , which the Roman Church holdes , if she want an essential part thereof , as you say she doth . Behold how furies of passion distract you into contrary parts . Yea this which now you so peremptorily decree , that heresy is not to oppose any truth , but only an essential part of the Gospell , you contradict an hundred times in your booke , where you distinguish heresies fundamental against the Essentials of the Gospell , Pag. 277. lin. vlt. and not fundamental against Truths of the Gospell profitable , but not necessary . How can this subsist , if that only be Heresy which opposes the Essentials of the Gospell ?

The security in the Roman Church is so great , as it is Madnesse to leaue it . §. 2.

6. THis I shall make good and euident by your owne most true & vndeniable sayings . Our Maintayner obiectes , that some Protestants leauing the Roman Church haue fallen away by degrees , euen from the Fundamentals of Christianity . Cap. 3. n. 63. lin. 14. You answer p. 168. lin. 9. What if some forsaking the Church of Rome , haue forsaken fundamental truths ? Was this because they forsooke the Church of Rome ? No sure : this is , non causa pro causa : For else all that haue forsaken that Church , should haue done so ; which we say they haue not : but because they went too farre from her . The golden meane , the narrow way is hard to be found , hard to be kept ; hard but not impossible ; hard , but yet you must not please your selues out of it , though you erre on the right hand , though you offend on the milder part : for this is the only way , that leades to life , and few there be that find it . It is true , if we said , there were no danger in being of the Roman Church , and there were danger in leauing it , it were MADNESSE to persuade any man to leaue it . Thus you . Before I come to the principall intent , let me note and put you in mind of two thinges . First that here ( as euery where also commonly ) you argue fondly , that the cause why some forsaking the Roman Church , forsook also the fundamentals of Christianity , was not their forsaking the Roman Church , For els , say you , all that haue forsaken her should haue done so . An argument fond and full of ignorance . Otherwise , we might say , that Couetousnesse was not the cause , that Iudas betrayed his Maister ; for else all couetous seruants should betray their maisters , which we know is not so : we may say that zeale of Puritanisme was not the cause , that Enoch ap euan murthered his Brother and Mother ; because many zealous Puritans do not murther their Brothers , and mothers that oppose them . These instances and a thousand more which might be brought lay open your ignorance , that you do not distinguish betwixt naturall necessary causes , whose force cannot be resisted ; and morall causes , which freely incline the will , leauing it liberty to resist , which is the reason they are effectuall in some , and not in others .

7. Secondly I note , that you also heere keepe your wont of contradicting your selfe . What you heere say that the narrow and onely way to life and saluation is hard to be found , hard to be kept , without erring on the right hand or on the left ; how doth it agree with , or how doth it not directly destroy what you teach (t) (t) Cap. 4. n. 53. lin. ●9 . pag. 221. lin. 20. about your Protestant safeway· This is a way so plaine , that fooles except they will cannot erre from it ; because in this way , not being free from errour , but indeauouring to be free , is the onely condition of Saluation . How is , not being free from errour , but endeauouring to be free , in your way the onely condition of Saluation ; if keeping the golden meane , and the narrow way without erring eyther on the right hand or left , be in your doctrine the sole meanes of Saluation ? How is the way so plaine , that euen fooles , vnlesse they will , cannot erre from it , if it be hard to be kept without erring on the right hand or left ? And pag. 290. n. 87. (u) (u) Cap. 5. n. 87. in fine . whereas the Maintayner sayth , that Protestants should not haue left the Roman Church , for errours vn-fundamentall , seing they were not sure by their departure to auoyd this kind of mischiefe ; yea they were sure they could not auoyd it : you say Protestants are so farre from acknowledging that they haue no hope to auoyd this mischiefe ( of errours vn-fundamentall ) that they proclayme to all the world , that it is most prone and easy to do so , to all those that feare God , and loue truth ; and hardly possibly for them to do otherwise without supine negligence and extreme impiety . How do these sayings hange together ; The golden meane of sauing truth the only way to life , is hard , difficile , and only not impossible to be kept without erring from it eyther on the left hand Fundamentally ; or one the right vn-fundamentally : The way of sauing truth is most prone and easy to be kept , without erring so much as vn-fundamentally ; yea , it is hardly possible to erre from it , on eyther side , without supine negligence , and extreme impiety ?

8. But now to the Principall intent ; by this your confession it is euident , that it is madnes for any man to to leaue the Roman Church , and that your writing to perswade them to leaue it was a fit of distemper in your brayne . For you confesse , that if you sayd there were no danger in being of the Roman Church , and there were danger in leauing it ; is were madnesse to persuade any man to leaue it . Now I assume : But you say both , that there is no danger in the Roman Church , and that there is extreme danger in leauing it . That you say the first , I proue , because you say , that he who belieues all Fundamentall truth , cannot be damned for any errour in fayth . And pag. 376. n. 57. (y) (y) Cap. 6. n. 57. in fine . he that belieues all necessary truth , if his life be answerable to his fayth , how is it possible he should fayle of Saluaton ? But you affirme , that the Roman Church retaynes all fundamentall and necessary truth , in that you onely charge her of going from the Golden meane of exact truth , on the right hand , on the surer part . Wherfore in the Roman Church men may safely expect Saluation ; there is no danger , yea there is no possibility of damnation for errours in faith with in her Communion . That you say the second , that there is extreme danger in leauing the Roman Church , I shew , euen by this testimony . For you say the Roman Church erreth on the right hand , on the milder part ; so that they who leaue her , must of necessity depart so farre from her on the left hand , that is , into the direfull gulfe of fundamentall errours ; except they keepe themselues in the golden meane , in the narrow way ; But the golden meane , the narrow way , is ( as you professe ) hard to be found ; hard , and onely not impossible to be kept : Ergo , in leauing the Roman Church there is danger , and exceeding great danger which can hardly be auoyded , of falling into errours fundamentall , remedilessely , and fatally damnable . These being your Confessions and otherwise of themselues manifest truths , you must acknowledge it is euen madnesse and fury for any man to forsake the Roman Church ; and that your writing to diuert men from her Communion , was a fit of phrensy .

That Protestants can neuer be sure that they belieue all fundamentall and necessary Truth . §. 3.

9. IT being indispensably necessary vnto Saluation to know distinctly and in particular all Fundamental & essentiall truthes ; how can Christian soules that be pious , carefull of their eternity , fearfull to fall into damnation euerlasting , rest quiet or calme in conscience , till they know an exact Catalogue of these Fundamentals ; that so they may be sure , they know and belieue them distinctly and in particular ? Now Protestants neither do , nor can agree vpon an exact Catalogue of their Fundamentals , nor wil tel their followers distinctly , and in particular which be the articles essentially necessary vnto Saluation , and you in many places signify , that they are innumerable .

10. On the Forehead of your Booke , you haue printed this sentence of King Iames : The number of thinges absolutely necessary to Saluation is not great : Wherefore the shortest and speediest way to conclude a general peace and concord in matters of Religion , would be to seuer exactly thinges necessary from thinges not necessary ; and to vse all industry , that in necessaries there may be agreement , and in thinges not necessary , place be left vnto Christian liberty . In your Dedicatory you professe , that your Booke in a manner is nothing else but a pursuance of , and a superstruction vpon this Blessed Doctrine , wherwith you adorn'd & arm'd the Frontispice thereof . This is the flattering of your forhead , and your setting a fayre Hypocriticall face of Friendship on this sentence , which you hate & blaspheme in your heart , and in the heart and bosome of your Booke . For some few leaues from the beginning you fall to reiect , pursue , and persecute this your Blessed sentence ; and your superstruction theron is nothing else , but a load of reproaches . You (x) (x) Pag. 23. say , that to seuer exactly thinges necessary from thinges not necessary ( which that learned Prince esteemeth to be of great vse , of great necessity , and the shortest way to conclude the generall peace of Christendome about Religion , & a thinge not only factible , but also which may easily & speedily be done ; ) this I say , which your Frontispicial sentence proclaymeth most vsefull and factible , the inside of your Booke declareth to be a thing of extreme great difficulty , and of extreme little necessity , an intricate peece of businesse , apparantly vnnecessary , of no vse , a vaine labour , to no purpose . Behold your wordes , Pag. 23. lin. 5. To seuer exactly and punctually these verities the one from the other &c. is a businesse of extreme great difficulty , and of extreme litle necessity . He that shall goe about it shall find an intricate peece of businesse of it , and almost impossible that he should be certaine he hath done it , when he hath done it . And then it is apparently vnnecessary to goe about it , because he that belieues all , certainly belieues all necessaries . And againe , ibid. lin . 15. And when they had done it , it had been to no purpose , there being as matters now stand , as great necessity of belieuing those truths of Scripture which are not fundamental , as those that are . These be your wordes : by the force of which you knocke on the head , the sentence of king Iames , nayled on the forehead of your Booke : and also giue a deadly stabbe on the heart of poore Protestants , and driue out of it all hope of Saluation .

11. For you neither do , nor can tell them , which points of fayth are Fundamentall , and necessary to be knowne distinctly of all ; without the least of which you say (z) (z) Cap. 6. n. 75. in fine . it implies contradiction they should be saued . How then shall they be sure they haue all Fundamental truth ? You say , he that belieues all , certainly belieues all that is necessary . And pag. 225. lin. 1. (a) (a) Cap. 4. n. 59. in fine . to a Protestant requesting of you to know , which in particular be fundamental truths , you answere ; It is a vaine question : belieue all , and you shall be sure to belieue all that is Fundamentall . This rule of assurance you repeate almost in the same formal wordes , I dare say a thousand times , which is craftily couched in equiuocal , and ambiguous termes , and hath a double sense , being in the one false , and deceitfull ; in the other impossible to be kept . If ( belieue all ) import no more , then , belieue in general and confusedly all contayned in the Holy Bible to be true , your rule is false , deceitfull , damnable , that men by belieuing all , shall certainly belieue all necessaries , as they ought , vnto Saluation . For you say (b) (b) Cap. 4. n. 3. Pag. 163. n. 3. Fundamental and essential points be such , as are , not only plainly reuealed of God , and so certaine truths ; but also commanded to be preach't to all men , and to be distinctly belieued of all , and so necessary truths . And (c) (c) Cap. 4. n. 4. lin. 20. Pag. 194. lin. 16. you teach , that to the constitution of Fundamental pointes , is required , that they be , First actually reuealed of God ; Secondly commanded vnder paine of damnation to be particularly knowne ( I meane , knowne to be Diuine reuelations ) and distinctly to be belieued . Wherfore your rule ( Belieue all in generall , and you shall be sure to belieue all Fundamentals sufficiently vnto saluation ) is by your owne definitions proued false , and damnable . But , if your rule haue this sense ; Belieue all that is in the Bible explicitly , distinctly , & in particular , and then you shall be sure to belieue all necessaries , if this ( I say ) be your meaning , you lay on your Protestants a most heauy burthen , a most vnsupportable load , a most tyrannicall and impossible command . For what you say that the burthen is light , and that all Protestants comply with this your command , pag. 129. n. 5. (d) (d) Cap. 3. n. 5. lin. 4. that all of them agree with explicite fayth in all those thinges , which are plainly and vndoubtedly deliuered in Scripture , that is in All , that God hath plainly reuealed ; this , I say , is ridiculous ; there being millions of truths plainly & vndoubtedly deliuered in Scripture , which millions of Protestants neuer heard : yea , there be , I dare say , a thousand such truths which your selfe are ignorant off .

