A Trial of the Romish Clergys Title to the Church, Title page – To the reader
A TRIAL OF THE ROMISH CLERGIES TITLE TO THE CHVRCH: By way of anſwer to a Popiſh Pamphlet written by one A. D. and entituled A Treatiſe of Faith, wherein is briefly and plainly ſhewed a direct way, by which eueryevery man may reſolue and ſettle his mind in all doubts, queſtions and controuerſies, concerning matters of Faith.
By ANTONIE WOTTON.
In the end you hauehave three Tables: one of the texts of Scripture expounded or alledged in this booke: another of the Teſtimonies of ancient and later Writers, with a Chronologie of the times in which they liued: a third of the chiefe matters contained in the Treatiſe and Anſwer.
A. D. Eſai. 30. Haec eſt via, ambulate in ea. This is the way, walke in it.
A. W. 2. Tim. 3. 15. The holy Scriptures are able to make thee wiſe to ſaluation.
LONDON▪ Printed for Elizabeth Burby Widow, and are to be ſold at the ſigne of the Swan in Pauls Churchyard, 1608.
TO THE CHRISTIAN READER.
IT ſtandeth not either with my occaſions or my liking, to make a long preface to that diſcourſe, which of it ſelfe ſeemeth to me ouerlong. OnelyOnly giuegive me leaue to informe the vnlearned of ſome few things, which may further him in the vnderſtanding of it. The manner of my anſwer is ſuch, as I hauehave vſed in my former writings. Firſt I ſet downe the Papiſts Treatiſe word forword: then I draw it into a right forme of reaſoning, that the truth may more euidently appeare: Laſtly, I frame as direct and plaine an anſwer to it, as conueniently I can with ſhortneſſe. If thou deſire fully to conceiue the whole courſe of this kind of anſwering, I muſt intreate thee to hauehave recourſe to the Preface, which I ſet before my anſwer to the 12 Articles; where the matter is deliuered largely and plainly enough. For the vnderſtanding of this preſent anſwer, it may ſuffice thee to know what is the meaning of certaine words of Art, as we call them, which I am inforced to vſe very often. Firſt then, a Syllogiſme is a certaine forme of reaſoning, which conſiſteth of three ſentences, whereof the ſecond is drawne out of the firſt, and the third ariſeth as a concluſion from them both. The firſt of theſe three, is called the Propoſition or Maior: the ſecond the Aſſumption or Minor; both of them ioyntly together are named the Antecedent: the third is termed the Conſequent or Concluſion. Therefore if I denie the Antecedent of a Syllogiſme, I meane to ſignifie that both the Propoſition and the Aſſumption are falſe: ſo must you conceiue ſeuerally, that which ſoeuer of the three ſentences I deny, that I take to be falſe. The conſequence is the dependance of one vponupon another: ſo that when I ſay, I deny the Conſequence, my meaning is, that the latter part doth not follow vponupon the former: for example, pag. 47. you hauehave this Syllogiſme:
Antecedent. Propoſ. If faith cannot be one vnleſſe it be entire, then it muſt be entire.
Antecedent. Aſsūp. But faith cannot be one, vnleſſe it be entire.
Conſequent. Concl. Therefore it muſt be entire.
My anſwer to this Syllogiſme is, I deny the conſequence of your Propoſition, that is, I ſay, it doth not follow that faith muſt be entire, if it cannot be one, vnleſſe it be entire.
There is alſo another forme of reaſoning, called an Enthymeme, which indeed is nothing elſe but an vnperfect Syllogiſme, conſiſting of either part of the Antecedent, and of the Conſequent. To this I anſwer, by denying either the Antecedent or the Conſequence. For example, pag. 177.
Our Sauiour himſelfe citeth ſome words out of that Chapter, and expoundeth them to be fulfilled in himſelfe.
Therefore that Chapter is to be vnderſtood of our Sauiour Chriſt and his Church.
To this Enthymeme I anſwer thus: this Conſequent doth not follow vponupon that Antecedent, which is all one, as if I ſhould hauehave ſaid, I deny the Conſequence, that is, I ſay, that Chapter is not therefore to be vnderſtood of our Sauiour Chriſt and his Church, becauſe our Sauiour citeth ſome words out of it, and expoundeth them to be fulfilled in himſelfe. An example where the Antecedent is denied, though the Enthymeme be not plainly ſet downe, you hauehave pag. 327.
The Pope is Peters ſucceſſor:
Therefore he cannot erre.
Here I deny the Antecedent, that is, I ſay it is falſe, that the Pope is Peters ſucceſſor. And this may ſerue for ſufficient inſtruction to the vnlearned, that they may be able to vnderſtand and iudge both of the reaſons and the anſwers to them. It remaineth that I cōmend thee Chriſtian Reader, whoſoeuer thou art, that vnfainedly deſireſt the aduancing of Gods glorie by thine owne ſaluation, to the gracious direction of the holy Spirit, that he may teach thee to vnderſtand and beleeue to the praiſe of his name, and thy preſent and euerlasting comfort, through Ieſus Chriſt our onelyonly Lord and Sauiour. Amen.
From my houſe on the Tower hill. Ianuary 20. 1607. Thine aſſured in the Lord Ieſus, Antony Wotton.