Testificandum de Christo Legibus ejus vilior est Christi legibus Scripturis Sanctis necessariò postponenda Wald. L. 2. Doct. Fidei Art 2. cap. 21. Numb 1. though this be contrary to their owne Doctrine must bee finally Resolved into the Authority of the Present Romane Church And though they would seeme to have us believe the Fathers and the Church of old yet they will not have us take their Doctrine from their owne Writings or the Decrees of Councels because as they say wee cannot know by reading them what their meaning was but from the Infallible Testimony of the present Romane Church teaching by Tradition Now by this two things are evident First That they ascribe as great Authority if not greater to a part of the Catholike Church as they doe to the whole which wee believe in our Creede and which is the Society of all Christians And this is full of Absurdity in Nature in Reason in All things That any c Totum est majus suâ parte Etiamsi Axioma sit apud Euclâ—…dem non tamen ideò Geometricum put andum est quia Geometres to utitur Vtitur enim tota Logica Ram in Schol. Matth. And Aristotle vindicates such Propositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from being vsurped by Particular Sciences 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Quia conveniunt omni Eâ—…ti non alicui Generi separatim 4. Metapb cap. 3. T. 7. Part should bee of equall worth power credit or authority with the Whole Secondly that in their Doctrine concerning the Infallibility of their Church their proceeding is most unreasonable For if you aske them Why they believe their whole Doctrine to be the sole true Catholike Faith Their Answer is Because it is agreeable to the Word of God and the Doctrine and Tradition of the Ancient Church If you aske them How they know that to be so They will then produce Testimonies of Scripture Councells and Fathers But if you aske a third time By what meanes they are assured that these Testimonies doe indeed make for them and their Cause They will not then have recourse to Text of Scripture or Exposition of Fathers or phrase and propriety of Language in which either of them were first written or to the scope of the Author or the d Intelligentia dictorum ex causis est assumenda dicendi quia non Sermonires sed Rei Sermo est subjectus S. Hilar. L. 4. de Trin. Ex materiâ dicti dirigendus est sensus Tert. L. de Resur carnis c. 37. Causes of the thing uttered or the Conference with like e Uidendo differentias Similium ad Similia Orig. Tract 19 in S Matth. Places or the Anteceden's f Recolendum est unde venerit ista Sententia qua illam superiora pepererint quibúsque connexa dependeat S. Aug. Ep. 29 Solet circumstantia Scriptura illuminare Sementiam S. Aug. L. 83. Quaest. q. 69. and Consequents of the same Places g Quae ambiguè obscurè in nonnullis Scripturae Sacrae locis dicta videntur per ea quae alibi certa indubitata habentur dâ—…clarantur S Basil in Regulis contractis Reg. 267. Manifestiora quaeque praevaleant de incertis certiora praescribant Tert. L. de Resur c. 19 21. S. Aug. L. 3. De Doct Christ. c. â—…6 Moris est Scripturarum obscuris Manifesta subnectere quod prius sub aenigmatibus dixerint apertâ voce proferre S. Hieron in Esa 19. princ Uide §. 26. Nu. 4. or the Exâ—…osition of the darke and doubtfull Places of Scripture by the undoubted and manifest With divers other Rules given for the true knowledge and understanding of Scripture which do frequently occurre in h S. Aug. L. 3. de Doctr. Christianâ S. Augustine No none of these or the like helpes That with them were to Admit a Private Spirit or to make way for it But their finall Answer is They know it to be so because the present Romane Church witnessethit according to Tradition So arguing à primo ad ultimum from first to last the Present Church of Rome and her Followers believe her owne Doctrine and Tradition to bee true and Catholike because she professes it to be such And if this bee not to proove idem per idem the same by the same I know not what is which though it be most absurd in all kind of learning yet out of this I see not how 't is possible to winde themselves so long as the last resolution of their Faith must rest as they teach upon the Tradition of the present Church only It seemes therefore to mee very necessary * And this is so necessary that Bellarmine confesses that if Tradition which he relies upon be not Divine He and his can have no Faith Non habemus fidem Fides enim verbo Dei nititur L. 4. de verbo Dei c. 4. §. At si ita est And A. C. tells us p. 47. To know that Scripture is Divine and Infallible in every part is a Foundation so necessary as if it be doubtfully questioned all the Faith built upon Scripture falls to the ground And he gives the same reason for it p. 50. which Belarmine doth that we bee able to proove the Bookes of Scripture to bee the Word of God by some Authority that is absolutely Divine For if they bee warranted unto us by any Authority lesse then Divine then all things contained in them which have no greater assurance then the Scripture in which they are read are not Objects of Divine beliefe And that once granted will enforce us to yeeld That all the Articles of Christian Beliefe have no greater assurance then Humane or Morall Faith or Credulity can afford An Authority then simply Divine must make good the Scriptures Infallibility at least in the last Resolution of our Faith in that Poynt This Authority cannot bee any Testimony or Voyce of the * Ecclesiam spiritu afflatam esse certè credo Non ut veritatâ—…m authoritatemve Libris Canonicis triâ—…uat sed ut doc eat illos non alios esse Canonicos Nec fi aditum nobis praebet ad hujusmodi sacros Librâ—…s cognoscendos protinus ibi acquiescendum est sed ultra oportet progredi solidâ Dei veritate niti Quâ ex re intelligitur quid sibi volucrit Augustinus quam ait Evangelio non crederem nisi c. M. Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8 fol. 34. b. Non docet fundatam esse Evangelii fidem in Ecclesiae Authoritate sed c. Ibid. Church alone For the Church consists of men subject to Error And no one of them fince the Apostles times hath beene assisted with so plentifull a measure of the Blessed Spirit as to secure him from being deceived And all the Parts being all liable to mistaking and sallible the VVhole cannot possibly bee Infallible in and of it self and priviledged from being deceived in some Things oâ—…