12. In contradiction of this your inconsiderate assertion , you grant pag. 137. lin. 5. (e) (e) Cap. 3. n. 19. lin. 20. That there be many truths , which in themselues are reuealed plainly inough , which yet are not plainly reuealed vnto some Protestantes of excellent vnderstanding , nor are belieued of them , because they are prepossest with contrary opinions , and with preiudices , by the strange power of education , instilled vnto their mindes . How then is it true , that Protestantes , all of them agree with explicite fayth in all thinges which are plainly reuealed of God ? How can those Protestantes ( who disbelieue many truths reuealed in Scripture plainly inough ) be sure they belieue all fundamentall and necessary truth ; seing they obserue not your command , Belieue all , and you shal be sure to belieue all that is fundamentall ? Who doth , or can assure them , that among these many points of Fayth reuealed in Scripture plainly inough , none be fundamental . It is therfore manifest that Protestants ( except you giue them an exact Catalogue of all your fundamentals which they are bound vnder payne of uamnation distinctly and explicitly to belieue ) can neuer be sure they belieue all fundamentall truth . And it is seely for you , (f) (f) Pag. 158. n. 52. lin. 19. pag. 160. n. 33. lin. 31. pag. 162. lin. 20. when Charity Maintayned vrgeth you for a Catalogue of your Fundamentals , to thinke that you may stop his mouth , with importuning him , for a Catalogue of our Churches Proposals ; for we say of our Churches Proposals , that it is sufficient to belieue them implicitly : we do not say , they must be belieued of all distinctly and in particular . What need then is there of a Catalogue , wherin such Proposals are set downe distinctly , and in particular ? Now you affirme of your Fundamentals , that all men are bound vpon their saluation , to know and belieue them in particular and yet obstinatly refuse to giue them an exact account , which in particular they be .

13. Besides , what an intricate and infinite obligation do you charge vpon Protestantes , in saying , that there is ( as thinges now stand ) at great necessity of belieuing those truths of Scripture which are not fundamentall , as those that are so . For the necessity of belieuing fundamentals deliuered in holy Scripture is vnder paine of damnation to know them in particular , and distinctly ; which obligation is so strict , that you say it implies contradiction , that Saluation be had without the least of them . Now if the necessity of belieuing not fundamentals , be as great as this ; yea the same with this ; no Protestant can be saued that doth not belieue such passages of Scripture as be not fundamentall distinctly & in particular , euen as he is bound to belieue fundamentals . You often ( as pa. 169. lin. 12. ) (g) (g) Cap. 3. n. 64. lin. 33. eagerly and bitterly declame against vs for requiring harder and heauier conditions of Saluation , then God requires , or then were required in the dayes of the Apostles . Who more guilty of this crime then your selfe ? For this your necessity of belieuing the not fundamentall truthes of Scripture , as much as the fundamental , was not euer in Gods Church ; seeing your selfe onely say it is so as matters now stand . Wherby you insinuate , that as matters stood anciently , this great necessity and obligation had no place in Gods Church . Nor can you say , that it is required of God : for then it would be deliuered in Scripture and consequently perpetuall in the Church euer since the Ghospell was written : wheras your wordes vrging this obligation onely ( as now matters stand ) imply the contrary . It is therefore manifest , that this necessity so heauy and direfull , is layd vpon Protestants , not by Apostolicall commaund , not by diuine Precept ; but by your selfe and other proud ignorant Ministers , who neither know which be Fundamentals , nor can agree vpon any short rule , within the compasse of which they are all comprized . Hence they are forced to send euery Protestant to fish for Fundamentals , in the vast and deepe Ocean of holy Scripture ; not giuing them any direction , any rule , any assurance of finding them all , except they can comprehend cleerly and distinctly all the innumerable truthes plainely reuealed therein .

14. Finally , what you say pag. 134. lin. 24. That may be sufficiently declared to one , which is not sufficiently declared to another ; and consequently , that may be fundamentall to one , which to another is not . And pag. 281. lin. 4. (f) (f) Cap. 5. n. 17. The same errour may be not Capitall to men that want meanes of finding the truth ; and Capitall to others , who haue meanes and neglect to vse them . This doctrine by you often repeated , driueth Protestants into a Thicket of Thornes and briers : into new insuperable difficulties & vncertainties of their Saluation . For though a Protestant were sure ( which in Protestancy he can neuer be ) that he distinctly belieues all capital & essential truthes , which are to be belieued of all ; how shall he be sure , that he belieues all truthes , which to him in particular ( in regard of his greater knowledge and capacity ) are , you say , Capitall and Fundamentall ? How can he be certaine , that there are not some capitall and substantiall truths , which he hath not found in Scripture , though he had meanes of finding them ? And if he want beliefe of these Fundamentall and Capitall truths ; how can he possibly be saued ? For though you should say , that these are the least of thinges fundamentally necessary to saluation ; yet this will not possibilitate their saluation : it being contradiction , to say , that Saluation may be had , without any the LEAST thing necessary to Saluation , as you affirme , (g) (g) Cap. 6 in fine totius capitis . Pag. 382 lin. 1.

The fourth Conuiction .

YOu could find no Way to make good the Saluation of English Protestants , against the demonstrations of Charity maintayned ; but onely such a Way , wherein the vildest Heretiques that now liue , or euer liued vnder the cope of Heauen , may be saued as well as they ; yea euen Iewes and Turkes : these two consequences from your principles , I will demonstrate in two Sections of this Conuiction .

That in your Way English Protestants cannot be saued more then Socinians ; with fixproofes , that you are of this impious Sect. §. 1.

1. YOu say in your Preface n. 39. that you haue not vndertaken the particular defence of the Church of England , but the common Cause , and Religion of all Protestants . And pag. 375. n. 56. you professe , that by the Religion of Protestants , which you mayntaine to be a safeway to saluation , you do not vnderstand the doctrine of Luther , or Caluin , or Melancton ; nor the Confession of Augusta , or Geneua ; nor the Catechisme of Hiedelberge ; nor the articles of the Church of England ; no nor the Harmonie of Protestants Confessions : but that wherin they all agree as a perfect rule of their fayth and actions , the BIBLE , the BIBLE , I say the BIBLE onely is the Religion of Protestants . This is the onely Religion , the onely way you could find to saue English Protestants , wherin they can no more be saued , then any other that belieue the Bible , and only the Bible , as a perfect rule of their life and actions . Now in the number of Protestants , Ghospelers , and Biblists , the new Ebionites , or Samosatenians whon we terme Socinians , are comprehended ; the most blasphemous Heretiques against the Fundamentall articles of Christianity that euer breathed , worse then Arians : For Arians acknowledged the Eternity of our Lord Christ Iesus , that he had an Eternall most perfect diuine Essence ; only they would not confesse him to be coequall , and consubstantiall to his Father ▪ But Socinians deny him to be the eternall Sonne of God , affirme him to be meere man , and tearmed the sonne of God , as other Iust and holy men and Prophets are .

2. Now that Socinians are by your account in the number of them , that goe the safe way to Saluation , as well as English Protestants , is manifest ; not only because they professe the Bible , and onely the Bible ; but also because they are that sort of Christians , whose Religion you follow as these six arguments euince .

3. First , because being so much suspected and accused euen in publique writing to be of that impious Sect : and if you were not prouoked to make a cleere profession of the Christian fayth against them , you haue not done it : you say sometimes , that Christ is the Sonne of God ; but neuer his Eternall Sonne , which omission of the word Eternall in a man so suspected of Socinianisme as you are , is in the iudgement of our late Soueraigne (h) (h) Proceeding against D. Vorstius . pag. 81. For of Vorstius his booke stiled de Filiatione Christi , without aeterna ; the King fayth : For this title only , an Authour so suspected as he , is worthy of the fagot . King Iames a signe of guiltines , & maketh your Booke worthy of the fagot .

4. Secondly , because you dislike words about matters of Fayth not found in the Scripture , which Christians vse for the better declaration of the Creed . This you tearme , (*) (*) Pag. 198. li. 16. a vayne conceit , that we can speake of the things of God , better then in the word of God . You declame also bitterly against , persecuting cursing , damning of such as will not subscribe vnto the words of men , as the words of God . No reader of vnderstanding in Ecclesiasticall affayres can doubt , but you gird at the word 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , consubstantiall , decreed by the first Councels of Nice , to declare the substantiall Equality betwixt the three diuine Persons : and at the word 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 , Deipara , Gods Mother , commanded by the Councel of Ephesus to be giuen to the Blessed Virgin ; to signifie , that she was mother to him , that was personally , not onely true man , but also the eternall God : These Canons of the first generall Councels , these sacred formes of Ecclesiasticall speach , you cannot indure ; because they thunder against Socinians ; they proclaime them to be Heretiques , and strike their Impieties dead .

5. Thirdly , because you (i) (i) Pag. 381. n. 72. cap 6. n. 72. lin 21. reprehend them , who by firme resolution of their will vphold themselues in the beliefe of their Religion , though their reason and vnderstanding fayle them Which is as much as if you had sayd , We are not , through pious affection and reuerence of Gods word , to belieue things aboue the reach of reason ; things in the apprehension of which our naturall vnderstanding faileth : as are the mysteries of the Trinity , & of the Eternall Generation of the Sonne of God .

6. Fourthly , because you say , (k) (k) Pag. 218. lin. 15. that they who captiuate their vnderstanding , to the beleefe of those things , which seeme irreconcileable contradictions ; may aswell belieue reall contradictions , (l) (l) Pag. 217. n. 47. Cap. 4. n. 47. which no wiseman will do . But he that belieues the mystery of the B. Trinity , & the Sonne of God his Eternall Generation , must of necessity captiuate his vnderstanding to the beliefe of impossibilities , implicancies , contradictions , seeming to be such in human reason , as euery true Christian by experience findeth . Therefore in your opinion no wise man doth , or will belieue them .

