<2>

{illeg} Res{illeg} doctrines \fundamentalls/, & not doctrines \fundamentals/ by ye {history} {illeg} decide ye controversy. For ye {one} {illeg} what particular \church/ which must be judges, or must they appeale to one high {Iudge}

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

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

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

And as to ye addition of Filioqꝫ to ye Creeds. & sume{illeg} in ye Greeks

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

6. Why did ye Pope add ye Filioqꝫ contrary to ye former decrees of Coucells {sic} \can the church contradict her selfe at several times?/ Or if this bee noe addition but only an Explication (wch there is small reason to say {illeg} either in respect of ye Councells prohibition extending to declarations too, or of ye article it selfe being rather an addition) yn ye denying it is not ye denying \an/ article of faith but an explication only. |&| Why then \made/ of faith. & wth an Anathema to it?

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



Chap 2. of Fundamentalls in Generall.

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

Quest. 1. Whither any Definitions of ye Church may bee beleived as {illeg} articles of faith \necessary to salvation/; 2. Whither they may bee beleive imposed on others to bee beleived as such, soe yt they may bee excluded Catholick communion if they doe not.

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

<3>

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Resp: Then ye church maks {sic} new articles of faith quoad nos.

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



Chapt 3 The absurditys of ye Romanists Doctrines of Fundamentals

Arg 1 If ye sentence of ye Church in faith is fundamentall tis because her authority is divine; (for wt can bee fundamentall if not knowne to bee revealed by God, & how known so but by divine authority? are there fundamentalls wch have no Divine authority for ym? It may bee ye churches infallibily {sic} sufficeth; but whence infallible {illeg} if not by ye assistance of Gods spirit? and {illeg} {authority} if yt assistance bee divine, why not ye authority also wch flows from it \wch is divine infallibly? {illeg} was ye Apostles infallity {sic} more then what you pretend is/); But noe church authority since ye Apostles is simply divine. Ergo.

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

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

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

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

<5>

Chap 4. Protestants doctrines of Fundamentalls indicted

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

A Catalogue of Fundamentalls, as to Church communion is conteined in ye {illeg} Creede, adding moreover yt ye scriptures are word of God: for this is ye foundation of yt creede.

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

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



Chap 5. The Romanists way of resolving faith

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

<6>

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

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

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

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

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

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

<7>

Arg: If from Chrurch {sic} Tradition \onely/ wee beleive ye Trinity Savior Resurrection, Gospell &c much more must wee yn beleive ye infallibility of ye Church in her Tradition & testimony.

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

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

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

Chap 6. Of ye Infallibility of Traditions.

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

Obj: If ye Church bee fallible yn so are particular{illeg} persons in their faith, & how can I bee assured shee erred not in defining wt is scripture & delivering it down to us.

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

<8>

Chap 7 The Protestant way {of} Resolving faith.

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

Quest 1. Why I beleive those things to be true \as to matter of fact/ wch are contained in ye Booke called ye Scriptures?

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

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

Object. All this is no more yn morall certainty, wch being fallible wee cannot from thence bee assured yt Christian religion is infallibly true.

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

Quest 3 Why I beleive those particular bookes of Scripture to bee ye {illeg}

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



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

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

<10>

Parte ye 2d. Of Scisme

Chap. 1 Of ye Vniversall church & {of} schisme in Generall.

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

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

3.     Any one particular Xtian society may impose \some/ things to bee beleived or practised repugnant to ye generall foundation of Christian society

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

5.    The society imposing conditions of Communion is {illeg} not to bee Iudge whither they bee just or no. In matters of peace conveniency & order (wch touch not her foundation) shee may overule particular persons. {illeg} But wn her foundation, (her authority too /church hood\) is questioned, why should ye party accused bee judge & yt against greate bodys of christians.

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

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

The Roman Church not ye Catholick Church

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

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



Chap 2. Protestants not Guilty of Schisme.

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

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

<11>

Papist. 1 If in Luthers time ye Romane Church was {Corrupt 1 There was noe} one visible particular Church uncorrupt. 2 nor any {illeg} times. 3 Then it was necessary to seperate from ye externall con{secration} of ye whole Church.