punished till the Uitiosity of it be consumed Purgatorio igne So the Translation renders it but in the Originall it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is in a fire that sleeps not which for ought appeares may bee understood of a Fire that is eternall whereas the fire assigned to Purgatory shall cease Besides S. Gregory sayes plainly The Soule cannot suffer by fire but in the Body and the Body cannot be with it till the Resurrection Therefore e S. Greg. Orat 3. de Resurrect Christi hee must needs speak of a fire after the Resurrection which must bee either the Fire of the Generall Conflagration or Hell Purgatory he cannot meane VVhere according to the Romish Tenet the Soule suffers without the Body The truth is Divers of the Ancient especially Greekes which were a little too much acquainted with Plato's Schoole †Noâ—… expedit philosophari alâ—…s c. Orig. L. 6 cont Celsuâ—… philosophized and disputed upon this and some other Points with much Obscurity and as little Certainty So upon the whole matter in the fourth and fist hundred yeare you see here 's none that constantly and perspicuously affirme it And as for S. Augustine he a Constat Animas pâ—…rgari post banc vitam S. Augustin Lib. 21. Civ Dâ—…i c. 24. vide said and b Justorum flagella non iâ—…nt post mortem sed definunt Et Anima mix in Paradisum c. S. Aug. Contr. Foeliciaâ—… c. 15. Et duo tantum loca esse c. S. Aug. Ser. 10. ae verb. Apost c. 15. Et L. 21. de Civ Dei c. 16 fine Negat nisi sit Ignis ille in Consummatione saculi unsaid it and c Quari potest c. S. Aug. in Enchirid. c. 69. Forsitan verum est c. S. Aug. L. 21. de Civ Dei c. 26. Quid S. Paulus senserit 1 Cor. 3. de Igne illo malo intelligentiores dâ—…ctiores audire S. Aug. L. de Fide Oper. c. 16. at the last left it doubtfull which had it then been received as a Point of Faith he durst not have done Indeed then in S. Gregory the Great 's time in the beginning of the sixt Age Purgatory was growne to some perfection For S. d S. Greg. in Psal. 3. Poenitentialem princ Gregory himself is at Scio 't was but at Puto a little before I know that some shall bee Expiated in Purgatory flames And therefore I will easily give Bellarmine all that follow For after this time Purgatory was found too warme a businesse to be suffered to Coole again And in the after Ages more were frighted then led by proof into the Beliefe of it Now by this we see also That it could not be a Tradition For then we might have traced it by the smoke to the Apostles times Indeed Bellarm. would have it such a Tradition For hee tels us out of S. Quod Vniversa tenet Ecclesia nec Conciliis institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi Authoritate Apostolicâ traditum rectissimè creditur S. Aug. L. 4. de Bapt. cont Donatist c. 24 Nec ad Summâ—…s Pontifices referri potest Addit Melch. Canus L. 3 de Locis c. 4. prin Augustine That that is rightly believed to be delivered by Apostolicall Authority which the whole Church holds and hath ever held and yet is not Instituted by any Councell And hee addes That Purgatory is such a Tradition so Constantly held in the whole Church Greeke and Latine And †Non invenimus initium hujus dogmatis sed omnes veteres Graeci Latini c. Bellar. L. 1. de Purg. c. 11. §. De tertio mode that wee doe not finde any beginning of this Beliefe Where I shall take the boldnesse to Observe these three things First that the Doctrine of Purgatory was not held ever in the whole Catholike Church of Christ. And this appeares by the proofes of * L. 1. de Purg. c. 6. Bellarmine himselfe produced and I have †§. 38. N. 16. before examined For there 't is manifest that scarce two Fathers directly affirme the beliefe of Purgatory for full six hundred yeares after Christ. Therefore Purgatory is no Matter of Faith nor to be believed as descending from Apostolicall Authority by S. Augustine's Rule Secondly that we can finde a beginning of this Doctrine and a Beginner too namely Origen And neither Bellarmine nor any other is able to shew any one Father of the Church that said it before him Therefore Purgatory is not to bee believed as a Doctrine delivered by Apostolicall Authority by Bellarmines owne rule For it hath a Beginning Thirdly I observe too that Bellarmine cannot well tell where to lay the foundation of Purgatory that it may be safe For first hee labours to found it upon Scripture To that end a Bellar. L. 1. de Purgat c. 3. 4 hee brings no fewer then ten places out of the Old Testament and nine out of the New to proove it And yet fearing lest these places bee strained as indeed they are and so too weake to bee laid under such a vast pile of Building as Purgatory is b De tertio modo perspicuum est c. Bel. L. 1 de Purgat c. 11. §. Tertiò ex Verbo c. §. De tertio modo c. he flies to unwritten Tradition And by this Word of God unwritten he sayes 't is manifest that the Doctrine of Purgatory was delivered by the Apostles Sure if Nineteene places of Scripture cannot proove it I would be loth to fly to Tradition And if Recourse to Tradition bee necessary then certainly those places of Scripture made not the proofe they were brought for And once more how can Bâ—… say here That woe finde not the Bâ—… 〈◊〉 of this Article when hee had said before that hee had found it in 〈◊〉 places of Scripture For if in these places hee could not finde the beginning of the Doctrine c Pâ—…y hee is fâ—…se while be sayes he did And if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it there then hee is faâ—…e here in saying we finde no beginning of it And for all his Bâ—… of Oâ—…s 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 Greeke 〈◊〉 Pâ—… Yet Aâ—… a Câ—… 〈◊〉 honestly and plainly and 〈◊〉 us That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 Writers is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 Greeks And he addes That 〈◊〉 Purgatory And what now I pray after all this may I not so much as deliberately 〈◊〉 of this because 't is now Dâ—… and but now in a manner and thus No sure So A. C. 〈◊〉 you Doubt No. For when you had fooled the 〈◊〉 of Sâ—… back to Rome there you either made him say or â—…d it for him â—…for in Prinâ—… and under his Name That since 〈◊〉 defined by the Châ—… a man 〈◊〉 much bound to believe there is a Purgatory as that there is a Trinity 〈◊〉 Persâ—… in the Godhead How farre
to feede when he is in and when he had fed to c S. Luk. 22. 35. Confirme and in all these not to erre and faile in his Ministration And is the Catholike Church in and over which he is to do all these great things quite left out of the Scripture Belike the Holy Ghost was carefull to give him his power Yes in any case but left the assigning of his great Cure the Catholike Church to Tradition And it were well for him if he could so prescribe for what he now Claymes But what if after all this M. Rogers there sayes no such thing As in truth he doth not His words are d Rogers in Art Eccle. Angl. Art 3. All Christians acknowledge He descended but in the interpretation of the Article there is not that consent that were to be wished What is this to the Church of England more then others And againe e Ibid. Till we know the native and undoubted sense of this Article is M. Rogers We the Church of England or rather his and some others Iudgement in the Church of England Now here A. C. will have somewhat againe to say though God knowes 't is to little purpose 'T is A. C. p. 47. that the Iesuite urged M. Roger's Booke because it was set out by