7. Fiftly , because you ioyne with the (m) (m) Carpocrates , Ebion , Cerdo . auncient enemyes of Christ Iesus his God head , to disparage the Gospell of S. Iohn ; wherein (n) (n) Ioannes aduersus Ebionem scripsit Euangelium , Diuinam Christi edisserens natiuitatem . Hieron . de . Script . Eccles. the eternall Generaation of the Word , the onely begotten Sonne of God , is most fully and plainely deliuered ; as also the indispensable necessity of belieuing the same , Ioan. 3.8 . He that belieueth in him is not damned ; he that belieueth not is already damned ; because he belieues not in the Name of the onely begotten Sonne of God . For though you dare not say plainely that S. Iohns Ghospell is of no authority , yet in effect you say as much ; contending , that in his Ghospell (o) (o) Pag. 211. in . 42. lin. 11. nothing is contayned of necessary beliefe , which is not cleerely & plainely set downe (p) (p) Pag. 212. lin. 1. Such a perfect Gospel . in S. Lukes Gospell . Wherfore ; because Christ Iesus his being the Eternall Word and sonne of God , is no where set downe so cleerly in the Gospell of S. Luke , you Socinians will not be bound to belieue it ; through our Lord himselfe in S. Iohns Gospell pronounce , that he who belieues it not , is already damned , that is , as sure to be damned , as if he were already in Hell . Now what is this , but in fauour of Sociniansme to giue the lye to S. Iohn ; yea to our Sauiour himselfe ?

8. Sixtly , you are proued to be not onely a Socinian , but also impiously obstinate in the defence of that Sect , by your changing the sacred text of Gods word , that they may not seeme therin accursed . S. Iohn in his first Epistle Cap. 4. v. 2. giueth this signe to know the spirit of true Prophets and Preachers , Euery spirit which confesseth Iesus Christ to be come in flesh is of God ; and euery Spirit which confesseth not Iesus Christ to be come in flesh is not of God , but of Antichrist . And Ep. 2. v. 7. Many Deceyuers are come out into the world , who do not confesse Iesus Christ to be come in flesh ; this is a Deceyuer & an Antichrist . In which places it is manifest , that S. Iohn speakes of false Christians , namely the (q) (q) Ebion confitebatur Iesum Christum , sed eum nudum esse hominem afferebat , non autem Deum vnigenitum , Sapientiam & Verbum Dei . Ignatius Epist. ad Philadelphos . Ebionites , who deny Christ Iesus to be a Person come from the bosome of God vested with humane flesh who deny him to be the Word made flesh , the Sonne of God incarnate . Which being your Socinian Beliefe , that the same might not seeme damned as Antichristian ; you make bold with Gods word , and thrust in your owne wordes in place therof , Preface num . 12. The rule , S. Iohn giues to make this trial of Spirits by , is to consider whether , they confesse Iesus to be the Christ , that is , the guide of their fayth , and Lord of their actions . And pag. 339. lin. 4. you say , S. Iohn Ep. 2. v. 7. speabes not of Heretiques , but of no Christians , of Antichrists , of such as denied Iesus to be the Christ . Thus still , as often as S. Iohn sayth , such as deny Iesus Christ to be come in flesh be false Prophets , deceyuers , Antichrists , you change the text into such as deny Iesus to be the Christ , as though S. Iohn had spoken in this place against Iewes , who deny Iesus to be the Christ , or the promised Messias . Whereby you not only chauge the text ; but also foyst in a falshood into Gods Word . For it is false , that whosoeuer confesseth Iesus to be the Christ , is therby knowne to be of God , and a true Christian : seing Turkes confesse Iesus to be the Christ , that is , the Messias promised to the Iewes ; and yet are not Christians . And that S. Iohn speaketh against Heretiques , who vnder the name of Christians , went about preaching , that Iesus Christ is not the eternal sonne of God , is cleere by the wordes which immediatly follow : He (r) (r) Epist. 2. v. ● . that departeth , and abideth not in the Doctrine of Christ , hath not God : He that abideth in his doctrine , hath the Father and the Sonne . If any come to you , and bringe not this Doctrine , receiue him not into your house ; bid him not God speed : For he that sayth to him , God speed , is partaker of his malignant workes .

9. What then may we thinke of those English Protestants , and of their state and Saluation , who haue made you the Patron of their Religion , and Pastour of their soules ? can they be excused from being partakers with you in your malignant workes , tending to the peruersion and damnation of many ? I confesse you haue rewarded them as they deserue . For you giue them no better assurance , or hope of Saluation , then to Socinians , who deny Christ Iesus to be the Eternal only begotten Sonne of God , whose damnation goeth before them vnto iudgment . Miserable they are , who be so desperately bent against Charity maintayned by Catholiques , as rather then yield to be saued in the Catholique Roman Church , will be defended by such a Socinian Patron , and in a Way which giueth them no hope of saluation ; but together with Heretikes , who deny the Incarnation of the eternal Sonne of God , who are branded in Scripture with the note of Deceyuers and Antichrists : and by the mouth of our Lord himselfe , men already damned .

That in your Way Iewes and Turkes may be saued aswelll as Protestants . §. 2.

10. PRotestants of your stampe who pretend to belieue the Bible , and only the Bible , being deuided into (s) (s) King Iames , Proceeding against Worstins pag. 65. innumerable sects ( agreeing in nothing but in their vnion against the Pope ) cannot but be full of many contrary and aduerse errours , as you grant . Wherefore in your Way they are saued in their errours by inuincible ignorance ; or if their ignorance be vincible , sinfull , and damnable , by General Repentance . But by your Principles , Iewes and Turkes may be saued in their false Religions through inuincible ignorance , or generall Repentance . That they may be saued by inuincible ignorance , is proued by what you write Pag. 393. lin. 1. (t) (t) Cap. 7. n. 8. lin. 26. ante finem . Certainly Religion is one of those thinges , which are necessary only because commanded . For if none were commanded vnder paine of damnation , how could it be damnable to be of any ? Neither can it be damnable to be of a false Religion , vnlesse it be a sin to be so . Thus you : whereupon I assume this Hypothesis : to Turkes , Iewes , Pagans , that are inuincibly ignorant of the falshood of their owne Religion , and truth of the Christian , it is no sinne to be of their false Religion and enemies of Christ our Lord : This hath been already shewed by your acknowledgments ; that God cannot be offended with men for errours purely inuoluntary , nor can he damne them for not doing what he knowes they cannot do . Wherefore it is impossible , that God should damne Iewes , or Turkes , or Pagans for errous of inuincible and inuoluntary ignorance : so that if your Thesis be true , that no false Religion is damnable , but only because it is sinne : it is comequent , that men may be saued in any Religion euen in Iudaisme , Turcisme , Paganisme through inuincible ignorance .

11. You say (u) (u) 2. Ed. pag. 24. lin. 23. Pag. 24. lin. 34. Who can find fault with D. Potter for saying , If , through want of meanes of instruction , incapacity , inuincible or probable ignorance a man dye in errour be may be saued ? Now many Iewes , and Turkes , and Pagans dye in their errours , through want of instruction , or incapacity , or inuincible ignorance . Ergo , they may be saued in their false Religions & impious errours . If you answer that your proposition , that men who dye in their errours may be saued , is to be vnderstood of such as dye in errours that be damnable only meritoriously , because sinnes , and against Gods commande , not of errours which remedilessely , fatally , vnauoydably destroy Saluation , which no ignorance can excuse , for which no repentance can begge pardon without a dereliction of them , as you say pag. 336. n. 19. I reply that this answere confirmes the Saluation of Iewes and Turkes & Pagans in your doctrine and Way . According to which , to dye in any false Religion cannot be damnable , remedilessely , but only meritoriously , because a sinne , and an offence of God : wherefore if any Iew , or Turke , or Pagan want capacity , or meanes of instruction , and so be inuincibly ignorant , he may be saued , euen as Protestants are saued in your safe Way .

12. I omit that you plainely contradict your selfe in saying that there be some errours which remedilesly destroy Saluation , because the contrary truth is necessary , Cap. 6. n. 19. lin. 33. non solum necessitate praecepti , sed medij , not only because commanded , but also because the sole meanes or remedy against sinne . This doctrine I say doth not agree with your assertion , that Religion it selfe is necessary only because it is commanded ; and that it cannot be damnable to be of any false Religion , but only because it is a sinne . For what thinges or doctrines can be necessary , not only because commanded , but also because the sole remedy against sinne , if Religion ( which is , to belieue that God is , and that he is are warder of them that seeke him ) be necessary only because commanded ; not because the meanes without which no man can be iustifyed from sinne and saued ? If to be of a false Religion , or of no Religion be damnable onely meritoriously ; because a sinne ; what errour can be imagined so malignant , as to destroy Saluation not onely meritoriously , but also remedilessely , or fatally , as you speake ?

13. Secondly that Iewes and Turkes may according to the Principles of your safe way , be saued in their errours by Generall repentance for all their sinnes , is proued : because there is no repugnance , but they may conceaue contrition for all their sinnes . For they belieue in one only God , Creatour of heauen and earth . The Iewes further belieue the truths reuealed in the old testament , the Turkes belieue in Iesus , that he is the Christ , the messias , which is to belieue in him as farre as Socinians belieue in him ; yea , they pray vnto him and inuocate him , which some (a) (a) Bellarmin . l. 1. de Christo . c. 1. Socinians refuse to doe , because they hold we are to inuocate the true God only ; and to them Christ is not God , but a meere holy man . Why then may not Iewes , & Turkes loue the true God , and conceaue sorow of all their offences and sinnes against so good a Lord , so worthy of all loue , of all their sinnes I say knowne and vnknowne , in which number all sinfull errours must of necessity be contayned as you say pag. 21. lin antepenullina , and pag. 20. lin vltima .

14. To this purpose very forcible and pregnant it is , what you say to vs speaking indefinitely of different Religions and Sects , pag. 32. n 4. You must not hereafter affirme , that of men of different Religions , one side onely can be saued ; but you must temper the crudenesse of this assertion ; by saying , One side only can be saued , except want of conuiction , or else repentance excuse the other . This your Charitable exception comprehends Turkes , & Iewes , that are of a different Religion from Christians ; that they may be excused from damnation through want of Conuiction , or through a generall Repentance of all their sinnes knowne and vnknowne . You giue vs warning in the same place saying to vs : You must abstayne from affirming , that Protestants dying in their Religion cannot be saued ; For you must alwayes remember to adde this caution , vnlesse they were excusably ignorant , or dyed with contrition . A goodly aduise , which because S. Paul obserued not , you must say he was to blame & vncharitable in pronouncing , (u) (u) 1. Co. 6 9 10. Galat. 5.20.21 . that impious men , drunkards , Heretiques , sectaries shall not possesse the Kingdome of God . For he should haue remembred to adde this caution ; except they be excusably ignorant , or dye with contrition . Nor must you say , that Turkes and Iewes dying in their Religion cannot be saued ; but you must alwayes remember to adde this caution ; vnlesse they were excusably ignorant of the falshood of it ; or dyed with contrition . And then considering , that you cannot know , whether or no they were sufficiently conuinced of the truth of christian Religion , you are obliged in charity to iudge the best , & hope they are not . And is not this to mantayne , that men may be saued in any Religion , Christian , Iewish , or Turkish , aswell in the one as in the other ? No Religion among Christians , no Sect among Protestants is found which you doe (x) (x) Preface n. 39. or dare defend to be free from errours against fayth and Religion ; and so in your Way none are sure to be saued , but through ignorance , or generall Repentance for their errours . But Iewes and Turkes may be saued in eyther of these wayes ; their errours ( according to your principles ) not being remedilessely damnable .