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



Chap 3. Of keeping Faith wwith Hereticks

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



Chap 4 The Reformation of ye Church of England justifyed.

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

Pap. You seperated not from Rome but from ye whole world. Prot. 1 From every particular church but not from ye whole World because not in any thing whein {sic} ye whole world was ageedgreed. 2 Not therefore from ye Catholick Church, for wee retaine what\ever/ she is Catholick in, yt is her Fundamentalls wch gives her being \& therefore wee still remaine a true church/. A man is a man still though hee vary from all ye world in accidentalls, as cloths, dyed &c: so long as hee consists of ye Essentiall soule & Body

If ye Generall Church will not reforme particulars may. Iudah might doe it wthout Israel Hosea 4.15. Israell was a church (many in her being saved) as well as Iudah & both yn wanted Reformation <12> Hosea {illeg}:3. Hos 1:1. 2 Kings 15;4, 35.10 & 17:19

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

Pap. yor Reformation was against fundamentalls, because in things generally held by ye \whole/ Church at ye Reformation. Prot: Then 1 wee might reforme in things not generally held by as Popes Supremacy, Infallibility, necessity of Cœlibate in ye Clergy, Communion in one kind, prayer in an unknown tongue, Indulgences &c: 2 All yor doctrines were not universally held, for yn ye Greeks & Abyssine Churches &c were, wth you, orthodox; Nay ye Church of Rome did not then hold any thing Catholick in wch wee reformed. Some of them were private opiniō of \some/ factions in her, & it may bee owned by such prevailing factions that ye opposers durst not appeare publickly against ym (as Transubst: Purgato &c) \wch might make them seme generally held/, but never were they att{illeg} d{ecreed} \defined/, or generall {sic} held to bee fundamentall till Trent Councell. And wt made ye reformation so ready but yt there were many wch wanted rather power yn will to oppose ym. 3 What if they were generally held then, were they soe up to ye times of ye Apostells?

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

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



Chap 5. Of ye Roman Churches Authority

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

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

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

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

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

When ye Emperor became Christian, for setting ye Vnity of ye Church, it was agreed yt precedency of honour in ye Church should follow yt of ye state. This gave advantages to ye B: of Rom{e} & Alexandria, The Popes wachfulnesse {sic} raised him by degrees, stiling ymselves Vindices canonum {illeg} last Pelagius & being therefore calld {sic} arrogant by ye Easterne Bishops. At last Pelagius 2d by ye necessity of ye times tooke ye Popedome wthout ye Emperors leave & sent St Gregory a Deacon embasador to excuse it. Anno 579 wn Italy was on fire wth ye Lombards. And, these broyles making ye Emperors protection & popes Homage useless, the Pope was left to play his owne game till A.D. 710 hee was able to confront ye Emperor. But ye Lombards pinching close ye Pope desires ye aid <13> of Charles Martell, who drove ym out of Italy & whose sonne \{illeg} X/ {illeg} his father tooke from ye Lombards (whose kingdome had stoode 204 yeares in Italy) Now was ye Pope greate indeed & (when Charles ye greate set up ye Western Empire) he {illeg}d assumed ye Emperors power of governing ye Church, calling Councells, ordering Papall Elections, wch ye Emperor enjoyed in Greg 7's time. For Greg 7 was confirmed in ye Popedome by Henry 4, whome he afterwards deposed.



Chap 6 Of ye Title of Vniversall Bishop.

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

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

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



Chap 7. The Popes Authority not proved from scripture.

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

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

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

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



Chap 8 Of ye Councell of Trent.

