may be said This I must or I may beleeue vpon the tradition and authority of the Church though it be not any way reuealed in the Scripture The which assertion of ours hath 2. parts the one affirmatiue that the Scripture alone and absolutely considered in it owne Latitude and extent containeth all things belonging to faith without defect This is proued a Digr 3. 1 2. in the way The other Negatiue that the Churches authoritie is neither needfull nor able to supply any necessary or new point of faith that is not contained in the Scripture I deny it not to be ordinarily a necessary condition for the knowing and beleeuing that which the Scripture reueales for b Ro. 10.14 How shall they heare that they may beleeue without a Preacher c Act. 8.31 How can we vnderstand except we haue a guide d Mal 3.7 for the Priests lips should preserue knowledge and at his mouth they should seeke the Law for he is the Messenger of the Lord of hoasts I onely deny it to be the rule and foundation of faith or so much as the last infallible and cleare ground whereupon the beleeuer in any point that he beleeues restes himselfe The which to hold proportion with the Iesuit in this place I onely proue by the Papists owne principles to wit that the proposition of the Church is e Grego Val. tom 3. disp 1. q. 1. punct 1. pag. 32. §. sit nunc Sexta neither the last and clearest motiue whereupon our faith staies but there are higher and clearer then it which can be nothing but the immediate supernaturall light of the verities beleeued themselues shining vpon our hearts from the Scripture whereunto the light of Church authority when it hath reuealed the doctrine contained in Scripture to vs giues place as all lesser lights do when a greater begins to shine 2 Secondly I answer that from this Principle of ours Nothing may be beleeued but what is set downe in Scripture expressely or may be gathered from thence by good consequence it doth not follow that a particular man as Luther or White cannot beleeue the promises of Gods speciall mercie touching his owne saluation because though Luther or Whites name be not expressely set downe in the promise yet that which is set downe is so offered to vs that being penitent beleeuers and iustified and standing in grace whereof there is an infallible assurance f THE WAIâ— Digr 43. by our aduersaries owne confession we may conclude our owne particular Saluation from thence and must indeuour to beleeue it This part of my answer affirmes 2. things First that a penitent sinner iustified and eleuated into the state of grace may infallibly proue or gather the assurance of his Saluation by good consequence from the Scripture Secondly that this assurance thus to be gathered appertaines to those verities which are beleeued by the habite of faith I do not say any man can at all times so firmely and without feare of the contrary beleeue his owne reconciliation with God as he can the first articles of faith that are expressely and immediately reuealed I onely affirme that he beleeues it by the habite of supernaturall faith and is bound to endeuour and vse the meanes that he may beleeue it 3 The first point I haue purposely shewed g Digr 40. n. 39. 4â— n. 10. in the THE WAIE and confirmed by the confession of diuers of our Aduersaries whither I referre the Iesuit that he may see how and in what manner this assurance is gathered Onely I will here admonish the reader that if the penitent beleeuer could not by necessary consequence of Scripture and true application of the generall promises of the Gospell to his owne particular person conclude his saluation he were in no wise bound to beleeue it but now when he hath receiued the Testimony of Gods Spirit within him crying Abba Father the power of the same Spirit in his body and soule renuing him and producing the effectes of sauing grace the Faith of Christ whereby he giues consent to the Gospell the life of Christ whereby he liues not himselfe but Christ liues in him the power of his death whereby he dies to the world and sinne when finally in truth and conscience he performes all the conditions that the Scripture requires and feeles within him those very signes whereby the Gospell describes the elect it may not be doubted but by good consequence both in matter and forme he may conclude his owne saluation It is no where written in the Bible that Luther or Caluine shall rise at the last day yet the Reply will allow them to beleeue it by consequence from that which is written All men shall rise It is no where written that this Iesuite shall come into Iudgement and giue an account of this his faith and the waies wherein he walkes yet I presume he beleeues it by faith in that by consequence it necessarily followes of that Article He shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead In the same manner a penitent sinner examining himselfe concludes his owne saluation from the Scripture that sayes h Marc. 16.16 Rom. 10.9 Euery one that repents and beleeues shall be saued Therefore if there be any certainty of a mans owne repentance of his being in Grace of the testimony of Gods Spirit and i Paret Lombarâ—um nec vâ—luâ—sse nec doâ—â—isse vt doâ—erentur Christian de peccatorum remissione gratia Dei vita aeterna perpetuo dubitare aut diffidere quemad modum re vera nec vllus Orthodoxus sani iudicij Ecclesiastes inter Pontificios quod equidem sciam vnquam illud docuit Mart. Eisengren defens Concil Trid. de cert grat p. 216. fie vpon that mouth that will say there is none when the Scripture k 2. Co. 13.5 biddes vs Try our selues touching them it must needes be yeelded that there is a certainty likewise of his saluation 4 The second point that the remission of our sinnes and eternall life is beleeued by Faith is cleare vpon 4. points 1. because in the Creed those 2. Articles are made the obiect of Faith therefore the penitent sinner applies them to himselfe by the same habit 2. l Aliqui Catholici existimarunt posse vnumquemque credete fide diuina sine peculiari reuelatione dimissa sibi esse peccata Vasqu 12. disp 200. n. 5. Many learned Papists confesse so much Fisher of Rochester m Roffenf opusc de fid miserecord dei axiom 10. If we will enter into heauen we must not come with a double heart or wauering Faith but with that which is ALTOGETHER VNDOVBTING and MOST CERTAINE For to doubting minds there is no way open Gropper and the Diuines of Collen n Antididag c. de iustif §. proditum est p. 29. We are iustified by Faith whereby WITHOVT DOVBTING we firmely beleeue that our sinnes who are truely penitent are forgiuen vs for Christ
whereof all this question rises 5 Our Aduersaries holding many points of religion which we refuse we require them to shew vs the said points in the Scriptures if they will either haue vs to beleeue them or free themselues from heresie their Tradition their Purgatory their Masse their Latine seruice their Transubstantiation their Images their seuen Sacraments their Inuocation of Saints and all the rest wherein we differ * This is shewed c. 28. n. 3. Their answer is that many diuine truthes and articles of faith are not contained in the Scriptures but reuealed by Tradition and Church authoritie which are to be receiued and beleeued as well as that which is written * The original cause why the Papists set a foot the question touching the insufficiency of the Scripture This is the originall reason why they stand thus against the sufficiency of the written word for their Church authoritie and to proue this they vse the Argument here propounded by the Reply and descant with it as you see Which is an impertinent kinde of proceeding when this point whether the Bookes contained in holy writ be Gods word is no question betweene vs but agreed vpon of all hands but the question is touching other speciall articles Images adoration halfe communion and such like a number more whether not being contained in the Scripture men are bound to beleeue them For touching these things it is properly that we say Nothing is necessary to be beleeued as a point of faith which cannot be prooued euidently by Scripture And therefore this argument is impertinent For where we affirme all points of faith to be comprised within the body of the Scripture we distinguish first of the things which we say are comprised for albeit we firmely hold the diuine truth and authoritie of these Bookes to be euident in themselues yet the points that we meane in this question are touching other matters for neither they nor we deny the Scripture but both they and we deny many things to be contained in it Secondly then againe of the manner how things are comprised for all other things are comprised in Scripture as the duty obedience of subiects is in the kings lawes and as true speaking is contained in Grammar or the right forme of resoluing in Logicke but this one point is so contained as light is in the Sunne or sweete in hony and according to the same notion whereby the authoritie of the Law and truth of Principles is contained in themselues This is it which very briefly I answered in * THE WAIE § 9. 3. digr 11. n. 17. two seuerall places of my Booke Now let us see what the Iesuite replies to it To this saith he I reply that principles insciences are either euident to vs and knowne by the onely light of nature and so neede no proofe but onely declaration of termes or words in which they be vttered or if they be not euident to vs they must be demonstrated either in the same science or in some superiour science by some other principle more euident to vs. But that these Bookes which are in the Bible are diuine Scripture is not euident therefore if M. Whites similitude be good it must be demonstrated by some other principle more euident to vs that these Bookes which are in the Bible be diuine Scripture The substance of his Reply is that all principles are either euident of themselues or not euident such principles as are euident he grants need no prouing but the Scriptures are principles of religiō not euident of themselues but such as need to be demonstrated to be Gods word by some other principle in a higher science more euident to vs both denying them to be euident and also to be made so by onely declaring the words wherein they are vttered And to proue this he saies in the margent if it were euident that these Bookes in the Bible are diuine Scripture how is it onely beleeued by faith for Saint Paule cals faith Argumentū non apparentium Heb. 11.1 1. My answer is that the Scriptures are principles euident of themselues to those that haue the Spirit of God and such as need not to be proued by Church authoritie but onely to be reuealed and expounded according to that which is in themselues This my answer to helpe the reader out of the Iesuits perplexed discourse I will lay downe and explicate in 3. propositions First the Scripture in diuinitie hath the same office that principles haue in sciences that as the rules and principles of Grammar teach all true speaking and as the elements of Arithmeticke teach all right numbring so the doctrine contained in the Scriptures teaches all true faith Secondly as they are the principles of religion and rule of faith so they enioy the same priuiledge that principles do in forren Professions that is to be receiued and assented to for themselues without discourse For e Atist Poster c. 1. no humane science proues it owne principles or disputes against him that denies them and although the principles of an inferiour science may be demonstrated in a superiour yet this befalles not that which is the highest as the Metaphysicks which hauing no superiour science neither stands to demonstrate it selfe nor to receiue demonstration from another but our vnderstanding assents immediatly to the principles thereof and so goes forward by them to discerne of other things In the same manner the Scripture hauing no superiour science or rule aboue it is like these principles receiued for it selfe and is not occupied in prouing it selfe and the principles therin contained but shewing other things by them it selfe must be assented to without discourse by faith before we can argue out of it Thirdly all demonstration and proofe of principles is onely voluntary not necessarie against him that denies them as in Musicke the Musitian demonstrates his precepts not thereby to teach his arte but to conuince him that denies it Hence appeares the insufficiency of my aduersaries reply First in that he saies principles are not euident but need demonstration that so the Scriptures being yeelded to be the principles of religion yet they should not be receiued vnlesse they proue themselues vntill the authoritie of the Church come There is no man acquainted with f Principia per seipsa nata sunt cognosci reliqua verò per principia Arist prio l. 2 c. 18. idem Procl in Euclid l. 2. c. 2. humane art will say so His owne Thomas g Tho. 1. part q. 1. art 8. sayes that like as other sciences do not argue to proue their owne principles but out of the principles argue to shew other things so the sacred doctrine doth not argue to proue the owne principles but from them proceeds to shew something The same is said by h Capreol prol in 1. part q. 1. pag. 24. Greg. Valent. tom 1. pag. 50. a. others Next it is false that the Scripture is like those principles which need
demonstration by some other principle in a higher art more euident to vs. Here are two vntruths For first there is no higher art then themselues Thomas i Vbi supra sayes The sacred Scripture hath no higher science The setting vp of the Pope and his Church aboue it to giue it authoritie as a higher science giues to a lower is a blasphemous practise of Antichrist Bozius k Boz de sign eccl tom 2. pag. 439. writeth that the Scripture is not to be reckoned among such principles as before all things are to be credited but it is proued and confirmed by the Church as by a certaine principle which hath authoritie to reiect and allow Scripture Let the Reader by these words of Bozius a famous Papist conster my aduersaries meaning in this place if he chance to say he meanes not as I charge him Againe it is false that the Church is more euident to vs then the Scripture in that sense that belongs to this question I see indeed the Church that teaches me before I beleeue the Scripture to be diuine supposing I were a Pagan that as yet had not receiued the Scripture but I beleeue the Scripture to be diuine and am conuinced in my conscience that it is the word of God before I can beleeue the Church sayes true For I cannot beleeue it sayes true but vpon the grounds of Scripture which it offers me and therefore consequently the truth of the Scripture is more euident then the truth of the Church In which case it is as when a man stands in the doore with a torch in his hand to giue light to such as need where he holds out the torch indeed yet he puts no light into it nor does any thing but onely hold it before them The Church-authoritie in ministring to vs doth no more to the Scripture then this man doth to his torch I wil yet vse a more familiar conparison whereby the Reader shall see how absurdly my aduersary holds the Church to be more euident then the Scriptures and to giue them authoritie which they haue not of themselues because it propounds and perswades them vnto vs. Seius owes Caius mony vpon a bond that vpon trust and for the better keeping thereof is put into the hands of Titius For the proofe of this debt it is necessary that Titius bring forth the bond but when he hath done I demand whence hath the bond his credit How is it proued to be Seius his true deed rather then a counterfet Not by Titius his authoritie because he brings it forth but by it self in that the hand and seale thereof manifest themselues to be Seius his Titius that keeps it is but a means to bring it forth But what if Seius denie the debt that Caius be enforced to sue him and by law to cast him who giue Caius the right and makes Seius his debtor and who makes the bond of force doth the Iudge before whom the cause is tried The simplest man in the countrey will not say so for the bond both proues it self and giues Caius his right and make Seius a debtor when the Iudge onely giues it execution and declares no more but that which was in the bond before Let the Scripture be compared to this bond and let my aduersary put me to proue that it is the word of God as Caius is put to proue his bond and it wil manifestly appeare that though the Church haue some ministery in propounding it yet that ministery or authoritie call it what you will doth no more then the Iudge in this case doth It is not a principle aboue the Scripture or more euident whereby the truth thereof is proued as the Iudges authoritie proues not the bond 6 Our aduersaries when they haue wrangled what they can are inforced to confesse thus much in that they grant the last and highest resolution of our faith to be into the authoritie of the Scripture And let the Reader diligently obserue how it comes about In euery controuersie and article of faith they say they are moued by the authoritie of the Church they beleeue the Trinitie the Incarnation the Scripture to be Gods true word because God hath so reuealed by the infallible authoritie of the Church But how come they to know this authority to be infallible by what motiue doth the spirit of God induce them to beleeue it l Can loc p 48. Stapl princip doctr pag. 318. Tripl aduer Whica pag. 184 188. Greg. Val. tom 3. pag 31. Rodeâ— Delgad de auth Script pag. 51. Pezant comm in Tho. pag. 479. They confesse expresly it is the reuelation of the Scripture giuing testimonie to the Church which reuelation is beleeued for it selfe and for no other therfore the highest and last reason light authoritie mouing a man to beleeue the things of faith the sence of the Scripture the authority of the Church and al is contained in the Scripture it selfe For thus I reason The reuelation of the Scripture is beleeued for it selfe therefore the Scripture is a principle indemonstrable by any other and euident in it selfe therefore it is not beleeued by Tradition vpon the authoritie of the Church but for it selfe therfore this point that the Scripture is Gods word is contained in the scripture therfore the Scripture is al-sufficieÌ„t wants nothing that is needful to be beleeued 7 Hitherto I haue expounded the maner how the Scriptures are said to be Principles that are to be admitted immediatly without discourse of other arguments and how this their authoritie is not founded vpon nor demonstrated by the authoritie of the Church and how Church-authoritie is onely a condition and ministery to offer them vnto vs. Now I come to answer his argument wherby he would proue them not to be euident to vs the which is but a poore one For S. Paul doth not say Faith is the argument of things not euident as the vulgar Latin cited in the margent translates but of things that are not seene Now things may be euident and appeare manifestly to the vnderstanding though they be not seene when they are euident otherwise by any light or discourse to the vnderstanding The which kind of euidence and that also which is by sence may stand with faith for the declaration whereof note first that a thing is euident m Jn assensis principiorum scientiae humanitus inuentae est coactio propter euidentiam speculationis quia in eu intellectus euidenter conclusionem intuetur speculatur August Anconit q. â—9 arâ— 4. ad 1. when it moues the vnderstanding so sufficiently that it cannot chuse but assent vnto it note secondly that a thing may be euident three wayes first when it is sensible as that which we apprehend by our outward sense secondly when by the light of nature it is manifest by it selfe as two equall numbers put together make an equall Thus the first principles and notions of nature are euident Thirdly when it
is manifestly gathered from that which of it selfe is manifest as that a stone cannot moue vpward of it selfe naturally because all heauie things naturally moue downeward Hence it is plaine that * Albeit faith rest not vpon that eu dence but vpon duine reuelatioÌ„ Fides non elicit actus suos mediante discursu sed sicut visus immediate fertur in obiectum sub ratione lucidâ—â—ta etiam fulei habitus in suum obiectum sub ratione diuinae reuelationis The contrary whereof is Manichisme Putaruâ—t nihil amplius esse â—re dendum quà m quod possit euidenti ratione demonstrari August de vtil credend c. 1. tom 6. many obiects of faith may also be euident because that which is beleeued may also in some respect be seene as Peter that beleeued Christ yet also saw him Or otherwise be knowne by the light of nature or gathered from that which is knowne as that there is a God And before I read this in my aduersaries margent I neuer knew but there was a compossibilitie of faith and euidence in diuers respects whereby they might both stand together in the same man about the same obiect Eymericus n Eymeric Directo part 1. q. 2 n. 2. sayes We may know the vnitie of the Deitie by naturall reason yet we beleeue one God Delgado o De Author Script pag. 51. Many diuine things touching God which are receiued by faith may also be found out by naturall reason Caietan p Caiet 22. qu. 175. art 3. sayes though Paul were rapt into the third heauens where he saw things which before hee beleeued yet the habit of faith touching those things remained in him still c. Faith and knowledge q Mayro 3. d. 23. art 6. pag. 13 sayes Francis Mayronis are habits that may stand together Faith by authoritie reuealed knowledge by euident demonstration Thus it is no contradiction that the same obiect be beleeued by authoritie and euidently knowne by demonstration Altisiodorensis r Altisiod sum l. 3. pag. 273. According to diuers apprehensions the same thing is knowne and beleeued beleeued and doubted Å¿ Mag. 3. d. 24. Alexand. 3. part qu. 79. m. 3. Tho. 22. qu. 2. art 4. cont Gent l. 1. c. 4 Occh. 3. q. 8. art 4. c. Duran prol sent pag. 4 c. Ricard 3. d. 24. q. 5. pag. 85. Gabr. 3. d 24. qu. vnic art 2. concl 2. Henric. Albert. Bonau Tarantas quos refert sequitur Dionys 3. d. 24. Simanch cath instit tit 28 n. 18. Rectè porro Caiet ex hoc loco Pauli argumentatur esse nonnulla quae de Deo euidenter cognosci demonstratiue probari queant Perer. select disp in Roma pag. 83. The principallest Schoole-men that are do all hold thus which I would not haue noted so curiously but to beate the confidence of my aduersary thus peremptorily auouching against me that he knowes not For albeit faith exceeds the dimension of reason yet reason is subordinate to it as sense is to vnderstanding And therefore as it is no inconuenience to say we vnderstand the same things we see no more is it to say we beleeue that which is euident in diuers respects How many things are we commanded in the Scripture to beleeue which yet we can demonstrate by reason as that there is a God and the immortalitie of the soule For as one may reueale a thing to another two wayes together first by shewing him a light to see it and then by proposing some externall signe or marke whereby to finde it or some image or description whereby to conceiue it so God hath shewed vs the Scripture to be diuine not onely by the light that shines in it whereby we beleeue it but also by the outward contexture of it containing the image of the diuine wisedome and puritie as the principles of sciences shew their owne authoritie The place cited out of the Hebrewes is answered by that I haue said CHAP. XX. 1. A continuation of the same matter touching the Churches authoritie in giuing testimonie to the Scriptures 2. The Scripture proues it selfe to be Gods word 3. The light of the Scripture 4. 5. How we are assured of the Scripture by the Spirit 6. The reason why some see not the light of the Scripture 7. The Papists retiring to the Spirit 8. And casting off the Fathers A Councell is aboue the Pope The Pope may erre A.D. It seemeth M. White saw the weaknesse of this his first answer Pag. 70. White pag. 47. and therefore not standing vpon it he secondly attempteth to proue Scripture to be diuine out of the Scripture For saith he S Paul 1 1. Tim. 3 v. 16 saith All Scripture is giuen by inspiration of God and S. Peter 2 2. Pet. 1. v. 20. saith no prophesie in the Scripture is of priuate interpretation but the holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost Against this I reply that my argument doth not enquire onely how we proue in generall that there is any diuine Scripture at all which is all that these or any such like sentences can proue but chiefly I aske how we proue these books in particular which the Church now vseth bearing the titles of S. Matthews S. Marks Gospel c. to be diuine Scripture to be the same which was written by those writers whose title they beare For vpon the certain beliefe hereof dependeth the certaintie of other points proued out of these bookes Now it is certaine that this is not proued by those sentences of Scripture since it may be true that there is some diuine Scripture and that all true diuine Scripture was inspired by God and yet if we seclude Tradition and Church-authoritie the question may still be whether S. Matthewes S. Markes Gospell c. especially these in particular which are now vsed are part of that Scripture which these sentences speake of Secondly I say that before these sentences proue sufficiently that there is any diuine Scripture at at all these sentences themselues must be supposed to be diuine the which cannot sufficiently be proued either by themselues or any other like sentences if we exclude Tradition which doth shew that they be diuine 1 All this I answered in the words of my Booke a Digress 12. immediatly following these words that he hath cited and that so briefly directly that nothing could be spoken plainer To proue the imperfection of the Scripture he had said it was no where expresly set downe and determined in Scripture that these bookes are the true word of God this in particular of euerie Booke holden for Scripture we shall not finde expresly written in any part of the Scripture Whereto I answered that it was written expresly that b 2. Tim. 3.16 All Scripture is giuen by inspiration and c 2. Pet. 1.20 No Scripture is of priuate interpretation but the holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost
all points contained in Scripture all which are points of faith and consequently are points necessary to be beleeued either expressely and in particular or implicitely and in generall vnder paine of damnation Indeed I do grant and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts necessitate medij and some necessary to be known necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith Whereby appeareth that M. White doth vtter two grosse vntruthes 2 White p. 5. 7. when he saies that we vtterly refuse knowledge and that the Colliars faith is canonized for our Creed In other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth For in this generall act is infolded a vertuall or implicite beleefe of all points both in regard a generall includeth all particulars contained in it as also for that this particular act of beleeuing the Church eo ipso in that we are moued vnto it by the authority of diuine reuelation as the primary or formall cause and by the authoritie of the Church it selfe as a necessary condition or the secondary cause doth so dispose the minde of the beleeuer that he is ready to beleeue euerie other point reuealed by God and propounded by the Church Againe * Pag. 140. Thirdly whereas M. White 3 White p. 5. requireth particular knowledge to be ioyned with the assent of faith as though he meant that one could not beleeue any point of faith which he did not first expressely and in particular know this his assertion is not onely contrarie to his fellow M. Wotton Wotton p. 46. who admitteth a generall or implicite beleefe of some points which we do not in particular know 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. but it is also against the Scriptures Fathers and naturall reason it selfe In the Scriptures we haue that not onely Faith and knowledge Heb. 11. v. 1. are 2. distinct things but also that faith is of things not apparant or not knowne and that faith doth captiuate the vnderstanding for the seruice of Christ 2. Cor. 10 v. 5. Rom. 10. v. 16. requiring an obedience in the beleeuer all which were not verified if expresse particular distinct knowledge were presupposed before beleefe or if beleefe and such knowledge were all one thing The Fathers do not onely distinguish faith and knowledge but do also affirme Faith to be without knowledge of things beleeued Iren. l. 2. c. 45. It is better saith Irenaeus that one that knoweth nothing beleeue God and perseuere in his loue which doth quicken a man then by subtilties of questions and by much speech to fall into impietie Not to know saith S. Hilary that which thou must beleeue Hilar. l. 5. de Trin. ante medium Aug. Ep. 102. ad Euodium doth not so much require pardon as reward because it is the greatest stipend of faith to hope for those things which thou knowest not If saith Saint Augustine Christ was borne onely for those that can discerne these things with certaine knowledge in vaine almost do we labour in the Church which he saith in regard the common sort cannot with all the preaching in the world discerne with certaine knowledge the high and hard Mysteries of the blessed Trinitie Incarnation and other such mysteries of faith and therefore not the viuacitie or quickenesse of vnderstanding saith the same Saint Augustine but the simplicitie of beleeuing Aug. cont Fund c. 4. Tract 40. in Ioan. doth make the common sort of people most safe And againe he saith of some they did not beleeue because they knew but they beleeued that they might know And in the same place he asketh what is faith but to beleeue that thou seest not Conformable to which also he saith Serm. 120. de tempore After we haue receiued Baptisme we say I am a faithfull man I beleeue that which I know not Reason also and experience it selfe teacheth that beleefe and knowledge are distinct and that beleefe doth not necessarily presuppose knowledge but is rather sometimes an antecedent to it Insomuch that euen in naturall things the Philosopher acknowledgeth that one that learneth must beleeue before he come to knowledge M. White may aske how one can assent to the veritie which he doth not first apprehend or know I answer that some apprehension at least confuse rude and generall I do not deny to be requisite in the assent of faith but expresse particular distinct or cleare apprehension or knowledge is not necessary otherwise not onely the common sort but the learnedest in the world might despaire of saluationâ— in regard they could not beleeue the mysterie of the blessed Trinity which no man in this life can distinctly and clearely vnderstand and know and yet all sorts of men are bound to beleeue it explicite and much lesse could they beleeue both it and all other mysteries contained in the whole corps of the holy Scripture all which are necessary to be beleeued in one sort or other explicite or implicite as hath bene proued and yet no one learned man hath particular distinct knowledge of euerie truth contained in the Scriptures Quis enim est hic laudabimus eum 1 FOr the reducing of this wilde discourse into some order and the better discerning of the controuersie you are to note that the Iesuite in the beginning of his Treatise laied downe 4. propositions touching faith out of the which he would spin his motiues to Papistry the first is that Faith is necessary to saluation The second that this faith is but only one The third that it must be infallible The fourth that it must be entire extending it selfe to all points vniuersally This conclusion I graunted in one sense and denied in another That our beleefe must be entire whole and sound in all points by obtaining a particular distinct knowledge of the same in our selues that so our faith might include an apprehension and knowledge of that we beleeue as well as an assent in the will I granted but if his meaning were that which then I suspected and now he bewraies that the implicite faith taught by the Iesuites and schoolemen destitute of knowledge and onely beleeuing as the Church beleeues were this entire faith so necessary and infallible then I denied it and gaue my reasons and a Dig. 2. in a speciall Digress shewed and confuted it All which he passes by and onely mentions as you see my bare assertion against his implicite faith but what I said in describing it confuting it and shewing the drift and purpose of it he touches not though it concerned his cause more then that which he replies to This is his method whereto he cleaues in all his booke to reply entirely to