Publike Authority And because the Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England A. C. may undoubtedly urge M. Rogers if he please But he ought not to say that his Opinion is the Doctrine of the Church of England for neither of the Reasons by him expressed First not because his Booke was publikely allowed For many Bookes among them as well as among us have beene Printed by publike Authority as containing nothing in them contrary to Faith and good manners and yet containing many things in them of Opinion only or private Iudgement which yet is farre from the avowed Positive Doctrine of the Church the Church having as yet determined neither way by open Declaration upon the words or things controverted And this is more frequent among their Schoolemen then among any of our Controversers as is well knowne Nor secondly because his Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England For suppose the worst and say M. Rogers thought a little too well of his owne paines and gave his Booke too high a Title is his private Iudgement therefore to be accounted the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England Surely no No more then I should say every thing said by * Angelici D. S. Tho. Summa Thomas or †Celebratissimi Patris Dom. Bonaventurae Doctoris Seraphici in 3. L. Sent. Disputata Bonaventure is Angelicall or Seraphicall Doctrine because one of these is stiled in the Church of Rome Seraphicall and the other Angelicall Doctor And yet their workes are Printed by Publike Authority and that Title given them Yea but our private Authors saith A. C. are not allowed for ought I know in such a like sorte to expresse A. C. p. 47. our Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to Question Here are two Limitations which will goe farre to bring A. C. off whatsoever I shall say against him For first let me instance in any private man that takes as much upon him as M. Rogers doth he will say he knew it not his Assertion here being no other then for ought he knowes Secondly If he be unwilling to acknowledge so much yet he will answer 't is not just in such a like sort as M. Rogers doth it that is perhaps it is not the very Title of his Booke But well then Is there never a Private man allowed in the Church of Rome to expresse your Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to question What not in any matter Were not Vega and Soto two private men Is it not a mâ—…tter subject to Question to great Question in these Dayes Whether a man may be certaine of his Salvation câ—…rtitudine fidei by the certainty of Faith Doth nâ—…t * Bellar. Lib. 3. de Justificat c. 1. 14. Bellarmine make it a Controversie And is it not a part of your Catholike Faith if it be determined in the †Huic Concilio Catholici omnes ingenia sua judicia sponte subjiciunt Bellar. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Sed Concilii Tridâ—…i Councell of Trent And yet these two great Friers of their time Dominicus Soto and Andreas Vega a Hist. Concil Trident. Lib. 2. p. 245. Edit Lat. Leidae 1622. were of contrary Opinions and both of them challenged the Decree of the Councell and so consequently your Catholike Faith to be as each of them concluded and both of them wrote Bookes to maintaine their Opinions and both of their Bookes were published by Authority And therefore I think 't is allowed in the Church of Rome to private men to expresse your Catholike Doctrine and in a matter subject to Question And therefore also if another man in the Church of England should be of a contrary Opinion to M. Rogers and declare it under the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England this were no more then Soto and Vega did in the Church of Rome And I for my part cannot but wonder A. C. should not know it A. C. p. 47. For he sayes that for ought he knowes Private men are not allowed so to expresse their Catholike Doctrine And in the same Question both Catharinus and Bellarmine b Bellar. L. 3. de Iustif. c. 3. take on them to expresse your Catholike Faith the one differing from the other almost as much as Soto and Vega and perhaps in some respect more F. But if M. Rogers be only a private man in what Book may we finde the Protestants publike Doctrine The Bishop answered That to the Booke of Articles they were all sworne B. What Was I so ignorant to say The Articles § 14 of the Church of England were the Publike Doctrine of all the Protestants Or that all Protestants were sworne to the Articles of England as this speech seems to imply Sure I was not Was not the immediate speech before of the Church of England And how comes the Subject of the Speech to be varied in the next lines Nor yet speake I this as if other Protestants did not agree with the Church of England in the chiefest Doctrines and in the maine Exceptions which they joyntly take against the Romane Church as appeares by their severall Confessions But if A. C. will say as he doth that because there was speech before of the Church of A. C. p. 47. England the Iesuite understood mee in a limited sense and meant only the Protestants of the English Church Bee it so ther 's no great harme done †And therfore A. C. needs not make such a Noise about it as he doth p. 48 but this that the Iesuite offers to enclose me too much For I did not
traditum est S. Cypri ad Pompeium cont Epist. Stephan princ tradere non traditum make a Tradition of that which was not delivered to her and by some of Them then She is unfaithful to God and doth not servare depositum faithfully keepe that which is committed to her Trust. * 1 Tim. 6. 20. and 2 Tim. 1. 14. 1 Tim. 6. And her Sonnes which come to know it are not bound to obey her Tradition against the c Si ipsa Ecclesia contraria Scripturae diceret Fidelis ipsi non crederet c. Hen. a Gand. Sum. p. 1. A. 10. q. 1. And Bellarmiâ—…e himselfe that he might the more safely defend himselfe in the Cause of Traditions sayes but how truly let other men Iudge Nullam Traditionem admittimus contra Scripturam L. 4. 