and the Nicene-Creed, fay nothing of them. But then the Scriptures fpeak as exprefly of them, and other Doctrines of Faith, as of the Doctrines mentioned in the Creeds; and the Apostles delivered them as to the Saints, and as Apoftolick Doctrines or Traditions, they were retained, profeffed, and practifed in all Churches, ab omnibus, ubique, & femper, as you should have proved your additional Trent-Articles were. To fhew that, is, and ever will be my Challenge; and therefore because you could not answer it, you impofe upon her Ladyship with Sophifms and Fallacies, never telling her that the Doctrines of Faith, which are not mentioned in the Creed, are contained in the Scriptures.to

I need fay no more to fhew the Vanity of your Paper. But that you, nor any of yours fhould think I paffed over any part of it, because I could not answer it, I must run over the whole, Period after Period, upon which I fhall make fuch Obfervations and Reflections, as they feverally require.

After you had told the Lady that the whole Faith, once delivered to the Saints, was not contained in the Creeds, you prove it by inftances a For example (fay you) neither what a Sacrament is, nor the number of thofe Sacraments is expreffed in thofe Creeds; and yet they are of the Faith once delivered to the Saints, though the two Creeds mentioned fay nothing of them. To which in the firft place let me Reply by the way, that there was no need that the Creed, or the Scriptures, fhould tell the Saints what a Sacrament was; for Sacrament in the religious Senfe of the Word, fignifies Mystery, and is ufed in the Latin Church to exprefs the Greek word Musnerov: And both Jews and Gentiles, before they were converted to Chritianity, knew what a religious Myftery was, and needed no definition or defcription thereof,

And

And then, as to the number of Sacraments, or religious Myfteries in the Christian Religion, neither the Scriptures nor the Creeds, differ in that; though the former mention all the things that are Myfteries, fome in a larger, and fome in a stricter Senfe; particularly Baptifm and the Holy Eucharift, which the Church in a most emphatical fpecial Senfe called of old ta alia Músneja, the holy Mysteries; as being fœderal Myfteries, or Sacraments of greater dignity than the other Rites, which the called Myfteries in a larger and lower Senfe. But to come to the purpofe; you fay the Sacraments, I pray to prevent Difputes, let me fay the two Sacraments, in which we both agree, were of the Faith once delivered to the Saints, though the Creeds fay nothing of them, and this you fay truly: But then you fhould have told the Lady they were mentioned in the Writings of the New Teftament, in which they were delivered by the Apostles to the Saints. Then you proceed to a fecond inftance: So alfo the Doctrines concerning Divine Grace pertain to the Faith once delivered to though the two Creed's mentioned fay nothing of them. Sir, pray alfo to prevent Disputes foreign to the prefent Occafion, let me alter your Expreffion into the Singular Number, and fay, the Doctrine concerning Divine Grace, or Affiftance; for that I grant you pertains to the Faith, though feveral of the School-points concerning Divine Grace determined by the Council of Trent, pertain not to the Faith. But then the Doctrine of Divine Grace, as well as that of the two Sacraments is contained in the Scriptures, though they are not mentioned in the Creeds. Then you go on: Wherefore thefe Creeds were not compofed to contain the whole Faith, but fo much of it as is neceffary to be known by every Chriftian. How, Sir, is no more of the Faith neceffary to be known by every Chriftian, than that part of it which is expreffed

the

expreffed in the Creed? Can the whole be neceffary to Salvation, as you acknowledge, and yet not neceffary to be known and believed by every Chriftian? Or can any certain parts of it be necessary to be known by every Chriftian, upon any other account, than as all are, because they are all necessary to Salvation? You grant that we are to contend earnestly for the whole Faith once deliver'd to the Saints by the Apostles: And if we are to contend for the whole of it, how comes it to pass that now only part of it is necessary to be known by every Christian? Doth God oblige us to contend for what we do not, or need not know? Or was it needful for the Saints, to whom the Apoftles preached the whole Faith, to know it all, and every Doctrine of it, and yet for the Saints of after Ages, only neceffary to know fome? But to proceed. What, fay you, if Errors arife deftructive to other Doctrines of Faith, which are not expreffed in those Creeds, must the SAINTS to whom the Faith was once delivered, or their SVCCESSORS, facrifice Divine Doctrines to Error, and not contend for them because they are not expreffed in thofe Creeds, which we know neither do, nor ever were intended to contain the whole Faith once delivered to the Saints? Here again by the way, let me ask you, if we are not to contend for Doctrines of Faith, which being expreffed in the Scriptures, are only couched, and implicitly contained in thofe Creeds. As for Example, The two Sacraments, in which the Saints hold Communion throughout the whole Catholick Church, are implicitly contained in the Holy Catholick Church, the Communion of Saints. So in the preceding Article of the Holy Ghost the Doctrine of Grace is implicitly contained, the Holy Ghost being fet forth in the Scriptures as the Author and Efficient of all Divine Grace, Strength, and Affiftance, or if you please of all Divine Graces; which there