faith or needfull to be followed And so from that place to pag. 57 I disputed that the Scripture ALONE is the rule of faith that is to say That rule which my Aduersary in his fourth ground had said God had prouided whereby euery man learned and vnlearned may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for the true faith Now he complaines that the State is peruerted the question not being whether Scripture be the rule of faith but whether Scripture alone be the rule and meane ordained of God to breed all faith And he notes two points wherein it is peruerted First in that I so affirme and defend the Scripture to be the rule as if he and his sectaries excluded it from being the rule in any sort which he sayes they do not For they hold the Scripture as propounded by the Church to be part of it I answer that I knew well enough they confessed the Scripture to be part of the rule and the Diuine doctrine which is the whole rule to be some of it written But I knew also that they denied it to be the whole rule ioyning therewith vnwritten traditions and the Popes Decretals which they call Church authority I knew also they allowed it to be no part of the rule but as and in such sence as the Church of Rome should please to propound it and I saw his conclusion in termes denying the Scripture alone to be the rule whereby men may sufficiently be instructed WHAT the faith is therefore I disputed directly opposite to all this that the Scripture alone without traditions is the whole rule to shew vs WHAT is to be holden for faith and nothing but the Scripture this is close to the question For albeit he yeelds it to be the rule in a sort because as his Church propounds it it containes part of the rule yet he denies it to be that whole and entire rule that his conclusion inquires of and so is to be disputed against as well as if he denied it to be any part of the rule at all Againe he holds two things First affirmatiuely that the Scripture is one part of the rule then negatiuely that the Scripture alone is not all the rule Both these are contradictory to my assertion The Scripture alone is the rule My assertion therefore affirming what he denies and denying what he affirmes containes the true state of the question and his inuoluing the matter with all this cauilling tends onely to the couering of his doctrine the loathsome visage whereof he is ashamed should be seene 3 The second point wherein he sayes the question is peruerted is in that I take the rule of faith otherwise then he doth For whereas he by that word rule meanes such a rule as not onely is sufficient to REVEALE all diuine truths that are to be beleeued but also to BREED or produce in vs the faith whereby we beleeue them I he sayes vnderstand such a rule onely as is sufficient to reueale the diuine verities though it be not sufficient to breed in vs faith and assent thereunto And it is true that I vnderstand such a rule indeed the Church wherein I liue onely beleeuing the sufficiency of the Scripture to containe all the obiect of faith but not to enable vs to beleeue it or vnderstand it ordinarily without the ministry of the Church and other meanes But this peruerts not the question * The state of the question touching Scripture ALONâ— for about the meanes there is no question but the question is whether Scripture alone excluding all Church traditions and authority comprehend the whole obiect or matter of faith that is to say All that we are bound to know beleeue and doe for our saluation though it be granted that to breed or produce faith and knowledge of that which is in the Scripture the Ministry of the Church and the helpe of Gods Spirit and our owne industry must concurre For our Aduersaries deny this and hold their runagate traditions and Church authority to be necessary not onely for the expounding and confirming to vs that which is in the Scripture if any one chance to deny it or not to see it but for the supplying of infinite articles of faith which are no waies at all comprised in the Scripture but vpon the said authority are to be receiued as well as that which is reuealed in the Scripture The Iesuite speakes as if he thought his Church authority to consist more in breeding faith and leading men to beleeue what is written then in adding any thing to the measure of the diuine verities contained in the Scripture and indeed sometime there be of his side that will plainely say so He that writ the defence of the Censure a Def. of the Cens pag. 141. NOTE THIS and inquire whether all Papists will stand to it sayes it is to be noted that the question betweene vs and the Protestants is of EXPRESSE SCRIPTVRE ONELY and not of any far fet place which by interpretation may be applied to a controuersie For this contention began betweene vs vpon this occasion that when we alledged diuers weighty places and reasons out of the Scripture for proofe of inuocation of Saints praier for the dead Purgatory and some other controuersies our aduersaries reiected them for that they did not plainely and expresly decide the matter Whereupon came this question whether all matters of beleefe are plainely and expresly in Scripture or not which they affirme and we deny And this he sayes is is the true state of the question Gretser b Defens Bellar tom 1. l. 4. c. 4. p. 1598. sayes These things may be proued by Scripture but not sufficiently not effectually by Scripture alone without tradition but onely probably The which if my aduersary and his Church did hold constantly and in good earnest I would confesse I had peruerted the state of the question But they do not but hold many things belonging to faith to be wanting and no way at all neither openly nor expresly nor consequently contained in the Scripture Dominicus Bannes c D. Dann 22. Tho. p. 302. All things which pertaine to Catholicke faith are not contained in the Canonicall books either manifestly or obscurely nor all those things which Christ and his Apostles taught and ordained for the instructing of his Church and confirming of the faith were committed to the holy Scriptures and the contrary is open heresie Melchior Canus d Can. loc p. 151 There are many things belonging to the doctrine and faith of Christians which are contained in the sacred Scriptures neither manifestly nor obscurely Cardinall Hosius e Hos confess Polon p. 383. The greater part of the Gospell by a great deale is come to vs by tradition very little of it being written in the Scripture Peresius f Peres de tradit p. 4. Tradition is taken so that it is distinguisht against the doctrine which is found in the Canonicall bookes of the
of faith contained and reuealed in Scripture it selfe 5 The difficultie is when I vpon the authoritie of the Scripture as I verily perswade my selfe beleeue contrary to the Church of Rome or any other presumed to be the true Church how it shall appeare to my selfe and others that I expound and vnderstand the Scriptures aright and not according to my own priuate spirit For answer whereto note first that this demand lies as well against the Beraeans and the rest of Gods people mentioned by Luke and Paul in the texts alledged as against the Protestants For they reiecting something that they were perswaded was not in the Scripture or receiuing that which they saw agreeable to the Scripture might be demanded how they were infallibly assured they had the true sence of the Scripture And a false Apostle when they should by the Scripture examine and reiect his doctrine might cauill as A.D. here doth and say they expounded it after their owne priuate spirit In which case the godly beleeuers could refer themselues to no other rule but onely leaue the truth still to be iudged by the Scripture by all such as would examine it Note secondly that the same difficultie presses our aduersaries For when they haue shewed and vrged the authoritie of the Church and their chiefe Pastor therin what they can yet this authoritie they cannot maintaine to be such as they hold but by the Scripture k Vbi sup liâ— b. Pezantius and k Vbi sup liâ— b. Greg. of Valence You wil ask how the proposition of the Church is known to be infallible Let him that is thus demanded answer He beleeues it by an infallible faith for the authoritie of the Scripture giuing witnesse to the Church which authoritie and reuelation he beleeues for it selfe albeit the proposition of the Church as a requisite condition be needfull thereunto I know not many of our aduersaries some l Durand 3 d 24. qu. 1. d. 25 q. 3. ibi Scot. Alm. Gabr. few Schoolmen excepted that hold the authoritie of the Church to be the formall reason of faith or the first and last cause of beleeuing but the authoritie of God himselfe reuealing these things which authoritie being something distinguished from the Church and aboue it can be no where manifested but in the Scripture Now when they alledge Scripture we may tell them againe they alledge it after their owne spirit which obiection may be multiplied as often as they multiply their discourses out of Scripture Thirdly therefore for satisfaction of the difficultie I beleeue and am assured of that I hold by infused faith God by a supernatural light reuealing and infusing the certaintie of that I beleeue partly by shewing to my vnderstanding out of the Scripture partly by stirring vp and inclining my will to assent vnto it and en brace it The which knowledge and assurance of mind when any man challenges as if it were but a priuate conceit subiect to error I can say no more but that which euery man sayes for his faith that so all true faith may be destroyed in that m For the beleeuer assents not by discourse to the matters of faith reuealed as by the formall reason of beleeuing but by simple cleaning adhering to theÌ„ faith neuer drawing forth her act by meanes of discourse but if discourse be vsed it is rather a conditioÌ„ helping to apply faith to it obiect Mat. 16.17 2. Cor. 10.5 Heb. 11.1 Fides secundùm se coÌ„siderata quod attinet ad causaÌ„ efficientem reuocanda est in motioneÌ„ diuinaeÌ„ lumenque diuinuÌ„ siue in habitum fidei Christiana fides etiam vt est in nobis reuocatur in DeuÌ„ mouentem diuinuÌ„que lumen Lud. Carb sum tom 3. c. 3. l. 1. pag. 6. no mans faith ascends aboue this infused illumination or can be demonstrated to be certaine by euident reasons n Tho. 1. part q 1. art 8 DuraÌ„ prolog sent qu. 1. pag 4. h. that shall conuince all gainsayers but onely there be forcible motiues to induce vnto it though when his reasons that thus beleeues shall be examined and his grounds of Scripture duly weyed by true Christians in a Councell or otherwise all that gainsay him may easily be confuted And this is the thing that we say for Luther and Scripture against the Papacie A. D. Yet saith M. White the Papists cannot denie but there is a heauenly light c. It is true Pag. 201. that Catholicks grant inward testimony of the Spirit to giue infallible assurance But what spirit is that which they thinke giueth this infallible assurance Not priuate spirit but the Spirit which is common to the Church the Spirit which inclineth men to humilâ—tie order and vnitie as in * Qu 6. the Introduction I haue shewed To whom also do they think infallible assurance to be giuen by the Spirit Not to euery one that presuming himselfe to be elect and to haue the Spirit shall rush without reuerence into the sacred text expounding it as he listeth or as it shall be suggested by priuate spirit but to such as with order humilitie and respect of vnitie reade and interprete Scripture as they learne it to be interpreted by the infallible authoritie of the Pastors of Gods Church Those that do otherwise though they may seeme to themselues to be infallibly sure yet indeed they are not as not hauing any substantiall ground to assure them which may not in like maner and with as probable colour be alledged by others whom although perswading themselues to be infallibly sure M. White himselfe wil grant to be deceiued in this their perswasion M. White * White pag. 62. 63. saith that his priuate men be assured by Scripture So say they M. White saith his men haue the witnesse of the holy Ghost So say they M. White saith his men were taught by the Pastors of the true Church This he saith indeed and so if they would be impudent they might say But whereas M White saith that his priuate men let Luther and Caluin be examples were taught by the Pastors if he meane they were taught by the Pastors those speciall points wherein they dissent from vs it is maruell that euen his owne blacke face blusheth not to vtter such a shamelesse vntruth Let M. White name if he can what Pastors those were that taught Luther and Caluin these new doctrines vnlesse he will allow the Diuell to be a Pastor whom Luther * Luth. de miss angul confesseth to haue taught him his doctrine against the Masse 6 If there be as the Replier grants a heauenly light in the things themselues that are beleeued and an inward testimonie of the Spirit that can giue infallible assurance to the beleeuer this is as much as we require for then this light and testimonie wheresoeuer and in whomsoeuer it be is sufficient as I said to assure the conscience of the truth of the things beleeued whosoeuer gainsay them and
of that I say And this is agreeing with the publicke profession and doctrine of their Church For it is holden e Quod ad nos pertinet certior fiâ—mior est Ecclesiae authoritas quam Sripturae Azâ—â— Inst tom 2 l 5 c. 24. See Abulens q. 13 prooem in Matth. Caiet apol de author Pap. par 2. c. 13. ad 5. Dried de eccl dogm l. 2. c. 3. ad 4. that the authoritie of the Church is greater then of the Scriptures f Stapl relect controu 4. q 5 pag. 494. 495. That the Churches authoritie is it that makes vs receiue the Scripture and euery thing that is to be beleeued yea the Church is to be heard MORE CERTAINLY then the Scripture because her doctrine is MORE MANIFEST AND EVIDENT THEN the doctrine of the Scripture And g Medin de rect in Deum fid l 5. c. 11 refert Azor. to 2 p. 602. our faith whereby we beleeue the matters of faith is reduced to the authoritie of the Church because we giue NO CREDIT TO THE SCRIPTVRES but for that the Church propounde the canon thereof to be beleeued And finally h Stapl relect pag 548. the Church hath the power to expound the Scripture from whom we must receiue the sense thereof i Pag. 550. which authoritie of the Church is the tower and bulwarke of our faith whereto euery faithfull man must retire when any question ariseth Pope Gregorie the 13 k D. 40. Si Papa annot sayes Men do with such reuerence respect the Apostolicall seate of Rome that they rather desire to know the ancient institution of Christian religion from the Popes mouth then from the holy Scriptures and they onely enquire what is his pleasure and according to it they order their life and conuersation By which words of theirs it is cleare that I said the truth For to what purpose should they alledge or mention Scripture for themselues that thus place all the power vertue and efficacie of it in their Church that in euery issue flie for the exposition of it to their Church that finde such wants and defects in it that all things must be supplied out of their Church If there were any error in my speech it lay in another point because I did not say all their speech is of the Pope no mention of the Scripture but of the Pope I should in stead of the Church haue said the Pope of Rome For l See below c. 35 n. 1 THE WAY digr 16. n. 4. howsoeuer they vse the name of the Church yet thereby they meane nothing but the Popes will he is the Churches mouth and head and from him the Church receiues her prerogatiues neither do we know or beleeue any thing to be the doctrine of the Church or sence of the Scripture vnlesse he deliuer it This is their doctrine 2 So that I might with good discretion compare our aduersaries to such as follow their mother onely and their mother her selfe to one of the Ethiopian kind without any imputation of scurrilitie And the Iesuite should not haue set vp his combe at the BB. about the matter for they will answer that a great Archbishop Thomas Becket of Canterburie long afore them did more then they haue done for they onely heard me vtter the speech but he vttered it himselfe m Iewel def apol pag 762. Our mother Rome is turned whore for money which being so I could not imagine when I writ how our aduersaries should call vpon any but their mother whose children they were of the surer side But if he thinke I haue slandered his mothers honestie the Court is open let him take his action against me and he shall heare my answer Francis Petrach a most learned man n Ioh Mar. Belg pag. 441. called Rome The whore of Babylon Budaeus o De Asse pag. 590. 601. If we consider the face and habit of our Cleargie speaking of the Church of Rome we shall be constrained to say the spouse hath renounced her husband and bidden him deale in his matters himselfe Now the spouse of Christ forgetting the band of mariage not onely lies from her husband but without all respect of shame goes vp and dowe the streetes and high waies and playes the whore from Prouince to Prouince Matthew Paris p Hist pag. 535. The vnsatiable greedinesse of the Romane Church so preuailed that all blushing set apart like a common and shamelesse whore she prostituted her selfe for money to all commers Ioannes Saris buriensis q Policrat pag. 402. An incestuous wooer is descended into the bosome of the Church Mantuan r Silu. l. 1. Mars is become father to our Romanes and a whore their mother Onus Ecclesiae Å¿ Cap. 43. n. 7. God by the Prophet Ezekiel speakes to the Church of our dayes in these words Thou hast committed fornication exceedingly and art not satisfied but hast multiplied thy fornication vpon earth and doest all the workes of a whore and of an impudent woman All these that thus speake were of the Church of Romes bed-chamber and attended on her and saw who came in and out and therefore their testimonie proues that I said of her Besides Nun-Bridget t Meretrix solet esse Procax in verbis Leuiâ— in moribus Pulcra facie Ornata vestibus Reuel l. 1. c 15. sayes the markes of a whore are foure Shamelesnesse in words Leuitie in manners A faire face And gay clothes All these agree to the Church of Rome as euery bodie knowes therefore I demand iudgement and my charges against the Iesuite CHAP. III. 1. The Order of the Iesuites why and to what purpose erected by the Pope They are that to the Pope that the Ianisaries are to the Turke 2. Their abodements Pag. 24. A. D. It would be too tedious to touch all particulars which may be obserued in this his Dedicatorie epistle in which like a man runne mad or franticke through furie he raileth and rageth against our religion and the professors thereof without care either of truth sinceritie modestie or common ciuilitie I will as I purposed giue the reader onely a taste leauing it to his discretion to thinke of the rest as he shall see cause The Iesuites saith he which are the Popes Ianizaries that guard his person and were brought in now at the last cast when the state of the Papacie was at a dead lift to support the waight of the maine battell haue pestered the land with their writings and filled the hands and pockets of all sorts of people with their papers yea fannes and feathers are lapped vp in them wherein it is admirable to see how presumptuously they take vpon them in disgracing our persons belying our doctrine and coyning and defending strange opinions of their owne neuer heard of afore c. How false this his relation is in diuers respects the discreete reader if he be acquainted with Iesuites will easily discerne As
bad vnder pretence of aduancing the Gospell or the glory of God especially if they thinke that they may lawfully maintaine it by writing apparent and knowne vntruthes the better to defend it If I say there be any Protestant writers of such seared consciences I would wish they would plainely tell vs this their minds that so those poore soules who haue bene hitherto seduced may the better see how vnsound the Potestant Religion is which cannot be maintained but with apparent vntruths vttered by their writers either without due care of conscience or against their knowledge and conscience or with hauing such bad consciences as to thinke it lawfull to lie in this their cause pretended by them to be for the aduancement of Gods glory and of the Gospell or which is all one or worse to thinke one cannot lye too much in defence of this their Protestant cause or Gospell 5 This is a poore motion and proceeds from no great conceit yet I will satisfie it vpon condition he will rest satisfied with my answer Let this content you and beare not your selues in hand to the contrary we know our cause to be Gods owne truth which you haue corrupted with innumerable heresies patched thereunto and we not onely defend it as we do with a good conscience against you but wee would thinke it our greatest happines if the cause should so require to shed our blood in defence of it and it ioyes our hearts to see the weapons wherewith you fight against vs lying railing pride rage treason sedition fire and powder which is a signe that you are not of God this our cause we will maintaine with zeale and synceritie which shall be tried not by your calumnies but by the thing it selfe And I am so far from seduâ—ing any that I would giue my life for the reclaiming of those whom you haue seduced and bewitched with meere cozenage and impostures And as I hate lying to defend Gods truth so can I not but vpbraide them that run headily into Papistry afore they know how things stand betweene vs when vpon iust triall it will fall out that in the maine question betweene the Church of Rome and vs our aduersaries vphold themselues with meere imposture To the Reader HItherto reaches that which my Aduersary hath written against the Epistle and Preface of my booke now in the next place before he fall to replying vpon the booke it selfe he inserts an Introduction as he calles it containing a Declaration of the word Faith the which bebeginnes pag. 49. where his exceptions to the said Preface and epistle end And forasmuch as it is a new discourse intended * Since I see M. A Wotton to be either of so dull capacity of wit that he cannot conceiue or rather of so captious disposition of will that he will needes doubt and make a question what I meant by the word faith I haue thought good not onely to declare what I meant by the word but also by this action to set downe certaine points of doctrine pertaining to the thing signified by the word pag 49. of his Reply as it should seeme against M. Wotton and is no Reply to me but a superfluous and impertinent collection rudely and obscurely peeced together for the outfacing of that which he was not able formally to answer I would therefore cast away no time in medling with it but onely defend my selfe against such places thereof as touch my Booke because I will not be in his debt for a word Those places onely I haue here set downe in order as they lie in his Discourse with my Answer to them CHAP. XVI Touching assurance of Grace and Beleeuing a mans owne saluation 1. Perfection of the Scripture and necessitie of the Church Ministrie 2. 3. How the iustified conclude their saluation from the Scripture 4. The iustified haue the assurance of faith This is declared Full assurance voide of doubting taught by the most in the Church of Rome 5. Touching Perseuerance A. D. Now that it doth not at all appertaine to that kind of verities Pag. 57. which are to be beleeued by faith I proue out of the Protestants owne Principles to wit that * That this proofe must be by necessarie consequence without all authoritie of the Church is insinuated by White pag. 46 nothing is to be beleeued by faith but what is expressely set downe in Scripture or so contained that without all Church authoritie it may be euidently and by good consequence proued out of Scripture But the promise of Gods speciall mercie applied absolutely and in particular to Luther Caluine c. is neither expressed nor in manner aforesaid contained in Scripture Therefore it is not a verity to be beleeued by faith by the Protestants owne Principles 1 IN this Chapter where these words lye he discourses of the obiect of faith and inquires what the things are which belong to it and must be beleeued to no purpose intruding himselfe vpon an impertinent question touching the beleefe of a mans owne saluation and in this period he affirmes that it is against the Protestants owne Principles to beleeue it Because by their Principles nothing may be beleeued but what is set downe in Scripture either expressely or by good consequence which the saluation or remission of sinnes to Luther Caluine White or any particular man is not And to shew this to be our Principle he saies in the margent that M. White in such a place insinuats that nothing may be receiued as a point of faith vnlesse it can be proued by necessary consequence of Scripture without all authoritie of the Church meaning as I suppose that I require no Church authoritie to assure a man any thing but intend such things onely to be beleeued as may be proued at least by consequence of Scripture without the authoritie of the Church I answer 2. things First that in the place alleadged I deny no authority of the Church that is dâ—e vnto it but onely against them that charge the Scripture with insufficiency as if they wanted many things needfull to be beleeued which must be supplied by the Tradition and Authority of the Church I affirme that whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne beleeued or done is contained in Scripture and by the same ALONE may absolutely be determined The meaning whereof is that what Ministrie and power soeuer the Church hath to teach and rule vs in the vse of the Scripture and points of faith which authority no Protestant will deny to belong to the true Church or to be needfull yet all things whatsoeuer belong to faith and the Church by any authoritie may propose vnto vs are contained in the Scripture and may be proued thereby alone the said Church authoritie being onely a requisite condition subordinate for the readier attaining to the sence and vse of the Scripture but no rule or principle either aboue or with the Scripture whereinto any mans faith in any point is resolued so that it
