AN APOLOGETICAL

ADVERTISEMENT TO THE READER.

READER:

NOTHING can be so well said or done, but may be ill taken. While I thus sincerely plead for truth, the well-meaning ignorance of some mistakers hath passed as deep, as unjust censures upon me: as if preferment had changed my note; and taught me to speak more plausible language concerning the Roman Church, than I either did or ought. Wherein, as I pity their uncharitableness, so I earnestly desire to rectify their judgment; lest their prejudice may turn more to their sin, than to my wrong.

The main ground of the exception is, That I yield the Church of Rome a True Visible Church.

Wherein, the harsh noise of a mis-construed phrase offends their ear, and breeds their quarrel. For this, belike, in their apprehension seems to sound no less than as if I had said, "The Church of Rome is a true-believing Church," or "a true part of the mystical body of Christ:" a sense, which is as far wide from my words or thoughts, as from truth itself. Wherefore serves this book, but to evince the manifold corruptions of that foul Church? That she is truly visible, abates nothing of her abominations: for, who sees not, that "visible" refers to outward profession; "true," to some essential principles of Christianity; neither of them to soundness of belief? So as these two may too well stand together, A True Visible Church, in respect of outward profession of Christianity; and, A heretical, apostatical, antichristian Synagogue, in respect of doctrine and practice. Grant the Romanists to be but Christians, how corrupt soever; and we cannot deny them the name of a Church. Outward Visibility gives them no claim either to Truth or Sal

vation.

Shortly, then, in two things I must crave leave to vindicate myself: one, that I do no whit differ from myself; the other, that I differ not from the judgment of our best, orthodox, and approvedly-classical Divines. Both which cleared, what have I done? It is a grievous challenge, this of Inconstancy: for though, while we are here in this region of mutability, our whole man is subject to change; yet we do all herein affect a likeness to the God of Truth, in whom there is no shadow by turning; especially in reli

gion, so much more as that doth more assimilate and unite us to that Unchangeable Deity.

"Lo," say they, "the man, that once wrote, 'No Peace with Rome,' now cries nothing, but, Peace with Rome, while he proclaims it a True Visible Church, and allows some communion with it."

Alas, brethren, why will ye suffer a rash and ignorant zeal thus to lie palpably in your way to truth? Be but pleased to cast your eyes upon the first chapter of that book of mine, which is thus objected to me in a causeless exprobration, that which long since I wrote, of the Irreconcileableness of Rome*; and see if that Section be not a full expression of the same truth, and that in the same words, which I have here published. There shall you find taught, That there is no other difference betwixt us and Rome, than betwixt a Church miserably corrupted, and happily purged; betwixt a sickly, languishing, dying Church, and one that is healthful, strong, and flourishing: That Valdus, Wickliff, Luther, did never go about to frame a new Church, which was not; but to cleanse, restore, reform that Church, which was: That they meant only to be Physicians, to heal; not parents, to beget a Church. There you shall find, That we are all the same Church, by virtue of our outward vocation, whosoever, all the world over, worship Jesus Christ the only Son of God, the Saviour of the World, and profess the same common Creed: That some of us do this more purely; others, more corruptly: That, in the mean time, we are all Christians; but sound Christians we are not. There ye shall find this very objection so fully answered, as if it had been either formerly moved, or so long since prevented.

The words are these: "But how harshly doth this sound to a weak reader, and more than seems to need reconciliation with itself, that the Church should be one; and yet cannot be reconciled! Certainly, yet so it is. The dignity of the outward form, which comprehends this unity in itself, avails nothing to salvation, nothing to grace, nothing to the soundness of doctrine. The net doth not straight make all to be fish, that it hath dragged together: ye shall find in it vile weeds; and whatsoever else, that devouring element hath disgorged. The Church is, at once, one, in respect of the common principles of faith; and yet, in respect of consequences, and that rabble of opinions which they have raked together, so opposed, that it cannot, (as things now stand) by any glew of concord, as Cyprian speaketh, nor bond of unity, be conjoined. That, which Rome holds with us, makes it a Church: that, which it obtrudes upon us, makes it heretical. The truth of principles makes it one: the error and impiety of additions makes it irreconcileable, &c. Look on the face, therefore, of the Roman Church, she is ours, she is God's: look on her back, she is quite contrary, antichristian. More plainly, Rome doth both hold the foundation, and

