THis REPLY , Good Reader , was indeed long since finished by the Author : but by reason of some impediment , it could not be commodiously transported , so soone as he wished , and desired it should .

GIVE me leaue ( good Reader ) to informe thee , by way of Preface , of three points The first concernes D. Potters Answere to Charity Mistaken . The second relates to this Reply of mine . And the third containes some Premonitions , or Prescriptions in case D. Potter , or any in his behalfe thinke fit to reioyne .

2. For the first point concerning D. Potters Answere , I say in generall , A generall consideration of D. Potters Answere . reseruing particulars to their prroper places , that in his whole Booke he hath not so much as once truly and really fallen vpon the point in question , which was , Whether both Catholiques and Protestants can be saued in their seuerall professions . And therefore Charity Mistaken iudiciously pressing those particulars , wherein the difficultie doth precisely consist , proues in generall , that there is but one true Church ; that all Christians are obliged to hearken to her ; that she must be euer visible , and infallible ; that to separate ones selfe from her Communion is Schisme , and to dissent from her doctrine is Heresie , though it be in points neuer so few , or neuer so small in their own nature ; and therefore that the distinction of points fundamentall , and not fundamentall is wholy vaine , as it is applied by Protestants . These ( I say ) and some other generall grounds Charity Mistaken handles , and out of them doth cleerely euince , that any least difference in faith cannot stand with saluation on both sides : and therefore since it is apparent , that Catholiques and Protestants disagree in very many points of Faith , they both cannot hope to be saued without repentance : and consequently , as we hold , that Protestancy vnrepented destroies Saluation ; so must they also belieue that we cannot be saued , if they iudge their own Religion to be true , and ours to be false . And whosoeuer disguizeth this truth , is an enemy to soules , which he deceiues with vngrounded false hopes of saluation , indifferent Faiths , and Religions . And this , Charity Mistaken performed exactly , according to that which appeares to haue been his designe , which was not to descend to particuler disputes , as D. Potter affectedly does , namely , Whether or no the Roman Church be the only true Church of Christ ; and much lesse whether Generall Councels be infallible ; whether the Pope may erre in his Decrees common to the whole Church ; whether he be aboue a Generall Councell ; whether all points of fayth be contained in Scripture ; whether Fayth be resolued into the authority of the Church , as into his last formall Obiect , and Motiue ; and least of all did he discourse of Images , Communion vnder both kinds , publique Seruice in an vnknowne Tongue , Seauen Sacraments , Sacrifice of the Masse , Indulgences , and Index Expurgatorius : all which and diuers other articles D. Potter ( as I said ) drawes by violence into his Booke . & he might as well haue brought in Pope loane , or Antichrist , or the Iewes who are permitted to liue in Rome , which are common Themes for men that want better matter , as D. Potter was forced to fetch in the aforsayd Controuersies , that so he might dazle the eyes , & distract the mynd of the Reader , and hinder him from perceiuing that in his whole Answere he vttered nothing to the purpose , & point in question : which if he had followed closely , I dare well say , he might haue dispatched his whole Booke in two or three sheetes of paper . But the truth is , he was loath to affirme plainely , that generally both Catholiques and Protestants may be saued : and yet seeing it to be most euident that Protestants cannot pretend to haue any true Church before Luther except the Roman , and such as agreed with her , and consequently that they cannot hope for saluation , if they deny it to vs ; he thought best to auoid this difficulty by confusion of language , & to fill vp his Booke with points which make nothing to the purpose . Wherein he is lesse excusable , because he must graunt , that those very particulers to which he digresseth , are not fundamentall errors , though it should be granted that they be errors , which indeed are Catholique verities . For since they be not fundamentall , nor destructiue of saluation , what imports it whether we hold them or no , for as much as concernes our possibility to be saued ?