The fifth Conuiction .

THis Conuiction ouer throweth the chiefe cause for which you charge our Religion to be damnable , & sheweth : first that the thing for which you would send vs to Hell , is the necessary duty of a constant Christian Fayth . Secondly , that your contrary mutability and leuity is Apostaticall and impious .

You damne vs to Hell for being faythfull , and constant Christians . §. 1.

1. YOu often proclame vs , to be men wilfully blind , sure to fall into the ditch of damnation . For this your censure of vs you giue this reason ; (x) (x) Pag. 380. n. 72. because we will not enter into any triall of our Religion , with indifference , with liberty of iudgement , with are solution to doubt of it , if vpon examination , the grounds of it proue vncertaine ; or to leaue it , if they proue apparantly false : my owne experience assures me , that herein I do you no wronge ; but it is very apparent to all men from your ranking doubting of any part of your doctrine , among mortall sinnes . Thus you . And we willingly grant , and openly professe , that we hold it a mortall sinne to doubt deliberately of any poynt of our fayth . But must we be damned in this respect ? O how doth malignancy against our saluation confound your memory and wit ? For against doubting in matters of Religion you write most earnestly pag. 195. n. 11. lin. 20. which of vs euer taught , it was not damnable to deny or doubt of the truth of any thing , whereof we eyther know or belieue , that God hath reuealed it ? Thus you . Now if it be damnable to doubt of the truth of any thing we belieue to be reuealed of God ; what an obliuious Creature are you , who will haue vs damned for not yielding to do that very thing , which you proclame damnable to be done ? you will haue vs sent to Hell , because we ranke doubting of any part of our fayth ( which we hold reuealed of God ) among deadly and damnable sinnes ; and yet your selfe ranke this doubting among deadly and damnable crimes , with an earnest tacite detestation of the contrary Doctrine , which of vs euer taught it is not damnable ?

2. Haue you so soone forgot your selfe ? Are your sayings no sooner out of your pen , then out of your memory and head ? which of vs ( say you ) euer taught it is not damnable ? Euen your selfe good Sir , you William Chilling worth teach it is not damnable , yea you hold it damnable for any man to ranke doubting of the Religion , which he holdes reuealed of God among mortall sinnes , which you proue ; because seing euery man must resolue neuer to commit mortall sinne , it followes , that he must neuer examine the grounds of his Religion , for feare of doubting ; or if he doe , he must resolue , that no motiues , be they neuer so strong , shall moue him to doubt . This is your argument , vpon which you conclude we are a company of blind inconsidering men , louers of the darkenesse , and not of light . And yet your selfe , are so blind , so inconsidering , and your wits are so dulled and darkened , as you do not perceaue , that this very argument proueth you & all your Biblists to be in the same case we are ; to wit obstinately blind : for you grant , that all of you ranke doubting of your Religion among mortall sinnes , that is , you all teach that it is damnable to doubt of the truth of any thing you belieue to be reuealed of God . Hence it followes that seing you must resolue neuer to commit damnable sinne ; that you must neuer examine the grounds of it at all , for feare you should be moued to doubt ; or if you do you must resolue that no motiues , be they neuer so strong , shall moue you to doubt . You see your argument agaynst vs turneth vpon your selues , and proueth you are obstinate and blind , and in danger of the Ditch as much as we are .

3. And do not you further teach and contend , that it is damnable for you to doubt of the Doctrine of Diuels : if you belieue it to be Diuine Reuelation ? Cap. 2. n. 122. lin. 21. Pag. 99. n. 122. l. 22. If by the discourse of the Diuel I be ( I wil not say conuinced , but ) persuaded , though falsely , that it is a Diuine Reuelation , and shall deny to belieue it , I shall be a formal ( though not a material ) Heretique ; For he that belieues any thinge to be a Diuine Reuelation , and yet will not belieue it to be true ; must of necessity belieue , that God is false , which according to your doctrine , is the Formality of an Heretique . You who teach , that he who will not belieue ( and he that will doubt , will not belieue ) that thing to be truth , which falsely by the persuasion of the Diuel , he belieues to be Diuine Reuelation , is a formal Heretique , and a blasphemous wretch : you ( I say ) that teach this , who will not wonder , how you could be so inconsiderate , as to make vs damnable , because we resolue not to doubt of that doctrine , which by the Tradition of so many Christian Ages , by our Pastours and Ancestours , men renowned for Learning , Sanctity , Miracles , for expelling of Diuels , for conuerting of nations , hath been deliuered , & persuaded vnto vs to be reuealed of God ?

That your Protestant Way to be firme to no Religion , but still in motion and change , is damnable . §. 2.

4. ABout your selfe , and your being vngrounded and vnsetled in matters of Religion , thus you write , and sincerely professe pag. 278. lin. 29. (z) (z) Cap. 5. n. 16. in . fine . I truly for my part , if I did not find in my selfe a loue and desire of all profitable truth ; if I did not put away idlenesse , & preiudice , and worldly affections , and so examine to the bottome all my opinions of Diuine matters , being prepared in mind to follow God , and God only , which way so euer he shall lead me ; If I did not hope , that I eyther do , or endeauour to do , these thinges ; certainly I should haue litle hope of obtayning Saluation . Here you professe , that neither Christian Religion , nor any truth thereof , hath been as yet firmely rooted , or deepely by the fingar of God printed in your heart . You declare your soule to be a Blanke , noted with no Religion : but prepared for any , which to you shall seeme of God , to wit you are ready to belieue not absolutly , but (a) (a) Preface n. 5. as most probable for the present ; but resolued neuer to belieue God so firmely , as to ranke doubting of what you haue receaued as his word , among mortall sinnes .

5. That this your practise implyeth doubting of all Christian Religion , I proue ; because you professe , to question and examine all your opinions of Diuine matters ; to make an if , or a doubt of the certainty and truth of them all ; that is , you examine them , prepared in mind to leaue them all and euery one , if vpon trial they seeme to you false . But among your opinions of Diuine matters , your persuasion that our Christian Scriptures and doctrines are Diuine oracles , and Gods word , is one ; for you hold the Diuinity of Scriptures , & consequently of the Doctrines contained therein , only as an opinion very probable , as is hereafter (a) (a) Conuict . 6. shewed . Ergo you question the holy Scripture , the Religion and Gospell of Christ ; you make an if of the truth and certainty thereof : You examine it doubtingly , with liberty of iudgment , prepared in mind to leaue it , if perchance you find the grounds thereof apparently false . What is this , but to be a Nullifidian , a man setled in no Religion , but doubtfull of all ? Such an one as they were whome the Apostle (b) (b) 2. Ti. 3.7 . checketh , terming them , men still learning , but neuer attayning to the assured knowledge of any thinge . Againe (c) (c) Cap. 5. n. 107. initio . Pag. 307. n. 107. you write , thus speaking vnto our Maintayner : Your eleauenth falshood is , that our first reformers ought to haue doubted , whether their opinions were certaine : which is to say , they ought to haue doubted of the certainty of Scripture : which in formall and expresse termes contaynes many of these opinions . From this testimony I conclude , that you doubt of the cetainty of the Scripture . You professe to examine and question all your Protestant opinions of Diuine matters ; to make a doubt of the certainty of them . But you contend , that some of your Protestant opinions of Diuine matters , be such as to make a doubt or question of the certainty of them , is to doubt of the certainty of formall and expresse Scripture . Ergo , your Way , and practise of doubting of all your opinions about Diuine matters , is doubting euen of the truth of the Christian Scripture , and Ghospell of Christ . A thinge most impious and execrable as you now suppose , & yet so fond and forgetfull you are , as to say , you should haue litle hope of Saluation did you not do it , or endeauour to do it .

6. In fine , your safe Way is a Labyrinth of implicatory and inextricable errours . Protestants , that are concluded therein , are lost in a maze of vncertainties , and in an intricate mixture of contrary doctrines , being sure to find nothing therein but damnation , which way so euer they turne themselues . Do they doubt of the truth of their Religion which they belieue to be the Ghospell ? They are both according to truth , and in your doctrine , damnable wretches , as being formall Heretiques . Be they so firme in their Religion , as they ranke doubting thereof among deadly sinnes ? Then they are ( you say ) obstinately blind , sure to fall into the pit of perdition , as much as we are , at the least you affoard them litle hope of obtayning Saluation .

The sixt Conuiction .

1. THis Conuiction sheweth , that only Roman Catholiques haue sauing fayth , which is demonstrated by three Arguments . The first : Sauing fayth , is that , (d) (d) Hebr. 11.6 . without which it is impossible to please God . Now fayth which pleaseth Gods must be on the one side certaine and infallible ; otherwise it is not worthy of God , to whose word we owe so firme beliefe ; that , if an Angel from heauen should Euangelize against that we haue receaued as his word , he were not to be heard , but to be accursed . On the other side , it must be a free and voluntary assent ; not enforced by the euidence of the thinge . For if the reason of belieuing be euident , and such as doth necessitate the Vnderstanding to assent , the assent is not pleasing to God ; because it is not voluntary obedience and submission to his word . Roman Catholiques by belieuing the Church to be infallible in all her proposals , obtaine a persuasion about Diuine mysteries firme and infallible , and yet of voluntary obedience and submission . But the Opposers of the Roman Church , not only want certainty in truth ; but also know not which way to challenge infallible certainty , without euidence .

2. This may be proued by what you write , (e) (e) Cap. 6. n. 7. circa medium . Pag. 329. lin. 31. The infallible certainty of a thing which though it be in it selfe ; yet is not made appeare to vs infallibly certaine , to my vnderstanding is an impossibility . What is this but to say , that fayth of a thing cannot be infallibly certaine ; except the thinge belieued be made so cleere and apparent , that the vnderstanding cannot choose but assent vnto it ? For what appeares to vs to be infallibly certaine , is seen of vs to be infallibly certaine : What we see to be infallible certaine , we cannot choose but assent , that it is so . So that , a firme (f) (f) Hebr. 11.1 . 6. Fides sperandarum substantia rerum , argumentum non apparentium . grounded beliefe of the truth of thinges not appearing , without which it is impossible to please God , is by your doctrine to Protestants impossible .