〈◊〉 Verbo Dei c. 3. §. Deindè commune Word of their Father For wheresoever Christ holds his peace or that his words aâ—…e not Registred I am of S. d S. Aug. Tom. 96. in 〈◊〉 Ioh. in illâ—… Ferba Multa habeo dicere sed non potestis portare modò Augustines Opinion No man may dare without rashnesse say they were these or these So there were many unwritten Words of God which were never delivered over to the Church and thereâ—…ore never made Tradition And there are many Traditions which cannot be said to be the unwritten word of God For I believe a Learned Romanist that will weigh before he speakes will not easily say That to Annoint or use Spittle in Baptisme or to use three Dippings in the use of that Sacrament or diverse other like Traditions had their Rise from any Word of God unwritten Or if he be so hardy as to say so 't is gratis dictum and he will have enough to doe to prove it So there may be an unwritten Word of God which is no Tradition And there are many Traditions which are no unwritten Word of God Therfore Tradition must be taken two wayes Either as it is the Churches Act delivering or the Thing thereby delivered and then 't is Humane Authority or from it and unable infallibly to warrant Divine Faith or to be the Object of it Or els as it is the unwritten Word of God and then where ever it can be made to appeare so 't is of divine and infallible Authority no question But then I would have A. C. consider where he is in A. C. p. 49. this Particular He tels us We must know infallibly that the Bookes of Holy Scripture are Divine and that this must be done by unwritten Tradition but so as that this Tradition is the Word of God unwritten Now let him but prove that this or any Tradition which the Church of Rome stands upon is the Word of God though unwritten and the businesse is ended But A. C. must not thinke that because the Tradition of the Church tels me these Bookes are Verbum Dei Gods A. C. p. 50. Word and that I do both honour and believe this Tradition That therefore this Tradition it selfe is Gods Word too and so absolutely sufficient and infallible to worke this Beliefe in me Therefore for ought A. C. hath yet added we must on with our Inquiry after this great Businesse and most necessary Truth 2. For the second way of proving That Scripture should be fully and sufficiently knowne as by Divine and Infallible Testimony Lumine proprio by the resplendency of that Light which it hath in it selfe onely and by the witnesse that it can so give to it selfe I could never yet see cause to allow a Hook l. 2. §. 4 For as there is no place in Scripture that tels us Such Books containing such and such Particulars are the Canon and infallible Will and Word of God So if there were any such place that were no sufficient proofe For a man may justly aske another Booke to beare witnesse of that and againe of that another and where ever it were written in Scripture that must be a part of the Whole And no created thing can alone give witnesse to it selfe and make it evident nor one part testifie for another and satisfie where Reason will but offer to contest Except those Principles onely of Naturall knowledge which appeare manifest by intuitive light of understanding without any Discourse And yet they also to the weaker sort require Induction preceding Now this Inbred light of Scripture is a thing coincident with Scripture it selfe and so the Principles and the Conclusion in this kind of proofe should be entirely the same which cannot be Besides if this inward Light were so cleare how could there have beene any variety among the Ancient Believers touching the Authority of S. a Euseb. L. 2. c. 27. fine Edit Basil. 1549. Iames and S. Jude's Epistles and the b Euseb. L. 3. c. 25. Apocalyps with other Bookes which were not received for diverse yeares after the rest of the New Testament For certainly the Light which is in the Scripture was the same then which now it is And how could the Gospell of S. Bartholomew of S. Thomas and other counterfeit peeces obtaine so much credit with some as to be received into the Canon if the evidence of this Light were either Universall or Infallible of and by it selfe And this though I cannot approve yet me thinks you may and upon probable grounds at least For I hope no †Except A. C. whose boldness herein I cannot but pitie For he denies this light to the Scripture and gives it to Tradition His words are p. 52. Tradition of the Church is of a company which by its owne light shewes it selfe to bee infallibly assisted c. Romanist will deny but that there is as much light in Scripture to manifest and make ostension of it selfe to be infallibly the written Word of God as there is in any Tradition of the Church that it is Divine and infallibly the unwritten Word of God And the Scriptures saying from the mouthes of the Prophets b Isa 44. passina Thus saith the Lord and from the mouthes of the a Act. 28. 25. Apostles that the Holy Ghost spake by them are at least as able and as fit to beare witnesse to their owne Verity as the Church is to beare witnesse to her owne Traditions by bare saying they come from the Apostles And your selves would never go to the Scripture to prove that there are Traditions b 2. Thess. 2. 15. Iude vers 3. as you do if you did not thinke the Scripture as easie to be discovered by inbred light in itselfe as Traditions by their light And if this be so then it is as probable at the least which some of ours affirme That Scripture may bee knowne to bee the Word of God by the Light and Lustre which it hath in it selfe as it is which you c In your Articles delivered to D. W. to be answered And A. C. p. 52. affirme That a
Divine Authority into internall Arguments found in the Letter it selfe though found by the Helpe and Direction of Tradition without and Grace within And the resolution that is rightly grounded may not endure to pitch and restit selfe upon the Helpes but upon that Divine Light which the Scripture no Question hath in it selfe but is not kindled till these Helps come Thy word is a Light d Psal. 119. 105. Sanctarum Scripturarum Lumen S. Aug. L. de verâ Relig. c. 7. Quid Lucem Scripturarum vanis umbris c. S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccl. Cathol c. 35. so David A Light Therefore it is as much manifestativum sui as alterius a manifestation to it selfe as to other things which it shewes but still not till the Candle be Lighted not till there hath beene a Preparing Instruction What Light it is Children call the Sunne and Moone Candles Gods Candles They see the light as well as men but cannot distinguish betweene them till some Tradition and Education hath informed their Reason And * 1 Cor. 2. 14. animalis homo the naturall man sees some Light of Morall counsell and instruction in Scripture as well as Believers But he takes all that glorious Lustre for Candle-light and cannot distinguish betweene the Sunne and twelve to the Pound till Tradition of the Church and Gods Grace put to it have cleared his understanding So Tradition of the present Church is the first Morall Motive to Beliefe But the Beliefe it selfe That the Scripture is the Word of God rests †Orig. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 1. went this way yet was he a great deale nearer the prime Tradition then we are For being to proove that the Scriptures were inspired from God he saith De hoc assignabimus ex ipsis Divinis Scripturis quae nos competenter movcrint c. upon the Scripture when a man findes it to answer and exceed all that which the Church gave in Testimony as will after appeare And as in the Voyce of the Primitive and Apostolicall Church there was a Principaliter tamen etiam hîc credimus propter Deum non Apoâ—…olos c. Henr. à Gand. Sum. A. 9. q. 3. Now if where the Apostles themselves spake ultimata resolutio Fidei was in Deum not in ipsos per se much more shall it be in Deum then in praesentem Ecclesiam and into the writings of the Apostles then into the words of their Successors made up into a Tradition simply Divine Authority delivering the Scripture as Gods Word so after Tradition of the present Church hath taught and informed the Soule the Voyce of God is plainly heard in Scripture it selfe And then here 's double Authority and both Divine that confirmes Scripture to be the Word of God Tradition of the Apostles delivering it And the internall worth and argument in the Scripture obvious to a soule prepared by the present Churches Tradition and Gods Grace The Difficulties which are pretended against this are not many and they will easily vanish For first you pretend we go to Private Revelations for Light to know Scripture No we do not you see it is excluded out of the very state of the Question and we go to the Tradition of the present Church and by it as well as you Here we differ we use the Tradition of the present Church as the first Motive not as the Last Resolution of our Faith We Resolve onely into d Calv. Instit. 1. c. 5. §. 2. Christiana Ecclesia Prophetarum scriptis Apostolorum praedicatione initio fundata fuit ubicunque reperietur ea Doctrina c. Prime Tradition Apostolicall and Scripture it selfe Secondly you pretend we do not nor cannot know the prime Apostolicall Tradition but by the Tradition of the present Church and that therefore if the Tradition of the present Church be not Gods unwritten Word and Divine we cannot yet know Scripture to be Scripture by a Divine Authority Well Suppose I could not know the prime Tradition to be Divine but by the present Church yet it doth not follow that therefore I cannot know Scripture to be the Word of God by a Divine Authority because Divine Tradition is not the sole and onely meanes to prove it For suppose I had not nor could have full assurance of Apostolicall Tradition Divine yet the morall perswasion reason and force of the present Church is ground enough to move any reasonable man that it is fit he should read the Scripture and esteeme very reverently and highly of it And this once done the Scripture hath then In and Home-Arguments enough to put a Soule that hath but ordinary Grace out of Doubt That Scripture is the Word of God Infallible and Divine Thirdly you pretend that we make the Scripture absolutely and fully to be knowne Lumine suo by the Light and Testimony which it hath in and gives to it selfe Against this you give reason for your selves and proofe from us Your Reason is If there be sufficient Light in Scripture to shew it selfe then every man that can and doth but read it may know it presently to be the Divine Word of God which we see by daily experience men neither do nor can First it is not absolutely nor universally true There is a And where Hooker uses this very Argument as he doth L. 3. §. 8. his words are not If there bee sufficient Light But if that Light bee Evident sufficient Light therefore every man may see it Blinde men are men and cannot see it and b 1 Cor. 2. 14. sensuall men in the Apostles judgement are such Nor may we deny and put out this Light as insufficient because blinde eyes cannot and perverse eyes will not see it no more then we may deny meat to be sufficient for nourishment though men that are heart-sicke cannot eat it Next we do not say That there is such a full light in Scripture as that every man upon the first sight must yeeld to it such Light as is found in Prime Principles Every whole is greater than a Part of the same and this The same thing cannot be and not be at the same time and in the same respect These carrie a naturall Light with them and evident for the Termes are no sooner understood then the Principles themselves are fully knowne to the convincing of mans understanding and so they are the beginning of knowledge which where it is perfect dwels in full Light but such a full Light we do neither say is nor require to be in Scripture and if any particular man doe let him answer for himselfe The Question is onely of such a Light in Scripture as is of force to breed faith that it is the Word of God not to make a perfect knowledge Now Faith of whatsoever it is this or other Principle is an Evidence a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well as Knowledge and Heb. 11. 1. the Beliefe is firmer then any Knowledge can
more wee finde that the thing it selfe doth answer our received opinion concerning it so that the former inducement prevailing somewhat with us before doth now much more prevaile when the very thing hath ministred farther Reason Here then againe in his Iudgement Tradition is the first Inducement but the farther Reason and Ground is the Scripture And Resolution of Faith ever settles upon the Farthest Reason it can not upon the First Inducement So that the State of this Question is firme and yet plaine enough to him that will not shut his eyes Now here after a long silence A. C. thrusts himselfe in againe and tels me That if I would A. C. p. 52. consider the Tradition of the Church not onely as it is the Tradition of a Company of Fallible men in which sense the Authority of it as himselfe confesses is but Humane and Fallible c. But as the Tradition of a Company of men assisted by Christ and his Holy Spirit in that sense I might easily finde it more then an Introduction indeed as much as would amount to an Infallible Motive Well I have considered The Tradition of the present Church both these wayes And I finde that A. C. confesses That in the first sense the Tradition of the Church is meere humane Authority and no more And therefore in this sense it may serve for an Introduction to this Beliefe but no more And in the second sense as it is not the Tradition of a Company of men onely but of men assisted by Christ and His Spirit In this second sense I cannot finde that the Tradition of the present Church is of Divine and Infallible Authority till A. C. can prove That this Company of men the Romane Prelates and their Clergie he meanes are so fully so cleerely so permanently assisted by Christ and his Spirit as may reach to Infallibility much lesse to a Divine Infallibility in this or any other Principle which they teach For every Assistance of Christ and the Blessed Spirit is not enough to make the Authority of any Company of men Divine and infallible but such and so great an Assistance onely as is purposely given to that effect Such an Assistance the Prophets under the Old Testament and the Apostles under the New had but neither the High-Priest with his Clergie in the Old nor any Company of Prelates or Priests in the New since the Apostles ever had it And therefore though at the entreaty of A. C. I have considered this very A. C. p. 52. well yet I cannot no not in this Assisted sense thinke the Tradition of the present Church Divine and Infallible or such Company of men to be worthy of Divine and infallible Credit and sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Which I am sorrie A. C. should affirme so boldly as he doth What A. C. p. 52. That Company of men the Romane Bishop and his Clergie of Divine and Infallible Credit and sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Good God! Whither will these men goe Surely they are wise in their generation but that makes them never a whit the more the Children of light a S. Luke 16. 