3. In one thing only he will perhaps seeme to haue touched the point in question , to wit , in his distinction of points fundamentall , and not fundamentall : because some may thinke , that a difference in points which are not fundamentall breakes not the Vnity of Faith , and hinders not the hope of saluation in persons so disagreeing . And yet in this very distinction , he neuer speakes to the purpose indeed , but only sayes , that there are some points so fundamentall , as that all are obliged to know and belieue them explicitely , but neuer tells vs , whether there be any other points of faith , which a man may deny or disbelieue , though they be sufficiently presented to his vnderstanding , as truths reuealed , or testified by almighty God ; which was the only thing in question . For if it be damnable , as certainly it is , to deny , or disbelieue any one truth witnessed by almighty God , thogh the thing be not in it self of any great consequence , or moment ; & since of two disagreeing in matters of faith , one must necessarily deny some such truth ; it cleerly followes that amongst men of different Faiths , or Religions , one onely can be saued , though their difference consist of diuers , or but euen one point , which is not in his owne nature fundamentall , as I declare at large in diuers places of my first Part. So that it is cleere , D. Potter euen in this his last refuge and distinction , neuer comes to the point in question : to say nothing that he himselfe doth quite ouerthrow it , and plainly contradict his whole designe , as I shew in the third Chapter of my first Part.

4. And as for D. Potters manner of handling those very points , which are vtterly beside the purpose , it consists , only in bringing vulgar meane obiections , which haue been answered a thousand tymes , yea , and some of them are cleerely answered euen in Charity Mistaken ; but he takes no knowledge at all of any such answers , and much lesse doth he apply himselfe to confute them . He alledgeth also Authors with so great corruption and fraude , as I would not haue belieued , if I had not found it by cleere , and frequent experience . In his second Edition , he hath indeed left out one or two grosse corruptions , amongst many others no lesse notorious , hauing as it seemes been warned by some friends , that they could not stand with his credit : but euen in this his second Edition he retracts them not at all , nor declares that he was mistaken in the First , and so his Reader of the first Edition shall euer be deceiued by him , thogh withall he reade the Second . For preuenting of which inconuenience , I haue thought it necessary to take notice of them , and to discouer them in my Reply .

5. And for conclusion of this point I will only say , that D. Potter might well haue spared his paines if he had ingenuously acknowledged , where the whole substance , yea and sometime the very words & phrases of his booke may be found in farre briefer manner , namely , in a Sermon of D. Vshers preached before our late soueraigne Lord King Iames the 20. of Iune . 1624. at Wansted , containing A Declaration of the Vniuersality of the Church of Christ , and the Vnity of Fayth , professed therein , which Sermon hauing been roundly and wittily confuted by a Catholike Diuine , vnder the name of Paulus Veridicus , within the compasse of about 4. sheetes of Paper , D. Potters Answere to Charity Mistaken was in effect confuted before it appeared . And this may suffice for a generall Censure of his Answere to Charity Mistaken .

