solved, and the effects we find to follow upon the receiving of it. Secondly, that Christian doctrine is revealed, it is evident, because staying within the confines of the light of natural reason, we can discern no such things as in this heavenly doctrine are manifested to us. Thirdly, the revelation that is now, being mediate, and depending on a former, it must of necessity be granted that there was a first and immediate revelation of the things that are believed. Fourthly, that that immediate revelation was without mixture of error, there being no imperfection found in any of God's immediate workings. Fifthly, that whatsoever books they wrote, to whom that immediate revelation of heavenly truth was granted, are divine, without mixture of error, and canonical. Sixthly, that all such books as are recommended to us by the consenting testimony of all Christians, not noted for singularity, novelty, or heresy, as written by those who first learned the doctrine of heavenly truth from God himself, must be acknowledged to have been written by them. Which persuasion is confirmed, in that when we read and meditate upon the books so commended to us, we find a majesty, virtue, and power appearing in them more than in all human compositions, captivating us to the obedience of faith, and making us to receive them as undoubtedly divine.

These are the grounds which we build upon. Wherefore let the reader judge whether the treatiser1 had any cause to write as he doth, that he "cannot sufficiently marvel, that I, or any man of judgment or learning, should run these courses, and impugn their doctrine concerning these points, as absurd, which indeed is most prudent and divine, and yet fall into most gross absurdities and inconveniences." How prudent and divine their doctrine is touching the ground of their faith, I have shewed before, making it most clear, that if they did shew no more prudence in any thing else, their part would soon be overthrown. But touching the absurdities into which he supposeth we run, they will be found to be none at all. For, as I have shewed at large, we ground our faith in general upon the evidence of heavenly truth, and the authority of Almighty God, whom we discern to speak in the holy Scriptures; and yet in such sort listen to the Church, as a mistress of heavenly truth in all particular points, that we do 1 Pag. 155.

[FIELD, IV.]

32

not broach any new and strange doctrine unheard of in the Church, nor impugn anything that was always constantly delivered and received in the same. So that it is untrue that the treatiser saith', that I "reject all general authority, and leave every man to follow his own private conceit :" he returneth therefore to prove, that supposing we know the letter of Scripture, yet have we no certain rule to find out the sense of it; and mustereth some objections to this purpose, which I have sufficiently answered already in the defence of the rules proposed by me, and impugned by him. Neither is it so strange as he would make it, that we confess every one, though never so much enlightened, to be subject to error, and yet each of us assureth himself he doth not err from the Christian verity, one having no more assurance of not erring than another. For is it not so, that in respect of things that may be known by the light of natural reason, each one confesseth himself to be subject to error, and yet every one assureth himself he doth not err in sundry particular things? Wherefore he leaveth this point, and proceedeth to another, where he bewrayeth the weakness of his brain, labouring seriously to prove, that he, who buildeth his faith upon the English Parliament, cannot firmly and undoubtedly believe, nor have any true faith; because I say, we can never be so well persuaded of any man or multitude of men, but that we may justly fear they are deceived, or will deceive." Truly it had been well that he had applied himself to some other thing rather than book-making, unless he had any greater facility and felicity in it than he hath; for who was ever so senseless as to build his faith upon the English Parliament ? or why doth the treatiser thus fight with his own shadow? But haply he will be better towards the end.

66

(A TREATISE, &c. Part II. § 6.)

In the last place, speaking of the supposed divisions and dissensions amongst protestants, he saith3, some amongst us are "so bold as to deny, that there is any great or material dissension in our Churches;" and that I, amongst others, 3 Pag. 181.

1 Pag. 156.

2 Pag. 166.

write, that it "so fell out by the happy providence of God, when there was a reformation made, that there was no material or essential difference amongst them that were actors in it, but such as upon equal scanning will be found rather to consist in the divers manner of expressing one thing, and to be but verbal upon mistaking, through the hasty and inconsiderate humours of some men, than anything else." And that further I add, that "I dare confidently pronounce, that after due and full examination of each other's meaning, there shall be no difference found touching the matter of the sacrament, the ubiquitary presence, or the like, between the Churches reformed by Luther's ministry in Germany, and other places, and those whom some men's malice called Sacramentaries; that none of the differences between Melancthon and Illyricus, except about certain ceremonies, were real; that Osiander held no private opinion touching justification, howsoever his strange manner of speaking gave occasion to many so to think and conceive; and that this shall be justified against the proudest papist of them all." This, my assertion, he saith, "all the world knoweth to be untrue;" and endeavoureth to prove it to be so, first, by mine own sayings elsewhere, and then by some other proofs1. By mine own sayings, in that I "complain of unhappy divisions in the Christian world, and of infinite distractions of men's minds, not knowing, in so great variety of opinions, what to think, or to whom to join themselves; and that the controversies of religion in our time are grown in number so many, and in nature so intricate, that few have time and leisure, fewer strength of understanding, to examine them2." But this proof will be found too weak: for there are many, and very material divisions in the Christian world, infinitely distracting the minds of men, as those of the Greeks and Latins; those of the Romish faction, and such as embrace the reformed religion and the controversies that are between these are in number many, and in nature intricate: in respect whereof my complaint might be most just, though never any one protestant had opened his mouth against another. And besides, supposing my complaint of divisions in the Christian world to reach to the breaches that are, and have been, amongst the professors of the reformed religion, nothing can be inferred 1 Pag. 182. 2 [Field, Book III. Chap. 13. Vol. I. p. 189.]