Ecclesiam Dei posse de assertione non vera facere veram aut de non non falsam Turrecâ—em sum de Eccl. l 4. part 2. c. 3. ad 6. our aduersaries denie the latter is not sufficient to make the Scripture onely probable in that howsoeuer for want of Church authoritie a man may not see such texts to proue the virginitie of Marie or the Baptisme of children yet the proofe is in them within their owne latitude and if there be any such matter in them at all then is it in them more then probably because no diuine testimonie is probable but necessarie but Gretser and the Church of Rome vse their traditions as Alchymists do the Philosophers stone with the touch of it they turne any mettall into gold or as Painters do Allum to giue tincture to their colours CHAP. XIX 1. 2. How the Churches authoritie proues the Scripture 3. The Iesuits plainely confesse that the Scriptures alone prooues it selfe to be Gods word 4. The Scriptures are Principles indemonstrable in any superior science 6. All other testimony resolued into the testimony of the Scripture 7. Touching Euidence and the Compossibility thereof with faith A. D. I will insist in that example which I propounded Pag. 68. in the treatise and thus I dispute All sorts both Catholickes and Protestants do beleeue and hold it a point necessary to be beleeued that S. Mathewes S. Marks Gospell c. are true diuine Scripture and that these particular bookes which the Church vseth are the same true Scripture at least in sense and substance which was set downe by those holy writers But these points are not expressed in Scripture nor secluding Church authority and tradition so contained as that they can be proued euidently and necessarily out of any sentence of Scripture Ergo all points necessary to be beleeued are not so contained in Scripture as Protestants say they are M. Wotton and M. White both struggle with this argument as other Protestants haue done before theÌ„ but when they haue done said all one may easily see how they sticke fast in the mire To omit their impertinent speeches there are onely two things which to the purpose they do or can directly say viz. either they must deny these to be points of faith necessary to be beleeued or else they must shew how one may prooue these points euidently out of some sentence of Scripture For if they admit that these be points of faith necessary to be beleeued and that these cannot be prooued out of Scripture it followeth ineuitably that all points of faith necessary to be beleeued cannot be prooued by Scripture and that their Principle is false which saith nothing is necessary to be beleeued as a point of saith which cannot be prooued euidently by Scripture M. White saith that like as in other sciences White pag. 47. there are some Principles indemonstrable so in matters of faith it is a Principle to be supposed that Scripture is Diuine and so no maruell if it cannot be prooued as other points of faith are To this I reply that Principles in sciences are either euident to vs and knowne by the onely light of nature and so neede no proofe but onely declaration of terms or words in which they be vttered or if they be not euident to vs they must be demonstrated either in the same science or in some superior science by some other Principle more euident to vs. But that these books which are in the Bible are diuine Scripture is * If it were euident how is it onely beleeued by faith For S. Paul calls faith argumentum non apparentium Heb. 11. v. 1. not euident therefore if M. Whites similitude be good it must be demonstrated by some other Principle more euidently vnto vs that these books which are in the Bible be diuine Scripture Secondly I aske whether this point of doctrine that S. Mathewes Gospell c. is diuine Scripture be such a Principle of faith as it selfe is also a point necessary to be beleeued and that by the same infallible faith by which we beleeue the blessed Trinity Or that it is so a Principle as it selfe is not to be beleeued at all by faith or by the same faith by which wee beleeue the blessed Trinity If the first be said then either the opinion of Protestants who say nothing is to be necessarily beleeued as a point of faith which cannot be prooued out of the Scripture is false or else this is not a Principle indemonstrable as M. White affirmeth If rhe second be said then it followeth that Protestants do not beleeue by faith S. Mathewes S. Marks Gospell c. nor any other booke in the Bible to be diuine Scripture and consequently not hauing assurance of diuine faith in this point they cannot haue any faith at all in any other points since other points being not otherwise in a Protestants iudgement points of faith then as they are conclusions prooued out of Scripture cannot be more assuredly knowne then Scripture it selfe which is the onely Premise or Principle whence Protestants deduce all other points of their faith 1 MY Aduersary in a In THE WAY §. 9. but in his printed booke cap. 7. his treatise that I answered to shew that the Scripture is not the Rule whereby to find and iudge of true faith obiected the insufficiencie and imperfection thereof because there be diuers questions and points of faith not contained and determined therein Which he endeuours to proue by this argument here set downe Whereto I answered directly and in forme as b THE WAY §. 9. n. 3. inde the booke will shew The which my answer in this place he replies to as you see after his ordinary manner with bragging and saying nothing and casting out a few insolent speeches The Protestants struggle with this argument One may easily see how they sticke in the mire Onely two things to the purpose It seems M. White saw the weakenes of his answer c wherto I answer 2 First he sayes we struggle with this argument and sticke in the mire which in some sense I may not deny for when I vndertooke this Iesuit I struggled with a dunghill and therefore * Hoc scio pro certo quod si cuÌ„ stercâ—re c. no maruell if for my penance I sticke in the mire both here and in many other places of this reply his bragging and railing and facing it out with nothing when yet all this with many shall be accepted for sound diuinity being such as will bemire and weary any man in the world that desires nothing but the truth Otherwise my answer was direct and plaine for the point he is to proue is that the Scripture alone containes not nor determines the whole obiect of our faith but diuers points needfull to be beleeued are wanting in it and must be supplied by the authority and tradition of the Church his reason to proue this is the
Syllogisme here set downe Whereto I answered First granting the maior and acknowledging it to be a point of faith necessary to be beleeued that the Canonicall bookes which the Church vses are true diuine Scripture but I denied the second proposition that they cannot be proued so to be by themselues secluding Church authority and tradition And I distinguish for the Authority and direction of the Church is Gods outward ordinance to teach vs as a condition how to see the Scripture to be diuine but not the thing whereby they are prooued so to be and whereon our faith leaneth but this diuinity the Church as a bare Minister out of the Scripture it selfe prooues to be in the Scripture not by her owne authority that vpon her word and testimony either onely or particularly it should be taken for Scripture rather then the books of other men In the same manner that a man shewes a star giuing light to it selfe which yet another cannot see till the man point to it Or as a dead mans will kept in the Register of necessity must be sought there and thence receiued yet all the authority of that court which is great and ample specially in preseruing records neither makes nor prooues the will to be legitimate but is onely a requisite condition to bring it forth and vs to the sight and knowledge of it the will proouing it selfe by the hand and seale of him that made it affixed to it So it is with the word of God which we do not ordinarily see to be the word of God vntill the Church teach and traine vs vp therein But when it hath done the arguments whereby it is proued so to be and the authority whereupon I beleeue it are contained in the word it selfe which I expound and confirme by this that euermore and perpetually the Church by the Scripture it selfe and by no other argument prooues it to be diuine to those she teaches and vpon that ground at the first receiued them for such her selfe and many times it fals out as with some Atheists and Pagans that where no Church authority ministry or perswasion is vsed by onely reading of the Scripture it selfe in respect of the outward meanes a man coms to faith which could not be if the Scripture it selfe had not conuinced him forsomuch as an Atheist or vnbeleeuer will not be perswaded by any thing but that which he euidently sees to be Gods owne word and this perswasion arises in him from the very booke it selfe without Church authority 3 And this is yet confirmed by that which the Iesuites teach against the Anabaptists Swinkfieldians holding the motions of their inward spirit to be Gods word for Bellarmine c De verb. Dei l. 1. c. 1. 2. sayes that to the faithfull acknowledging the Scripture to be Gods word it may be prooued out of the Scripture it selfe that the Scripture is the word of God Molhusine and Gretsers d Gretser def Bellar. l. 1. c. 2. pag. 34. D. words are these It is manifest that Bellarmine onely affirmes that it may be prooued OVT OF THE SCRIPTVRES THEMSELVES and the Canonicall books thereof onely TO THE FAITHFVLL who receiue and reuerence them for such that the word of God is not the inward spirit whereof fantasticall men boast but the word of God is truly it which is contriued in those books which the faithfull hold for Canonicall In which words they say three things First that the faithfull who acknowledge the Scripture to be Gods word are they persons of whom they speake not such as receiue it not Secondly that to such it may be prooued that not the inward spirit of fantasticall men but the Canonicall Scripture is the word of God Wherein they affirme two things may be prooued A Negatiue that the inward spirit is not Gods word and an Affirmatiue that Gods word is truely it which is contained in the Canonicall books of the Scripture Thirdly that both this Negatiue and this Affirmatiue may be proued out of the Scriptures themselues Hence I reasō thus To the godly that receiue and acknowledge the Scripture this affirmatiue that Gods word is it which is contained in the Canonicall Bookes of the Scripture may be proued out of the Scriptures themselues therefore the Scripture it selfe can proue it selfe to be the word of God Therefore that the Scripture it the very word of God is contained in the Scripture because otherwise it could not be proued so to be out of the Scripture it selfe Therefore all things needfull are contained in this Scripture No wrangling can auoid this If to such as receiue them it may be proued out of themselues that these Bookes are the word of God then this point that these bookes are diuine Scripture is contained in Scripture and the cause why some see it not is their owne indisposition and vnbeleefe wherewith the Scripture must not be charged but to such as receiue these Bookes the Iesuits affirme it may be proued out of themselues that they are the word of God that is without all Church authoritie which is externall and not in the Scripture 4 Secondlie this being admitted that it is a a point of faith necessary to be beleeued that the Canonical Books are diuine and then againe that they could not be shewed so to be out of themselues yet doth it not follow ineuitably that all points of faith are not contained in them for the question is not whether the Scripture be Gods word or no which is granted of all hands but whether being confessed so to be it containe all such verities as a Christian man is bound to know in such measure that there is no point to be beleeued that is not contained therein The reason is because the Scriptures are the principles of diuine knowledge and the faith thereof * Not in nature but in proportion like the credite we yeed to the rules of humane sciences which are knowne and beleeued of themselues without any further demonstration And as the kings lawes containe all things whatsoeuer the subiect is bound to do and yet the said lawes not prouing themselues to be of authoritie but supposing it to be known before and otherwise are not thereby proued to be vnperfect or defectiue but being receiued then there is nothing wanting in them that is necessary for the common-wealth and as in all arts and sciences that we learne the rules and precepts thereof need not proue themselues for that which is the generall rule of other things is not ruled it selfe in the same kinde and yet it were folly to say they were therefore imperfect So may it be said to be in the Scripture supposing it had no more light thereby to authorize it selfe then Princes lawes and humane principles haue that it containes all points of faith though it were not expressed that it selfe is the word of God For the readier vnderstanding whereof let the Reader againe cast his eie vpon the occasion
d Luc. 1 70. God spake by the mouth of his holy Prophets therefore it is expresly written that all the bookes of Scripture are Gods word Any man may see this answer to be full his question being touching this Scripture that we vse and haue in our hand where therein it was written that it selfe is Gods word For I answer that it is written in these three places whereof he hath here rehearsed two Now he replies that he doth not onely enquire how we proue in generall that there is any diuine Scripture at all but how we proue these bookes which the Church now vses to be the same that those men writ whose titles they beare which he sayes cannot be proued by the Scriptures alledged because it may still be doubted whether these bookes that we vse as the Gospell of Matthew and Marke for example be part of that Scripture which the texts alledged affirme to be inspired of God and it must likewise be proued that these texts that affirme this are themselues the word of God Whereto I answer first that granting these places to proue some diuine Scripture to be and to be inspired of God it must be granted that the Scripture may be proued so to be by the Scripture it selfe For these sentences All Scripture is giuen by inspiration Holy men spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost and such like places could not proue so much as in generall that any bookes at all whether it were these that we vse or no are diuine Scripture if themselues were not diuine I say they could not proue it truly and effectually they might say it but they could not proue it because that which shall proue it must it selfe first be a diuine testimonie Secondly prouing some diuine Scripture to be and to be inspired they proue this that we vse to be such because they so mention the Scripture they speake of that it appeares to be this that we vse and it is agreed vpon of all hands that there is no scripture but this and therefore speaking of some scripture they speake of this This is my argument That Scripture whereof the sentences alledged speake is proued thereby to be diuine But the sentences alledged speake of the same Scripture that we vse For the Church hath alwayes vnderstood it so The sentences therefore alledged proue this Scripture that we vse to be diuine And so my aduersaries demaund is satisfied I enquire not onely how it is proued by Scripture that there is some diuine Scripture which is inspired by God but that these bookes in particular are that Scripture For if it giue any testimonie at all to any Scripture at all it is to these bookes in particular which are now vsed in that it describes these bookes neither are there or haue there bene any other nor dares the Church of Rome it selfe hitherto canonize any other howsoeuer some therein think it may 2 To this my aduersarie replies that before these sentences can sufficiently proue the Scripture to be diuine they must themselues be supposed to be diuine which cannot be proued by themselues if Tradition be excluded I answered this e Digr 12. in my Booke whereto he hath replied neuer a word but stands dumbe and offers the Reader that which I answered in stead of a Reply to my answer neuerthelesse I answer againe that all places in the Scripture which affirme the Scripture to be Gods word are proued to be Gods word by themselues and their owne light and not by Tradition or Church-authoritie which is but the ministerie whereby God reueales the proofe to vs and it selfe is iudged by the Scripture For if the Church-authoritie make them to be canonicall and diuine * For that is it properly that the Papists say Bellar. Stapl. Grego to vs then it is either by adding truth diuinitie authoritie to them which they had not before in themselues by diuine inspiration or onely by declaring and reuealing to vs that truth diuinitie and authoritie which they haue immediatly from God of themselues before the Church approued them that we might see and confesse it The former our aduersaries will not say or if they will it is Atheisme worse then blasphemie for so all our faith and the highest reason mouing vs to beleeue should not be diuine reuelation but humane authoritie and the Scripture which of it selfe had no truth or diuine inspiration should be canonized by men If the latter which our aduersaries dare not denie then who sees not that they proue themselues and in themselues haue diuine authoritie immediatly from God the Church-authoritie in approuing them being nothing else but bare ministerie in respect of the Scripture though in regard of vs it be authoritie in helping vs to see that which is in themselues When the King stampes coine and signes it with his image and superscription he puts that valew and currentnesse into it that was not there before Thus a small peece of copper of it selfe originally not worth a penie may be made worth sixe pence Thus the Church authorizes not the Scripture Stapleton f Staplet relect pag. 505. in explicat art sayes The Church approues not the Scripture the first way by making it sacred diuine for this approbation it hath onely from the holy Ghost the author thereof of whom alone it hath to be sacred and not humane nor the second way by making that through her iudgement it should be accepted for true and worthy credit because that which is in the Scripture is the diuine truth BY IT SELFE AND IS NOT MADE TRVE BY THE APPROBATION OF THE CHVRCH But the third way in that by the force of her approofe and iudgement they are accepted of the faithfull for sacred and diuine and infallible true And thus we beleeue these Scriptures to be Canonicall for the testimonie of the Church The King sends a commission vnder seale by a messenger this messenger giues no authoritie to the commission but is the Kings minister authorized to propound it to the subiects Thus the Church giues testimonie to the Scriptures that it is diuine and no otherwise and it selfe fetches this testimonie from the Scripture and all the authoritie thereof is lastly resolued into the testimonie of the Scripture 3 Next these Scriptures are proued to be diuine by their owne light shining and by their owne vertue shewing it selfe in them as sweetnesse is knowne by it owne taste and the Sunne seene by it owne light and as the Kings coine is knowne by his image vpon it and the fathers voice is knowne to his children by the sound and fashion thereof so are these Scriptures by the heauenly light image and sound inspired into them knowne to be the word of God The aduersaries against whom I deale haue here with Turks and Infidels debarred me from alledging Scripture to proue it selfe and therefore I will shew it otherwise Canus a Papist g Can. loc l. 2. c. 8. pag. 13.
sayes A minde well disposed discernes the doctrine of God as the mouth being in taste doth the difference of tastes Saint Austin h Aug. tract 35. in Ioh. In the night of this world the Scriptures as a candle are lighted vp vnto vs that we should not remaine in darknesse i Rob. Parsons in his Directorie sets downe against the Atheist how the certaintie of these Scriptures is layed before vs. 1. By the Antiquitie thereof pag. 63. 2. Their manner of writing Authoritie and Preseruation p. 65. 3. Their sinceritie and the vprightnesse of the writers pag. 67. 4. The Consent of the Writers one with another pag. 72. 5. The Scope whereto they tend pag 73. 6. The Simplicitie Profoundnesse and Maiestie of the writers pag. 76. 7. The Contents pag. 80. 8. The Testimonie giuen to them by heathens pag 100. c. Pars Christ Directorie printed ann 1585. This light and heauenly maiestie by all men with one consent affirmed of the Scriptures proues that they are the word of God If the light k Vbi priùs saith the same Saint Austin be able to shew those things that are not light shall we say it failes in it selfe doth not that open it selfe without which other things are not opened and do you light a candle to see a burning candle Is not the Sunne or a starre seene by his owne light to them that haue eyes And if the ministerie of the Church be required to propose and offer and expound them to vs as it were l Apoc. 1. vlt. a candlesticke * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Areth. ibi to hold vp the candle so that as the Iesuites vse to reply to this argument this light should not shine nor this diuinitie appeare in the Scripture vnlesse the Church proposed them m Possibâ—le est actu crâ—dere omma credendâ— per solam fidem infusam ABSQVE TEâ—TIMâ—Nâ—O Dâ—CTRINA â—T MAGâ—STâ—RIO ECCLESIAE Stapl. princip l 8. c. 3. PER ILLAM SOLAM Sp sancti persuasioneÌ„ quodlibet credendum credi queat TACENTE Pâ—ORSVS VEL NON AVDITA ECCLESIA fide priuata via extraordinaria testimonio interno Relect. in Adm. Whitak §. Iam quum doth this light and maiestie therefore arise from the Church doth the light of the candle arise from the socket that beares it Doth the man that carries a torch before his master giue light to the torch and not the light thereof rather from out of it selfe enlighten both his master and him This light hath immediatly conuerted Atheists enlightened Infidels reclaimed heretickes that neuer so much as receiued or knew this Church-authoritie and tradition Which propertie of the Scripture thus to eleuate it selfe aboue all Church-authoritie inuincibly shewes that they prooue themselues to be the word of God In all this that hath bene said I grant we beleeue the Scripture and the things of faith by the ministerie of the Church but not for the authoritie of the Church Pag. 111. A. D Thirdly they hold that by this Spirit they are made infâ—llibly sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures insomuch that when they heare or reade any booke they can by their spirit discerne clearly and infallibly whether it be diuine Scripture or not holding the Scripture of it selfe to shine like a candle to them and that they discerne it from other writings and the true sense of it from false in matters necessary to saluation as the sense of taste discerneth sweet from sower Vpon this bold presumption of hauing and being taught by the Spirit proceedeth their audacious and impudent neglect of the authoritie of the ancient Fathers generall Councels or whatsoeuer else standeth against that which they imagine to be taught them by the Spirit especially when they haue seeming words of Scriptures to second that which is suggested by this their spirit Pag. 114. A. D. Againe M White saith pag. 126 that the publicke word of God speaketh in the Scripture openly though the children of God onely know and beleeue it 4 He sayes it is our doctrine that we are made infallibly sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures by this spirit insomuch that reading the Scripture we can thereby discerne whether it be Scripture or no c and to shew this he alledges some words of mine M. White saith that the sheep of Christ know his voice To which purpose my other words also are vsed that he alledges three pages after M. White saith that the publicke word of God c. There is little hope of reducing our aduersary to any indifferencie when they will not so much as sincerely report nor ingenuously acknowledge that we hold for if they would there were an end and the world should see we hold the truth Yet I wil make all things plaine and let the Reader iudge for in the ordinary course of attaining to faith we do not in the first place referre men to their owne spirit but binde them to heare the Church and stoope to her ministery which hauing done then we bid them examine themselues and affirme that such as are led by the Spirit of God through the helpe and teaching of the Church going before are by this Spirit made sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures and can discerne thereof as of the light c. This Spirit therfore neither goes before the Church teaching ORDINARILY nor is the priuate spirit of man but the Spirit of God * For Gods Spirit testifies to our spirit all truths that are beleeued giuing that light that infused faith immediatly rests vpon 1. Ioh. 2.20 27. witnessing with our spirit This being premised the Reply sayes we hold that by THIS spirit they are made infallibly sure of the diuine authoritie of the Scriptures insomuch that by THEIR spirit they can discerne c. This is vntrue For the spirit whereby the authoritie of the Scripture is assured vnto vs is neither this spirit nor their spirit nor yet n For in pâ—ocesse of time when the Church began to abound in temporals forgetting in a manner all conscience many rulers therein cloking the Scriptures with sundrie wiles feared not to falsifie the vpright iudgements of God therein We see persons hauing neither conscience nor science gouernâ— the spouse of Christ sayes Fascie rerum antiq an 1414. the vnsauorie spirit of the Pope and his cleargie but the Spirit of God testifying to our spirits that it is his word after the Church hath begun to teach vs. So that it giues not testimonie to euery one immediatly without al ministery of the Church but theÌ„ wheÌ„ the Church propounds and reueales the Scripture to such as know it not the Spirit of God by that ministery descending into their hearts and assuring them and then all the testimonie and authoritie of the Church in this her ministery giues place againe to this greater light of the Spirit of God in the beleeuers heart and is no part of that authoritie whereon
nothing 2 That which he sayes is two things First he repeates and expounds his conclusion Next he touches some small portion of that I said concerning it In repeating his conclusion first he sayes he meant it against such as thinke it sufficient to beleeue some few articles onely though they deny or doubt of others which yet the Church beleeues yea rashly and obstinately denies them who these men are he names not but he meanes the Protestants Because they deny such points as the Church of Rome which he meanes by his Catholicke Church vntruly propounds vnto them For they must be the persons intended that deny any thing which the Roman Church holds for an article of faith as the Popes primacy Purgatory Images and the rest which in b Commonly printed with the Trent Councell inserted in the WAY praef n. 15. the new Creed of the Trent Councell are made articles of faith But the Protestants answer readily that they confesse no point at all may be denied or doubted of either obstinately or rashly or at all that is a point of faith reuealed in the word of God but the things holden and propounded by the Church of Rome against them are the false doctrines and heresies of Antichrist ridiculously called the faith of the Catholicke Church Then expounding his conclusion he shewes in what manner faith must beleeue all things that it may be entire and he sayes either expresly or implicitely wherein he bewrayes that which I suspected and signified in my answer for his conclusion being that faith must be entire and sound stedfastly beleeuing all things reuealed I c The WAY pag. 5. answered that this might be granted in a true sense But peraduenture his mind ran vpon a further matter which his Church teaches about infolded faith meaning thereby that howsoeuer he affirmed that we are bound to beleeue all points of faith as well one as other yet that might be done sufficiently by beleeuing as the Church beleeues without knowledge of any thing that is beleeued the which my suspition he grants in this place to be true and so his conclusion which at the first carried so good a semblance of binding men to the knowledge of particular verities and made so honest a proffer against ignorance is now resolued into this sense that by an intire faith you are bound to beleeue all things the which is done by knowing nothing but onely beleeuing implicitely as the Church of Rome beleeues Let a man neuer trouble himselfe with inquiring into the mysteries of Christian religion or controuersies of faith but onely say d Rhem. annot Luc. 12.11 he will liue and die in that faith which the Catholicke Church teaches and this Church can giue a reason of the things beleeued This is the equiuocating tongue of the Church of Rome that can ambush it selfe in words and vnder faire speeches conceale no small wickednes 3 His arguments in maintenance of this implicite faith are fiue First the authority of M. Wootton who seemes to speake against me next because to get expresse knowledge of all points contained in Scripture which are points necessary to be beleeued is impossible at least for vnlearned men Thirdly faith and knowledge are two distinct things faith being of things not knowne captiuating the vnderstanding therefore this distinct knowledge is not presupposed before Fourthly reason and experience teach that beleefe and knowledge are distinct beleefe not presupposing knowledge but going before it Fiftly the Fathers Irenaeus Hilary Austin affirme faith to be sufficient without knowledge Afore I answer his arguments note fiue things First what our aduersaries meane hy implicite or infolded faith and it is nothing else but a blind assent of the mind to whatsoeuer the Church of Rome beleeues without any knowledge at all of the things themselues e Occh. dialog part 1. l. 3. c. 1. p. 18. Dur. 3. d. 25. q. 1. â—abr ibi Notab 2. Do. Bann 22. pag. 349. The Schoolemen deliuer it in finer termes that it is the assent of the minde to some generall or vniuersall thing wherein many particulars are included with will to beleeue nothing that is contrary thereunto but the meaning is that to the essence and nature of this entire faith the distinct knowledge or apprehension of any particular truth or article is not required but onely resolution and profession to be of the Churches beleefe whatsoeuer it be in the same manner that I reported the Colliars faith Thus any man by an implicite faith beleeues the articles of Religion and particular mysteries of our faith touching the Vnity and Trinity of the Godhead the Incarnation and Office of Christ the nature of Faith the practise of Repentance the Resurrection the Sacraments Redemption of mankinde state of sinne and the last Iudgement when he will beleeue and hold touching these things as the Church of Rome doth and yet in the meane time his vnderstanding in no measure penetrates into these articles nor can distinctly explicate or conceiue them Altisiodorensis f Sum. l. 3. tract 3. c. 1. qu. 5. saies To beleeue implicitely is to beleeue in this generall that whatsoeuer the Church beleeues is true Dionysius g 3. de 25. qu. vnic p. 215. This is infolded faith to beleeue in generall all that our Holy mother the Church beleeues Summa Rosella h V. Fides n. 1. quem refert Bann vbi sup To beleue all that which our mother the Church beleeues and holds as when a Christian man is asked whether Christ were borne of the virgine Marie or whether there be one God and three Persons and he answers that he cannot tell but beleeues touching these matters as the Church holdeth This is the definition of entire faith which the Iesuite saies extends it selfe vniuersally to all points at least implicitely Note Secondly what the things are and which be the points that our aduersaries teach to be sufficiently beleeued by this infolded faith The Reply seemes to affirme that it is allowed onely in some points which a man for want of sufficient meanes cannot know I grant saith he and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts Necessitate medij and some necessary to be knowne Necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith in other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth In which wordes my aduersarie seemes to allow implicite faith only in some few cases and charges me with two grosse vntruthes because I say the Papists vtterly refuse knowledge and Canonize the Colliars implicite faith for their Creed But he should haue obserued that which was vnder his eyes and affixed to my words alledged whereby I proued what I said I alledged Iacobus