6. For the second , touching my Reply : if you wonder at the Bulke thereof , compared eyther with Charity Mistaken , or D. Potters Answer , Concerning my Reply . I desire you to consider well of what now I am about to say , and then I hope you will see , that I was cast vpon a meere necessity of not being so short , as otherwise might peraduenture be desired . Charity Mistaken is short I grant , and yet very full , and large for as much as concerned his designe , which you see was not to treate of particuler Controuersies in Religion , no not so much as to debate , whether or no the Roman Church be the onely true Church of Christ , which indeed would haue required a larger Volume , as I haue vnderstood there was one then coming forth , if it had not been preuented by the Treatise of Charity Mistaken , which seemed to make the other intended worke a little lesse seasonable at that tyme . But Charity Mistaken proues onely in Generall out of some Vniuersall Principles , well backed and made good by choyce and solide authorities , ●hat of two disagreeing in points of Fayth , one ●nely without repentance can be saued ; which ayme exacted no great bulke . And as for D. Potters Answere , euen that also is not so short as it may seeme . For if his marginall notes printed in a small letter were transfered into the Text , the Booke would appeare to be of some bulke : though indeed it might haue been very short , if he had kept himself to the point treated by Charity Mistaken , as shall be declared anon . But contrarily , because the question debated betwixt Charity Mistaken & D. Potter , is a point of the highest consequence that can be imagined , & in regard that there is not a more pernicious Heresy , or rather indeed ground of Atheisme , then a persuasion that men of different Religions may be saued , if otherwise forsooth they lead a kind of ciuill and morall life : I conceaued , that my chiefe endeauour was not to be employed in answering D. Potter , but that it was necessary to handle the Question it selfe somewhat at large , and not only to proue in generall , that both Protestants and Catholikes cannot be saued ; but to shew also , that Saluation cannot be hoped for out of the Catholique Roman Church ; and yet withall , not to omit to answere all the particules of D Potters Booke which may any way import . To this end I thought it fit , to deuide my Reply into two Parts : in the former whereof , the maine question is handled by a continued discourse without ste●●ping aside to confute the particulers of D. Potters Answere , though yet so , as that euen in this first Part , I omit not to answere such passages of his , as I find directly in my way , and naturally belong to the points wherof I treat : & in the second Part I answere D. Potters Treatise , Section by Section , as they lie in order I heer therefore intreate the Reader , that if hartily he desire satisfaction in this so important question , he do not content himselfe with that which I say to Doctour Potter in my second Part , but that he take the First before him , eyther all , or at least so much as may serue most to his purpose of being satisfied in those doubts which presse him most . For which purpose I haue caused a Table of the Chapters of the first Part , together with their Titles & Arguments , to be prefixed before my Reply .

7. This was then a chiefe reason why I could not be very short . But yet there wanted not also diuers other causes of the same effect . For there are so seuerall kinds of Protestants , through the difference of Tenets which they hold , as that if a man conuince but one kind of them , the rest will conceiue themselues to be as truly vnsatisfyed and euen vnspoken to , as if nothing had been said therein at all . As for example , some hold a necessity of a perpetuall visible Church , and some hold no such necessity . Some of them hold it necessary to be able to proue it distinct from ours ; & others , that their businesse is dispatched when they haue proued ours to haue beene alwayes visible : for then they will conceiue that theirs hath been so : and the like may be truly said of very many other particulers . Besides , it is D. Potters fashion , ( wherein as he is very far from being the first , so I pray God he proue the last of that humour ) to touch in a word many triuiall old obiections , which if they be not all answered , it will , and must serue the turne , to make the more ignorant sort of men belieue , and brag , as if some maine vnanswerable matter had been subtily & purposely omitted ; and euery body knowes that some obiection may be very plausibly made in few words the cleere and solid answere whereof will require more leaues of paper then one . And in particuler D. Potter doth couch his corruption of Authors within the compasse of so few lines , and with so great confuseones and fraude , that it requires much time , paines , and paper to open them so distinctly , as that they may appeare to euery mans eye . It was also necessary to shew , what D. Potter omits in Charity Mistaken , and the importance of what is omitted , and sometimes to set downe the very words themselues that are omitted , all which could not but add to the quantity of my Reply . And as for the quality thereof , I desire thee ( good Reader ) to belieue , that whereas nothing is more necessary than Bookes for answering of Bookes : yet I was so ill furnished in this kind , that I was forced to omit the examination of diuers Authors cited by D. Potter , meerely vpon necessity ; though I did very well perceaue by most apparant circumstances , that I must probably haue been sure inough to find them plainely misalleadged , and much wronged : and for the few which are examined , there hath not wanted some difficulties to do it . For the times are not for all men alike ; and D. Potter hath much aduantage therein . But Truth is Truth , and will euer be able to iustify it selfe in the midst of all difficulties which may occurre . As for me , when I alledge Protestant Writers as well domesticall , as forraine , I willingly and thankefully acknowledge my selfe obliged for diuers of them to the Author of the Booke entituled , The Protestants Apology for the Roman Church , who calls himselfe Iohn Brereley , whose care , exactnes , and fidelity is so extraordinary great , as that he doth not only cite the Bookes , but the Editions also , with the place and time of their printing , yea and often the very page , and line where the words are to be had . And if you happen not to find what he cites , yet suspend your iudgment , till you haue read the corrections placed at the end of his booke ; though it be also true , that after all diligence and faithfulnes on his behalfe , it was not in his power to amend all the faults of the print : in which prints we haue difficulty inough for many euident reasons , which must needs occur to any prudent man .

