A vindication of the Animadversions on Fiat lux

Answ. 1. You represent my Answer lamely. I desire the Reader to consult it in the Animadversions, pag. 66, 67, 68. What you have taken notice of, discovers only your fineness, in making Heresy an adherence to an error in faith, contrary to the doctrine of the Church; and your selves the Church, whereby you must needs be secured from Heresy, though you should adhere to the most heretical Principles that ever were broached in the world. But nothing of all this, as I have showed, will be allowed you. 2. As we have seen some of the Reasons, why you were so unwilling to try the Cause of your Church, on the heads of Idolatry and Apostasy; so here you discover a sufficient Reason, why you have passed over your other head of Schism, in silence. You avow your self one of the most schismatical Principles, that were ever adhered unto by any professing the name of Christ. The Roman Church and the Catholic are with you one and the same. Is not this Petilianus his, in part Donati; nay Basilides his, [Greek or Hebrew]. Epiphan. Heres. 4. We only are men, all others are Dogs and Swine. Macte virtute! If this be not to show moderation, and to pursue reconciliation, at once to shut out all men but your selves from the Church here, and consequently Heaven hereafter, what can be thought so to be? In earnest Sir, you may talk what you please of moderation, but whilst you avow this one wretched schismatical Principle, you do your endeavour to exclude all true Christian moderation out of the world. 3. Why do you conclude, that your Query is not answered? Suppose one Question could not be answered, doth it necessarily ⟨p. 67⟩follow that another cannot? I suppose, you take notice that this is another Question, and not that at first proposed, as I told you before. Your first enquiry was about your Churches crime, this is about her conviction and condemnation; and your Conclusion hath no strength in it, but what is built on this unquestionable Maxim, that, None ever offended, who was not publicly judged; as though there were no Harlot in the world but those that have been carted. It is enough Sir, that her condition is sub judice, as it will be, whether you or I will or no; and that there is not evidence wanting for her conviction, nor ever was since her fall, though it may be it hath not at all times been so publicly managed.

Answ. 1. You represent my Answer lamely. I desire the Reader to consult it in the Animadversions, pag. 66, 67, 68. What you have taken notice of, discovers only your fineness, in making Heresie an adherence to an errour in faith, contrary to the doctrine of the Church; and your selves the Church, whereby you must needs be secured from Heresie, though you should adhere to the most hereticall Principles that ever were broached in the world. But nothing of all this, as I have shewed, will be allowed you. 2. As we have seen some of the Reasons, why you were so unwilling to try the Cause of your Church, on the heads of Idolatry and Apostasie; so here you discover a sufficient Reason, why you have passed over your other head of Schism, in silence. You avow your self one of the most schismaticall Principles, that were ever adhered unto by any professing the name of Christ. The Roman Church and the Catholick are with you one and the same. Is not this Petilianus his, in parte Donati; nay Basilides his, . Epiphan. Heres. 4. We only are men, all others are Dogs and Swine. Macte virtute! If this be not to shew modcration, and to persue reconciliation, at once to shut out all men but your selves from the Church here, and consequently Heaven hereafter, what can be thought so to be? In earnest Sr, you may talk what you please of moderation, but whilest you avow this one wretched schismaticall Principle, you do your endeavour to exclude all true Christian moderation out of the world. 3. Why do you conclude, that your Query is not answered? Suppose one Question could not be answered, doth it necessarily