8. S. Luke 16. And could they put this home upon the world as they are gone farre in it what might they not effect How might they and would they then Lord it over the Faith of Christendome contrary to b 1. S. Pet. 5. 3. S. Peter's Rule whose Successours certainly in this they are not But I pray if this Company of men be infallibly assisted whence is it that this very Company have erred so dangerously as they have not only in some other things but even in this Particular by equaling the Tradition of the present Church to the written Word of God Which is a Doctrine unknowne to the a S. Basil goes as farre for Traditions as any For he sayes Parem vim habent ad pictatem L. de Sp. Sanct. c. 27. But first he speaks of Apostolicall Tradition not of the Tradition of the Present Church Secondly the Learned take exceptions to this Booke of S. Basil as corrupted BP Andr. Opusc. cont Peron p. 9. Thirdly S. Basil himself Ser. de Fide professes that he uses somtimes Agrapha sed ca solùm quae non sunt aliona à piâ secundum Scripturam sententiâ So he makes the Scripture their Touch-stone or tryall And therefore must of Necessity make Scripture superior in as much as that which is able to try another is of greater force and superiour Dignity in that use then the thing tried by it And Stapleton himselfe confesses Traditionem recentiorem posteriorem sicut particularem nullo modo cum Scripturâ vel cum Traditionibus priùs à se explicatis comparandam esse Stapleton Relect. Controv. 5. q. 5. A. 2. Primitive Church and which frets upon the very Foundation it selfe by justling with it So belike he that hath but halfe an indifferent eye may see this Assisted Company have erred and yet we must wink in obedience and think them Infallible But. A. C. would have me consider againe That A. C. p 52. it is as easie to take the Tradition of the present Church in the two fore-named senses as the present Scriptures printed and approved by men of this Age. For in the first sense The very Scriptures saith he considered as printed and approved by men of this Age can be no more then of Humane Credit But in the second sense as printed and approved by men assisted by God's Spirit for true Copies of that which was first written then we may give Infallible Credit to them Well I have considered this too And I can take the Printing and Approving the Copies of Holy-Writ in these two senses And I can and do make a difference betweene Copies printed and approved by meere morall men and men assisted by Gods Spirit And yet for the Printing onely a skilfull and an able morall man may doe better service to the Church then an illiterate man though assisted in other things by God's Spirit But when I have considered all this what then The Scripture being put in writing is a thing visibly existent and if any errour be in the Print 't is easily corrigible by b Ut §. 18. Nu. 4. Eâ—… S. Aug. L. 32. cont Faustum 〈◊〉 1â—… former Copies Tradition is not so easily observed nor so safely kept And howsoever to come home to that which A. C. inferres upon it namely That the A. C. p. 53. Tradition of the present Church may be accepted in these two senses And if this be all that he will inferre for his penne here is troubled and forsakes him whether by any checke of Conscience or no I know not I will and you see have granted it already without more adoe with this Caution That every Company of men assisted by Gods Spirit are not assisted to this height to be Infallible by Divine Authority For all this
his abodc on Earth And this Promise of his spirituall presence was to their Successors else why to the end of the world The Apostles did not could not live so long But then to the * Rabanus Manr goes no furrher then that to the End some will alwayes bee in the world fit for Christ by his Spirit and Grace to inhabit Divina mansione inhabitatione digni Rab. in S. Mat. 28. 19 20. Pergatis habentes Dominum Protectorem Ducem saith S. Cypr. L. 4. Epist. 1. But he doth not say How farre sorth And loquitur Fidelibus sicut uni Corpcri S. Chrysost. Homil in S. Matth. And if S Chrysost. inlarge it so farre I hope A. C. will not extend the Assistance given or promised here to the whole Body of the Faithfull to an Infallible and Divine Assistance in every of them as well as in the Pastors and Doctors Successors the Promise goes no further then I am with you alwayes which reaches to continuall assistance but not to Divine and Infallible Or if he think me mistaken let him shew mee any One Father of the Church that extends the sense of this Place to Divine and Infallible Assistance granted hereby to all the Apostles Successors Sure I am Saint †In illis donâ—… quibus salus aliorum quaeritur qualia sunt Prâ—…phetiae interpretationes Sermanum c. Spiritus Sanctus nequaquam semper in Pradicatorib us permanet S. Greg. L. 2. Moral c 29. prin Edit Basil. 1551. Gregory thought otherwise For hee saies plainly That in those Gifts of God which concern other mens salvation of which Preaching of the Gospell is One the Spirit of Christ the Holy Ghost doth not alwayes abide in the Preachers bee they never so lawfully sent Pastors or Doctors of the Church And if the Holy Ghost doth not alwayes abide in the Preachers then most certainly he doth not abide in them to a Divine Infallibility alwayes The Third Place is in S. Iohn 14. where Christ sayes S. Iohn 14. 16. The Comforter the Holy Ghost shall abide with you for ever Most true againe For the Holy Ghost did abide with the Apostles according to Christs Promise there made and shall abide with their Successors for ever to * Iste Consolator non auferetur à Vobis sicut subtrahitur Humaint as mea per mortem sed aternalitèr erit Vobiscum hic per Grasiam in futuro per Gloriam Lyra. in S. John 14. 16 You see there the Holy Ghost shal be present by Consolation and Grace not by Infallible Assistance comfort and preserve them But here 's no Promise of Divine Infallibility made unto them And for that Promise which is made and expresly of Infallibility Saint Iohn 16. though not S. Ioh. 16. 13. cited by A. C. That 's confined to the Apostles onely for the setling of thâ—…m in all Truth And yet not simply all For there are some Truths saith a Omnem veritatem Non arbitror in hac vita in cujusquam mente compleri c. S. Augustin in S. Ioh Tract 96. versus fin Saint Augustine which no mans Soule can comprehend in this life Not simply all But b Spiritus Sanctus c. qui eos doceret Omnem Veritatem quam tunc cum iis loquebatur portare non poterant S. Ioh. 16. 