HOC NOBIS SIT SATIS INDVBIVM APVD LITERATOS HABERI NVLLVM ESSE IN TERRIS IVDICIVM QVOD ERRARE LABI DECIPI NON POSSIT Pic. Mirand apolog pro Sauanarol l. 1. c. 1. infallible and sufficient to breed infallible assurance and so easie to be knowne and vnderstood of all sorts that all may ordinarily direct themselues thereby onely by diligent attending and assenting to it and this is the rule of faith that in this place he meanes wherein if he meane good earnest this question is at an end and the Scripture is granted to be the rule for he will allow that to be the rule which by the helpe of grace supposed is sufficient to direct all sorts onely by diligent attending and yeelding assent to it now such is the Scripture alone that the grace of God supposed onely by diligent attendance and assent vnto it it is sufficient and therefore also you see the necessitie and requisite condition of vsing diligence by my aduersaries owne words hinders not the Scriptures from being the rule of faith euen in his owne sence as himself vnderstands the rule of faith for such as is both infallible and sufficient to breed infallible assurance in vs and so easie to be knowne and vnderstood that all sorts of men may direct themselues in all points of faith onely by diligent attending and assenting to it because onely diligent attention and assenting being added on our behalfe to the helpe of Gods grace it may thereby be determinately vnderstood of all sorts in all things needfull to be knowne 3 But he sayes that as in a common wealth besides the written lawes there are vnwritten customes which interprete the written law and liuing magistrates that haue authoritie to interprete both written and vnwritten lawes and to compell men to his sence without which the written lawes were not a sufficient rule and meanes to preserue good order in the state because through the peruersnesse of men they would be misvnderstood so in the Church beside the written Scriptures there must be admitted some vnwritten traditions to interprete the Scriptures and some liuing magistrate the Pope to propound and expound the Scriptures and to compell men to take the sence that he giues because the Scriptures are not so plaine but they may be misvnderstood c. This comparison and the conclusion of it I denie for albeit meanes must be ioyned with the Scripture yet this Church-authoritie and these vnwritten traditions are none of the meanes but onely that which I haue named for there needs no meanes to supply any matter of faith that is wanting in the Scripture but onely to open our eyes that we may see what is therein whereas these traditions and this Church-magistracie are supposed to be necessarie for the adding of innumerable things to be beleeued that are not contained in the Scripture as I haue * Ch. 27. n. 3. shewed My aduersarie therefore plainly shewes the difference that is betweene vs and discouers what he meanes when he pretends the Church and her authoritie for this rule of faith he expounds transparently to be the Pope with his traditions and to him giues that which is denied in the Scriptures plenarie power partly out of the Scripture partly out of his Decretals to propound to all men the matter of their faith and compell them to take his sence be it true or false This is the Antichristian bondage whereinto the man of Rome will bring all the world and the hellish pride wherin he aduanceth himself to sit as God in the Church exalting his owne will lawes aboue the wil and lawes of the eternall God and subiecting Gods blessed word to his cursed will which his base a Coâ—ceruauâ—runt sibi magistros ad desideria sua non vâ— ab eu discerent quod facere deberent sed vt eorum studio calliditate iâ—â—â—niretâ—r ratio qua licereâ— id quod liberes Spoken of the Popes clawbacks by Concil delect Card. sub init Parasites for their backes and bellies so much striue for which we execrate as hell and leaue to the Diuell from whence it first appeared vnto the world ciuill states and the commonwealths of this world may haue such vnwritten customes and allow this authority to magistrates but God hath left no such traditions to his Church nor set any such head ouer it thus to expound the Scriptures or to determinate the sense thereof but all his whole will is written and out of the Scripture it selfe is to be reuealed imparted to particular men when any doubt arises by the ministry of the Church either in ordinary preaching or in the Councels of godly orthodoxall Bishops b That a Councel is the highest tribunall vpon earth and aboue the Pope affirmed by Iustinian in praetermiss per Anto. Cont. p. 11. Phot. Nomocan tit 9 c 1 6. The Councels of Pisa Const Basil and the Vniuersity of Paris to this day See to this purpose Card Florent tract de Scism Anto. de Rosell monarch tract de concil Mich. Cezen lit ad imperat part 12. sub sin Ioh. Fran. Pic. Mirand apol pro Sauanaro l. 1. c. 1. to the which the Pope and his rabble if they will know the truth and be saued ought to subiect themselues as well as the poorest Christian that liues and the written word is so absolute and sufficient to direct them herein and his spirit so infallibly ready to guide them if they will vse the meanes that there is no more to be required for the full manifestation of any thing needfull for any man whatsoeuer and c CertuÌ„ est quod possit errare etiam in ijs quae tangum fidem haeresim per suam determinationem aut decretalem asserendo Hadrian 4. de sacra consit p. 26. see below this authority of the Pope it selfe when all is done is faine to be reiected 4 Thirdly whereas I said out of Chrysostome that howsoeuer some part of the Scripture be obscure yet some places are so plaine and easie to vnderstand that euery man by reading may know the meaning which speech I extend to so many places as are sufficient to teach vs all things needfull to saluation in this sense that the whole rule of faith is set downe in plaine places of Scripture which any man of himselfe by reading may vnderstand requiring still the grace of God and diligence in searching he replies three things The which afore I answer the Reader must note that the words he opposes are Chrysostomes and what I said I proued by many arguments the last whereof was the testimonie of the ancient Fathers who say in expresse words as much as I. The which arguments he answers not a word to and therefore replying vpon my conclusion he opposes through me the plaine Scripture the ancient Church and his owne writers by all which I confirmed that I said 5 First he sayes that albeit some places are plaine yet it doth not
assurance and the assurance of all other things beleeued is wrought and bred in the heart by the Spirit of God principally and then by the alone words of the Scripture ioyned therewith as by the formal beginning of that my assurance and by the ministry of the Church onely as Gods ordinance appointed to helpe me to attaine and recouet that sence and assurance that by meanes of this helpe arises in me from the Scripture it selfe though many times and very ordinarily this is done without all motion of the Church whatsoeuer by onely reading as I haue often said in case when men are either conuerted from Athisme or confirmed in the truth without hearing or knowing of the Church by onely reading CHAP. XXX Touching the Al-sufficiency of the Scripture to the matter of faith 2. It shewes it selfe to be Gods word Luthers denying Saint Iames his Epistle 3. How the Papists expound the light of the Scripture 4. What they and what we hold about the authority of the Church 6. How expresse Scripture is required A. D. § 3. Pag. 187. The Scripture containeth not all points of faith concerning my third reasō I wish the reader to obserue that I do not attribute any imperfection to the Scripture when I proue that it containeth not all points of faith For want of perfection in a thing is not to be accounted an imperfection vnlesse it can be shewed that the perfection which wanteth doth necessarily pertaine to the nature of the thing or at least is due and ought to be in it as my aduersaries will neuer be able to shew that to containe all points of faith doth necessarily pertaine to the nature of Scripture or is due or ought to be in it This being noted I need say little in confirmation of this argument as hauing vrged it sufficiently against M. Wootton and M. White in the introduction in such sort as they will neuer be able sufficiently to answer it Onely here I will aske one question of M. White White p. 48. who telleth vs that the Scripture manifesteth it selfe to be diuine in regard the vertue and power that sheweth it selfe in euery line and leafe of the Bible proclaimeth it to be the word of the eternall God and the sheepe of Christ discerne the voice and light thereof as men discerne light from darkenesse c. If this be so how chanceth it that his illuminated Luther whom doubtlesse M. White will account one of the sheepe of Christ could not see that S. Iames his Epistle was diuine Scripture by the vertue and power that sheweth it selfe in euery line and leafe of it no lesse then in other places of Scripture shall he be accounted illuminated or rather starke blinde that could not discerne light from darkenesse And shall not M. White also be accounted not so much blinde as braine-sicke that fancieth to himself such a light to shine in euery leafe and line of the Bible that euery one that is the sheepe of Christ discerneth it no otherwise then he that hath corporall eye-sight discerneth outward light from darkenesse True it is there is the vertue and power of God in the Scripture there is puritie and perfection of matter maiestie of speech power ouer the conscience certaintie of Prophecies c. but these do not shine like light to our vnderstanding till it be illuminated with the light of faith as euery one euen of the elect is not at all times indued with faith nor then neither vnlesse those things be propounded duly mediatè or immediatè by the authoritie of the Church vpon which being like a candlesticke the light of the Scripture must be set or else it will not according to the ordinary course of Gods prouidence sufficiently shine and appeare vnto vs in such sort as to giue infallible assurance Wootton p. 89. White pag. 46. that it is the word of God It troubleth M. wootton M. White both that I say there be diuers substantiall points which are not expressely set nowne and determined in Scripture which they being conuinced with euidence of the matter cannot deny to be so but say they this is not the question But by their leaues this was first the question when their Grandfather Luther was so hoate to haue expresse Scripture See Gretz in defens Bellar. tom 1 in li. 4. de verbo Dei non scripto cap. 3. See introduct q. 2. as that he would haue all expressed euen in wordes Afterwards indeed when his fury cooled a litle he thought it sufficient if all were expressed though not in so many sillables yet in sense And now of late our new Ministers seeing that this also cannot be defended haue made the question whether all be contained in Scripture that is either expressely or so as without Church authoritie or Traditions al necessary points of doctrine may be necessarily euidently or by good consequence deduced out of that which is expressed in Scripture In which sense also they will be neuer able to shew that all points and namely those which I mentioned in my third argument Wootton p. 93. are contained in onely Scripture but must be forced to run to tradition and Church authority if they will haue sufficient assurance of them 1 THe third thing obiected against the Scripture was Imperfection that it containes not the whole matter of faith but many things else are needfull to be knowne and beleeued that are not written therein For though he spake somwhat reseruedly There be diuers questions of faith which are not EXPRESSLY set downe yet his meaning is There be diuers particular points to be beleeued which are contained therein neither expressely nor anyway at all but receiued vpon sole Tradition and Church authoritie as I haue a Ch. 27. n. 2. shewed and his Introduction here mentioned affirmes which being a grosse and blasphemous assertion therefore to couer the odiousnesse of it here in the first place he saies that by affirming the Scripture not to containe all points of faith he doth not attribute any imperfection to it And how I maruell will he perswade vs this when it is impossible it should be perfect that leaues vs vnperfect in the faith and reueals but a portiō of that which yet of necessitie must be known to saluation his reason is because his aduersaries will neuer be able to shew that to containe all points of faith doth belong to the nature and perfection of Scripture But I answer it pertaines to the perfection of the Scripture and is due to the nature thereof to containe all things because it selfe sayes so and there can be no other infallible or conuenient reuelation And b Propounded in the WAY Digr 3. 13. many testimonies and arguments euince it which my aduersary not being able to answer hath well and wisely passed by with silence And therefore denying this they attribute imperfection to it For to deny that which the Scripture is is to make it imperfect Athanasius
is so able as to worke that effect without any other meanes or helpes concurring with it but at the most doth import a great degree of profitablenesse Or if it import sufficiency it is not meant that alone sufficiency of which our questiō is but at the most sufficiency in suo genere in a certaine limited kind to wit of written Scripture Against the second part of my answer first M. White either had a corrupt copie of my treatise or else himselfe his writer or printer corrupteth euen my words and sense For I do not say as he maketh me the Scripture is sufficient because c. But I say onely that it is profitable the rather because it commendeth the authority of the Church By which corruption he maketh himselfe matter to worke vpon but very idlely most of his obiections being ouerthrowne only by reading my words aright as I set them downe His chiefe obiection is this The Scriptures are able to make the man of God perfect that is the Pastours the Pope Councell and all but it cannot send these to the Church because these be the Church I answer that it sendeth euen these also to the Church First in that it sendeth them to the interpretation of Councels and Fathers of the ancient Church Secondly it sendeth them as they are priuate men needing instruction to themselues as authorized Pastours who by the assistance of Gods Spirit shall be enabled as neede shall require for their owne and other mens instruction to define rightly which is the right doctrine of faith in any point wherein Controuersie shall arise The answer of his other obiections may without difficulty be gathered out of that which here I haue said already and which I am after to say when I do shew how Church authority is prooued out of Scripture Whence followeth not that other places of Scripture either are superfluous or not to be accounted part of the rule or that Church doctrine is to be opposed to Scripture or to be accounted humane traditions or doctrine of men The sentences of Fathers and others which M. White bringeth to proue alone sufficiency of Scripture either proue nothing against me to wit being explicated that the Scriptures with other meanes prouided by God namely the authority of the Church are able to instruct vs or else they proue against him and his fellow M. Wootton as well as against me if the Fathers words be taken without limitation that the Scriptures alone without any meanes ioyned to thē are able to instruct vs in all things And it is maruaile that these men haue so little iudgement to alledge such authorities which make no more againe Church-authority required by me then against Church-ministery which is required by themselues as the ordinary meanes to instruct men in faith 1 The Apostle 2. Tim. 3.15 hath these words The holy Scriptures are ABLE to make thee wise TO SALVATION through THE FAITH WHICH IS IN CHRIST IESVS For the whole Scripture is inspired of God and is profitable to TEACH to IMPROVE to CORRECT to INSTRVCT IN ALL RIGHTEOVSNESSE That the man of God may be ABSOLVTE and made PERFECT VNTO ALL GOOD WORKES This text we alledge to proue the sufficiency of the Scripture whereto my Aduersary in his discourse a In the WAY §. 11. answered two things First that the Apostle doth not say in these words that the Scripture is sufficient to instruct a man to perfection but that it is profitable but I shewed that he affirmes it to be SVFFICIENT by three reasons the first because the Apostle sayes They are able to make vs PERFECT and that to EVERY good worke now that which doth this is sufficient inasmuch as God requires no more at any mans hand but perfection to euery good worke My Aduersary in this his cōfused Reply wherin he durst not deale openly and distinctly that I might perfectly discerne which part of my argument his words properly concerne seemes to deny the consequence because S. Paul sayes also that Piety is profitable to euery thing and yet it is not sufficient in such sort that there needs no other helpe or meanes to be ioyned with it to attaine whatsoeuer thing Whereto I reply againe First that euen this Piety being the totall and whole effect that the study of the Scripture works in mē is sufficiēt without the ioyning of any thing else to it that is not Piety for it followes in the next words that this Piety hath the promises of this life and of the life to come that is to say whatsoeuer is promised vs in this world or in the next is obtained by Piety Therefore Piety is sufficient Therefore any thing in this example notwithstanding the Scriptures being affirmed to be profitable to euery thing are affirmed also to be sufficient Secondly we do not maintaine the Scripture to be sufficient in that sense that without all helpe and meanes to learne them they will suffice for who euer denied the ministery of the Church the illumination of Gods Spirit and a mans owne syncere indeuour to be also requisite But when we say they are sufficient we do it against the assertion that sayes they containe not the substāce of al things needful to be knowne but besides the meanes to vnderstand and learne them we need Church authority and vnwritten tradition to supply diuers articles of faith that they reueale not Thirdly my Aduersary may possibly finde some formes of speech where a thing is called profitable to all things yet other things are as necessary as it for the profitablenes of one thing excludes not the necessity of another thing But wheresoeuer it is said that any thing is profitable not simply to this or that purpose but to make persect to euery thing in the same kind there the sufficiency thereof is absolutely concluded and thus the Apostle speakes of the Scripture that it is profitable to make PERFECT to EVERY good worke The said perfection being an effect of their profitablenesse for that profitable thing is sufficient of it selfe that makes and produces the effect perfect 2 My second reason whereby I shewed the sufficiency of the Scripture was this All that we need to saluation is either to be taught or reproued or instructed or corrected but the Scripture alone doth all this Ergo they are sufficient to this he answers nothing 3 Thirdly I reasoned thus That is sufficient and containes all things needfull to be knowne which is able to make a man wise to saluation but the Scripture is able to doe this Ergo it is sufficient this argument he hath tumultuously repeated as he hath all the rest and answered I know not how First he sayes if the word alone had bene put in it would more plainely appeare how it proues nothing let the world therefore be put in That which alone is able to make a man wise to saluation is sufficient but such is the Scripture that alone it is able to make a man wise to
saluation Therefore it is sufficient How doth it now appeare so plainely that it proues nothing the first proposition is manifest of it selfe the second is as manifest for all that the Apostle affirmes is of the Scripture alone and of nothing else for of Scripture alone he saies it is able to make wise to saluation it is profitable to teach to reproue to instruct to correct that the man of God may be perfect the conclusion therfore must needs be true Secondly he saies the Apostle speakes of the old Testament yea of euery parcell of Scripture yet M. White will not say that now specially the old Testament without the New or euery parcell of the old it selfe is alone sufficient for all the said purposes whereto M. White answers that he neither speakes of the old Testament alone nor of any one parcell either of old or new separated from the rest but of the whole in this sense all the whole Scripture taken together is able c. And if the Iesuits and D. Stapleton whom this man traces had not renounced all truth they would not say it when that which the Apostle auouches of the Scripture cannot agree to euery parcel alone but to all together for what one parcell performes all these effects to make wise to saluation to teach to reproue to instruct to correct to make perfect the Scripture is so vnderstood as that all these things may truly be affirmed of it but these things cannot truely be affirmed of the parcels alone Ergo. 4 Thirdly he saies the word PROFITABLE must not expound the word ABLE or if it be the word ABLE doth not signifie that the Scripture is so able as to worke that effect without any other meanes or helpes concurring with it but at the most it imports a great degree of profitablenesse This is no answer to this argument But to another that he hath not expressed I said therefore thirdly though very briefly By the word able the other word profitable must be expounded Which I thus put into forme that which is PROFITABLE by being ABLE is sufficient the Scripture is so PROFITABLE that it is ABLE to make vs wise to saluation Ergo it is sufficient He first denies the Minor and saies the word profitable is not to be expounded by the word Able but he seemes to be dazeled For that which is able to make wise to saluation must needes be able to make absolute and perfect because perfection consists in being wife to saluation but the Scripture alone is able to make wise to saluation Ergo. Next he saies that supposing the word PROFITABLE be expounded by the word ABLE thus Scripture is able to make one absolute and perfect yet the meaning is not that it is able without other helpes and meanes concurring with it but at the most that it is very profitable and if it be sufficient yet this sufficiency is not that whereof our question is but in a certaine limited kinde to wit of written Scripture That is to say if by able to make vs wise to saluation be meant that the Scriptures are sufficient yet it is not meant that alone they are sufficient as the Protestants hold but with a limitation so far as Scripture can be sufficient In which his answer he plainely discouers himselfe to be foundred and spent For our question is not whether the Scripture alone without vsing the Ministery of the Church or our owne industry or such meanes as God hath appointed for the finding our and vnderstanding of that which is contained in it be sufficient for Bread and Drinke and all manner of food is not sufficient to sustaine mans life if he take no paines to get it or if he be not able to swallow and digest it and my aduersaries owne Church and traditions with all their royalties are not sufficient vnlesse men take paines to finde them and be so mad as to beleeue them and so blinde as to let them downe but the question is of their latitude and extent viz. whether the written Scripture containe in expresse words or sense the whole and entire doctrine of faith and good life so that the Church by her authoritie and traditions may adde no point of faith that is wanting in the Scripture This appeares to be the question by my aduersaries own words and the words of the Diuines in his Church Now the Apostle saying the Scripture is able to make one wise to saluation affirmes the sufficiency of it alone without any other helpe or meanes to supply any doctrine or matter of faith not contained therein because there is no more needfull but to be wise to saluation and that wisdome the Scripture is able to instruct vs in Which ability is not limited to certaine points but extended to all the whole obiect of faith by the word For thus I reason He speakes of the Scripture alone and nothing else therefore the Scripture alone is able to make wise to saluation therefore it is so profitable and in such sort to make absolute and perfect to euery good worke that it can do it For it is able Therefore it alone is sufficient Therefore this sufficiency is so limited to written Scripture that it is perfectly and wholy contained in it 5 The second part of my aduersaries answer in his discourse to the text alleadged was that the Scripture is said to be profitable because it commendes to vs the authority of the Church This his answer I opposed with 7. arguments But when I repeated it I put in the word sufficient thus He saies they be profitable and SVFFICIENT because they commend vnto vs the Churches authority the addition of which word you see he distasts and makes a vantage of thereby to put off the answer to sixe of my arguments That the Prouerbe might be true it s an ill winde but blowes some men profite for vnder that pretence he takes occasion to cauill and put off that he could not answer For first the word might well be put in without any preiudice to his sense For if their profitablenesse lie in commending to vs the Church authoritie then their sufficiency lyes there too and so I might well make him say they be profitable and sufficient because they cōmend vnto vs the Churches authority Secondly it is idle that he saies my obiections are ouerthrown Only by reading his words aright leauing out the word sufficient For let him looke vpon them againe and he shall finde they ourthrow his exposition of profitable as well as if he had expounded sufficient in the same manner But my aduersary will take a small occasion to shun an argument 6 Onely to the sixth he replies for whereas I said the meaning cannot be that they are profitable because they commend vnto vs the Churches authority because the Apostle saies they are able to make the man of God perfect that is the Pastor himselfe the Pope the Councell and all and it were absurd to say that the