8. And for asmuch as concernes the manner of my Reply , I haue procured to do it without all bitternes , or gall of inuectiue words , both for as much as may import either Protestants in generall , or D. Potters person in particuler ; vnles , for example , he will call it bitternesse for me to terme a grosse impertinency , a sleight , or a corruption , by those very names , without which I do not know how to expresse the things : and yet wherein I can truly affirme that I haue studied how to deliuer them in the most moderate way , to the end I might giue as little offence as possibly I could , without betraying the Cause . And if any vnfit phrase may peraduenture haue escaped my pen ( as I hope none hath ) it was beside , and against my intention , though I must needs professe , that D. Potter giues so many and so iust occasions of being round with him , as that perhaps some will iudge me to haue been rather remisse , then moderate . But since in the very Title of my Reply I professe to maintaine Charity , I conceiue that the excesse will be more excusable amongst all kinds of men , if it fall to be in mildnes , then if it had appeared in too much zeale . And if D. Potter haue a mind to charge me with ignorance or any thing of that nature , I can , and will ease him of that labour , by acknowledging in my selfe as many & more personall defects , then he can heape vpon me . Truth only and sincerity I so much valew and professe , as that he shall neuer be able to proue the contrary in any one least passage or particle against me .

9. Rules to be obserued if D. Potter intend a Re●oynders . In the third & last place , I haue thought fit to expresse my selfe thus . If D. Potter , or any other resolue to answere my Reply ; I desire that he will obserue some things which may tend to his owne reputation , the sauing of my vnnecessary paines , and especially to the greater aduantage of truth . I wish then that he would be carefull to consider , wherein the point of euery difficulty consists , and not impertinently to shoote at Rouers , and affectedly mistake one thing for another . As for example , to what purpose ( for as much as concernes the question betweene D. Potter and Charity Mistaken ) doth he so often and seriously labour to proue , that fayth is not resolued into the Authority of the Church , as into the formall Obiect and Motiue thereof ? Or that all points of Fayth are contained in Scripture ? Or that the Church cannot make new Articles of fayth ? Or that the Church of Rome , as it signifies that particuler Church or diocesse , is not all one with the vniuersall Church ? Or that the Pope as a priuate Doctour may erre ? With many other such points as will easily appeare in their proper places . It wil also be necessary for him not to put certaine Doctrines vpon vs , from which he knowes we disclaime as much as himselfe .

10. I must in like manner intreate him not to recite my reasons & discourses by halfes , but to set them down faythfully & entirely , for as much as in very deed concernes the whole substance of the thing in question ; because the want somtime of one word may chance to make voyd , or lessen the force of the whole argument . And I am the more solicitous about giuing this particuler caueat , because I find how ill he hath complied with the promise which he made in his Preface to the Reader , not to omit without answere any one thing of moment in all the discourse of Charity Mistaken . Neither will this course be a cause that his Reioynder grow too large , but it will be occasion of breuity to him , and free me also from the paines of setting downe all the words which he omits , and himself of demonstrating that what he omitted was not materiall . Nay I will assure him , that if he keep himselfe to the point of euery difficulty , and not weary the Reader , and ouercharge his margent , with vnnecessary quotations of Authors in Greeke and Latin , and sometime also in Italian and French , togeather with prouerbs , sentences of Poets , and such grammaticall stuffe , nor affect to cite a multitude of our Catholique Schoole deuines to no purpose at all ; his Booke will not exceed a competent size , nor will any man in reason be offended with that length which is regulated by necessity . Agayne before he come to set downe his answere , or propose his Arguments , let him consider very wel what may be replied , and whether his owne obiections may not be retorted against himselfe , as the Reader will perceiue to haue hapned often to his disaduantage in my Reply against him But especially I expect , and Truth it selfe exacts at his hand , that he speake cleerly and distinctly , and not seeke to walke in darknes , so to delude and deceiue his Reader , now saying , and then denying , and alwayes speaking with such ambiguity , as that his greatest care may seeme to consist in a certaine art to find a shift , as his occasions might chance , eyther now , or heereafter to require , and as he might fall out to be vrged by diuernty of seuerall arguments . And to the end it may appeare , that I deale plainely , as I would haue him also do , I desire that he declare himselfe concerning these points .