12 13. S. Augustin Tract 97. in S. Ioh. prin all those Truths quae non poterant portare which they were not able to beare when Hee Conversed with them Not simply all but all that was necessary for the Founding propagating establishing and Confirming the Christian Church But if any man take the boldnesse to inlarge this Promise in the fulnesse of it beyond the persons of the Apostles themselves that will fall out which Saint c Omnes vel insipientissimi Haeretici qui se Christianos vocars volunt audacias figmentorum suorum quas maximè exhorret sensus humanus hac Occasione Evangelicae sententiae colorare comentur c. S. Augustin T. 97. in S. Ioh. circamed Augustine hath in a manner prophecyed Every Heretick will shelter himselfe and his Vanities under this Colour of Infallible Veritie I told you a * Num. 26. A. C. p. 52. little before that A. C. his Penne was troubled and failed him Therefore I will helpe to make out his Inference for him that his Cause may have all the strength it can And as I conceive this is that hee would have The Tradition of the present Church is as able to worke in us Divine and Infallible Faith That the Scripture is the VVord of God As that the Bible or Bookes of Scripture now printed and in use is a true Copie of that which was first written by the Penne-men of the Holy Ghost and delivered to the Church 'T is most true the Tradition of the present Church is a like operative and powerfull in and over both these workes but neither Divine nor Infallible in either But as it is the first morall Inducement to perswade that Scripture is the Word of God so is it also the first but morall still that the Bible wee now have is a true Copie of that which was first written But then as in the former so in this latter for the true Copie The last Resolution of our Faith cannot possibly rest upon the naked Tradition of the present Church but must by and with it goe higher to other Helpes and Assurances Where I hope A. C. will confesse wee have greater helpes to discover the truth or falshood of a Copie then wee have meanes to looke into a Tradition Or especially to sift out this Truth that it was a Divine and Infalliâ—…le Revelation by which the Originals of Scripture were first written That being fatre more the Subject of this Inquiry then the Copie which according to Art and Science may be examined by former preceding Copies close up to the very Apostles times But A. C. hath not done yet For in the last place hee tells us That Tradition and Scripture A. C. p. 53. without any vicious Circle doe mutually confirme the Authority either of other And truly for my part I shall easily grant him this so hee will grant mee this other Namely That though they doe mutually yet they doe not equally confirme the Authority either of other For Scripture doth infallibly confirme the Authority of Church Traditions truly so called But Tradition doth but morally and probably confirme the Authority of the Scripture And this is manifest by A. C ' s. owne Similitude For saith he 't is as a Kings Embassadors word of mouth and His Kings Letters beare mutuall witnesse to each other Iust so indeed For His Kings Letters of Credence under hand and seale confirme the Embassadors Authority Infallibly to all that know Seale and hand But the Embassadors word of mouth confirmes His Kings Letters but onely probably For else Why are they called Letters of Credence if they give not him
more Credit then hee can give them But that which followes I cannot approve to wit That the Lawfully sent Preachers of the Gospell are Gods Legats and the Scriptures Gods Letters which hee hath appointed his Legates to deliver and expound So farre 't is well but here 's the sting That these Letters doe warrant that the People may heare and give Credit to these Legats of Christ as to Christ the King himselfe Soft this is too high a great deale No * Will A. C. maintaine that any Legate à Latere is of as great Credit as the Pope himselfe Legate was ever of so great Credit as the King Himselfe Nor was any Priest never so lawfully sent ever of that Authority that Christ himselfe No sure For yee call mee Master and Lord and yee doe well for so I am saith our Saviour S. Iohn 13. And certainly this did not suddenly S. Iohn 13. 13. drop out of A. C ' s. Penne. For hee tould us once before That this Company of men which deliver the present Churches Tradition that is the lawfully sent A. C. p. 52. Preachers of the Church are assisted by Gods Spirit to have in them Divine and Infallible Authority and to bee worthy of Divine and Infallible Credit sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Why but is it possible these men should goe thus farre to defend an Error bee it never so deare unto them They as Christ Divine and Infallible Authority in them Sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith I have often heard some wise men say That the Iesuite in the Church of Rome and the Precise party in the Reformâ—…d Churches agree in many things though they would seeme most to differ And surely this is one For both of them differ extreamely about Tradition The one in magnifying it and exalting it into Divine Authority The other vilifying and depressing it almost beneath Humane And yet even in these different wayes both agree in this consequent That the Sermons and Preachings by word of mouth of the lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of the Church are able to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Nay are the * For this A. C. sayes expresly of Tradition p. 52. And then he addes that the Promise for this was no lesse but rather more Expresly made to the lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of the Church in all ages in their teaching by word of mouth then in writing c. p. 53. very word of God So A. C. expresly And no lesse then so have some accounted of their owne factious words to say no more then as the †For the freeing of factious and silenced Ministers is termed the Restoring of Gods Word to â—…s Liberty In the Godly Author of the late Newes from Ipswich p. 5. Word of God I ever tooke Sermons and so doe still to be most necessary Expositions and Applications of Holy Scripture and a great ordinary meanes of saving knowledge But I cannot thinke them or the Preachers of them Divinely Infallible The Ancient Fathers of the Church preached farre beyond any of these of either faction And yet no one of them durst thinke himselfe Infallible much lesse that whatsoever hee preached was the VVord of God And it may be Obserued too That no men are more apt to say That all the Fathers were but Men and might Erre then they that thinke their owne preachings are Infallible The next thing after this large Interpretation of A C. which I shall trouble you with is That this method and manner of proving Scripture to bee the VVord of God which I here use is the same which the Ancient Church ever held namely Tradition or Ecclesiasticall Authority first and then all other Arguments but especially internall from the Scripture it selfe This way the Church went in S. Augustine's a And S. Aug. himselfe L. 13. contr Faustum c. 5. proves by an Internall Argument the fulfilling of the Prophets Scriptura saith he quae fidem suam rebus ipsis probat quae per temporum successiones hac impleri c. And Hen. a Gand. Par. 1. Sum. A. 