3. Moreouer , that Protestants cannot haue fayth pleasing to God , that is , fayth infallibly certayne not grounded on euidence , I demonstrate in this sort . No man can be assured infallibly of the truth of things not seene , nor to him euidently certaine , but by the word of an Authour infallibly veracious in all his words , deliuered vnto him by a witnesse of infallible truth : For if the witnesse , or messenger of the word be fallible , let the Authour of the word be neuer so infallible , our assent to the truth of the thing proposed cannot be infallible . Now Protestants haue not the word of God by meanes of a witnesse and messinger infallible : For the witnesse , proposer , and messenger of the word of God is the visible Catholique Church , which Protestants hold to be fallible , full of false Traditions , not free ( so you (g) (g) Pag 279. n. 64. The visile Church is not free from all errours in it selfe damnable . say ) from errour in it selfe damnable , and in this sense (h) (h) Pag. 291 lin. 8. From such fundamentall errours the Church Catholique is not secured . Fundamentall . Wherfore it is demonstratiuely certaine , that onely Roman Catholiques ( who belieue the Church to be infallible ) can haue Fayth worthy of God ; Fayth of voluntary submission to Gods word , that is , fayth of things to them not euidently yet infallibly certayne , and consequently they only please God , by their belieuing and are saued .

4. The second Argument . You say (i) (i) Cap 3. n. 36. lin. 23. pag. 148. lin. 16. There is no other reason to belieue the Scripture to be true , but onely because it is Gods word : so that you cannot belieue the doctrines and myestries reuealed in Scripture to be true , more firmely and infallibly then you belieue the Scripture to be Gods word : for we must be surer of the proofe , then of the thing proued thereby , otherwise it is no proofe , as you say pag. 37● . n. 59. But your assurance that the Scripture is the word of God , is onely human , probable , and so absolutely fallible . For you belieue the bookes which were neuer doubted of in the Church to be Gods word , and a perfect rule of fayth , onely by the tradition or testimonies of the ancient Churches (k) (k) Cap. 2. n. 27. pag. 63. lin. 35. But , the ioynt tradition of all the Apostolicall Churches with one mouth and one voyce teaching the same doctrine , is onely a very probable argument , as you affirme (l) (l) Cap. 6. n. 40. pag. 361. n. 40. Ergo , your fayth , that Scripture is Gods word , & consequently of all the mysteries therin reuealed , is but human and probable , and therefore vnworthy of God , being not firmer then the credit we yield to euery morall honest man . For to vs his word is probable and credible , and to you the word of God is no more .

5. Protestants commonely pretend , that their fayth , that these Bookes be the word of God , resteth finally , not vpon the credit of human Tradition , but vpon the Scripture onely ; which shewes it selfe with euident certitude to be diuine and supernaturall truth and so reuealed of God , (m) (m) Caluin . l. 1. Instit c. 7. n. 2. Quod autem rogant , vnde persuade bimur scripturas à Deo fluxisse : perinde est ac si quis roget , vnde discemus lucem discernere à tenebris , suaue ab amaro &c. Euen as light is seene by its owne brightnesse , and hony is proued to be sweet by the very tast thereof . But this point of Protestancy you reiect , as fond , vaine , ridiculous , pag. 371. n. 51. and proue it to be such . Because , if the Bookes of Scripture were euidently certayne , if they did with euident certitude demonstrate themselues to be Diuine truth ; then all men that haue vnderstanding and capacity to apprehend the right sense and sentence of Scripture would belieue them to be true , which experience sheweth be otherwise . If Protestants answere , that such as haue their tast distempered , to them hony is bitter ; so Infidels , through preiudice and distemper of passions , do not perceaue , and tast the Diuinity of the Doctrines of the Scripture . Against this , the reply is ready and conuincing : For they who through distemper of their palate , iudge hony to be bitter , do not apprehend the true tast of hony , but a tast contrary to the true tast thereof ; which being in their palate , they conceaue it to be in the meate . But Infidels by their vnderstanding do rightly apprehend , and conceaue the true senses of Scripture , and the mysteries of fayth deliuered therein more cleerely then many Christians of meane capacity do : and yet they do not iudge them to be Diuine truth , or truth at all . Ergo the very true sense and sentence of Scripture , doth not with euident certainty shew it selfe to be Supernaturall truth , such as could not be reuealed , but of God .

6. Finally , if the Protestants beliefe of Scripture be grounded vpon sight of the truth thereof , this their beliefe is not sauing fayth : for Fayth by which men are saued ( as hath beene sayd ) is that wherby they submit by voluntary obedience , their vnderstanding to Gods word ; belieuing firmely and assuredly vpon the Authority thereof , things in themselues incredible , and aboue the reach of human reason . But Protestants do not belieue the doctrine of Scripture because it is the word of God , but because ( as they say ) they see it to be Diuine truth , and consequently the word of God . Ergo , they haue not the fayth of humble submission to Gods word , which is the onely fayth that pleaseth God , and by which men are saued .

7. The third Argument : Protestants haue not fayth of infallible adherence , that is , fayth worthy of God , about the sense , and interpretation of Scripture . For holding the Churches interpretation to be fallible ; they pretend to be sure by this rule , that what they belieue , to them seemes plainely , cleerely , euidently reuealed , and proposed in the Scripture . But this rule of assurance is not infallible , but very fallible and deceytfull . For euen Protestants themselues contend , that many texts and places of Scripture , which seeme plaine and cleere , are to be vnderstood figuratiuely against the plaine , proper , and literall sense . For example the words of our Lord about the chiefe Sacrament & mystery of fayth , THIS is My Body , This is My BLOVD , in their plaine , proper and literall sense deliuer and establish Transubstantiation ( as Protestants (n) (n) B. Morton l. 2. de enchar . initio . grant . ) Hence Protestants , that are resolued not to belieue a mystery so high aboue reason , & seemingly repugnant to sense , will by no meanes allow these wordes to be true in their proper and literal sense : they will not yield to the plain euidence of the Diuine text . Whereupon it is euidently consequent , that they cannot be sure , about any mystery of fayth , by vertue of the sole seeming euidence of the sacred Text. For instance ; take the most fundamental text of Scripture , about the most fundamental mystery of Christian Religion , to wit , the Incarnation of the Sonne of God , (o) (o) Ioan. 1. 12. The Word was made flesh . How doth this text euidently conuince , that the Eternal Word , and Sonne of God was made Man truely , substantially , personally ? What Protestants say of the word of Christ , This is my Body ; why may not Nestorians affirme about this text , The Word was made ffesh , that it is not true in a proper , plaine , and literal sense , but metaphorically , figuratiuely , that God and Man were made one in Christ by affectual vnion , as two great friendes are said to be one ? How can Protestants be themselues assured , or how can they proue by the sole euidence of the text , that this Nestorian interpretation is false ? And if their beliefe of the mystery of the Incarnation be not solide and firme , grounded on a rule of interpretation infallibly certaine ; how can they be saued ?

8. Learned and iudicious Readers may find in your booke a world of laughter about your answering the arguments of Charity Maintayned : you do it so vnscholler-like , so okerly and vntowardly . Let your answere to this argument serue for a patterne . Our Maintayner vrgeth D. Potter , that if the Church may erre in points of fayth not fundamentall , you can neuer be sure of any such point : For as you erre about some , deceyued by the seeming euidence of the Scripture , so you cannot be sure you do not erre about other . You answere (p) (p) Cap. 2. n. 160. Pag. 117. n. 160. A pretty Sophisme depending vpon this principle , that whosoeuer possibly may erre , he can neuer be certaine , that he doth not erre . A Iudge may possibly erre in iudgment : can he therefore neuer be sure he hath iudged aright ? A Traualler may possibly mistake his way ; must I therefore be doubtfull , whether I am in the right way from my Hall to my chamber ? Or can our London-Carrier haue no certainty in the middle of the day , when he is sober , and in his wits , that he is in the way to London ? And a litle after nu. 161. whereas our Mayntainer argueth , that you cannot be sure it is an errour to make the Church Iudge of Controuersies , because you pretend to be sure by the seeming euidence of Scripture ; but this rule is not infallible , & so you cannot be sure by the warrant thereof . The ground of this Sophisme ( say you ) is very like the former , viz. that we can be certaine of the falshood of no proposition , but those only , that are damnable errours . But I pray , good Sir , giue me your opinion of these : The snow is balcke , the fire is cold , M. Knot is Arch-Bishop of Toledo , the whole is not greater then a part of the whole , that twise two make not foure , in your opinion , good Sir , are these damnable heresies ? Or because they are not so , haue we no certainty of the falshood of them . I beseech you , Sir , consider seriously with what strange captions you haue gone about to delude your King and your Country : & if you be conuinced they are so , giue glory to God , and let the world know it by your deserting that Religion , which standes vpon such deceytfull foundations . This you write , which you could neuer haue written , had you been with your London Carrier sober , and in your wits . You haue proued Gusman de Alfarache his saying , that the Fooles Hospital is of large extent , to be most true : He can range and reuell within the compasse thereof in a world of sottish extrauagances ; from hoat to cold , from , snow to fire , from Oxford to London , from London to Toledo , from Toledo backe againe to King and Country , and then fetch a new carriere ouer the whole Vniuerse , and euery part thereof , to be sure , that no part is greater then the whole . What is impertinentcy , what is deserting the matter and argument in hand , if this be not ?

Good Syr , be pleased to vnderstand , that the Controuersy betwixt D. Potter and our Maintayner , is not about all Kind of propositions , nor whether , snow be blacke , or fire cold , nor about your not being Arch-Bishop of Canterbury , nor about the way from your Hall to your Chamber : but about propositions pertayning to Christian faith , not euident to sense , but only to be knowne by reuelation from heauen . Our Maintayner auoucheth , that these Diuine truths cannot be knowne assuredly , but by the teaching of Gods Church , infallible in all her proposals . This he proueth not ( as you feigne ) by this principle , He that may possibly erre , can neuer be sure he doth not erre , but by this : He that may erre , and hath some times erred by following some certaine Rule , can neuer be sure he doth not erre by following the same rule . If a Iudge condemne a man to death wrongfully , vpon euidence giuen against him by two witnesses , how can he be sure , that he doth not condemne another man vniustly ; if he haue no greater assurance , then the deposition of two witnesses , not knowne to be of better credit & conscience ? A traueller hath been misguided out of his way , by inquiring of the first man he met , & trusting his direction ; how can he be sure he is not out of his way by crediting the word of another directour equally vnknowne vnto him ? This then is the Argument of Charity Maintayned , which you durst not encounter ; but ran about the world in the wild-goose chase , to auoyd the force thereof . No man can be sure he doth not erre by following a rule which is fallible and deceitfull ; But to iudge of the sense of the Scripture , by the sole seeming euidence of the text , is a rule fallible , which often fayleth , and deceaueth them who rely thereon : because many places are not taken in their plain , proper , literall sense ; and many texts considered by themselues , seeme cleere and plaine , which conferred with other texts ( that seeme to say the contrary ) become darke and obscure : Therefore to discerne the true sense and meaning of Scripture by the sole seeming euidence of some text thereof , is a rule fallible : & Protestants by the sole direction therof can neuer be sure , or infallibly certain about any mystery of faith .