11. First , whether our Sauiour Christ haue not alwayes had , and be not euer to haue a visible true Church on earth : & whether the contrary doctrine be not a damnable Heresy .

12. Secondly , what visible Church there was before Luther , disagreeing from the Roman Church , and agreeing with the pretended Church of Protestants .

13. Thirdly , Since he will be forced to grant that there can be assigned no visible true Church of Christ , distinct from the Church of Rome , and such Churches as agreed with her when Luther first appeared , whether it do not follow , that she hath not erred fundamentally ; because euery such errour destroies the nature and being of the Church , and so our Sauiour Christ should haue had no visible Church on earth .

14. Fourthly , if the Roman Church did not fall into any fundamentall errour , let him tell vs how it can be damnable to liue in her Communion , or to maintaine errours , which are knowne & confessed , not to be fundamentall , or damnable .

15. Fiftly , if her Errours were not damnable , nor did exclude saluation , how can they be excused from Schisme , who forsooke her Communion vpon pretence of errours , which were not damnable ?

16. Sixtly , if D. Potter haue a mind to say , that her Errours are damnable , or fundamentall , let him do vs so much charity , as to tell vs in particuler what those fundamentall errours be . But he must still remember ( and my selfe must be excused , for repeating it ) that if he say the Roman Church e●●ed fundamentally , he will not be able to shew , that Christ our Lord had any visible Church on earth , when Luther appeared : & let him tel vs how Protestants had , or can haue any Church which was vniuersall , and extended herselfe to all ages , if once he grant , that the Roman Church ceased to be the true Church of Christ ; and consequenly how they can hope for Saluation , if they deny it to vs .

17. Seauenthly , whether any one Errour maintayned against any one Truth though neuer so small in it selfe , yet sufficiently propounded as testified or reuealed by almighty God , do not destroy the Nature and Vnity of Faith , or at least is not a grieuous offence excluding Saluation .

18. Eightly , if this be so , how can Lutherans , Caluinists , Zuinglians , and all the rest of disagreeing Protestants , hope for saluation , since it is manifest that some of them must needs erre against some such truth as is testified by almighty God , either fundamentall , or at least not fundamentall .

19. Ninthly , we constantly vrge , and require to haue a particuler Catalogue of such points as he calls fundamentall . A catalogue , I say , in particuler , and not only some generall definition , or description , wherein Protestants may perhaps agree , though we see that they differ when they come to assigne what points in particuler be fundamentall ; and yet vpon such a particuler Catalogue much depends : as for example in particuler , whether or no a man do not erre in some point fundamentall or necessary to saluation ; and whether or no Lutherans , Caluinists , and the rest do disagree in fundamentals , which if they do , the same Heauen cannot receiue them all .

20. Tenthly , and lastly I desire that in answering to these points , he would let vs know distinctly , what is the doctrine of the Prot●stant English Church concerning them , and what he vtters only as his owne priuate opinion .