"No Peace with Rome:" et, " Roma irreconcifrabilis." Sect. 1. AUTHOR. See pp. 29-32 of this Volume. EDITOR.

destroy it she holds it directly, destroys it by consequent. In that she holds it, she is a True Church, howsoever impured: in that she destroys it, what semblance soever she makes she is a Church of Malignants. If she did altogether hold it, she should be sound and orthodox: if altogether she destroyed it, she should be either no Church, or devilish: but, now that she professes to hold those things directly, which by inferences she closely overthrows, she is a truly visible Church, but an unsound one *.

Thus I wrote well-near twenty years ago, without clamour, without censure. And, since that, in my Latin Sermon to the Convocation, did I vary ought from this hold? Did I not there call heaven and earth to record, of our innocence, in separating from the Roman Church? Did I not cast the fault upon their violence, not our will? Did I not profess, Lubentes quidem discessimus &c. "We willingly indeed departed from the communion of their errors; but, from the communion of the Church, we have not departed. Let them abandon their errors, and we embrace the Church: let them cast away their soul-killing Traditions, and false appendances of their new faith; we shall gladly communicate with them in the right of the same Church, and hold with them for ever +?"

This I freely both taught and published, with the allowance, with the applause of that most Reverend Synod; and now, doth the addition of a Dignity bring envy upon the same truth? Might that pass commendably from the pen or tongue of a Doctor, which will not be endured from the hand of a Bishop? My brethren, I am where I was: the change is yours. Ever since I learned to distinguish betwixt the right hand of verity and the left of error, thus I held; and shall, I hope, at last send forth my soul in no other resolution. And, if any of you be otherwise minded, I dare boldly say, he shall do more wrong to his cause, than to his ad

versary.

That I differ not from myself, you have seen: see, now, that I differ not from our learned, judicious, approved Divines.

That the Latin or Western Church, subject to the Romish Tyranny, unto the very times of Luther, was a true Church, in which a saving profession of the truth of Christ was found, and wherein Luther himself received his Christianity, Ordination, and Ministry, our learned Doctor Field hath saved me the labour to of power prove, by the suffrages of our best and most renowned Divines 1: amongst whom, he cites the testimony of Calvin, Bucer, Melauchthon, Beza, Mornay, Deering. And if, since that time, it be foully corrupted, so as now that acute author is driven to the distinction of Verè Ecclesia, and Vera Ecclesia; yet, at last, he thus concludes: "But will some man say, 'Is the Roman Church at

* See and compare the passage at p. 31 of this volume. + "Columba Noæ." See vol. v. p. 170 of this edition. tion varies a little from that of his son. EDITOR.

Append. to the Book of the Church: iii, part. chap. 2.

this day no part of the Church of God?' Surely, as Austin noteth * that the societies of heretics, in that they retain the profession of many parts of heavenly truth and the ministration of the Sacrament of Baptism, are so far still conjoined with the Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church in and by them bringeth forth children unto God: : so, the present Roman Church is still, in some sort, a part of the Visible Church of God; but, no otherwise, than other societies of heretics are, in that it retaineth the profession of some parts of heavenly truth, and ministereth the true Sacrament of Baptism to the salvation of the souls of many thousand infants, &c." Thus he.

Junius, distinguishing betwixt the Church and Papacy, determines the Church of Rome to be a truly-living, though sick, Church; whereof the Papacy is the disease, marring the health, threatening her life and punctually resolves †, Ecclesia Papalis, quà id habet &c. "The Popish Church, in that it hath in it that, which pertains to the definition of a Church, is a Church."

Doctor Raynolds makes it his position, That the Church of Rome is neither the Catholic Church, nor a sound member of the Catholic; yielding it a member, while he disproves it sound ‡.

66

Paræus: Accusant nos &c. "They accuse us," saith he §, “ that we have made a division, in departing from the Church :" Nos verò &c." But we have not departed from the Church, but from the Papacy."