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

Nor was it a free Councell, for 1 ye place Trent was too neare ye Popes dominion, amidst ye Alps in a barren & woody soyle. 2 None had suffrage but who were sworne to ye Popes & Roman interest & <14> against all Reformation; whereas tis not apparent any oaths were primitively imposed, & when they came into use (as \is/ first mentioned of ye 4th Councell of Toledo AD. 675) they onely bound themselves to observe ye Cath: Faith & onely their superiours. 3: The Pope declared ye Appellants Hereticks before ye Councell condemned them. 4 ye Number of Bishops was too small ye Popes summons not being Generall, ye Greek & English Church having no representatives {5} ye Popes party was too numerous 187 Italians to 83 of all other Nations, & votes went by ye number of persons, not of churches as anciently. 6: All things were first consulted on at Rome, 7 Nothing might bee propounded but by ye Popes Legats, though formerly every Bishop had ye Liberty. 8 When nothing else would doe they flouted & scoffed ye spanish Bishops & all yt durst speake freely, & created fresh swarmes of Italian Bishops to out vote them

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

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

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

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

1 If they bee Infallible, what signifys yt to ye Churches peace wthout evidence yt 1. They may bee so? 1 Not because they are representatives of ye church. For they were not instituted by ye same {illeg} divine Authority: being but ye Emperors {sic} Constantines invention. And yn they can have noe more infallibility yn shee, wch they \may/ have without ye Popes confirmation. 2 Not by Resoning (for so they are men) nor by Divine Assistance in their Conclusions: For wt is Revelation if that bee not, & yn wt need of debating? 3 Is ye Councell in determining or Pope in confirming infallible |if ye Coun: yn what need confirmation? but if ye Councell may erre without P's Confirmacion, yn ye Pope is infallible & what neede of a Councell?|

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



Chap 2 Of ye Vse & Authority of Generall Councells.

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

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

The Church collective cannot in reason give more power to its body Representative yn a binding power upon it selfe & all particulars: wth this reservation yt it would call againe & reforme or <15> {illeg} whatever its representative failed in either as to trust or tr{uth} and ye rather {illeg} shee is as infallible ye {sic} her representative, & more surely so.

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



Chap 3. Of ye Errors of prtended Generall Councells

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

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

The Counsell of Lateran 1st decreed Transubstantiation, contrary to sense, nor wth consent of ye Fathers or Scripture. As, This [bread] is my \(real)/ body. Is yt sense?

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

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

The Counsell of Nice 900 yeares since & yt of Trent decreed ye worshiping of Images. Whereas in ancient churches ye very art of Painting was therefore condemned, saith Clem: Alexandinus. And Hea {sic} place no more Divinity in Images yn Papists doe.

<16>

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

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

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



Chap 5 Of ye Safty of ye Protestant faith.

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

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

2a: What meane {sic} by yor possession? yt you beleive yor owne doctrins? You may still keep in yt possessiō. Or yt you would have us beleive ym? But why so? are wee bound to beleive as you doe? Wee must first know wt this Possession is whither of truths or {illeg} fictions. When wee understand it to bee of truth wee will consent wth you: But if it bee of fictions, why do you tell us of Possession? can there bee a possession of meere nothings? (of Infallibility, Purgatory, Transubst: &c)



Chap 6. Of Purgatory.

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

<18>

And that the Moneyers p{illeg} shall be appointed them by the said Mm & Wr

920 or 921 Atreus moritur.

929 Hyllus Eusytheum occidit. {illeg} is regnat

924 Hyllus Peloponnesum invadendo occiditur ab Echenus.

943 {illeg} Pelops moritur Euristheus regnat. v

{illeg} Sthenelus Persei filius regnat in Mycene {illeg} 948

<19>

Others have held yt all soules shall bee purged {illeg} conflagration {illeg} \& {illeg}/ attaine to Happiness (at Origen, Lactantius, St Augustin, Hilary, Ambrose, &c.)

Others have thought yt ye prayers of ye church \will/ advance ye happiness of ye blessed & {illeg} ye {illeg} the {Anointed} (if not prevaile for their salvation) but not before ye day of Iudgment.

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

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

© 2020 The Newton Project

Professor Rob Iliffe
Director, AHRC Newton Papers Project

Scott Mandelbrote,
Fellow & Perne librarian, Peterhouse, Cambridge

Faculty of History, George Street, Oxford, OX1 2RL - newtonproject@history.ox.ac.uk

Privacy Statement

  • University of Oxford
  • Arts and Humanities Research Council
  • JISC