21. These are the questions which for the present I find it fit and necessary for me to aske of D. Potter , or any other who will defend his cause , or impugne ours . And it will be in vaine to speake vainely , and to tell me , that a Foole may aske more questions in an houre , then a wiseman can answere in a yeare ; with such idle Prouerbs as that . For I aske but such questions as for which he giues occasion in his Booke , and where he declares not himselfe but after so ambiguous and confused a manner , as that Truth it selfe can scarce tell how to conuince him so , but that with ignorant and ill-iudging men he will seeme to haue somewhat left to say for himselfe , though Papists ( as he calls them ) and Puritans should presse him contrary wayes at the same tyme : and these questions concerne things also of high importance , as wherevpon the knowledge of Gods Church , & true Religion , and consequently Saluation of the soule depends . And now because he shall not taxe me with being like those men in the Gospell whom our blessed Lord and Sauiour charged with laying heauy burdens vpon other mens shoulders , who yet would not touch them with their finger : I oblige my selfe to answere vpon any demaund of his , both to all these Questions , if he find that I haue not done it already , and to any other concerning matter of faith that he shall aske . And I will tell him very plainly , what is Catholique doctrine , and what is not , that is , what is defined or what is not defined , and rests but in discussion among Deuines .

22. And it will be heere expected , that he performe these things , as a man who professeth learning should doe , not flying from questions which concerne things as they are considered in their owne nature , to accidentall , or rare circumstances of ignorance , incapacity , want of meanes to be instructed , erroneous conscience , and the like , which being very various and different , cannot be well comprehended vnder any generall Rule . But in deliuering generall doctrines we must consider things as they be ex naturarei , or per se loquendo ( as Deuines speake ) that is , according to their natures , if all circumstances concurre proportionable thereunto . As for example some may for a time haue inuincible ignorance , euen of some fundamentall article of fayth , through want of capacity , instruction , or the like , and so not offend eyther in such ignorance or errour ; and yet we must absolutely say , that errour in any one fundamentall point is damnable , because so it is , if we consider things in themselues , abstracting from accidentall circumstances in particuler persons : as contrarily if some man iudge some act of vertue , or some indifferent action to be a sinne , in him it is a sinne indeed , by reason of his erroneous conscience ; and yet we ought not to say absolutely , that vertuous , or indifferent actions are sinnes : and in all sciences we must distinguish the generall Rules from their particuler Exceptions . And therefore when , for example , he answers to our demand , whether he hold that Catholiques may be saued , or whether their pretended errours be fundamentall and damnable , he is not to change the state of the question , and haue recourse to Ignorance , and the like , but to answere concerning the errours being considered what they are apt to be in themselues , and as they are neyther increased nor diminished , by accidentall circumstances .

23. And the like I say of all the other points , to which I once againe desire an answere without any of these , or the like ambiguous termes , in some sort , in some sease , in some degree , which may be explicated afterward as strictly or largely as may best serue his turne ; but let him tell vs roundly and particulerly , in what sort , in what sense , in what degree he vnderstands those , & the like obscure mincing phrases . If he proceed solidly after this manner , and not by way of meere words , more like a Preacher to a vulgar Auditour , then like a learned man with a pen in his hand , thy patience shall be the lesse abused , and truth will also receiue more right . And since we haue already layed the grounds of the question , much may be sayd heereafter in few words , if ( as I sayd ) he keep close to the reall point of euery difficulty without wandring into impertinent disputes , multiplying vulgar and threed-bare obiections and arguments , or labouring to proue what no man denies , or making a vaine ostentation by citing a number of Schoolemen , which euery Puny brought vp in Schooles is able to doe ; and if he cite his Authours with such sincerity , as no time need be spent in opening his corruptions ▪ and finally if he set himselfe a worke with this consideration , that we are to giue a most strict accompt to a most iust , and vnpartiall Iudge , of euery period , line , and word that passeth vnder our pen . For if at the later day we shall be arraigned for euery idle word which is spoken , so much more will that be done for euery idle word which is written , as the deliberation wherwith it passeth makes a man guilty of more malice , and as the importance of the matter which is treated of in bookes concerning true fayth and religion , without which no Soule can be saued , makes a mans Errours more materiall , then they would be , if question were but of toyes .