Catholic communion defended against both extremes, and unnecessary division confuted in five parts ...…Catholick communion defended against both extreams, and unnecessary division confuted in five parts ...…

14. I humbly propose it to consideration, Whether by consequence (which he seeth not, nor owneth) he do not deny Christ, and all the Gospel, and work of mans redemption: I challenge him to name me one Church on Earth for many hundred years after the Apostles, that had not that which he calls false Worship and Idolatry: Suppose this were but in a few Ages, as the second, third, or fourth Century: Then a Temple of Idols, and Company of Idolaters, is no true Church: And if at any time there was no Church there was no Head of the Church: No Kingdom, no King: No Wife, no Husband, that is no Christ. How much more, if he make all, or near all the Church Idolaters to this day, and himself with the rest?

15. If it be a heinous sin to bear false Witness against a Neighbour, or to slander one man, what is it to slander and back-bite all the Church on Earth, and Christ himself?

15. If it be a heinious sin to bear false Witness against a Neighbour, or to slander one man, what is it to slander and back-bite all the Church on Earth, and Christ himself?

16. Is it not a work of Satan to destroy Love, and to render almost all Christians odious? And doth not he do so, that calleth them Idolaters? Is not this Preaching men into the hatred of each other? Do we owe no Love to any Christians, but such as is due to Idolaters? Is not the fruit of the Spirit otherwise described?