10. And I pray you , good Sir , leaue your wild vagaries , come home to the litle closet of your wits , hold them close to the matter , and then tell vs : A Protestant who denyes the wordes of Christ , This is my Body , to be true in their plain , proper and literall sense ; how can he be sure himselfe , or how can he assure others , that this text , The word was made flesh , is to be taken , and true in the plain , proper and literal sense ? Do not tell vs , that you know the way from your Hall to your chamber , that snow is white , fyre hoat , M. Knot is not Arch-Bishop of Toledo ; but giue vs an assured rule whereby to know , that this text , The word was made flesh , is literally to be vnderstood in the plain substantial sense : & the text , This is my body , ought to be figuratiuely interpreted , so that the Body of Christ , be taken for but a peece of Bread ? The meane while I conclude that Protestants seing they haue not any infallible rule to assure them of the sense of Scripture ; cannot firmely belieue the Mysteries reuealed therein : and so they haue , not such a persuasion of the truth of Gods word , as is worthy of God , and pleasing to him : nor will they euer obtayne sauing fayth , till they ioyne with Roman Catholiques , to acknowledge the infallible authority of the visible Catholike Church .

The seauenth Conuiction .

BEcause you cannot damne Roman Catholiques for any want of necessary and fundamentall truth ; you endeauour to procure their damnation , and plead earnestly for it , in regard they do not endeauour to know all profitable truth . In which discourse you prodigiously contradict other assertions of your Booke . By the discouery of which , damnation will be seene to fall a way from vs vpon your owne head , togeather with the cause meritorious thereof , the not caring to auoyd vnfundamentall heresies .

1. First you contradict your selfe in the same sentence , wherby you make your Way plaine , and yet impossible to be gone . Pag. 221 lin. 19. (q) (q) Cap. 4. n. 53. post medium . This is a way so plaine , as fooles cannot ( except they will ) erre from it . Because not knowing absolutely all truth ; nay not all profitable truth , & not being free from errour , but endeuoring to know the truth and obey it , and to be free from errour , is by this Way made the onely condition of Saluation . It is strange you should say , that fooles cannot erre from your Way , vnlesse they will : whereas your selfe being so wise a man haue erred so mightily from your Way , ( no doubt against your will ) as you are gone a contrary way . In the first part of your saying you pronounce your Way to be so plaine as fooles , except they will , cannot misse of being saued therein : but in the second , you require so much , and so hard conditions of Saluation , as you make the same wholy impossible for fooles and ignorant persons ; and morally impossible euen to the learned'st leaders of your flocke . For you require to Saluation , that men know , not onely all necessary truth , but also that they endeauour to know all profitable truth , yea absolutely all truth . For by vertue of your speach they are bound to endeauour for the knowledge of that truth , which in this sentence , you say , they are not bound to know . But the truth you say in this sentence they are not bound to know , is not all necessary truth , but all profitable truth , yea absolutely all truth : Ergo your followers are bound , as they will be saued , though not to know , yet to labour , endeauour , study to know all profitable truth , yea absolutely all truth about Diuine matters . Which is , as much as to say , that none can be saued in your way , but such as haue studied Diuinity , and haue not omitted so much as one question thereof , not only about profitable points of that Science , but also about vnnecessary and vnprofitable quirks , absolutely all . What can be imagined more vaine fond , and absurd , then to bind all men , as they will be saued , to study and endeauour for the knowledg of all Diuinity , and Diuine truth ? And yet such is your desire to damne vs , as you will do it vpon any condition ; though your selfe , and all other Protetestants be damned in our company .

2. Secondly you grossely contradict your selfe , whiles your declame against our Religion as extreme dangerous , because we do not ( you say ) care to auoyd errours not fundamentall : which declamations are frequent in your booke , particularly Pag. 277. n. 61. lin. 29. (r) (r) Cap. 5. n 61. lin. 28. Neither is there any reason , why such a Church should please her selfe too much for retayning fundamentall truths ; whiles she remaynes so regardlesse of others . For , though the simple defect of some truths profitable onely , and not simply necessary , may consist with Saluation ; yet who is there that can giue her sufficient assurance , that the neglect of such truths is not damnable ? Besides , who is there , that can put her in sufficient caution , that these errours about profitable matters may not ( according to the vsuall fecundity of errour ) bring forth others of a higher quality , such as are pestilent and pernicious &c. Lastly , who can say , that she hath sufficiently dicharged her duty to God and man , by auoyding onely fundamentall Heresies ; if in the meane tyme she be negligent of others , which though they do not destroy Saluation , yet obscure and hinder , & onely not blocke vp the way to it . Thus you : who seeme as forgetfull of your selfe , as he was , who is sayd to haue had so little wit , as he could not remember his owne name . For had you remembred your name , to the questions , Who can giue such a Church sufficient assurance ? who can put her in sufficient caution ? Who can say , she hath done her duty sufficiently ? You would haue readily answered , I William Chillingworth : for you often vndertake for a Church that retaynes all Fundamentall truths , to be her surety , and giue her assurance of Saluation agaynst all these pretended dangers . You say , they who belieue all fundamentals , belieue all necessaries , and so wee must confesse , that they may safely expect Saluation : except we will say , that more is necessary , then that which is necessary . You say , poynts circumstantiall ( that is not fundamentall ) be those of which we may be securely ignorant , such as euen the Pastours themselues are not bound to know , or belieue , or not disbelieue them absolutely and alwayes , but then only when they do see , & know them to be deliuered in Scripture as Diuine Reuelations . I say when they do so , and know , and not onely when they may &c. Otherwise it should be a damnable sinne in any learned man actually to disbelieue any one particular Historicall verity contayned in Scripture : for though he did not know it to be reuealed , yet he might haue knowne it , had he with diligence perused Scripture . You say , he that belieues all fundamentals , cannot be damned for any errour of fayth . You earnestly demand , He that belieues all necessary truth , how can he possibly fayle of Saluation if his life be answerable to his fayth ?

3. By these sayings do not you giue men , that retayne all fundamentals , good cause of too much ( that is of excessiue ) pleasure and content ; by telling them they cannot possibly be damned for any errour in fayth ? Do not you affoard abundant assurance , that neglect to know truths not fundamentall , is not damnable , there being no obligation to know them , or to vse diligence to find them ? The people , and euen the Pastours may securely be ignorant of them , yea actually disbelieue them ? Do not you put such a Church in sufficient caution , that errours not Fundamentall cannot bring forth errours pestilent and pernicious ? that she hath performed her duety to God and man sufficiently vnto Saluation , by auoyding Fundamentall Heresies ? Except you will say more is necessary , then that which is necessary ; that can be which cannot be ; that is possible which is altogether impossible ; men are bound to know that which they are not bound to know ; men are damned for not caring to know , that whereof they might be securely ignorant . Into this maze of contradictions you are brought by your will to damne vs , which is much stronger then your wit .

4. Your third Deuise to damne vs , it yet more full of strange forgetfulnesse , and contradiction of your selfe . You suppose , that we distinguish Heresies into two kinds , some fundamentall , some not fundamentall ; that we hold the first damnable and vtterly destructiue of Saluation , and so to be carefully auoyded ; but that men may be saued in their heresies of the second kind . Hence you say , we regard not Heresies vnfundamentall , we are carelesse and negligent to auoyd them ; being persuaded , that if we hold all fundamentall truth , we cannot be damned for any errour or heresy against fayth . In regard of this loose doctrine and our negligence consequent thereupon ; you say , we are in great danger of damnation . This is your Plea against our Saluation , so dull , and so voyd of memory as you may seeme to haue forgotten euen the argument of the whole booke of Charity manitayned , and of your owne . For this distinction of Heresies into two sortes , some Fundamentall , some not Fundamental , is taught by Protestants , who by the largenesse & laxitie of this doctrine would draw some kind of Heretiques , to wit Heretiques not fundamentall , within the compasse of the fold of Christ , and the number of them that be saued . This is the substance of D. Potters whole treatise , which our maintayner impugneth . Is it not then prodigious want of memory to charge the Roman Church with this Doctrine , and to seeke her damnation , because ( forsooth ) she doth not care to auoyd Heresies not Fundamentall ? For our Roman Theology doth not allow the distinction of errours or heresies agaynst fayth into Fundamentall and not Fundamentall in your sense : for we hold Heresies damnable , and equally damnable , as much those , that are against Truths profitable only , as those that destroy truths simply necessary . Hence in the Way of the Roman Church , he that knowing Transubstantiation to be proposed as matter of fayth , by the definition of the Church , shall presume to gaine say it , is as full , formall , and very an Heretique , as he who denyes the personall vnion of two Natures , Diuine and Human in Christ . For the greatnes of the malice of Heresy is not measured by the greatnesse of the matter denyed ; but by the greatnes of the pride , wherby an Heretique preferres his fancies of Scripture before the definition of the Church ; & by the greatnes of that impiety , wherby he presumes to reiect that doctrine , which he hath so many stronge reasons to belieue to be reuealed of God .

5. If you say , that Charity maintayned doth suppose , that the Roman Church hath some corruptions and errours in fayth not Fundamentall ; I answere it is impudently in you so to affirme ; and great vanity to gather your affirmation from these his wordes , As for our Churchs corruptions in doctrine ( I speake vpon the vntrue supposition of our Aduersaries ) : you vpon no better warrant then this ; say to our Maintayner pag. 274. n. 58. (t) (t) Cap. 5. n. 58. & 59. You are so courteous as to suppose corruptions in your doctrine . And a little after pag. 275. n. 59. I thanke you for your courteous supposall , that your Church may erre . And pag. 276. lin. 2. You suppose your Church in errour ; & yet excommunicate those that belieue your owne supposition . What found vanity is this ? To say , Our Aduersaries do vntruly suppose there be corruptions in our Church , is this a courteous supposall , and not rather a constant deniall that she doth erre , and a charge of falshood vpon them that so suppose ? Is the vntrue supposition of our Aduersaries our owne supposition ? I was euen amazed at your inconsideration when I read these words in your Booke pag. 280. n. 95. lin. 8. (u) (u) Cap. 5 n 95. lin. 8. Why I pray may not a man of iudgement continue in the communion of a Church confessedly corrupted ; aswell as in a Church supposed to be corrupted ? A strange assertion ; A man may aswell imbrace the communion of a Church corrupted confessedly by the concession of her friends ; as of a Church vntruly supposed by her Aduersaries to be corrupt . So that with you , for a Christian to say , S. Ioseph was the Father of Christ , and the Blessed Virgin corrupt , according to the vntrue supposition of the Iewes , is all one , as to say , S. Ioseph was the Father of Christ , and the Blessed Virgin corrupt confessedly euen by the concession of Christians . Wherfore if it be damnable to neglect Heresies not Fundamentall ( as without question it is ) this proueth Protestants damnable , who thinke it not against Saluation to hold errours in fayth , and heresies against the definition of the whole Church , if such heresies be about matters profitable onely , and not simply necessary .