F

therefore are called the Fruit of the Spirit. So the Doctrine of Divine Providence plainly taught in the Scriptures, is implicitly contained in the first Article of the two Creeds, as in its first Principle; and we are to contend for it, not only as exprefly taught in the Scriptures, but as implicitly taught in the Creeds. I make this Obfervation, because in the Paffages of my Book, which you pretend to Answer, I have challenged you to fhew that your additional Articles of Faith in the New Creed of Pius IV. are involved, or virtually contained in any of the Articles of the Old, and are deducible from them, by juft and clear Confequences, or from any other Doctrines of Faith which are expressed in the Scriptures, though not mentioned in the Creeds. Will you fhew us, for Example, how this Article, I do acknowledge the Holy Catholick and Apoftolick Roman Church to be the Mother and Mistress of all Churches, is virtually included in I believe the Catholick Church in the Apostles, or I believe one Catholick and Apoftolick Church in the Nicene Creed. Which Article is intended to fignify no more than this, that all particular Churches where foever difperfed, having, and retaining a Succession of the Apoftolical Doctrines and Miniftry, make up one Catholick and Apoftolick Church. So I pray you, Sir, to fhew us how, in, and with THIS IS MY BODY, and THIS IS MY BLOOD, &c. in the Inftitution of the Holy Eucharift is contained, and connected that Rabble of Doctrines relating to the Mafs; which follow thefe words in the Creed of Pius IV. I do alfo profess that in the Mafs there is offered, &c. as before in the Margent. You own the Church cannot make a new Article of Faith; but if you cannot fhew that these and the other additional Doctrines in Pope Pius IV's Creed, are involved in the Principles and Articles of the old Creeds, and clearly deducible from them, as I

am

am fure you cannot, then that Creed is not as Vincentius Lirinenfis fpeaks, an Amplification or Expofition of the Old Creeds, but a New one; not profectus fidei, but permutatio; and the additional Doctrines of it are fo many new Artus or Members, which are not to be found in the bodies of either of the old Creeds, of which the latter is only a Paraphrafe or Inlargement, but not an Alteration or Change of the former, as Pius's Creed is of both.

The fecond thing I defire to do by the way, is to enquire of you, what you mean by the Saints, and their Succeffors. The Phrafe is not common, and I fufpect you may have fome lurking meaning in it, fome fecret Cabala, or rather fome cunning Fallacy, which you would not have the Lady perceive. I obferved before, that by the Saints you understood the Holy Catholick Church; and I have juft now obferved, that by Holy Catholick Church you always mean the Holy Catholick Apoftolick Roman Church: And then by the Succeffors of the Saints, it was eafy for the Lady to understand the prefent Church of Rome, and by confequence to conclude, that the prefent Church of Rome, Succeffour to the Primitive Church of Rome, to which the Faith was once delivered, ftill had, and ftill contended against Hereticks, especially against the Hereticks of the Church of England, for the fame Faith which was once delivered to the one Holy Catholick Apoftolick Church; that is, to her felf. Pardon, good Sir, thefe By-obfervations, which in Controverfy are often ufeful; and now I anfwer directly to your Question : That the Succeffours of the Saints, to whom the Faith was once delivered, when Errors arife deftructive to it, are not to facrifice the Divine Do&trines of Faith to Error, but carneftly to contend for them, though they are not expreffed in the Creeds; provided, First, that they are im

F 2

plicitly