ground of true assurance 8. Who the Pastors were of whom Luther learned his faith 9. His conference with the Diuell 10. By the Church the Papists meane onely the Pope A.D. To the reason alledged by me and namely to that point of it wherein I say Pag. 200. that a priuate man who presuming to be inspired by the spirit doth oppose himselfe against the Church neither can know himselfe or can assure others that his spirit is infallible M. White answereth denying this to be true For saith he the Scripture is a light and knowne by the sonnes of light and by it they may be assured Now they that be thus assured are infallibly sure they be taught by the holy Ghost for all Scripture is inspired of God and containeth the teaching of the holy Ghost To this I reply asking how in particular Luther for example could by Scripture assure himselfe or others that he was taught by the Spirit of God It seemeth by M. Whites answer that this assurance came by this or the like Syllogisme Whatsoeuer is taught by Scripture is infallibly taught by the Spirit of God But I Luther am taught by Scripture this and that point viz. that I am iustified by onely Faith c. Ergo I Luther am infallibly assured and may assure others that in these points of doctrine although contrary to the doctrine of the vniuersall visible Church I am taught by the Spirit of God But who seeth not the weaknesse of this proofe when all the certaintie thereof is finally resolued into Luthers owne priuate and particular iudgement in his owne case which cannot be proued to be infallible by saying he was assisted in his iudgement by the Spirit of God but by begging the question and supposing that which is the point that needeth most proofe to wit that he is in those points taught by the Scripture or that he is assisted by the Spirit to interprete aright He iudged so it is true but his iudgement is fallible and is so much the more to be suspected to be false by how much he did prize and ouerweene his owne iudgement in his owne cause when with intollerable pride he preferred it so contemptuously before the iudgement of a thousand Augustines and Cyprians and of other most worthy and learned Doctors of the Catholicke Church 1 HE that opposes himselfe against the true Catholicke Church holding contrary to the vniuersall doctrine thereof can giue no assurance either to himselfe or others that his Spirit is infallible this is true but when Luther and the rest opposed themselues against the Church of Rome which is the Papacie this was no presumption but the worke of Gods Spirit in them whereof they might infallibly be assured themselues and giue infallible assurance to others My reason was this The Scripture is a light and knowne by the sonnes of light and by it they may be assured now they that be thus assured are infallibly sure they are taught by the holy Ghost For all Scripture is inspired of God and containeth the teaching of the holy Ghost To this he replies that then the assurance which they haue arises by such a Syllogisme as he hath set downe Whereto I answer granting that it doth saue that in the conclusion there is more although contrary to the doctrine of the vniuersall visible Church then he was able with all his skill to contriue into the premisses But he replies that Luther could haue no certaintie of the second proposition that he was in those points taught by the Scripture when he taught against the vniuersall Church The which reply grants that a priuate man may haue infallible assurance he is taught by the Scripture and assisted by Gods Spirit so long as the thing he holds is not against the vniuersall Church But holding this or that point against the Church he can haue no such assurance I answer first that Luther and the priuate men whom he meanes taught nothing contrary to the vniuersall Church much lesse did they frame to themselues in their mind the conclusion of this Syllogisme that their conscience should checke them as if they had taught contrary to the vniuersall Church or felt themselues so taught by the Scripture that withall they felt the true Church to be against them They felt no such thing but categorically they concluded I am infallibly sure that in this point of iustification for example I am taught by the Scripture Secondly I answer that Luther and euery priuate Protestant beleeuing Iustification by onely Faith and all the rest that our Church holdeth against the Papacie haue infallible assurance they are taught by the Scripture the which assurance is bred by the plaine and euident places of Scripture and the vniuersall teaching of the true Church confirming the same whereto the Spirit of God giues witnesse inwardly in their conscience But this he sayes is the question that should be proued that Luther had these things on his side I answer there is in this life no further or after proofe aboue these things a For albeit the proposition and ministerie of the Church concurre as a condition yet the authoritie of God himselfe speaking in the Scripture induces vs to beleeue in as much as all the authoritie which the Church hath with a beleeuer is because the said beleeuer sees and vnderstands by the Scripture that it is the true Church c. Jassisse Deum vt Ecclesiae credamus non ex Ecclesiae authoritate suspendimus veluti propria aut sola ne quidem in genere causae externae huius fidei nostrae causa sed partim ex Scripturis manifestissimis quibus ad Ecclesiae magisterium remittimur partim ex ipso fideâ— symbolo Stapl. Triplicat pag. 279. the finall and formall resolution of faith being into the authoritie and light of the Scripture and Gods Spirit speaking therein so farre foorth that our b For the Iesuites say the proposition of the Church is beleeued vpon the testimonie of the Scripture the Scripture is beleeued for it selfe Si quis rogatur quare credat si sermo sit de ratione formali assentiendi Dicat se id credere quia Deus reuelauit Si rursus interrogetur vnde cognoscat Deum reuelasse Respondeat se id clare non nosse credere tamen fide infallibili ob infallâ—bilem tamen propâ—sitionem Ecclesiae tanquam conditionem ad idâ—redendum requisitam Quaeres vnde cognoscatur propositioneÌ„ Ecclesiae esse infallibilem similiter respondeat se id credere fide infallibili ob authoritatem Scripturae testimonium perhibentis Ecclesiae cuâ— authoritati reuelationi ob seipsam crâ—dit Alex. Pezâ—nt in Tho. 22. p 479. B. Greg. de Val. toÌ„ 3. p. 31. They that hold the authoritie of the Church to be the hiest reâ—son inducing vs to beleeue fall into two grosse absurdities 1. because so our faith shall not be diuine being grounded on the authority of men 2. because this authority of the Church
is one thing it selfe that is beleeued the fore to be grounded on some superior authoritie Can loc l. ◠§. 8. D Weston layes the resolution of faith thus Our faith of any mystery is resolued into a former act wherby the Scripture containing this mystery is beleeued to be the word of God and this also is resolued into a former act as the cause thereof that the Church cannot erre Which we beleeue for the signes and notes which shew it to be a true Church Thus resoluing all diuine faith into humane motiues de Tripl offic c. 3. pag. 143. aduersaries themselues as I haue often shewed after all authoritie of Fathers Church Councels Pope and all do rest and resolue their faith vpon the second proposition of this Syllogisme I am taught this by Scripture our aduersaries denie not but Fathers Councels Popes may erre or if they cannot yet the authoritie of these things is not the reason of our faith for then faith should be humane but the inward authoritie of the Scripture and the Spirit of God If it be demanded how the Protestants can giue infallible assurance to others that they vnderstand the Scripture aright I answer that the same question is to be made to the Papists and both they and we must answer that vnlesse God illuminate their hearts we can giue no assurance neither they by the Church nor we by the Scripture but such as haue this illumination do see manifestly the truth of the things they haue beleeued But Luther he sayes held against the vniuersall Catholicke Church I answer and let all Papists well consider of it that they must proue this which I call the Papacie to be the vniuersall Catholicke Church afore they can say Luther was deceiued That they cannot proue but by the Scripture in which triall Luther shall retire to the Scripture no faster then themselues and then they may be deceiued as well as Luther in as much vnlesse they will runne in a round as all their other authoritie proofes and motiues must be tried by the Scriptures OVER WHICH GOD HATH SET NO VISIBLE IVDGE IN THIS WORLD THAT CAN INFALLIBLY CONVINCE AND PERSWADE ALL MEN. I wil make this plaine by laying downe the maner how Luther and how a Papist assures himselfe Luther and the Protestants for their part beleeue for example that a man is iustified by faith onely because the Scripture in plaine places excluding workes and proposing Gods free grace in Christ and maintaining the sole merits of Christ applied by faith debarres euery thing from iustifying that is in our selues and so teaches expresly that we are iustified onely by faith in Christ The Papists hold the contrary alledging the Church and the Pope whose doctrine they say it is that we are iustified by our workes But being demanded how we know infallibly that the Church or the Pope hath not erred in holding so they grant they may erre and answer that yet they are known not to erre in this point by the Scriptures which Scripture and the true sence thereof is knowne and beleeued for it selfe Here they are fallen into the same issue that the Protestants are I am taught this by the Scripture Now if they reply that we are infallibly assured the Scripture is meant as we say because the Church expounds it so who sees not that they make a circle thus to beleeue the Church first because of the Scripture and then againe to beleeue the Scripture because of the Church Their maine resolution therfore is the euidence and authoritie of the Scripture perswading them both that the doctrine is true and that the Church which teaches it is the true Church And so they lie open to the same cauils that are made against the Protestāts Luther in vnderstanding the Scripture may be deceiued so may they It is Luthers own cause so is this the Papists Luthers iudgment is to be suspected when he preferred himself before the iudgement of the Church The same say we to them They preferre their iudgement before the Church and all the Fathers in as much as we can shew the Church and Fathers to be against them and themselues professe that the Popes authoritie is aboue both Church and Fathers 2 Indeed if M. Luther had had a thousand Austins and Cyprians and other Fathers of the Church with one consent and plainly against him he had bin so much the more to be suspected for this is one maine thing that makes vs abhorre the present Roman Church because it prefers it selfe and the Popes determination before all the Doctors in the world but he neuer thought so nor said so His words are these in c Tom. 2. Wittemb pag 344. a booke that he writ against King Henry the 8. Lastly he produces the sayings of the Fathers for the establishing of the sacrifice of the Masse and sees my foolishnes who alone will be wiser then all other This is is it I say that by this my opinion is confirmed For this I said that these * His vnciuill speeches to the King himselfe afterward retracted Sleid. They are but a weak argumēt to discredit his reformation Lucifer Caralitanus his books against the Emperor Constantius are as bitter and violent If Luther offended against K. Harry the Iesuites and their supplies repay it to K. Iames and long since haue returned it with the interest to good Q. Elizabeth Thomisticall asses haue nothing to produce but a multitude of men and antique vse and then to him that brings the Scriptures to say Thou art the foolishest of all men that liue Art thou onely wise and then it must needs be so But to me who am the foolishest of all men it is sufficient that the most wise Henry can bring no Scripture against me nor answer that which is brought against him besides he is constrained to grant his Fathers haue often erred and his antique vse makes no article of faith in which it is lawfull but for the multitude of that Church to trust whereof he himselfe with his pardons is defender But against the saying of Fathers men Angels and diuels I oppose not ancient custome nor a multitude of men o This is that which the Fathers themselues aduise vnto when heresies haue long continued preuailed in the Church to flie to the Scriptures because the writings of the Fathers after the long continuance of heresie are in danger of corruption See Chrysost op imperf hom 49. sub init §. Tūo cum videritis abominationē Vincen. Lyrin cōmonit c. 39. but the word the Gospel of one eternal maiestie which themselues are constrained to allow wherein the Masse is euidently taught to be the signe and testament of God wherein he promises and by a signe certifies to vs his grace For this worke and word of God is not in our power here I set my foote here I sit here I abide here I glorie here I triumph here I insult ouer Papists Thomists Sophisters and
all the gates of hell not onely ouer the sayings of men though holy men or deceitful custom Gods word is ouer all The diuine Maiestie is of my side that I care not if a thousand Austins a thousand Cyprians a thousand King Harry-churches stood against me God can neither deceiue nor be deceiued Austin and Cyprian as all the elect may erre and haue erred In all these words there is nothing spoken simply against the Fathers but comparatiuely if a thousand Fathers were against the Scriptures he would rather stand to the Scripture wherein he speakes most godly and honestly that d Gal. 1. if an Apostle or an Angell from heauen farre greater then a thousand Austins and Cyprians should preach otherwise let him be accursed Neither Saint Paul nor Luther granted the Angels or Doctors of the Church to preach otherwise then they did but if any man would pretend and oppose their names and preaching against the Scripture let them be accursed the word of God is aboue all that I care not if a thousand Austins and a thousand Cyprians stood against me which is the truth and our aduersaries say as much themselues Baronius e An. 31. n. 213. Though the Fathers whom for their high learning we worthily call the Doctors of the Church were endued with the grace of the holy Ghost aboue others yet in expounding the Scripture the Catholicke Church doth not alway and in all things follow them D. Marta f De iurisdict part 1. pag. 273. The common opinion of the Doctors is not to be regarded when the contrary opinion fauours the power of the Popes keyes or a pious cause And I haue shewed g THE WAY digr 47. elsewhere that this is the common practise of our aduersaries They speake not alway so zealously and plainly as Luther doth but for substance they say the same that he doth h Yesterday Ecchius brought against me Gregory Ambrose Chrysostome to whom I then answered nothing I will therefore now say what I then forgot opposing the rule of diuine Augustine that the savings of all writers must be iudged by the sacred Scripture whose authoritie is greater then the authoritie of all men Not that I condemne the iudgement of the most illustrious Fathers but I imitate those that come nearest to the Scriptures and if the Scripture be plaine I embrace it before them all Tom. 1. disput Lips cum Ecch. pag 263. Wittemb I mention the opinion of Austin not to defame or detract froÌ„ that holy man but because it is good necessary that these holy Fathers be sometime found like our selues men that the glorie of God may stand firme c. Jâ— Genesc 21 pag. 255. tom 6. Wittemb who thought also as reuerently of the Fathers as any man is bound to do 3 But it was not Luthers going against the Fathers that discontented our aduersaries it was his resisting the Popes Canons and the faith of the Church of Rome which they shrowded vnder the name of the Fathers wherein by their owne diuinitie he might be guiltlesse Peraduenture i Dialog tract 2. part 2. c. vult pag. 180. col 3. edit Lugdun per Ioh. â—rech an 1494. saith Occham one might say that simple men ought to beleeue nothing but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer to be beleeued explicately and should be content with things common not presuming vpon their owne vnderstanding to beleeue any thing explicitely but what the Pope and Cardinals deliuer vnto them but HE THAT SHOVLD AFFIRME THESE THINGS WERE AN INVENTOR OF NEW ERRORS For though simple men be not ordinarily tied to beleeue explicitely but onely those things which are by the Cleargie declared to be so beleeued yet SIMPLE MEN READING THE DIVINE SCRIPTVRE BY THE SHARPNES OF REASON MAY SEE SOME THING THAT THE POPE AND CARDINALS HAVE NOT DECLARED EVIDENTLY TO FOLLOW OF THE SCRIPTVRE in which case they can and must explicitely beleeue and ARE NOT BOVND TO CONSVLT WITH THE POPE AND CARDINALS FORASMVCH AS THEY ARE BOVND TO PREFERRE THE HOLY SCRIPTVRE BEFORE THEM ALL. If all the Papists in the world can shew Luther did any more then Occham here allowes euery simple man to do I am much deceiued And if he did no more then by their owne iudgements he might doe then away with these friuolous and emptie exclamations against Luther and let vs heare no more of them A. D. But saith M. White Scripture promiseth Pag 201. that euery doctrine is of God which consenteth to it and this consent a man may know infallibly or else in vaine had the Bereans searched c. I answer that I do not denie but a man may know doctrine to consent to Scripture but I aske how he may know this by onely Scripture interpreted by ones owne iudgment or priuate spirit I hope I haue shewed the contrary neither will M. White be euer able to proue that the 1 Act. 17.11 Beraeans had infallible certaintie onely by the Scripture interpreted by their owne priuate iudgement or that 2 Es 8.20 the Prophet sent any for infallible certaintie to the law and testimonie expounded onely by priuate iudgement or that 3 Luc 1 4. Saint Luke or f Col. 2.2 Saint Paul whom he alledgeth meant that men should haue infallible assurance by onely Scripture interpreted by priuate iudgement or spirit 4 I neuer intended that any man could haue infallible assurance of that he beleeues onely by Scripture interpreted by his owne priuate iudgement all that I affirme is that priuate men may examine any doctrine that is publickly taught by whosoeuer and by Scripture alone as by a certaine rule they may be assured of the truth This is plainly euinced by the texts alledged For the Beraeans hearing the Apostles preach yet searched the Scripture dayly whether those things were so and therefore beleeued In which example the matter examined is the things that the Apostles preached The rule whereby this was examined is the Scripture alone which in the text is distinguished from the Apostles preaching and ministery and authoritie and opposed against them for by it the Beraeans examined them The persons that did this were a priuate people subiect to the Pastors of the Church as much as any can be The end why they did thus examine the doctrine was to see if it consented with the Scripture The euent and issue of their examining was Therefore many of them beleeued Whereby it is cleare that a priuate man by the Scripture alone may be able to iudge of any thing that is publickly taught and by the Scripture alone be infallibly assured if he hold the truth Not the Scripture alone excluding the condition of the meanes whereby God makes the sense thereof knowne but the Scripture alone as the rule of faith excluding all authoritie of the Church and Pastors Nor the Scripture interpreted by a mans owne iudgement and priuate spirit but by it selfe truly according to the manifest rule
here mentioned For though there be a Church in any sense that a true Church can be meant ordained to teach vs yet it followes not that it hath any such authority or any authority at all to propound vnwritten traditions and there may be a Church and yet the iudgement thereof not be the authority whereon our faith is grounded and the same Church may be ordained to teach vs yet not allowed to teach these vnwritten verities For God hath propounded all doctrine of faith in the Scriptures and appointed his Church to reueale and expound it to his people the which doctrine thus expounded inlightens the mind begets faith and is the rule of all mens iudgement through the worke of the Holy Ghost that confirmes it in the mind Granting therefore that which the Repliar so much desires that all his meaning is that once or in one age there was a company of men who in one sense or other may be called the Church whom God hath appointed and furnished to teach all men the things of faith yet it helps not his conclusion nor makes it true in that sense wherein he meanes it CHAP. XXXV 1 The Papists pretending the Church meane onely the Pope 2. How and in what sense they vnderstand the doctrine of the Apostles to be the rule of faith 3 They hold that the Pope may make new articles of faith 4 And that the Scripture receiues authority and credit from him 6Vnlearned men may see the truth when the Pope and his crew sees it not 7. And they may iudge of that they teach 8 The Iesuites dare not answer directly Pag. 204. White pag. 67. A. D. This being proued my Aduersaries may see how much they mistake when they thinke me to meane in this Chapter by the name Church onely the Pope or onely the present Pastours of the Church when as rather I meant to include these onely secondarily meaning here by the name Church principally the Apostles themselues who for the time they liued on earth were principall Doctours and Pastours of thâ— Church being by me therfore tearmed the Church which I said is the rule of faith not taking the verbe is so strictly as onely limited to this present time but â—â—ther indefinitely abstracting from all time or per ampliationem as it may extend it selfe to the by-past as well as to the present time This to be my meaning my Aduersaries might haue perceiued by the texts of Scripture which I bring for the proofe of my conclusion For those texts are by me here applied as they were by our Sauiour spoken and meant to wit principally to the Apostles being the primitiue Pastours and principall members of the Church and are onely secondarily or by consequence applied to other Pastours succeeding in their places Now taking my conclusion in this chiefly intended sense it cannot be denied to be true neither can the reason by which I proue it with any reason be denied to be good 1 IT is easie to see that he knownes not in what sense he should take his conclusion that it might be defended For if by the Church he meant no more but the Apostles and primitiue Pastours and by the doctrine of the Church no more but that which is the doctrine indeed contained in the Scripture no man would deny the doctrine and teaching faith and beleefe of the Apostles contained in the written word to be the rule of faith but he meant and still meanes otherwise that this Church which all men ought to follow is the B. of Rome alone for the time being wherein a See Chap. 34. nu 1. I mistooke him not For he meanes that which in all ages for the time being is the supreame iudge and hath subiectiuely in it all the Church authority But such is the Pope alone according to the principles of Papists Therefore he meanes the Pope alone againe he meanes that Church whereof he expounds the texts of Scripture alledged in that Chapter to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule but all those texts he expounds of the Pope alone for the time being Ergo. Thirdly I suppose the Repliar to be a Papist and in this place a maintainer of the Popish doctrine touching the rule of faith but that doctrine meanes the Church as I expound For the order which God hath left in his Church for the iudging and deciding of matters of faith according to the Iesuites doctrine b Staplet Princ. doctrin fid l. 6. praef 1 Bell. de Rom. Pont. l. 4. c. 1. 2 Staplet Princ. doctr l. 5. c. 1. 3 c. 2. 4 c. 5. 5 l. 6. c. 1. is this 1. That not the Scripture but the Church is this supreme iudgâ— of all controuersies and things of faith 2 Yet this Church as it is taken for the whole body iudges not 3. Nor lay priuate men therein 4. But the power of iudging belongs to the Bishops and Priests alone 5. And among them the B. of Rome alone as the successor of S. Peter is so the head of the whole Church and the primary and highest subiect of this Church iudgement that he hath power alone aboue all others whether Pastors or sheepe to pronounce 6 Grets def Bellar. tom 1 p. 1218. c. and determine touching the matters of faith 6. So that besides the Doctors and Pastors there must be in the Church some other supreme iudge and he is the B. of Rome either alone or with a Councell Here it is plaine that howsoeuer the name of the Church be pretended yet the whole power is limited and restrained to the Pope alone For they hold the gouernment and power of the Church not to be Aristocraticall placed in Councels or Bishops but Monarchicall where all the gouernment power and infalliblenesse is in the Pope alone Councels Bishops Priests and all other parts of the Church are but cyphers the power is eminently and infallibly and authoratiuely in the Pope alone either with them or without them Bellar. c De Rom. Pont l. 1. c. 9. §. sed nec sayes plainely Neither the Scripture nor secular princes nor priuate men are iudges of controuersies but Ecclesiasticall Prelates and Councels may iudge of the controuersies of religion but that iudgement is not firme or ratified till the Pope haue confirmed it and therefore the last iudgement belongs to him for either there must be no iudge among men at all or else he must be the iudge that is aboue the rest I haue alledged the words of Gregory of Valence diuers times d Tom. 3. in 22. pag. 24. When we say the Proposition of the Church is a condition necessary to the assent of faith by the name of Church we meane the head thereof that is to say the B. of Rome either alone by himselfe or with a Councell Syluester Prierias e In Luth. tom 1. pag. 159. fundam 1. The vniuersall Church essentially is the conuocation of all that beleeue in Christ but