Master Hooker is most pregnant for this point. "Apparent it is," saith he , "that all men are, of necessity, either Christians or not Christians. If, by external profession, they be Christians, they are of the Visible Church of Christ: and Christians by external profession they are all, whose mark of recognisance hath in it those things which we have mentioned ¶T; yea, although they be impious idolaters, wicked heretics, persons excommunicable, yea and cast out for notorious improbity." Thus he; and, going on, he shews how it is possible for the self-same men to belong to the Synagogue of Satan, and to the Church of Jesus Christ. The passages are too long to transcribe, and the books are obvious.

Doctor Crakenthorp, in his learned answer to Spalatensis, defends heretical Churches to be truly members of the Catholic Church, though unsound ones; subscribing herein to the determination of Alphonsus: and, descending to this particular, concludes **, Hæc tamen ipsa tua Romana &c. "This your Roman Church must be accounted both to be in the Church, and to be a Church: not simply, not according to the integrity of faith, not according to any inward virtue, not so effectually that it should avail to Salvation for a man to be in it; but yet a Church it is, in some respects, according to the external profession of faith and of the

*Aug. de Baptis. contr. Donatist. lib. i. c. 8. et 10. Thes. Rain. 5. § Par. in Rom. xvi. One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism.

† Jun. de Eccl. lib. sing. c. 17.

Hook. Book iiid. of Eccl. Pol. c. 1. ** Crak. Defen. Eccles. Angl. c. 16.

Word of God, according to the administration of the Sacraments, according to some Doctrines of true belief, by which, as by so many outward ligaments, she is yet knit to the Orthodox and Catholic Church." Thus he, fully to my words and meaning.

I might swell up the bulk with many more: a catalogue whereof Brierley hath, for his own purpose, fetched up together *. I will only shut up this scene with our late most learned Sovereign, King James; who, in the Conference at Hampton Court, with the acclamation of all his judicious hearers, avowed, that no Church ought further to separate itself from the Church of Rome in doctrine or ceremony, than she hath departed from herself when she was in her flourishing and best estate, and from Christ her Lord and Head.

Well, therefore, doth my reader see, that I have gone along with good company, in this assertion: although I am not ignorant, that some worthy Divines of ours † speak otherwise; in the height of zeal denying the Church of Rome to be a True Church, to be a Church at all; whose contradiction gives colour to this offence. But, let my reader know, that, however their words are opposite, yet not their judgment: a mutual understanding shall well accord us in the matter, however the terms sound contrary. Our old word is, "Things are as they are taken." The difference is, in the acceptation of "True" and "Church;" both which have much latitude, and variety of sense. While, by True, they mean right believing; and, by Church, a company of Faithful, which have the Word of God rightly understood and sincerely preached, and the Sacraments duly administered: it is no marvel, if they say the Church of Rome is neither True nor Church: who would, who can say otherwise? But, while we mean, by a True Church, a multitude of Christians professing to agree in the main principles of religion, how can they but subscribe to us; and, in this sense, yield the Church of Rome both a Church, and Truly Visible? So as, shortly, in a large sense of "True Church," these Divines cannot but descend to us; in a strict sense of both, we cannot but ascend to them in fine, both agree in the substance, while the words cross. Certainly, in effect, Master Perkins saith no other §, while he defines his Reformed Catholic to be one, that holds the same necessary heads of religion with the Roman Church; yet so as he pares off and rejects all errors in doctrine, whereby the same religion is corrupted: wherein that well-allowed author speaks home to my meaning, though in other terms. That the Roman Church

* Pet. Baro, Conc. ad Clerum. Bunny, Treat. of Purif. D. Some, against Penry. Peter Mart. Epistle. Answer to Machiavel, p. 8. D. Covel. Fregevil. Polit. Ref. B. of St. David's Chap. D. Williams of the Church. Confer. p. 75.

+ Zanch. Miscell, de Eccles. Whitak. Quæs. 6. c. 1. pp. 444, 445. in quar. Perk. in 1. ad Galat. Cameron.

Zanch. ubi suprà. In quo purum Dei Verbum Orthodoxè intellectum et sincerè prædicatum, Sacramenta sola et legitimè juxta institutum Christi administra

ta, &c.

§ M. Perk. Ref. Cath.