The eight Conuiction .

1. YOu inscribe the pages of your last Chapter with this title : The Religion of Protestants a safer Way to Saluation then the Religion of Papists . For which assertion ( besides bare and bold affirmations , & earnest verball expressions , manifest tokens ( as you say ) of a weake cause ) you haue one Argument which is this , pag. 393. n. (y) (y) Cap. 5. n. 9. 9. If the safer way for auoyding sinne , be also the safer way for auoyding damnation , then certainly the way of Protestants must be more secure , and the Roman way more dangerous . Take into your consideration these ensuing controuersies . Whether it be lawfull to worship Pictures ? To picture the Trinity ? To inuocate Saints and Angels ? To deny laymen the Cup in the Sacrament ? To prohibite certayne Orders of men and women to mary . To celebrate the publique seruice of God in a language the assistants generally vnderstand not ? and you will not choose but confesse , that in all these you are on the more dangerous side for the committing of sinne ; 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 inough ; for we should onely not do something , which you confesse not necessary to be done . We pretend , and are ready to iustify out of Principles agreed vpon betweene vs ; that in all these things you violate the manifest Commandements of God ; and alleage such texts of Scripture against you , as ( if you would weigh them with any indifferency ) would put the matter out of question : but certainely you cannot with any modesty deny , but that at least they make it questionable . This argument I haue set downe at large , because it is the best in your booke , and yet vaine and weake , as I now demonstrate .

The ground of your Safety , onely false suppositions , and foolish braggs . §. 1.

2. FIrst it is false , that if Protestants say true , we do that which is impious . For Protestants against Zelots maintayne , that our practises though erroneous in their iudgement , yet are not impious , and in themselues damnable ; and that they who in sincerity of heart professe them , shall this notwithstanding (y) (y) D. Potter pag. 78. without doubt be saued .

3. Secondly , it is false , that if we be in the right , yet you may be secure inough in your refusing to vse these our practises , because they be not necessary . For though it be no sinne of it selfe purely to omit pious practises , and profitable deuotions : yet to omit them out of proud contempt , and much more out of an Hereticall persuasion , that they be impious , is vndoubtedly an heynous and damnable crime . It is not necessary that you marry a wife , you may be saued if you lead a chast single life : but if you omit mariage out of an opinion , that it is a thing impure , or out of contempt of that doctrine , that (z) (z) Ephes. 5.32 . Mariage is a great Sacrament in Christ and his Church ; you will ( except you repent ) certainly be damned . In like manner , if we be in the right , and that these be pious Christian practises of voluntary deuotion , you who relinquish them out of contempt , and Hereticall persuasion that they are impious , cannot escape damnation without a dereliction of your errour .

4. Thirdly , it is false , that if we be in the right , yet you only do not something which we confesse not necessary to be done . For we do not say of all these practises , that they be not necessary to be done ; yea we say , it is necessary to Saluation to receaue the B. Sacrament , and in receauing to adore it . Besides we say , that you not only omit to do what is not necessary to be done , but also condemne the vniuersall practises of Gods Church , and definitions of her Generall Councells ; which is not only not necessary to be done , but also execrable , impious , hereticall to be done .

5. Fourthly , it is a foolish bragge that you can alleadge such cleere texts of Scripture against these our practises . For if you can alleade them , why do you conceale them ? Why are you ashamed to bring them to light ? Why haue you not stored your booke with such allegations as are able to put the matter out of question ? Some very few you haue produced , Church Conquerant cap. 6. conuict . 8. and those which you tearme the playnest that possibly may be , I haue shewed to be darke , obscure , yea by you falsifyed in the text ?

6. Fiftly , it is also a foolish bragge , that your texts of Scripture be certainly such as make the matter questionable : which you proue very grauely , because we cannot with any modesty deny it . Verily had you any modesty or shame , you would blush to dispute so poorely , miserably , seelily in a Controuersy of such moment which concernes the eternal damnation of your Country . I adde , though it were true ( as it is most false ) that your texts make the matter questionable ; yet your abandoning the Roman Church is damnable . For , Arguments which make the matter questionable , be not necessary nor euident : But it is damnable to forsake the Church of Rome , and the definition of General Councels without reasons necessary and euident , as both you and D. Potter affirme , as hath beene often noted .

These doctrines and practises are proued by manifest and plaine Scripture . §. 2.

ON the other side , Roman Catholiques do not boast ridiculously , as you do , of their texts of Scripture ; but by manifest euiction shew euen these , of the impiety of which you seeme most confident , to be Christian and pious , and consequently , that your damning of them is damnable and impious .

7. For images of Christ crucifyed vsed in the Church with Apostolicall allowance we haue the plaine words of S. Paul Gal. 3.1 . O senselesse Galathians , who hath be witched you not to obey the Gospel , before whose eyes Christ Iesus , is painted Crucifyed among you . The Greeke word is 〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉〈◊〉 liuely set forth in the picture of his Crucifixion ; so that S. Paul proueth the Galatians were senselesse people , that honoring Christ Iesus pictured before their eyes as crucifyed ; yet did not hope for Saluation by his Crosse and Crucifixion ; but by Circumcision , and the obseruances of the Law . This sense being according to the plaine proper , and literall sense of the wordes , Protestants are bound by the rule of their Religion to admit thereof , and cannot without impiety refuse it , and expound the place of metaphoricall Painting ; except they can euidently demonstrate this sense to be false or incongruous against the Apostles intent , which they will neuer be able to do .

8. If you say , that this text at the most proueth the vsing of Images for the representation , Appeale to Caesar pag. 254.255 . not honoring of them : I answere with the learned M. Montague your Bishop of Chichester , that in the vsing of Images for memory sake , the honouring of them is necessarily included , which he proueth euidently , and together affirmes , that it is strange , that any Christian should be displeased with the Doctrine , That respect and honour is to be giuen to Images .

9. The Persons of the Trinity we picture not , but only the person of Goa the Sonne in the forme and shape of man , as personally he was . Onely we represent the type wherein God the Father appeared , to wit , the forme of the Ancient of dayes , described Dan. 7. and the type , wherein the Holy Ghost appeared the forme of a Doue , recorded Math. 3.

10. For Inuocation of Angels , we haue the practise and example of holy Iacob Gen. 84.15 . The Angell which deliuered me from all euill , blesse these Children : which text , you cannot answere without iugling and changing the Angell into the figure of another substance .

11. For the sufficiency of the Sacrament vnder the forme of bread , we haue the expresse warrant of our Lord , Ioan. 6.59 . He that eateth this bread shall liue for euer . And for the practise of Communion in one kind for lay men we haue his example Luc. 24.30.31 .

12. For the adoration of the Sacrament , we haue the Scripture in the plaine and proper sense . For ( sayth D. Morton (z) (z) Lib. 2. initio . your B. of Durham ) If the words of Christ be true in a proper and literall sense , we must yield vnto Papists the whole cause of Transubstantiation &c. the proper adoration of the Sacrament .

13. That we prohibite certaine orders of men & women to mary is a slander . They freely without constraint prohibite themselues , whiles by vow they bind their fayth , and fidelity vnto Christ , to liue single and chast , & peculiarly consecrated to his seruice . Which fayth and fidelity , if they violate and make voyd by consequent Mariage ( as your first reformer the Frier did , who married a Nunne ) , we hold their state sacrilegious and damnable , which is the expresse doctrine of S. Paul , 1. Tim. 5.12 .

14. The Controuersy , which language is fittest , and of most edification in Church seruice : whether the vulgar , which is best knowne in this or that particular country ; or some learned language , Greeke or Latin , which be best knowne in the whole Christian Church ; cannot be determined by Scripture , as hath beene already proued . So that measuring the way of Saluation euen by the rule of the Bible only , the Roman Religion is the plainer , and safer Way , better warranted , euen by expresse texts of Scripture .

The Ninth Conuiction .

THe chiefe Fundamental ground of the security Roman Catholiques enioy , that they are in the right Way of Saluation , according to which if they walke they cannot be damned ; is the direction of an infallible guide , the holy Catholique Church , which is no other but the Roman . This is conuinced by what your self are forced to grant , as hath been shewed , (a) (a) Church Conquerant cap. 5.6 . & . 7. but because this businesse is the maine and the totall , I will here repeate some of the passages though very briefly .

1. First , conuicted by the wordes of S. Paul , you grant , that the visible Catholique Church is the pillar and ground of truth , that is , the teacher of all necessary , and profittable truth by duty and office ; yea that she is always in fact the teacher of all truth necessary to Saluation . For ( say you ) that the true Church alwayes shall be the maintayner and teacher of all necessary truth , 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 , then any thing can be a man , and not be reasonable . Thus you grant , that there is and alwayes shall be a Catholique Church , which shall not only belieue inwardly and in heart ; but also teach and ( a ) propose without fayle all diuine reuelation (b) (b) The visible Church shall alwayes without fayle propose so much of Gods reuelation , as is sufficient vnto Saluation . For otherwise it will not be the visible Church . necessary to Saluation . For it is her very essence to be so . Wherefore not only in belieuing , but also in teaching and proposing all necessary truth , she can no more faile then from her owne being which is indefectible . Hence she is ( and you must grant she is ) an infallible guide in Fundamentalls : Because to shew men the way to heauen , by teaching them all reuealed truth that is necessary to bring them thither ; what is it , but to be a guide of men vnto Saluation ; shewing them the Fundamental doctrines of Christian Religion , without which no man is saued ?

2. Secondly , the visible Catholique Church , being ( as you grant she is ) an infallible teacher or guide in Fundamentalls , must of necessity be also infallible in all her proposalls . The necessity of this consequence you deny a thousand tymes , and almost in euery period of your third Chapter ; yet you affirme it in expresse termes . Pag. 105 n. 139. lin. 23. To say , that the Church is an infallible guide in Fundamentals , were to oblige our selues to find some certain Society of men , of whome we might be certain , that they neither do , nor can erre in Fundamentals ; nor in declaring what is Fundamental , and what is not : and consequently to make any Church an infallible guide in Fundamentals would be to make her infallible in all thinges she proposes ; and requires to be belieued . Which truth you proue vnanswerably . Pag. 148. n. 36.

3. Thirdly , the visible Catholique Church being a guide in Fundamentals , that is , alwayes a Teacher of all necessary truth , is a Church ( c ) of one denomination , that is , some settled certaine Society of Christians knowne and distinguished from other Societies , by adhering to such a Bishop . This is proued by this Syllogisme , wherein both the premises be your owne formall assertions . The Church is appointed of God to be the teacher and guide of men in the way of Saluation , and so she is able and fit for that office . For God would not by his word haue appointed her an office , for which she is vnfit and vnable to perferme it ; yea , you say , the Church is not only able to performe the office of guide ; but also that alwayes in fact she doth exercise the same in teaching all necessary truth . But you say (d) (d) Cap. 3. n. 55. pag. 163. lin. 9. A Church of one denomination distinguished from all others by adhering to such a Bishop ; such a determinate Church alone can performe the office of Guide and Directour . And Pag. (e) (e) Cap. 2. n. 139. 105. n. 239. lin. 30. No Church can possibly be fit to be a guide , but only a Church of some certaine denomination , as the Greeke , the Roman , the Ahissine . Wherefore the Visible Catholique Church being fit , and able to performe the office of Guide and Directour ( as you grant she is , and that it is essentially necessary that she be so ) she is , and of necessity must be a Church of one denomination , subiect to one certaine supreme Guide and Bishop .