whether this doctrine of these succeeding Pastors shal need to be the same that the doctrine of the Apostles was but onely affirmes that as the Apostles doctrine for the time they liued was the rule so the doctrine of the succeeding Pastors is the rule leauing roome enough for this doctrine of these succeeding Pastors to vary from the doctrine of the Apostles that when we shew the present abuses in the Church of Rome and decrees of their latter Popes for these last 800. yeares to haue swarued from the Apostles doctrine and practise they may pleade the authoritie of their succeding Pastors And indeede it is true that the Church of Rome holds that it is not necessary the doctrine and teaching of the present and succeeding Pastors be the same in all things that it was in the Apostolicke and Primitiue Church but the Pope hath power to make a NEW CREED and NEW ARTICLES of faith For Iacobatius m De Concil p. 310. A. saies The Pope alone may make new articles of faith according to one acceptation of the word Article that is for such as must be beleeued which before needed not be beleeued and Zenzelin a Popish doctor n Gl. extr Ioh. 22. cum inter § doclaramus saies The Vicar of Christ may make an Article of faith taking an article not properly but in a large sense for that which must be beleeued when before by the precept of the Church it was not necessary to be beleeued Augustinus Triumphus writes o August Anconit sum de eccle potest q. â—9 art 1. that it belongs to the Pope alone to make a new Creed For in a Creed those things are put that vniuersally belong to Christian faith he therefore hath authority to make such a Creed who is the head of Christian faith and in whom as in the head all the members of the Church are vnited and by whose authoritie all things pertaining to faith are confirmed and strengthened And p Art 2. againe That the Pope may dispense in adding articles may be vnderstood 3. waies First in respect of the multiplication of the articles themselues Secondly in respect of expounding the things contained in the articles Thirdly in respect of the augmentation of such things as may be reduced to the articles ALL THESE WAIES the Pope may dispense in adding articles because as he may make a new Creed so he may MVLTIPY NEW ARTICLES OVER AND ABOVE THE OTHER Secondly he may by more articles explicate the articles already placed in the Creed Thirdly because peraduenture all things beleeued in the Creed may be reduced after the aforesaid articles and by such reduction may be increased so that vnder each article MORE THINGS NECESSARY TO BE BELEEVED MAY BE PVT THEN ARE YET PVT The which being done marke what they say touching their authority q Roder. Dosm de auth script l. 3. c. 12. The Popes assertions ascend to the height of diuine testimony as the assertions of the Apostles did and of such as made the holy Scripture and there be who contend that they belong to the sacred Scripture it selfe which is contained in the bookes of the Bible This doctrine whereof all our aduersaries bookes are full shewes plainely that they intend not that this their Church teaching so much magnified to be the rule should alway be one and the same but such as shall follow the Popes lust and be altered with the time that so this Antichrist of Rome might abolish the whole Testament of Christ this is the first thing to be noted that the reader may see what he meanes by his Church doctrine that is the rule 4 The next thing is his distinction about this doctrine of the Church that it was the rule in the Apostles dayes and is the rule in succeeding ages but not as contained in onely Scripture but as deliuered by these Pastors Which speech containes 2. things a Negatiue and an affirmatiue the negatiue is that the doctrine of the Church is not the rule as it is contained in onely Scripture Meaning as * Ch. 27. n. 3. I haue shewed that all diuine doctrine belonging to the rule is not contained in the Scripture but much or the most of it in tradition vnwritten and that which is contained is not the rule by vertue of writing but by vertue of the Church that makes it authenticall Panormitan r Panorm tom 2. de praesumptione c. Sicut noxius sayes The words of the text of Scripture are not the Popes words but the words of Salomon in the Prouerbs but because this text is made Canonicall it is to be beleeued and induceth necessity so to do as if the Pope had set it foorth himselfe Because we make all those things to bee ours whereto we might impart our authority But whether without Canonization the sayings of Salomon be approued in the Church seeing they are in the body of the Bible say as the glosse saith and Ierom holdeth who seemes to conclude that they are Apocrypha which is to be noted and that because of this as also because Salomon had no power to make Canons This also must be obserued that the Reader may know the meaning of his conclusion and what it is that we deny therein For NO DOCTRINE EITHER OF THE APOSTELS IN THEIR TIME OR OF THE SVCCEEDING PASTORS OF THE CHVRCH IN ANY TIME IS THE RVLE OF FAITH BVT ONELY THAT WHICH IS CONTAINED IN THE SCRIPTVRE As I haue Å¿ In the WAY digr 3. shewed His affirmatiue is that the doctrine of the Church is the rule as it is deliuered by the Pastors or the Pastours deliuering this doctrine are the rule which is the same that he said a little before the doctrine as deliuered by the Church or the Church as deliuering doctrine is the rule t Pars obiecti formalis fidei est vox Ecclesiae D. Stapler relect p. 484. Saltem aequalis est Ecclesiae Scripturae authoritas ibi pag. 494. His meaning is that the Churches testimony and authority mingles it selfe with the authority of the doctrine and is ioyntly with it or aboue it the rule of faith as when diuers simples haue their ingredience into one compound and two men equally carry betweene them one burthen Their doctrine this way is knowne wel enough how the Scriptures in regard of vs haue all their authority from the Church the sense of the Scripture is to be fetched from the Church whatsoeuer the Church of Rome shall teach is the word of God c. The which things being couched in the Iesuites conclusion as he vnderstands it we detest and spit vpon when he shall thus debarre the Scripture from being the rule to set vpon the bench his Papall Antichristian authority If the shame either of God or men or any respect of truth were with them they durst not thus presumptuously and basely steale the authority to themselues whereby both themselues and we and all the world
Papists to explicate proue their transubstantiation that it is confessed to be too grosse and meerly false if the words be vnderstood as they sound of the bodie of Christ So the Glosse Nisi sanc intelligas verba Berengarij in maiorem incides haeresim quà m ipse habuit §. Dentibus Turrecremata Nec iste modus loquendi est tenendus Ibi. nu 1. §. Respondeo Hervaeus Quod quidem vocabulum vt sc à dentibus tereatur non est extendendum sed exponendum restringendum vt sit sensus non quod corpus verum Christi teratur dentibus sed quod illae species sub quibus realiter est tereantur dentibus Et ideo est alia opinio communior verior c. 4. d. 10. qu. 1. pag. 17. But this Glosse is proued vntrue by this that the words thus expounded containe nothing against Berengarius opinion who had denied onely the grosse and reall presence of Christs flesh it was sometime therefore beleeued by some bodie in the Church of Rome belike that his blessed bodie touching the place and maner of presence was as far from them that receiue the Sacrament as heauen is from earth This for the reall and spirituall presence If the Iesuite dare put his Transubstantiation to the triall let him looke into m Digress 49. nu 9. THE WAY and hearken what many of his owne learned men say of it and when he hath done let him take a view of the poore answer that in this his Reply he hath made vnto them Pag. 32. A.D. The fourth marke is set downe by M. White in these words The most points of Papistrie are directly and at the first sight absurd and against common sence and the law of nature If he meane that they seeme at the first sight absurd c. to the seduced people of his sect who neither beleeue nor rightly vnderstand either the things by vs beleeued or the reason or authoritie for which we beleeue them then it may be he saith true but nothing to the purpose For if this were a sufficient marke to make vs misdoubt our religion by the like reason other heretickes or infidels who do not beleeue the mysteries of the blessed Trinitie the Incarnation c. might thinke to make vs misdoubt the truth of these mysteries because they who neither beleeue these mysteries nor rightly vnderstand them nor the reasons and motiues which make vs beleeue them will say that these mysteries are directly and at first sight absurd c. yet in truth they are not absurd nor against but aboue our reason and sense so I say to M. White although other points of our religion seeme to him absurd yet in truth they are not absurd neither are they contrary to but at most aboue the reach of naturall reason 4 I do not obiect against the religion of the Papacie that it is but aboue the reach of reason For many mysteries of the true faith are so the which we must beleeue and n Nec quisquam potest intelligentiam Dei apprehendere nisi qui toto se despecto conuersus ad sapientiam Dei omnem quaerendi ratiocinationem transtuleriâ— ad credendi fideÌ„ Oros l. 6. c. 1. not examine by sence but that many points thereof are absurd and directly against sence and the light of nature which no peece of true religion is as for example that a man endued with reason should fall downe and adore and inuocate an image o Shewed in THE WAY §. 50. n. â—6 51. n 7. and below chap. 54. the which in the Church of Rome is taught and practised As many other points are as absurd as it But if it be true which the Iesuite sayes that they are mysteries which we vnderstand not being a seduced people not acquainted with the authority whereupon they are beleeued that is another matter that I knew not before for they are to blame that will demand reason for the mysteries of Rome that haue authoritie beyond reason p Apoc. 17.5 whose forehead hath the word Mysterie written in it and I had forgotten q Quia in his quae vult ei est pro ratione voluntas Nec est qui ei dicat cur ita facis Gloss §. Veri c. Quanto de transl ep Sacrilegij instaâ— esset disputare de facto suo Glos §. Quis enim d. 40. Non nos Jta nos ad iudices reuocas ac si nescires omnia iura in scrinio pectoris nostri collecata esse sic flat sententia Loco cedant omnes Pontifex sum Paul 2. Platin. p. 304. a rule in his law that forbids men to aske any reason of his doings But in the mean time where are the Iesuites r Introd q. 4. p. 100. prudentiall motiues without which nothing ought to be beleeued because the vnderstanding cannot assent to the thing propounded without some probable motiue For religion bids not men be stockes A. D. And one cause why the common sort of Protestants do at the first sight thinke them absurd is because they haue not heard points of our doctrine truly related and declared as our Authors declare them nor the reasons and authorities set downe for which we beleeue them but haue heard such ignorant or malicious Ministers as M White make false relation of points of absurd doctrine to be held by vs which we do not hold but abhorre As to go no further M. White falsely relateth in this very place that we hold the Pope to haue right to Lord it ouer the Scriptures Fathers Councels Church and all the world That we teach also men to murther the King to pay no debts to blow vp the Parliament to dispense with murther and whoredome c. These and such like be not points of our doctrine but shamelesse and slanderous vntruths by which simple people are drawne by ignorant or malicious Ministers to mislike our doctrine in generall and to be apt to haue a worse conceit of euery point of it in particular especially at the first sight then by due examination they shall finde it to deserue 5 Not Protestants onely thinke Poperie absurd but many Papists also censuring the points I haue named and misliking them shew plainly that I spake true yet the Reply sayes the cause why the common sort of Protestants thinke Poperie absurd is because they heare not the points of Papistrie truly related but their ignorant and malicious Ministers charge them to hold what they hold not This is false for first these Protestants that thus condemne Papistrie do dayly reade the Papists owne bookes which are not restrained and prohibited with a The reading and vse of Lutheran bookes forbidden not onely the vulgar but all others of what state degree order or condition soeuer they be though Bishops Archbishops or greater onely the Jnquisitors are excepted by a Decretall of Iulius the 3. See Sept. Decr. l. 5. tit 4. de lib. prohib c. 2. that seueritie wherewith
it may be the easing of him may do him good He complains this distinction when it is granted will not helpe the matter neither for the question may still be how many and which truthes those be that are necessary the which question if we leaue to be determinated by euery priuate spirit either we shall haue no point to be counted Fundamentall in regard the ignorance of some may be such that they may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life although through ignorance he beleeue nothing at all or else so many as shall please euery brainsicke fellow The determination therefore of this necessary question is to be left to the iudgement of the Catholicke Church that all such points that are confirmed by full authority of the said Church he receiued for such as must necessarily be beleeued by all men Wherein first I blame his discretion for where I mentioned the distinction I had no cause to inquire whose the authority is to iudge what is Fundamentall and what otherwise but assuming it as a thing iudged already I onely mentioned it affirming some points to be Fundamentall and some otherwise How it helps the matter therefore I had nothing to do in that my words were not vsed in this question Next I pittie his wretched state that in no controuersie running betweene vs no not so much as in this a poore distinction can preuaile vnlesse his owne Church and the Pope therein for * Shewed plainely below cap 35. 36. that he meanes by the authority of the Catholicke Church be made the iudge This is a very meane shift when a question depends betweene vs and them to put the Scripture and the consent of the Ancient Church by and require themselues to be iudges Thirdly this question as all other matters belonging to faith must be iudged by no mans priuate spirit but by the Catholicke Church of Christ as the Iudge and by the Scripture onely as the Rule and if they be no competent Iudges who through ignorance may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life though he beleeue nothing at all then away with the Church of Rome and let it be acknowledged as erroneous as any priuate spirit i See cap. 22. n. 1. wherein it is frequently holden that the Gentiles were iustified and might be saued onely by their morall life without beleeueing any thing at all Fourthly supposing the Protest left the determining of this question to priuate spirit which they do not but to the true Church of God following the Scripture yet let my Iesuite answer if the practise of his owne Church be not as bad where the Pope hath power k See cap. 36. n. 3. to make a new article of faith and that to be a Fundamentall point belonging to faith at one time which is not so at another so that all men shall then be bound to beleeue it which before were free to beleeue it l Scot. 4. d. 11. q. 3 §. ad argu Tonstall de verit corp p 46. as it hath already bene practised in the point of transubstantiation and may when the Pope will in the points of m Dico primò veritatem hanc sc virginem esse conceptam sine peccato originali posse definiti ab Ecclesia quando id expedire indicauerit probatur Nam imprimis EcclesiaÌ„ posse controuersiam hanc in alterutram partem decidere apertè supponunt Sixtus 4. Pius 5. Suar. tom 2. disp 3. sect 6. the conception of the B. Virgin and n Paul Benc Eugub l. de effic auxil c. 1. the concourse of Gods grace with mans wil and the o Staplet Princip doctr l. 9. c. 4. Relect. coÌ„tro 5. q. 2. art 4. Canonizing of Hermes or Clement into the sacred Scripture In which case his Holinesse might possible if not be brain-sicke which betides yonger men which Popes commonly are not vnlesse it be sometime when the yong Cardinâ—â— are in an humor to elect a Bennet or Iohn or * When Leo the tenth a yong man was elected in the Conclaue Alphonsus Petrucius a yong Cardinall proclaimed his election at the window Pontificem habemus Leonem decimum ac viuant vigeantque iuniores Pap. Masso in LeoÌ„ 10. he should haue cried by the order Annutiâ— vobis gaudium magnum Papam habemus Marcell sacr cerem pag. 19 Leo yet doâ—e at least by vertue of his age or for his recreation play the vice of a Play as p Alex. ab Alexand. genial dicr l. 3. c. 21. Amasis the King of Egipt would sometime do among his Courtiers and as q Aelian var. hist l. 12. c. 15. Agesilaus ride vpon a sticke among his children to make them sport the which comparisons howsoeuer his creatures will take vnkindly yet all the world knowes his Consistorie hath bene a stage whereon he hath many a time and often plaied these parts ere now as formally as the priuatest spirit or braine-sickest companion aliue can do and so I leaue him CHAP. XVIII 1. Touching the perpetuall virginity of Mary 2. The celebration of Easter 3. The Baptisme of Infants The Iesuits halting 4. And the Scriptures sufficiency A. D. I for breuitie sake will omit to vrge other points Pag. 68. which Protestants beleeue with vs viz the perpetuall virginitie of the blessed Virgine against the errour of Heluidius White pag. 12. the celebration of Easter on the Sunday against those heretikes that denied it the Baptisme of Infants against Anabaptists who will not allow it c. 1 HEre my name is cited in the Margent and the page of my Booke as if I had written or some way insinuated that these 3. points were matters of faith and yet not contained in the Scripture But I writ nothing that sounds that way neither in the place cited nor any where else yet because I will misse no place where he cites me I answer he affirmes 3. things First that we hold the perpetuall virginity of the blessed Virgine the Celebration of Easter vpon the Sunday and the Baptisme of Infants to be a For that is the question expressed by himselfe a litle before pag. 67. of his Repl. points of faith necessary to be beleeued â—â—condly that these 3. are not contained in Scripture Thirdly that we beleeue all this with the Papists Wherein there is neuer a true word For to the first the perpetuall virginity of the Virgine Marie after the birth of our Sauiour as well as before we beleeue as a probable and likely truth but not as a matter of faith the which if my aduersarie mislike I require him to forbeare me and answer Saint Basil with whom we consent b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Basil pa. 233. graec Froben an 1551. That she denyed not the workes of mariage to her husband after the birth of her Sonne though it nothing hinder godly doctrine yet what was done after without medling with it let vs leaue to the
his faith of the Scripture resteth 5 Let our aduersaries therefore leaue this custome of forging and misreporting and let them acknowledge the truth No matter to this point whether Protestants or Papists be the elect that haue this spirit but say directly and shrinke not is there not a Spirit euen the Spirit of God enlightning the conscience whereby euery one that beleeues is assured without which the authoritie and perswasion of the Church can do no good Then if there be such a Spirit why may it not be called the voice of Christ the light that shines in the Scriptures themselues and what defect is there in saying that by this Spirit true Scripture and true doctrine too is discerned o The soule hath it taste it feeling it smelling sayes Gers serm de Bern. tom 2. pag 750. edit Paris 1606. as the taste discernes sweet from sower such as know not the Scripture haue not this Spirit The word of God speakes in the Scripture openly though none but Gods children beleeue it Here I challenge my aduersarie and all his sect let them denie this if they can I would not haue them with gesture to out-stare it but as Christian men ought to do shew some reason if it be false which they cannot do D. Stapleton that laboured in this matter beyond all others yet p Triplicat in admonit confesses the internall perswasion of the Spirit to be so necessarie and so effectuall for the beleeuing of euery obiect of faith that neither without it can any thing of any man be beleeued though the church should beare witnesse a thousand times and by it ALONE any thing that should be may be beleeued THOVGH THE CHVRCH ALTOGETHER BE SILENT OR BE NOT HEARD q Princip l. 8. c. 3. Let our aduersaries know we do no way so extoll the outward voice of the Church that we should teach * There can be no faith absolutely without it sine ea nullam fidei rationem posse absolutè consistere Here we see D. Stapleton grants that by the Spirit of God inwardly perswading we may be and are and without it are not assured of any thing to be beleeued and that such as haue this Spirit doe by IT discerne which is the true Scripture and the true sense thereof and which is not as our taste discernes sweet from sower as our eyes light from darknesse doth euidently follow of his words And to let the Reader see how this ignorant Iesuite censures that he vnderstands not his owne Canus r Loc. l. 2 c. 8. pag. 43. edit Colon. an 1605 sayes that as the taste well affected easily discernes the difference of tastes so the good affection of the minde makes that a man can discerne the doctrine of God from error It is therefore true that the beleeuer in himselfe doth taste and see by it owne maiestie the Scripture to be Gods word when the Church hath testified it a thousand times and this taste and light of the Spirit in the heart is a thing distinct from the Churches authoritie and aboue it though ordinarily this Church-authoritie in ministring leade vs to the attaining it and help to open our eyes that we might see it 6 And the reason why some do not thus discerne the true Scripture or any truth is not because the Scripture is not euident enough of it selfe but because such as discerne it not want their taste and such as see or heare it not want their senses in the same maner that they do which cā neither taste the sweetnesse of hony nor heare the sound of a bell nor see the light of the Sunne because they are senslesse for the Sunne hath light in it selfe and honey sweetnesse in it selfe which are discerned by the sense it selfe but some haue no such sense and therefore Saint Austin ſ Prolo de doctr Christia sayes They which vnderstand not the things I write must not reprehend me because they vnderstand not like as if I should shew them with my finger the Moone or a starre which were not very bright and they had not eye-sight enough to see my finger wherewith I point they ought not therefore to be incensed at me So they who vnderstand ng these precepts that I giue cannot yet perceiue the obscure things which are in the sacred bookes must not blame me but pray that some light may be giuen to their eyes from God aboue For though I can with my finger point at a thing yet I can kindle light in no mans eyes to make them see that I point at And againe t Tract 35. in Ioh. in another place he sayes that as our eyes though whole and open yet need the helpe of outward light to see so our minde which is the eye of the soule vnlesse by the light of truth which illuminates other things but it selfe is not illuminated it be enlightned can come neither to wisedome nor righteousnesse In which words Saint Austin affirmes all this that we say that the Scripture and euery truth therein contained shines as a light and by proportion tastes of it selfe and speakes publickly to all as the Sunne shines openly to all and the reason why men discerne it not is not any defect in themselues which must be supplied by Church-authoritie and tradition but onely the def ct of disposition in themselues whereof the want of Church-ministery may be one cause And a little more to shew my aduersaries presumption in denying this let the words of u Ad Antolych l 1 pag 285. 289 edit Basil Henrico Petr. an 1555. Theophilus Antiochenus that liued two hundred yeares afore Austin be obserued If thou who art a Gentile say to me that am a Christian shew me thy God I will bid thee againe shew me that thou art a man and then I will shew thee my God Let me see the eyes of thy soule and the eares of thy heart open For as with carnall eyes we see the things belonging to this life so * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with the eyes and eares of the soule onely it is possible to behold God who is not seene of all but of such onely as can behold him hauing the eyes of their soule opened All haue eyes yet some are so dimme sighted that they see not the Sunne * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet the Sunne hath neuerthelesse light albeit the blinde see it not who must accuse themselues for their owne blindnesse In like manner O man are the eyes of thy soule possessed with blindnesse c. This therefore which our aduersaries so scurrilously call bold presumption of hauing and being taught by the Spirit was beleeued in the Church from the beginning and it was neuer called either audacious or impudent till this Romane Church and her creatures most audaciously and impudently renounced the authoritie maiestie and euidence of Gods blessed Spirit to aduance the tyrannie heresie and pride of Antichrist For the intended drift
Scripture Bellarmine g Bell. de verb. Dei lib. 4. c. 1. The name of tradition is applied by Diuines to signifie onely vnwritten doctrine Alphonsus h Alphons à Castr adu haer lib 1. c. 5. This is to be laid for a most sound foundation that the traditions of the vniuersall Church and the determinations thereof in things concerning faith are of no lesse authority then the sacred Scripture it selfe though there be no Scripture to proue them Hessels of Louan i Hessel expli symb c. 69. p. 38. The Apostles neuer intended by their writing to commit to writing the whole doctrine of faith but as necessity vrged them what in their absence they could not teach that they committed to writing Costerus the Iesuite k Coster enchirid p. 43. It was neuer the mind of Christ either to commit his mysteries to parchment or that his Church should depend on paper writings Lindane l Lind. panopl. pag. 4. We Catholickes teach that Christians are to beleeue many things which are to be acknowledged for Gods word that are not contained in the Scripture and many things finally to be receiued with the same authoritie wherewith those doctrines of faith are receiued which are contained in holy writ Rodericus Delgado m Roderic dosm de autor Script l. vlt. p. 63 Albeit these things are not found written in the Bible yet they must no lesse be obserued by the godly that they may fulfill the precepts and firmely beleeue the mysteries of the heauenly faith Doctor Stapleton n Staplet princip doctr l. 12. cap. 5. There both were among the Iewes and are among vs very many things religiously performed in the worship of God and also necessary to saluation and necessarily to be beleeued which yet are not comprehended in the Scriptures but are approued or commended to vs ONELY by the authority of the Church Gregory of Valentia o Valent. tom 3. p. 258. D. All the controuersie is whether the Apostles by word of mouth WITHOVT WRITING deliuered any such doctrines as now affoord an infallible argument for the determining of the controuersies of faith in the Church These wordes of our aduersaries make it more then plaine that the Church of Rome holds the Scriptures vnsufficient not onely in respect of breeding faith or bringing men to know and beleeue it ordinarily which we grant but also in respect of containing it in themselues which we deny And that my aduersary holds the same thing I will prone directly For ha-laid downe 4. grounds First that true faith is necessary Secondly that this faith is onely one Thirdly that this faith must be certaine Fourthly and entire in all points he addes the fift that it must not be doubted but God hath prouided and left some certaine rule and meanes whereby euery man may in all points and questions be sufficiently and infallibly instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith and then immediately he puts the question what in particular may be assigned to be this rule wherto he answers in his first conclusion The Scripture alone especially as translated into English cannot be this rule Which I denied Therefore his question was touching the sufficiency of the Scripture as the said sufficiency is opposed to vnwrittē traditiō not as it is distinguished against the requisite condition of the meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scripture And this I confirme for my aduersary saies they hold the Scripture to be part of the rule because it is part of the doctrine of the Church immediatly reuealed by God but yet there are many substantiall points of faith not contained in them Yea p Pag. 67. Reply his expresse words are The question is betwixt vs and Protestants whether God did reueale any thing to the Prophets and Apostles necessary to be beleeued which is not now expressed or so contained in the Scripture that by euident and necessary consequence excluding all tradition and Church authority it may be gathered out of some sentence expresly set downe in the Scripture I did not therefore peruert the state of the question but my Aduersary hauing nothing else to say thought good by this shift to rid himselfe from that which he saw could not be answered 4 Neuerthelesse pleasing himselfe with his owne conceite he concludes that conuicted with the euidence of truth I haue yeelded to his conclusion in that sence wherein he meant it That Scripture alone is not the rule of faith And therefore all my discourse is idle and impertinent I answer two things first if his conclusion The Scripture alone is not this rule which almighty God hath prouided whereby euery man may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith meane no more but onely to adde the Ministry of the Church and mens owne industry to the Scripture as the meanes for the ordinary vnderstanding and beleeuing that which is written in it in this sence the Scripture alone is the rule whereby to iudge whatsoeuer matter belongs to faith but Scripture alone is not the ordinary rule and meanes by it selfe to kindle in vs the true knowledge and faith of that which it containes without the Ministrie of the Church and other things be ioyned with it for the learning of it then I grant it and require the Iesuite againe in lieu thereof either to renounce his traditions or else confesse they haue no other vse but onely to helpe to expoūd and teach that which is wholly contained in the Scripture without any power to supply any defect of doctrine that may be supposed to be therein And when he hath done the next treatise of faith he writes to distinguish a little better betweene the Rule and the Meanes of applying it and not say that is no sufficient rule whereby to be instructed WHAT is faith and WHAT not which onely is not a sufficient meanes to bring men to faith without the subordinate condition of such meanes as is required in the application of any rule Secondly I answer that his conclusion meanes more viz. That Scripture alone is vnperfect and defectiue 2. waies The first in that without other meanes it doth not ordinarily breed or draw foorth in vs assent to that it reueales nor so much as make vs see the reuelation to be And therefore there needes the Church by her Pastor to teach and perswade vs and there needes the Spirit of God and industrie in our selues This way no Protestant euer denied The second is in that it alone containes not all Gods word or all such truth as he hath reuealed necessarily to be beleeued but onely one small and obscure part thereof the best part or at least some part being by Tradition onely vnwritten This way we deny with open mouth and the Iesuite holds it and in the place now controuerted hugges it in his armes and therefore I discoursed against him as I did and in no other sense and so consequently it is