from thence contrary to anything that I have written touching the agreeing of these men in judgment and opinion. For there may be great breaches between such men as are of one judgment and opinion upon mistaking one another; and therefore Gregory Nazianzen, in his Oration made in the praise of Athanasius, sheweth that the whole world in a sort was divided upon a mere mistaking; and that Athanasius, by making either part rightly to understand the other, procured a reconciliation. Neither need this to seem strange; for oftentimes controversies are multiplied, and by ill handling made intricate, that in truth and indeed are no controversies, and might easily be cleared, if there were a due proceeding in the discussing of the same. So that the treatiser had no reason to say, that an indifferent reader will hardly excuse me from error in this behalf.

Wherefore let us go forward, and see what other proofs he bringeth to prove that my assertion cannot be true. First, whereas I say there is no difference touching the sacrament, the ubiquitary presence, and the like, between the Lutherans and Sacramentaries, as he maketh me to speak, he saith, I may easily be convinced of untruth; because Calvin avoucheth, that by the ubiquitary presence, Marcion, an ancient heretic, is raised up out of hell, and a thousand books are written about the same point, shewing how great dissensions there have been in the world touching the same. But this proof is easily disproved: for though it be true that Calvin hath, that to imagine that the body of Christ hath no finite dimensions, but such as are extended as far as heaven and earth, and that it is everywhere by actual position, or local extension, is to make it a fantastical body, and to raise up the old heretic Marcion out of hell; yet to think that Christ's body is personally everywhere, in respect of the conjunction and union it hath with God, by reason whereof it is nowhere severed from God, who is everywhere, neither Calvin nor any other orthodoxal divine ever condemned. So that the divines of Germany, condemning that kind of ubiquitary presence that Calvin doth, and Calvin allowing that other whereof they speak, they must of necessity agree together, notwithstanding anything the treatiser can say to the contrary. But because I have largely handled this matter touch1 Instit. Lib. IV. cap. 17. § 16 et 17.

ing the ubiquitary presence and the sacrament in my Fifth Book Of the Church, and in my answer to Higgons, I will no longer insist upon it, but refer the reader to the former places.

Secondly, whereas I affirm, that none of the differences between Melancthon and Illyricus, except about certain ceremonies, were real, he saith: "Whosoever readeth the acts of the synod holden by the Lutherans at Altenberg, and the writings of the Flaccians against the Synergists and Adiaphorists, shall find dissensions touching greater matters." For the clearing of this objection it must be observed, that the supposed differences between those whom the treatiser calleth Flaccians, and the other whom he nameth Synergists, were touching the co-operation of the will of man with the grace of God, in her first conversion unto God, and the necessity of good works to salvation.

Concerning the former of these two points', it was ever agreed on between both these sorts of men, that after the first conversion there is a co-operation of the will of man altered and renewed by the work of God's Spirit, with grace in all ensuing actions of piety and virtue; and in this sense both of them as defending a synergy, or co-operation of man's will with God's grace, might rightly be named Synergists. Secondly, it was likewise agreed on by both sorts, that man by the fall of Adam, and in the state of sin, is not only wounded in the powers of his soul, in respect of things natural, external, and political, so that he cannot perform any action so well in any of these kinds of things as before he could; but that he is - utterly spoiled of all power, strength, and ability to do any spiritual and supernatural actions of true virtue and piety, and is not only half dead, but wholly dead, having no more power of himself to do anything that is good, than a dead man hath to perform the works of life. Thirdly, it was agreed on that there is not left in men corrupted by Adam's fall the least spark of moral or spiritual good desire or inclination, which being blowed upon and stirred, may concur with God's grace for the bringing forth of any good work. So that neither of them were Synergists in this sense, though Illyricus, Musæus, and other, supposed that Victorinus and some other did think so. Fourthly, it was with like unanimous consent agreed on, 1 Vide Disput. Vinare habitam inter Illyricum et Victorinum. [De Originali Peccato et Libero Arbitrio, 4to. Brem. 1562.]