4. From these most certaine truthes by you granted , approued and proued , it is necessarily and euidently consequent ; that the Roman Church is the Visible Catholique Church of God , an infallible Teacher of all fundamentall and necessary truth : yea infallible in all thinges she proposes as matter of fayth : This I say , is cleerely consequent of the former grants . For the visible Church being the Guide , Teacher and Directour of men , is on the one side a Church of one denomination ; else she could not performe that office of guide which she doth ( as you confesse ) alwayes actually performe . On the other side , being the Catholique , that is , the Vniuersall Church , she must be spread ouer the face of the earth ; as the Roman is in Europe , Africa , Asia , America , and in many of the particular Kingdomes , and Prouinces of these foure quarters of the world . So that the wordes of S. Paul to the Romans , come to be verified no lesse now , then at that time , your fayth is renowned and published in the whole world . Which vniuersality , or vniuersal Vnity agrees to no other Church of one denomination , as is manifest . Wherefore the Roman Church is the Holy Catholique Church , the infallible guide of men in the way of Saluation .

5. Hence is concluded the security of Roman Catholiques , that they cannot possibly erre about matters of fayth , so long as they follow the dogmatical directions and definitions of the Roman Church . Contrariwise they who oppose what they know to be proposed by her , as matter of fayth , erre Heretically & damnably , and cannot possibly be saued without expresse repentance of their errours .

The Conclusion .

6. THis argument of the assured Saluation of Roman Catholiques , and of the assured damnation of all the knowing opposers of their Religion and Church , being thus euidently demonstrated ; for Conclusion I could wish an Ocean of teares of bloud , endued with the quality of mollifying hearts , as hard as the Adamant : for so I might condignely and fruitefully deplore the pittifull state , the commiserable condition , the vnfortunate thraldome in Errour of many millions in our deare Country , caused by mortall auersion from the true Catholique Church , which is instilled into their mindes by Heretical education .

7. They grant , conuicted by the euidence of Gods word , that the Catholique Church is the ground and rocke of Truth , wheron men may securely rest and rely ; an infallible Guide and teacher of all Fundamentals ; consequently of all euen profitable truth about Diuine matters . They further acknowledge , conuicted by experience and reason , that the Church cannot be fit orable to performe the office of guide & Directour , except it be of one denomination , of one obedience , subiect to one determinate Bishop as her supreme Pastour and Gouernour . They cannot but see with their eyes , there is no Church Catholique , or vniuersally diffused , of one Fayth , of one Obedience , of one Denomination , subiect to one Pastour , acknowledged of all of that Religion , but the Roman : Consequently , that there is no Church besides the Roman fit , or able to performe the office of Guide and Directour to men that are saued , as the true Catholique Church is bound to do , and alwayes actually doth . These thinges they confesse , or see ; and yet so inflexible is the obstinacy , the passion , & pride against the Roman Church , wherwith Education ( like Medusa's head ) hath dulled , stupifyed , and instoned their soules , as they contemne her Direction , forsakes her Communion , hate her Authority , scorne her Motherly care of their Saluation , running to perdition in the way of their owne fallible , and palpably false conceytes fancied to be Scripture .

8. Why did our Sauiour make his Church the pillar and ground of truth , that is , an infallible Teacher of the doctrine of Saluation ; but that he would haue men to make vse of her teaching ? As knowing , that , through a world of errours , which carry with them a faire shew of truth , they could not attayne to eternal Happinesse , without a Visible infallible Guide . No doubt when he gaue her the office of Mother , he bound vs as we would be his Children and Heyres , to loue , honour , and reuerence Her ; and to liue alwayes in the lap of her Communion . When he gaue her the office of Guide , he bound vs to follow her directions , as we desire to speed in our iourney to him , and to come to see for euer his Blessed face . When he gaue her the office of Rocke , he obliged vs to build our fayth and hope of Saluation on her Teaching ; assuring vs that no sublimity of wit & vnderstanding , no (a) (a) Omnis caelo inferenda sublimitas in huius Petrae firmitate consurgit . S. Leo. serm. 3. in anniuers . Assump. suc. height of perfection , be it in our conceite neuer so eleuate , can reach to Heauen , which is not grounded on the neuer-fayling fortitude of this Rocke .

9. They then that haue disioyned themselues from the wombe and lap of this Mother , can neuer be so in Gods fauour , as to be his Children , the Heyres of his glory the fellow heyres with Christ : They that follow not the Directions of this euer vn-erring Guide , be not in the way towardes him , that is Truth and Life , but wander in a wildernesse of Errour , the issue wherof is eternall Death· They that haue not setled the feete of their Fayth and Affection on this Rocke , the sole Rocke of safety in this vast Ocean of dangers ; what are they but wauing and wauering Babes , floating in a sea of vncertainties , tossed this way and that way with euery gust of erroneous doctrine ?

10. For a man not to belieue , that our Sauiour did institute his Church to continue for euer , the Teacher of all sauing truth ; the Rocke of Saluation , against which the gates of Hell shall neuer preuayle ; what is this , but to stop his eares against the cleer and plaine voyce of his word ? For a man to say , that he gaue the office of Guide to a confused multitude and Chaos of different Religions and Obediences and not to a Church of one denomination , which alone is able to performe that office ; what is it but to open his mouth into blasphemies against his Diuine Wisedome ? For a man not to see , that there is no vniuersally diffused Church in the world of one fayth , and obedience , all the Professours thereof adhering vniuersally to one certayne Bishop , besides the Roman ; what is it but in a desperate moode of neglect , to shut his eyes against the truth , that may saue his soule , the cleere euidence whereof shineth ouer the world ? Hebr. 2.3 . So that I may say with the Apostle , Quomodo nos effugiemus si tantam neglexerimus salutem ? How shall we escape from being damned , if we neglect so great a meanes ; such an assured way of Saluation ?

11. A Way so secure to be followed , so obuious to be found so cleere to be seene , so facile to be gone , so hard to be lost ? In which we haue the succour of so many Sacraments , not onely that of Baptismes to put vs in the Way , and giue vs Gods Holy Spirit to walke therein ; but also that of the Bread of life , to refresh vs when we faynt ; that of Chrisme to confirme vs when we are stronge ; that of Pennance , or imposition of Hands , to help vs vp , when we are fallen , that of Holy Oyle to heale vs , when we are sicke .

12. A Way beaten & made plaine by the precedent walking therein , of so many former Christian worlds ; proued to be the sole Way to Heauen , by the writings of so many most holy and learned Ancient Fathers ; sealed and enobled for such with the sacred bloud of innumerable Martyrs ; confirmed by the perpetuall , and vnto this day continued Conuersion of Nations to the Roman Church ; by the glorious labours of her Apostolical Preachers .

13. Finally a Way printed with the foote-stepps of Sanctity of so many millions of admirable pious and Religions Christians ; who went this Way to Eternall Happines ; and haue from thence sent vs tidings of their safe arriuall , by the testimony of euident miracles and vndoubted apparitions : to assure vs , we cannot fayle of comming thither , if we walke constantly in the Way of the same fayth they professed ; and in the exercise of the same Christian Vertues they practised .

FINIS .

The contents of the Booke , & the summe of ech of the Nine Conuictions . The first Conuiction . THe Confession of Protestants , that our Religion is a safe Way to Saluation , proued against M. Chillingworths falsifications , and ignorant explications of D. Potters words . §. 1.2.3 . That the argument drawne from the confession of Protestants is not voluntary and of meere charity , but enforced by the principles of Christianity . §. 4.5 . That M. Chillingworth doth expressely teach the errours of Protestants to be damnable in themselues , and the Roman Religion to be as safe as it . §. 6. The second Conuiction . Though the false supposition were granted , that the Roman Church erreth ; yet Roman Catholiques cannot be damned for following her errours ; because they cannot but be excused by ignorance inuincible . §. 1.2 . That Protestants if they erre ( as certainty they do ) cannot be saued by Ignorance , or General Repentance . §. 3. M. Chillingworth his impudent falsifying of the Tenet of Charity Maintayned . §. 4. The third Conuiction . The Roman Church holding all fundamentall and necessary truth , no man can possibly be damned in her Communion for any errour in fayth ; so that it is madnesse to leaue it . §. 1.2 . That Protestants cannot possibly be sure they belieue all necessary truth ; & what impossible conditions of Saluation M. Chillingworth layes vpon them . §. 3. The fourth Conuiction . That in M. Chillingworth his Way English Protestantes can be no more saued then Socinians , who deny Christ to be God ; yea no more then Iewes and Turkes : with six proofes , that he is a Socinian . §. 1.2 . The fifth Conuiction . That M. Chillingworth damneth Roman Catholiques for being faithfull and constant Christians . § 1. That in his Way Protestants are bound to be still doubtfull , and changing the articles of their Religion , and that this is damnable . §. 2. The sixt Conuiction . That only Roman Catholiques can haue fayth which pleaseth God , and saueth the Belieuer , demonstrated by three arguments . The seauenth Conuiction . M. Chillingworth his vayne & contradictious endeauour to damne the Roman Church , because forsooth she doth not care to auoyd Heresies not Fundamental ; & that this is the damnable state of Protesters against her . The eight Conuiction . M. Chillingworth his instances in some points wherin he pretendes the way of Protestants to be safer then ours , proued to be false suppositions & idle brags . §. 1. The Roman Doctrine and practise euen in those instances proued by plaine texts of Scripture . §. 2. The Ninth Conuiction . That the true Catholique Church is infallible in all her Proposals , known by subordination to one supreme Bishop ; & that this church can be no other than the Roman .

The Conclusion .

Faults escaped in the Print .

PAge . Line . Errour . Correction . 6. 20. in marg. omitted Lib. 3. cont. lit . Petil. c. 18. 37. 5. inforing inforcing 52. 7. so farre too farre 63. 21. change change 84. 13. your you 88. 2. impudently impudency

Notes, typically marginal, from the original text

Notes for div A01011-e130

Notes for div A01011-e670

Notes for div A01011-e5170

Notes for div A01011-e6910

Notes for div A01011-e9660

Notes for div A01011-e12000

Notes for div A01011-e12780

Notes for div A01011-e14070

Notes for div A01011-e14850

Notes for div A01011-e15830

Notes for div A01011-e16410