words seeming plaine are to be vnderstood properly as they sound and when they are to be taken in a figuratiue or improper sence This say I is not to be learned sufficiently in the bare letter of Scripture alone but is to be learned of the Church according to that worthy saying of Vincentius Lyrinensis Vincent Lyr. cont haeres c. 2. Because all men do not take the holy Scripture for the height of it in one and the same sence but diuers men interpret the sayings of it diuersly in so much that almost so many different sences may seeme possible to be drawne from it as there are diuers men c. Therefore it is very necessarie that the line of Propheticall and Apostolicall interpretation be directed according to the rule of Ecclesiasticall and Catholicke sence True it is that by other probable meanes viz. rules of art knowledge of tongues obseruation of circumstances conference of places c. one but not euery lay-man woman and childe euen of M Wotton and M. Whites owne parish may probably finde out when the words are and when they are not to be vnderstood properly but infallibly in such sort as to build thereupon infallible assent of faith one cannot without infallible interpretation had either immediatly by reuelation of the Spirit which is not ordinarily to be expected or by infallible authoritie of the Church True it is also that ordinarily Diuines hold it for a certaine rule that words of Scripture are to be vnderstood properly as they sound vnlesse to auoide some absurditie we be compelled to interprete by a figure But when such an absurditie occurreth that ought to compell vs to interprete plaine words of Scripture by a figure and when not although reason it selfe may probably know which probable knowledge may suffice for direction of manners yet infallibly in such sort as is required to the assent of faith reason alone not assisted by Church authoritie cannot at the least alwayes tell sith many things may seeme absurd to our priuate sence and reason which in truth are not absurd as in the mystery of the blessed Trinitie may plainly appeare and contrariwise many things may seeme in reason not absurd which in true Diuinitie are absurd and most false 1 HIs second reason against the Scriptures being the rule of faith was their obscuritie because they faile in the second condition of the rule being of themselues alone so obscure and vnknowne both to the vnlearned and learned that no man can thereby alone be sufficiently directed This reason was handled § 7 and 8. where I answered the argument whereby he prosecuted it and euery word also that he replies here which makes me to wonder with what conscience he followes his cause when that he sayes here being answered he shrinks from replying and onely repeates his old argument againe and yet intitles his booke a Reply when he replies nothing but conceales all from his Reader that I answered neuerthelesse that he sayes I will answer againe 2 First he tels in what sence he holds the Scripture to be obscure and how farre forth Not that it cannot by any meanes be vnderstood or that it is any imperfection in the Scripture to be obscure but the perfection rather the onely thing he goes about to proue being that de facto it is obscure or at the least not so easie as the ordinary rule of faith ought to be which is denied and confuted not denying some parts to be obscure as many prophecies and mysteries therein nor affirming any of it to be so effectuall to our vnderstanding that without the motion of Gods Spirit and vse of the meanes euery man can effectually vse it to his saluation for I neuer denied the requisite condition of Gods grace and the Churches teaching and our owne endeuour to open our vnderstanding euen in the plainest Scripture that is but I onely affirme all things concerning faith and good life needfull to be knowne to be so plainly set downe therein that the vnlearnedst man aliue vsing the meanes which is not the Church-authoritie intended by my aduersary and being enlightned with Gods Spirit may sufficiently vnderstand them to his saluation which is enough to make it a rule perfect entire and as easie as is possible for a rule to be for the finding out and deciding whatsoeuer matter belongs to faith For howsoeuer some things in the Scripture the knowledge whereof is not simply necessary to saluation be very obscure and doubtfull yet the whole rule of our faith needfull to all men is set downe so plainly that it may be vnderstood of all men allowing them some eleuation and onely supposing them to haue the light of grace and to take that paines in searching that is ordinarily required in the vse of any rule and in the execution of any meanes whatsoeuer It seemes my aduersarie would conclude from hence that therefore I grant Scripture alone not to be so easie as the rule of faith ought to be because I require so many euen outward meanes and helpes for the vnderstanding thereof beside the helpe of Gods Spirit within vs. But he is deceiued and deceiues his Reader for I expounded my selfe that it is not necessarie the rule be so easie and effectuall that no helpe shall be needfull for the applying it to our conscience but the perfection and easinesse of it stands in this that a man vsing diligence and eleuated by grace from his naturall ignorance shall finde therein absolutely and plainly all things whatsoeuer he is bound to know and beleeue and needs not that the Church by her authoritie and traditions should adde any thing to it that is not contained in it And that this condition of vsing meanes and outward helpes takes not away the reason of a rule he must confesse by his owne principles for let his Church-teaching and authoritie his owne Helena be the rule yet afore any man can determinately know it or vnderstand and yeeld to it he must I hope haue the grace of the Spirit and seeke it out and diligently attend what it teaches him which is as much as we require for the vnderstanding of the Scriptures This therefore is a vaste partialitie in my Iesuite that he will conclude a thing cannot be a sufficient rule or meanes that requires the helpe of grace and a mans owne industrie in the applying it when themselues holding their Church to be the rule yet confesse that no man can heare the voice thereof not vnderstand nor yeeld assent to it without the very same meanes that we require for the vnderstanding of the Scriptures What voice what complaint what querimonie shall we vtter against this peruersnesse against this spirit of contradiction But my aduersarie sayes that among these outward meanes and helpes which M. White requires to the vnderstanding of the Scripture besides the Spirit of God there must be one an outward meanes which is * There is no such outward infalible means in this life
follow that the Scripture ALONE euen in those plaine places is the rule because no man without some other meanes besides the plainenesse of the words can be infallibly assured that he vnderstands them right the which he proues first because some places seeming plaine are vnderstood otherwise then they seeme Secondly because the plainest places that are may be wrested to a wrong sense as that plaine place This is my body is wrested by the Caluinists to a figuratiue sense I answer his reason why Scripture alone could not be the rule of faith was because it is not plaine the which obscurity I denied to be in that which is necessary to be knowne affirming the Scripture in such places to be plaine now he replies that though such places be plaine yet still it cannot be the rule Thus first he denies the Scripture to be the rule because it is not plaine and then allowing it againe to be plaine yet still he denies it to be the rule What will this man stand to I maruell But they be not plaine enough because without some other infallible meanes besides the seeming plainenes of the words no man can be infallibly assured that he vnderstands aright euen those plaine places This absurd cauill I haue answered twenty times first that the meanes whereby this is done are the helpe of Gods Spirit our owne diligence the Church-teaching the light of nature and these meanes are infallible And these meanes I admit either coniunctim or diuisim to be necessary as a condition and medium for the full assurance of vnderstanding these places but this condition takes not away the true motion and reasons of plainenesse from them for as I answered in my booke to this argument that is not obscure which by ordinary and easie meanes may be vnderstood but which either hath no meanes at all to open it or onely such as are not ordinary to his confirmation d THE WAY p. 36. n. 2. I answered likewise But to his instances of the Caluinists wresting a plaine place This is my body to a figuratiue sense I reply first it is plaine and euident that it is a figure by the circumstances of the place when he that said the words This is my body that is giuen for you at the same instant held nothing but bread in his hand and liued and was neither yet glorified nor crucified and spake of a sacrament wherein it is ordinary to speake figuratiuely Secondly the Papists do the same in the next words This cup is the new Testament and yet they hold them to be plaine words if my aduersary will be smattering about the exposition of these words let him giue a reall answer to the place of my booke e Digr 49. n. 8. where they are handled of purpose for him 6 Next he sayes though the letter of the Scripture be neuer so plaine yet to haue infallible assuraÌ„ce of the sence there is required some other rule and meanes the which rule is not in the bare letter of the Scripture but is to be learned of the Church as Vincentius saith The which being the same he said before without difference or augmentation let it briefly receiue the same answer That the requisite coÌ„dition of vsing ordinary easie meanes wherof the ministry of the Church truly expounded is one I neuer denied but this proues not the Scriptures to be obscure nor remoues infallible assurance froÌ„ the Scripture to the Church but onely shewes that the Scripture infallibly out of it selfe giues vs this assurance by this meanes and VinceÌ„tius his words affirme no more for by the rule of Ecclesiasticall and Catholicke sence according to the which he requires the line of propheticall and apostolicall interpretation to be directed he meanes no vnwritten Church-tradition or doctrine that is wanting in the Scripture for he holds the Scripture it selfe to be sufficient for euery thing but onely that that which is in the Scripture be so vnderstood as agrees with the rule of faith which the true Church hath alwaies holden now that which the Church hath alwaies holden is contained in the Scripture alone that the Reader may see the Iesuites treachery in alledging Vincentius against the sufficiency of the Scripture who in that very place which belike he neuer saw with his owne eyes begins thus Here possible one may demand when the rule of the Scripture is perfect and in it selfe more then enough sufficient vnto all things Note here whether he thinks as the Iesuite doth that many substantiall points of doctrine needfull to saluation are not contained in them and that it is but a part of the rule what need is there to ioyne vnto it the authority of the Churches sence and he answers as the Iesuite hath alledged that this is because all men do not take it in one sence therefore it is necessary that the line of interpretation be directed according to the rule of Ecclesiasticall and Catholicke sence In which manner he speakes also in f Diximus in superioribus hanc suisse semper esse hodie Catholicorum consuetudinem vt fidem veram duoâ—us his modis approbent Primum diuini canonis authoritate Deinde â—cclesiae catholicae traditione Non quia canon solus non sibi ad vniuersa sufficiat sed quia verba diuina pro suo plerique arburatis interpetantur cap. 41. another place not supposing any thing to be wanting in the Scripture so much as to giue infallible assurance of it owne sence much lesse any articles of faith needfull to saluation but onely supposing that some heretikes would not yeeld to that it gaue or possible through their owne default did not see it and thereupon aduises to oppose against them the rule and practise of the Church as a man by witnesses would conuince him that denies the truth the which practise as it hinders not the Scriptures to containe the perfect rule of faith so we will allow it and require no sence or exposition of the Scripture nor no point of religion to be receiued vnles it be thus directed 7 It is therefore vntrue that he concludes with one cannot infallibly be assured when the words of the Scripture are to be vnderstood properly and when not without the authority of the Church vnlesse it be by reuelation I say this is false vpon two points first because this assurance may be had as from the externall meanes by the Scripture it selfe though the Church say nothing Next because this Church authority he vnderstands to be the externall testimony of the Church reuealing if not making the said sence out of tradition which is not written and not out of the Scripture it selfe so that the vnderstanding which I haue of the sence and my perswasion that it is the true sence shall not be founded on the Scripture but on the authority of the Church of Rome that sayes it which g THE WAY §. 8. n. 7. digr 11. I confuted affirming that this
nos certos faciat Grego de Valent tom 3. pag. 117. c. Verus Scripturae sensus inest Scripturae sicut signatum signo sed media certa explorata infallibilia quibus sensus iste eruitur non est ipsa Scriptura sed traditio Ecclesiastica vox definitio Ecclesiae seu eius qui Ecclesiae vice Christi praesidet Grets defens Bellar. tom 1. p. 1970. c. This is the finall euasion that the Iesuites vse against this argument in defence of their traditions and Popes authority against the sufficiency of the Scripture that the Scriptures haue in them a shining light and are as the Protestants say able to proue themselues to be the word of God and containe their true sense in themselues but this light we see not and this true sense we know not and this assurance that they are Gods word or that this is the true sense we cannot haue in the Scripture it selfe but by the meanes of Traditions and the Popes authoritie shewing and propounding these things to vs. As a candle though hauing light in it selfe yet shewes light to none when it is hid vnder a bushell but when it is set vpon a Candlesticke I answer 2. things First as I haue often said this authority and teaching of the Church is not alway nor simply necessary to shew all men the light of the Scripture or so much as to point to it for either by the immediate light of Gods Spirit or by the light of nature it may be knowne to be Gods word as by the light of nature it is knowne that God is whereupon it followes plainely that the Scripture alone as the Rule hath this light in it selfe and from it selfe shewes it else it could not in this manner without Church proposition shine to any Secondly I grant that ordinarily for the seeing and discerning of the euidēce perfection purity power sence all this light that is in the Scripture the proposition of the Church is necessary as a candlesticke to hold it forth but then this proposition may be expounded two waies one way to signifie such authority as by and from it selfe induces me to beleeue afore I see any authority in the Scripture and together with the authority of the Scripture the twofold authority of the Church and Scripture concurring to the moouing of my vnderstanding as when two men concurre as one formall beginning to the carrying and moouing of a blocke This Church proposition thus expounded I vtterly deny to be either needfull or possible Secondly it may be expounded for the Ministry of the Church by her Pastors and people reuealing the Scriptures to them that know them not and teaching the nature sense and meaning thereof But this ministry is but a bare condition adding no light sense authority or matter to the Scripture but onely leading vs to see it Of which Ministery there is no question betweene vs for all Protestants grant The authority or ministery of the Church supposes no want of light in the Scripture and vse it but the question is whether all the articles and whole nature of faith be contained in Scripture alone excluding vnwritten traditions though the Ministery of the Church be needfull as an instrument to shew teach and expound the Scripture as a candlesticke is needfull to shew the candle For the vse of this Ministry and requisite condition of all other meanes that are to be vsed supposes no want or defect in the obiect whereabout they are applied but onely produces it to his operation as the setting of a candle vpon the socket addes no light to it that was wanting in it selfe but onely remoues some impediments that hinder the standers by from seeing and the opening of a window to let in light makes not the Sunne imperfect or but a partiall light And if our aduersaries intended no more but this there were an end of the controuersie for no Protestant euer denied the necessity of Church ministry in this sense but freely confesse it although the authority * See it expounded Chap. 35. n. 1. inde and here immediatly after in nu 4. mentioned we renounce 4 For the better explication of this my answer and that the Reader may see how impertinent it is that my Aduersary sayes Note FIRST that o The quest betweene vs the Papists about the Churches authority the question is not whether some meanes be ordinarily required to the vnderstanding of the Scripture and the producing of faith in such as reade and vse it nor whether the Scripture worke infallible assurance immediatly in all men for in some it doth without the operation and coming betweene of the Church ministery For we hold it doth not But the point is whether this authority of the Church supply any article of faith or matter needfull to saluation that is wanting in the Scripture so that it may be said as my Aduersary alway speaketh the Scripture alone is but a part of the rule of faith which God hath left to instruct men what is to be holden for faith and there be many substantiall points belonging to faith which are contained in Scripture alone nether expresly nor thence to be deduced by consequence but to be supplied by tradition and Church authority and so the question is not about the expediency or condition of the meanes but about the perfection and sufficiency of the thing it selfe Note SECONDLY that my aduersary from the necessity of the means concludes the insufficiency of the thing thus The light of the Scripture shines not to vs the true sense of the Scripture is not infallibly assured vnto vs without the meanes of the Church The Scripture therefore is vnsufficient not containing all things needfull not instructing vs WHAT is to be holden for matter of faith as if a man should say the light of the candle appeares not to vs but when it is set on a candlesticke therefore there is much light that is wanting in the candle and is supplied by the candlesticke Note THIRDLY what the things properly are which our aduersaries attribute to the Church in comparing it with the Scripture They are there first to be a meanes to reueale and expound the Scripture to vs and to breed the faith thereof in our consciences Secondly to be the Foundation of our faith in this sense that we do beleeue this to be Scripture and this to be the true sense of the Scripture and this to be the matter of faith onely because the Church expounds the Scripture so Thirdly to supply vnto vs many articles of faith absolutely needfull to saluation that are wanting in the Scripture out of tradition and by the said tradition to expound the Scripture These two latter points they infer on of the first which is the incroching consequence that I except against in that the authority wherein God hath placed his Church is not in respect of the Scripture but in respect of vs being a bare Minister to the
Scripture D. Stapleton a Relect. p. 462. sayes The Church is the ground and pillar of truth in a higher kind then the Scripture namely in the kind of the efficient cause And b Pag. 494. in explicat qu. the authority of the Church may be vnderstood to be greater then the authority of the Scripture because it is not simply subiect or bound to it but may by it authority teach decerne something which the Scripture hath neither determined nor taught The things which the Church teaches do as much binde the faithfull as those things which the Scripture teacheth we Catholickes affirme that the Church is to be heard more certainely then the Scriptures because the doctrine thereof is more manifest and euident then the doctrine of the Scriptures or at the least equally with the Scriptures because the authority thereof is no lesse irrefragable and infallible The Scripture is the booke of the Church the testimonie of truth which the Church testifies the law of God which the Church hath publisht the rule of faith which the Church hath deliuered We had wont to maruell at the blasphemies c Illyric clau script p. 541. Hos de express verb. Dei of Cusanus Verratus Hosius That the Church hath authoritie aboue the Scripture The Scripture as it is produced by heretikes is the word of the Diuell A Councell is the highest tribunall and hath the same power to determine any thing that the Councell of the Apostles and Disciples had The things written in the Gospell haue no soundnesse but through the determination of the Church c. But now you see the same renewed in that Church to this day and the Iesuits in the midst of their learned subtilties to be as grosse as the grossest Friars preferring their Church authority farre aboue the Scriptures or any vse that a Candlesticke can haue in shewing the candle Note FOVRTHLY what it is that the Protestants say touching the authority of the Scripture and the Church so much as belongs to the present occasion First that the Scriptures haue in them a light and an authoritie of their owne sufficient to prooue themselues to be the word of God and to giue infallible assurance to all men of the true sense and this light and authority is not added increased or multiplied by the Ministry of the Church or any thing that it doth about the Scripture Secondly this light and authoritie of the Scripture shines in vs and takes effect in vs then onely when the Spirit of God opens our hearts to see it The defect of which heauenly illumination is the reason why some neuer and the elect themselues at all times do not see it but it argues no defect of light in the Scriptures Thirdly the means whereby God opens our eies and hearts to see this light and authoritie in the Scripture is the Ministry of the Church I expound my selfe it is the ordinary and publike meanes wherto he referres men And this Ministry is by preaching and expounding the Scripture out of it selfe and perswading and conuincing the consciences of men yet priuately and extraordinarily when and wheresoeuer this Ministry failes or ceasses the light and sense of the Scripture is obtained by the Scripture alone without this Church Ministry and the Scripture alone in this sort immediately at sundry times by it selfe giues full assurance and workes all other effects in our consciences that it doth when the Church propounds it Fourthly the Scripture is so sufficient of it selfe both to reueale whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne and to establish and assure our heart in the infallible faith of that it reueales that the Church hath nether authority to adde so much as one article more then is contained therein nor power to giue this assurance from any thing but from the Scripture it selfe So farre forth that THE WHOLE TEACHING AND DOCTRINE AND AVTHORITIE OF THE CHVRCH IS TO BE ADMITTED AND YEELDED TO OR REFVSED ACCORDING AS IT CONSENTS OR DISAGREES WITH THE SCRIPTVRE the fountaine of truth the rule of faith Note FIFTLY what our aduersaries meane by the Church and the meanes whereby the Church executes her authority what the things are which by her authority she may do and what the proper effect is that this authority workes in vs. First by this Church d This is shewed c. 35. nu 1. c. 36. nu 1. they vnderstand the Church of Rome for the present time being and therein the Pope in whom they say the whole power and vertue of the Church abideth Secondly the meanes whereby it executeth her authority is vnwritten Tradition out of the which it supplies all things pretended to be needfull for the exposition of the Scripture or the defining of matters that must be beleeued Thirdly the things that she may do by her authoritie are all things that appertaine to the questions of religion 1 Cus epi. 2. 3. 7. to expound the Scripture after her owne iudgement 2 Conc. Trid. sess 24. can 3. to dispense against the Scripture 3 Stapl. princip l. 9. c. 14. relect pag. 514. to canonize new Scripture that before was none 4 Stapl. ibi relect p. 494. inde to giue authority to the Scripture 5 August de Ancon qu. 59. art 1. 2. to make new articles of faith 6 Gl. de transl episc Quanto §. veri to make that to be the sence of the Scripture that is not Lastly the effect of this power is the same that the Scripture breeds and more 7 Grets defens Bel. tom 1. pag. 1218. c. obedience in all that will be saued so that the world is bound as much to the Popes definitiue sentence as to the Scripture or the voice of God himselfe 8 The speech of all the canonists for Christ and the Pope make but one tribunal 9 Capistran de author Pap. pag 130. He is aboue al like him that came downe from heaueÌ„ 10 Capist ibi For with God and the Pope his will is sufficient reason and that which pleases him hath the vigor of a law 11 Palaeot de consist part 5. q 9. after his sentence pronounced no man must doubt or delay to yeeld 12 Petrisedes in Romano solâ—o collocata libertate plena in suis agendis per omnia poteri debet nec vlli subesse homini Gl. ibid. vbi sup yea all the CouÌ„cels and Doctors and Churches in the world must stoop to his determination 5 These fiue things thus obserued it is easie to se that our aduersaries attribute more to the Church then to be onely a meanes for the communicating of that which is in the Scripture to vs expounding the authority thereof that it exceedes the latitude of a Candlesticke and is turned into the Candle it selfe And so to returne to my aduersaries answer and to conclude I thus reason The Ministery and authority of the Church is required either
Churches that should either refuse or examine the publike faith of the Church of Rome which he meanes by the Catholicke Church as Wickliffe Hus Luther and the Churches of England Scotland and Germany haue done the which his intent the rather because the Diuines of his Church are so a Proh nefaÌ„dum hominem Caluinus poeta Cynadus stigmaticus errare non potest Ecclesia tamen Christi sponsa errori est obnoxia Vna Geneua euibrato è sole radio coruscat Ecclesia autem in tenebris squalet conticescit West de tripl offic l. 3. pag. 337. violent therein I confuted by answering all his arguments which marching against priuate spirits I easily perceiued to be meant against the Protestant Churches casting off the papacy Now let vs see what heresies first he sayes that I seeme to disclaime from immediate teaching of priuate spirits and to grant the substance of his conclusion in that sense wherin it was principally intended He affirmes two things of me First that I seeme to disclaime the immediate teaching of priuate spirits This I grant and wish that himselfe and his sectaries by our example would likewise disclaime the priuate spirit of the Pope b Sicut coelum generat corrumpit ista inferiora alterat variat ipsa nihil tamen istorum inferiorum insurgit contra coeluÌ„ vel appellat contra ipsum sed patienter tolerat quicquid coelum operatur in eâ—s siue per generationem siue corruptionem siue alterationem sic potest as Papalis tanquam celestis ita potest omnes inferiores potestates tam Clericorum quam Laicorum generare cerrumpere alterare quia nulli licet insurgere vel appellare contra ipsum August Triumph sum de eccl pot q 6. â—â—t 5. Sententia Papae est praeferenda sententiae omnium aliorum Ioh de Turrecrem sum de eccleâ— l. 3. c. 64. concl 1. Sententiae Papae standuÌ„ est quando contradicit sententiae totius Concilii Ioh. Andrae quem refert Syluest sum v. Concil n. 3. Papa absque Concilio reuocat gesta in Concilio Si Papa Concilium diuersas constitutiones edant praefertur constitutio Papae tanquam maioris authoritatis Ioh. Capistran de author Pap. pag. 105. Jn pontifice totam esse Monarchiam spiritualem ipsius potestatem ab omni regula quae coarctet absolutam esse Hieâ—on Alban de potest Pap. pag. 125. n. 122. Summus pontifex tanquam agens vniuersale ecclesiasticas omnes potestates veluti agentia particularia sua authoritate continet Palaeot de consist pag. 61. Probatione non indiget Cardinalium aut aliorum consensum in rebus consistorialibus definiendis nullatenus necessarium esse pag. 25. Ad ostendendum Papae primatum super omnia potestatem dicitur corporalis in orbe Deus Dominic Iacobat de concil p. 653. edit Rom. per Anto. Blad 1538. who determines aboue beside and against the publike spirit of the whole Church Next that consequently I seeme to grant the substance of his conclusion as it was principally intended by him this is false for though I allow the conclusion yet not his principall intent which c In the WAY § 58. inde afterward he discouers to be against our Diuines Church that resisted the Papacy d §. 60 , 57. alledging this reason against them that they were but priuate men and a few of them lately sprong vp against the vniuersall Church Which was the cause why I distinguisht 2 senses of the conclusion the one seeming in the words the other lurking in the intent and this latter I confuted 2 Secondly he sayes notwithstanding we seeme to disclaime priuate spirits yet we are finally forced to flie to them againe No maruell when he sayes it but say on how are we inforced and by what necessity Because whensoeuer they be vrged How they know there be any Scripture How they know these bookes to be Scripture How they know this or that to be the sense of the Scripture they are forced finally to flie for infallibly assurance to the immediate teaching of their priuate spirit or else to run the round betwixt Scripture priuate spirit This is vntrue For we ground not our faith of these things or any thing vpon our owne spirit but vpon the Spirit of God bearing witnesse with our spirit and speaking vnto vs out of the Scripture it selfe in the middest of the Catholicke Church in this manner that euery one which is inlightned of God no other can haue assurance any way but remaines in vnbeleefe as Gentiles Atheists and Heretikes doe feels the holy Ghost testifying these things to his heart and infallibly assuring him by the Scripture it selfe which light of the Spirit of God shining to our spirit is the formall reason of beleeuing the which spirit if my Aduersary will deny or call a mans owne priuate spirit or measure whether it be Gods Spirit or noe by the agreement thereof with the Church of Rome and the Popes will when themselues are part of that that must be tried by the Spirit of God let him go for an Atheist and one that renounces the habit of infused faith which is not resolued into any thing e Actus sidei infusae est credere Diuinae veritati propter se Aquar in Capreol p. 43. e. but the authority of this spirit or if he distast that let him looke vpon two principles holden by his owne Diuines f Staplet princi doctr fid pag. 274. Triplicat pag. 183. The first that the internall perswasion of the Holy Ghost or the alone habite of faith infused is so effectuall that thereby ALONE WITHOVT THE TESTIMONY AND TEACHING OF THE CHVRCH a man may beleeue that is to say be infallibly assured of any thing that must be beleeued The second that g Greg. de Valent tom 3. p. 32. AlexaÌ„d Pesant in Thom. p. 479. the propositioÌ„ of the Church is beleeued to be infallible for the reuelation of Scripture giuing testimony to the Church which reuelation of the Scripture is beleeued FOR IT SELFE These principles affirming that without any authority of the Church by the Spirit of God alone a priuate man may be infallibly assured and that the Scripture prouing to vs the infallible authority of the Church is lastly beleeued for it selfe let him shew if he can so that we may vnderstand him that it must needs be a priuate spirit of a mans owne whensoeuer by the Scripture alone without and beyond the authority of the Church we rest contented and assured of that we beleeue For before the Church authority and after it and without it men may be infallibly assured by Gods Spirit in their hearts by meanes of the Scriptures beleeued therefore knowne and vnderstood in themselues Againe they hold the Pope to be the supreme Pastour yet thinke h Occh. op 90. dierum cap. 1. that in case of heresie one may appeale from him to a superior
haue said A. D. Whereas I obiect that sectaries and the Diuell himselfe doth alledge words of Scripture Pag. 202. White pag. 64. M. White granteth it but saith he either they alledge not true Scripture or not truly applied as also they alledge the authority of the Church but either not the true Church or the true Church not truly Testimonium hoc verū est This which M. White granteth is the very truth and wanteth nothing but that he apply it to his priuate men Luther and Caluin and to his owne selfe Partiality will not suffer him to apply it thus but there is no reason that he should be iudge it is more fit that the iudgement of this matter be left to the Catholicke Church which he confesseth to be taught of God White pag. 63. 10 If my answer be true that when sectaries or the Diuell alledge Scripture or the Church they do it not truly let the Repliar giue ouer bragging and shew really that the Protestants haue not alledged these things truly And if it be no reason we be iudges our selues no more is it that the Pope and Papacy which k Nomine Ecclesiae intelligimus eius caput id est Romanum Pontificem Grego de Valent pag. 24. tom 3. Quod autem haec regula animata rationalis sit summus Pontifex non est hic locus proprius probandi Fra. Albertin Coroll p. 251. c. No maruell now though the Catholicke Church were so fast talked of he meanes by the Catholick Church be iudge but were it at that that we might haue a free Councell assembled and holden as Councels were of ancient time where the Pope and his faith might be tried as well as we it would soone appeare the Protestants haue not bene partiall in their cause when the late Trent Councell it selfe had come nearer vs then it did if it had not bene managed by Machiauellisme more then religion and the greatest tyranny and cosenage and villany vsed in it that euer stirred in any publicke busines CHAP. XXXIIII 1 The Papists pretending the Church haue a further meaning then the vulgar know 2 The Popes will is made the Churches act 3 Base traditions expounded to be diuine truth A. D. Concerning the tenth Chapter both my Aduersaries make maine opposition against the conclusion of this Chapter Pag. 202. one reason whereof is that they do not or will not rightly vnderstand what I meant when here I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith note therefore first whereas the name Church may be taken seuerall waies Intro q. 3. according to that which I noted in the Introduction whereas also in euery one of these senses it may be taken either as it is generally in all ages or as it is particularly in this or that determinate age my Aduersaries omitting all other senses principally vnderstand me to meane by the name Church the Pope or Pastours of this present age whereas in this Chapter I do not at least ex professo or primarily intend to speake of the Church in this sense but rather do speake of the Church in a more generall indefinite and indeterminate sense as it signifieth one or other companie of men liuing either in all ages or in one or other age who in one or other sense may be called the Church the doctrine whereof say I is the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all sorts of men in all matters of faith Note secondly that by the doctrine of the Church I do not vnderstand any Friars dreames White pag. 3 as M. White dreameth nor humane traditions especially opposite to Scripture but diuine doctrine including therein both the written diuine Scripture and the vnwritten diuine traditions and the true diuine interpretation of them both as by word writing signes or otherwise it is or may be propounded and deliuered to vs by the authority of the Church all which although it may worthily be called diuine doctrine as being first reuealed by God here I call Church-doctrine because as it was first reuealed and committed to the keeping of Prophets and Apostles who in their time were chiefe and principall members of the militant Church so by Gods ordinance it was to be propounded and deliuered to other men by the same Prophets Apostles and others their successors as they are Doctors and Pastors of the same Church Note thirdly that by the rule of faith I meane such a rule as is also a sufficient outward meanes ordained and set apart by God to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith which consequently must haue those three conditions or properties of the rule set downe and declared in the sixt Chapter viz that it must be infallible easie to be vnderstood of all sorts and vniuersall or such as may sufficiently resolue one in all points of faith Note fourthly that when I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith I do not vnderstand that the doctrine as seuered from the Church or the Church as diuided from the doctrine is the rule of saith but that the doctrine as deliuered by the Church or the Church as deliuering doctrine is that rule and meanes which God hath ordained to instruct men in faith Note fifthly that to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of faith in such sort as now I haue said it might suffice for this Chapter that it be shewed that at least once or in one age there were one or other company of liuing men in one or other sense called the Church who were ordained by God and set apart to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith being for that purpose in their doctrine and teaching furnished with these three conditions which are requisite in the rule of faith for this being shewed in this Chapter I shall easily shew in the next that the same is to be said of some or other company continuing in all ages In this Chapter therefore I chiefly vndertake to proue that once or in one age there was a company of liuing men who in one sense may be called the Church whom God specially appointed as a meanes sufficient quantū ex se to instruct all men in all matters of faith being for that purpose furnished with the three conditions or properties of the rule of faith 1 THe conclusion of this Chapter was that the infallible rule which we ought obediently to follow in all points of faith is the doctrine and teaching faith and beleefe of the true Church his meaning wherein he saies I would not or did not rightly vnderstand Let vs therefore see how I vnderstood it My answer was that we would freely grant this conclusion if the meaning were no more but that the doctrine and faith of the vniuersall Church is the rule of faith but there is a higher matter meant First that the Churches word and authority without grounding the same on the Scripture is the rule
whether it agree with the faith of the Apostolique Church and not oppresse vs with the name of their Councels And when we shew not onely particular Doctors in the Church of Rome to haue erred but their chiefest Councels also such as were those of Neece Lateran Florence Constance and Trent they are bound to quit them or not to deny our obiection 2 Therefore he grants that some kinde of Councell may erre and haue erred but he denies that Councels which haue bene generall and lawfully called and confirmed by the Pope can erre For this is the new distinction now in fashion Yet the meaning is not that a Councell either generall or called or lawfully called by the Pope himselfe or holden by his Legate is free from error vnlesse the Pope ratifie it vpon which ratification he thinkes all the authoritie of Councels must depend 1. Can. Loc l. 5. c. 4 concl 1. Staple relect controu 6. q. 3. art 4 2 Can. concl 2. Stapl. vbi sup The conclusions of his Doctors are these 1. A generall Councell not assembled nor confirmed by the Popes authoritie may erre in the faith 2. A generall Councell assembled by the Popes authoritie may erre in the faith 3. A generall Councell 3 Can. c. 5. Azor institut to 2. l. 5. c 12. Dom. Bann p. 135. concl 2. 4 Can c. 4. concl 3. Bellar. de Concil l. 2. c. 2. duely called and celebrated by the authority of the Popes Legates but yet not confirmed by the Popes authority may erre 4. A generall Councell confirmed by the Popes authority cannot erre My aduersarie answers by the last of these conclusions and biddes me proue the Councell whose errour is obiected to haue bene lawfully called continued and confirmed But this shall not need at this time because the Councels whose errors we most obiect he will confesse are such as the Pope hath confirmed And though I beleeue neither the calling continuance nor confirmation of Councels depends on the Pope yet will I be so farre from denying these Councels whose errours I obiect to be confirmed by him that I auouch their errours chiefely to haue sprong from his intermedling and vsurped authority ouer the Bishops therein who had lesse erred and more maintained the truth if he had lesse medled The Councels therefore charged with innouating the ancient faith are such as our aduersaries can take no exception to but whether they were generall or nationall called or not called continued or not continued by the Pope the Pope allowes them they being the soundest Councels that he least allowes 3 All the question will be whether the things obiected be errours for he thinkes it can be no errour that the Pope confirmes But he deceaues himselfe if he thinke the Popes authority can free Councels from erring e Papa in casu haeresis est ipso iute priuatuâ— Papatu Dom. Iacobat de Concil l. 10. art 7. p. 727 d. who himselfe may erre and be an hereticke the contrary whereof was neuer taught in the Church of Rome till of late time certaine parasites to gratifie the Pope and make their faction strong began to teach it For Waldensis f Wald. vbi sup saies None of these neither a Synod of Bishops nor a common decree in the Church of Rome nor peraduenture a generall Councell of the Fathers of the world is the Catholicke symbolicall Church mentioned in the Creed nor challengeth faith to be giuen vnto it Alphonsus g Adu Haer. l. 1. c. 4. calles them impudent flatterers that ascribe to the Pope the gift of not erring The Vniuersity of Paris alway hath maintained this against the Court of Rome whereof it seemes the prouerbe grew * Dici solet articulos ParisieÌ„ses non transire montes Alph. à . Caâ—t l. 1. c. 8. that the articles of Paris go not beyond the Alps. The Cardinall of Florence h Zabar de schism p. 703. edit Basil 1566 saies the Fulnesse of power is in the Pope but yet so that he erres not for if he erre then a Councell hath to do to conuert him wherein the fulnesse of power is as in the foundation Neither can the Pope by his constitution or by any other way make resistance in this point because so the Church should be subuerted And whatsoeuer our aduersaries hold or will graunt the thing it selfe is cleare that he and his Councels haue erred and of a Pastor is turned into an hereticke the greatest that euer was and this we prooue by the Scripture and doctrine of the Primitiue Church in all the controuersies depending betweene vs. Next whether the things obiected be errours or no must be tried by the word of God and iudged by the Catholicke Church and not by the peremptory censure of such as my Replyar is our assertion therefore is that the worship of images for example decreed by the Councell of Neece the communion in one kinde decreed by the Councell of Constance and the seuerall points which wee reiect in the Councels of Lateran Vienna Constance Trent Florence Colen Millan and the rest of that kinde are errours and damnable heresies contrary to the faith of the ancient Church Which assertion we proue by shewing the same points to be against the Scripture first and then repugnant to that which the ancient Fathers with vnanime consent taught and defended in their time Which the Repliar must not thinke to out-face with saying we ignorantly account that an errour which is none or corruptly cite the words or misinterpret the minde of the Councell for we both alleadge the wordes and minde of the Councels truly and challenge nothing in them to be erronious but what is contrary to the word of God and many learned in the Church of Rome confesse to be so as well as we as shall appeare in that which insues touching the second Nicen Councell approued by Pope Adrian and yet accused and refused as erronious in that which Adrian approued by all the Churches of these Westerne parts in another Councell vnder Charles the Great holden at Frankford CHAP. XLVIII Touching the Councels of Neece the Second and Frankeford 2. How the Nicene decreed images to be adored 3. What kinde of Councell it was 4. And what manner of one that of Frankeford was Frankeford condemned the Second Nicen 5. Touching the Booke of Charles the Great and of what credite it is A.D.M. White maketh his faire flourish about the Second Nicen Councell condemned as he endeauoureth to proue by the Councell of Frankeford Pag. 278. Wh. in his Praef to the reader for defining that the same adoration and seruice ought to be giuen to images of Saints which is giuen to the diuine Trinity But first the Nicene Councell which indeed was a generall Councell did not define that images were to be worshipped with honour onely due to God which supposeth that men must accompt images Gods This grosse conceite could neuer haue entred into any Christian mans minde who knoweth
moraliter id fieri sine magnus incommodis periculis contra reuereÌ„tiam huit sacramento debitam quae vel propter multitudinem comunicantiuÌ„ vel propter eorum varietatem tam in conditionibus affectibus corporu quà m in animi prudentia circumspectione vel denique propter ministraÌ„tiuÌ„ incuriaÌ„ nullatenus possent iuxta humanaÌ„ conditionem euitarâ— Suar. defens fid cathol l. 2. c. 5. n. 20. giues First for the reuerence and decencie of the Sacrament that the cup be not spilled and the wine shed in so great and confused a companie Next for vniformitie that all people euery where might receiue alike which should not be if the cup were ministred for some people loue no wine Thirdly to auoid their error that hold it may not be ministred in one kind Fourthly for the preseruation of the Sacrament and that it might be carried to the sicke which in wine it could not for sowring and spilling Lastly for the instruction of the ignorant that they may know Christ by Thomas his concomitancie is perfectly vnder either kind It were no hard matter throughly to shew the vanitie of these reasons and merrily to whip them but the Cardinall had forgot that all these reasons in his owne opinion held in the primitiue Church and yet then they moued not the Church to take away the cup. I haue read of words vttered in a great frost which freezed in the venting as they were spoken and were not hard till a thaw came a long time after so belike our aduersaries will answer These reasons might be vttered in the ancient Church but they could not be conceiued till d Praeterea nosse debueras quod fecit Deus duo magna luminaria c. de maiorit obed Solitae in decr l. 1. tit 33. the great light in the firmament of the Church had shewed them with his beames now of late within these three hundred yeares CHAP. LVI Touching Transubstantiation 1. It was made an article of faith by the Lateran Councell 1200 yeares after Christ 2. How it came in by degrees 3. The Fathers neuer beleeued nor knew it Pag. 286. A. D. Lastly concerning Transubstantiation 1 White pag. 343. 350. M. White setteth down some coniectures whereby he endeuoureth to perswade his Reader that the beliefe of Transubstantiation came into the Church of late to wit at the Lateran Councell But 2 See the Prot. Apol. tract 1. §. 3 n. 2. where it is shewed that eueÌ„ ProtestaÌ„ts far better learned then M. White will be in haste doe grant the Transubstantiation was beleeued long before the Lateran Councel See Bellar. l. 3. de sacram euchar c. 19.20 21. Gre. de Val. tom 4. disp 6. q. 3. p. 2. §. 2. 3. this is false For although the name Transubstantiation was not perhaps vsed before the Councell of Lateran yet the thing signified by this name to wit the reall presence of Christs body succeeding in the place of the substance of bread was held and beleeued from the beginning as appeareth by plaine and sound authorities of Scriptures and Fathers set downe by Bellarmine and others And although the Church had no necessary occasion to make expresse determination what was to be held in that point before contrary heresies arose which might be one cause that some men did not or were not bound to know it so expresly as after the matter was explaned and determined by full authoritie from the Church yet at least implicitè all did were bound from the beginning to beleeue it And although some in their ignorance did before this declaratioÌ„ of the Church doubt or hold opinion to the contrary yet this hindreth not that they might beleeue this by implicite faith in regard priuate doubts and opinions so long as they are in ignorance without obstinacie especially with resolution and readinesse to yeeld to the Church do not take away implicite faith infolded in the generall assent which euery Catholicke giueth to that article I beleeue the Catholicke Church 1 TO shew the doctrine of Transubstantiation to be contrary to the faith of the Primitiue Church and to be brought in afterward and neuer to haue bin an article of faith before the Lateran Councell I set not downe coniectures but direct full testimonies first * Another like hereticall and most daÌ„gerous aâ—sertion of theirs the Iesuites is that the ancient Fathers Rem transubstantiationis ne attigerunt Quodl p. 31. of the Fathers expounding the words of Christ touching the Sacrament and auouching the substance of bread and wine to remaine as we do then of diuers great Papists Schoole-men and others who confesse the same I say either in expresse words or in effect that not only the NAME of Transubstantiation but the DOCTRINE and thing it selfe was made a matter of faith by the Lateran Councell no man being bound to beleeue it before Their words are reported in the Digression and will giue testimonie to themselues without my contending about them The Reply sayes though the name Transubstantiation were not perhaps vsed before the Councell of Lateran yet the thing to wit the reall presence of Christs bodie succeeding in the place of the substance of bread was held from the beginning as Bellarmine and others haue shewed and euen Protestants farre better learned then M. White will be in hast do grant But the authorities alledged in the Digress shew the contrary not onely the name but the thing it selfe to be new as will appeare by viewing them And though Bellarmine take vpon him to proue Transubstantiation by the Scripture and Fathers yet he confesses it is not improbable that Scotus said There is not extant any place of Scripture so expresse that without the Church declaration can euidently constraine vs to admit it For though the Scripture which I haue brought seeme to vs so cleare that it may constraine a man not froward yet whether it be so or not IT MAY WORTHILY BE DOVBTED when men MOST LEARNED AND ACVTE doe thinke the contrarie Let this be noted he bring a De Euch. l. 3. c. 23. §. Non dissimili Scripture to proue that which may worthily be doubted whether it be so or no and such Scripture as cannot conuince without his Churches declaration b Decernit Synodus vt nemo sacraÌ„ ScripturaÌ„ contra eum sensum quem tenuit tenet sancta mater Ecclesia cuius est iudicare de vero sensiâ— interpretari audeat Con. Trid. sess 4. that is to say vnlesse it be expounded so as shall agree with the doctrine of the Church of Rome The Reply therefore must not call them sound authorities of Scripture which without this wresting proue nothing and with all this wresting proue not so much but a man may still worthily doubt and most learned and acute men do doubt and the reader may see in what case he is that shall follow Bellarmine and the Reply in this opinion of Transubstantiation
onely as a condition to instruct vs and leade vs to the knowledge and assurance of that which is contained in the Scripture it selfe or else as a meanes to reueale vnto vs some thing that is not conceiued in the Scripture But not of the latter for all articles of faith are in the Scripture Therefore the former Therefore the Scripture alone is the rule of faith 6 My aduersarie saies it troubles vs that he sayes there be diues questions of faith which are not expressely set downe nor determined in the Scripture Whereto I answered that this was not the question for if by expressely he meant written word for word in so many syllables then the rule is not bound to containe all things thus expressely it being sufficient if all things needefull were contained therein in respect of the sense so that it might be gathered from thence by consequence the question not being in what manner but whether any way at all the whole and entire obiect of our faith be reuealed in the Scripture though some part thereof be gathered but by Consequence from that which is written expressely in so many syllables To this my aduersary replyes that it troubles vs sore to be thus conuinced with the euidence of the matter that we cannot deny it but are driuen to confesse diuers sustantiall points not to be expressely set downe But he is deceaued it troubles vs not a whit would this hatefull guise of bragging and talking of Conuincing when nothing is graunted but that which belongs not to the question troubled vs no more For no Protestant affirms all things to be written expressely but onely that All things belonging to faith are written in such sort that we haue in the Canonicall bookes either expresse wordes as plaine as any man can speake or infallible sense which any man by vsing the meanes may vnderstand for euery article of faith whatsoeuer Neither did D. M. Luther or any of the learned Diuines of our Church whom my aduersary in his canting language calles his new Masters euer hold otherwise He sayes by our leaues this was the question first when our Grandfather Luther was so hoate to haue expresse Scripture that he would haue all expressed euen in words c. And biddes me see Gretser in his defence of Bellarmine But by his leaue Gretser and he both speake vntruly and he absurdly For he so quotes Gretser that a man would thinke Gretser had shewed out of Luthers writings some places wherein Luther required expresse Scripture euen in wordes which he doth not nor Bellarmine whō he defends could do but be reports in English what Gretser lied in Latine and then biddes see Gretser when there is as little in Gretser to this purpose as in himselfe If M. Luther and the Diuines of our Church confesse many things not to be written verbatim in expresse syllables as it is not thus written that infants must be baptized or that Christ is consubstantiall with his Father do they therefore confesse they are not written at all or will himselfe conclude the Scripture wants that which is not written in so many words Is the true sense and meaning of the words nothing are they not as well conclusions of Scripture which are deduced by true discourse as which are expressed verbatim doth not Picus e Theorem 5. sub sin say such are most properly conclusions of faith which are drawne out of the old and new Testament or by good connexion depend on those that are drawne doth not the Cardinall of Cambrey f 1. q. 1. art 3. p. 50 h. say They are conclusions of diuinity not onely which formally are contained in Scripture but also which necessarily follow of that which is so contained And before him g Prolog sent qu. 1. art 2 pag. 10. f. Rom. edit Aureolus another Cardinall In the second manner of proceeding when we goe forward from one proposition beleeued and another necessary or from both beleeued to inquire of any one that is doubtfull no other habite is obtained but the habite of faith the contrary whereof are heresies in which wordes we see he affirmes a going forward from that which is certainely beleeued because it is expresly written to that which is gathered by discourse and makes this latter also to belong to faith I know few of the schoolemen deny this whereupon it followeth manifestly that it is reputed to be within the contents of the Scripture not onely which is expressed in words but also which is so in sense and good consequence In which manner I haue prooued vnanswerably that all the whole obiect of faith is expressed CHAP. XXXI Wherein the place of 2. Tim. 3.15 alledged to proue the fulnes and sufficiencie of the Scripture alone is expounded and vrged against the Iesuites cauills A. D. To my answer of the Protestant obiection whereas I say Pag. 190. the Apostle affirming the Scripture to be profitable doth not auouch the alone sufficiency of it Whereas also secondly I say it is rather profitable in that it commendeth the authority of the Church which is sufficient M. White replieth against the first part of this my answer White pag. 55. that when the Apostle saith the Scripture is profitable c. he meaneth that it is so profitable that a man by vsing it may be made perfect to euery worke and thereupon thus he reasoneth We do not say Scripture is profitable Ergo sufficient but it is profitable to euery thing Ergo sufficient I answer that this consequence is not good Piety is by S. Paul said to be profitatable to euery thing doth it therefore follow that it is sufficient in such sort that there need no other helpe or meanes to be ioyned with it to attaine whatsoeuer thing M. Wootton and M. White seeme to reason more strongly yet weakely enough to this effect That is sufficient which is able to make a man wise to saluation and which is profitable taking the word profitable as expounded by the word able to make one absolute and perfect c. But the Apostle affirmeth Scripture to be able and profitable to the foresaid purposes Ergo. To this I answer that if they had put into the argument the word alone of which all the question is it would more plainly appeare how it proueth nothing Secondly I might say that the Apostle speaketh of the old Testament Wootton p. 97 as M. Wootton granteth yea of euery parcell thereof as the word Omnis signifieth yet I hope that neither M. Wootton nor M. White will say that now the old Testament without the new and much lesse euery parcell of the old is of it selfe alone sufficient for all the foresaid purposes For if so what need were there of the new Testament or of the other parts besides any one parcell of the old Thirdly I say that the word profitable is not to be expounded by the word able and if it were the word able doth not signifie that the Scripture