〈◊〉 q. 3. cites S. Aug. Book de vera Religione In which Book though these Foure Arguments are not found iâ—… Termes together yet they fill up the scope of the whole Book Time He was no enemy to Church-Tradition yet when hee would prove that the Authour of the Scripture and so of the whole knowledge of Divinity as it is supernaturall is Deus in Christo God in Christ he takes this as the All-sufficient way and gives foure proofes all internall to the Scripture First The Miracles Secondly That there is nothing carnall in the Doctrine Thirdly That there hath been such performance of it Fourthly That by such a Doctrine of Humility the whole world almost hath beene converted And whereas ad muniendam Fidem for the Defending of the Faith and keeping it entire there are two things requisite Scripture and Church-Tradition b Duplici modo muniri fideÌ„ c. Primò Divinae Legis Authoritate tum deinde Ecclesia Catholicae Traditione cont Har. c. 1. Vincent Lirinens places Authority of Scriptures first and then Tradition And since it is apparent that Tradition is first in order of time it must necessarily follow that Scripture is first in order of Nature that is the chiefe upon which Faith rests and resolves it selfe And your owne Schoole confesses this was the way ever The Woman of a S. Ioh. 4. Samaria is a knowne Resemblance but allowed by your selves For b Hen. à Gand. Sum. Par. 1. A. 10. q 1. Sic quotidie apudillos qui forts sunt intrat Christus per mulierem i. Ecclesiam credunt per istam famam c. Gloss. in S. Ioh. cap. 4. quotidâ—…è daily with them that are without Christ enters by the woman that is the Church and they believe by that fame which she gives c But when they come to heare Christ himselfe they believe his words before the words of the Woman For when they have once found Christ c Ibid. Plus verbis Christi in Scripturae credit quam Ecclesiae testificanti Quia propter illam jam credit Ecclesiae Et si ipsa quidem contraria Scripturae diceret ipsi non crederet c. Primam fidem tribuamus Scripturis Canonicis secundam sub ista Definitionibus Consuctudinibus Ecclesiae Catholicae post ist as studiosis viris non sub poena perfidiae sed proterviae c. Walden Doct. Fid. To. 1. L. 2. Art 2. c. 23. Nu. 9. they do more believe his words in Scripture then they do the Church which testifies of him because then propter illam for the Scripture they believe the Church And if the Church should speake contrary to the Scripture they would not believe it Thus the Schoole taught then And thus the Glosse commented then And when men have tyred themselves hither they must come
erre if he keepe his chaire which yet he affirmes L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. 2. Protestants so you will but understand it s not erring in Absolute Fundamentall Doctrines And therefore 't is true also that there can bee no just Cause to make a Schisme from the whole Church But here 's the Iesuite's Cunning. The whole Church with him is the Romane and those parts of Christendome which subject themselves to the Romane Bishop All other parts of Christendome are in Heresie and Schisme and what A. C. pleases Nay soft For another Church may separate from Rome if Rome will separate from Christ. And so farre as it separates from Him and the Faith so farre may another Church sever from it And thâ—…s is all that the Learned Protestants doe or can say And I am sure all that ever the Church of England hath either said or done And that the whole Church cannot erre in Doctrines absolutely Fundamentall and Necessary to all mens Saâ—…vation besides the Authority of these Protestants most of them being of prime ranke seemes to me to be cleare by the Promise of Christ S. Matth. 16 â—…hat the gates of Hell shall not prevaile S. Matth. 16. 18. against it Whereas most certaine it is that the Gates of Hell prevaile very farre against it if the Whole Militant Church universally taken can Erre from or in the Foundation But then this Power of not Erring is not to be conceived as if it were in the Church primò per se Originally or by any power it hath of it selfe For the Church is constituted of Men and Humanum est errare all men can erre But this Power is in it partly by the vertue of this Promise of Christ and partly by the Matter which it teacheth which is the unerring Word of God so plainely and manifestly delivered to her as that it is not possible she should universally fall from it or teach against it in things absolutely necessary to Salvation Besides it would be well waighed whether to believe or teach otherwise will not impeach the Article of the Creed concerning the Holy Catholike Church which we professe we believe For the Holy Catholike Church there spoken of containes not onely the whole Militant Church on earth but the whole Triumphant also in Heaven For so †Ecclesia hic tota accipiâ—…da est non solum ex parâ—…e quà pâ—…rinatur â—…terris c. vâ—…tiam ex illa parte quae in coelâ—… c. S. Aug. Eâ—…hir c 56. S. Augustine hath long since taught me Now if the whole Catholike Church in this large extent be Holy then certainly the whole Militant Church is Holy as well as the Triumphant though in a far lower degree in as much as all * Nemo ex toto Sanctus Optat. L 7 contra Parmen Sanctification all Holinesse is imperfect in this life as well in Churches as in Men. Holy then the whole Militant Church is For that which the Apostle speakes of Abraham is true of the Church which is a Body Collective made up of the spirituall seed of Abraham Rom. 11. If the root be holy so are the branches Well then the whole Militant Church is Holy Rom. 11. 16. and so we believe Why but will it not follow then Thaâ—… the whole Militant Church cannot possibly erre in the Foundations of the Faith That she may erre in Superstructures and Deductions and other by and unnecessary Truths if her Curiosity or other weaknesse carry her beyond or cause her to fall short of her Rule no doubt need be made But if She can erre either from the Foundation or in it She can be no longer Holy and that Article of the Creed is gone For if She can erre quite from the Foundation then She is nor Holy nor Church but becomes an Infidell Now this cannot be For †Dum Christus or at in Excelso Návicula id est Eâ—…clesia â—…tur fluctibus in profundo c sed quia Christus orat non potest mergi S. Aug. Serm 14 de Verb. Domi. c 2. Et Bâ—…llar L. 3 ac Eccle Milit c. 13. Praesidiâ—… Christi fulâ—…itur Ecclâ—…siae perpetuitas ut inter turbulentas aâ—…itationes formiâ—…abiles mâ—…tus c. salva tamâ—…n maneat Câ—… L. 2. Instit c. 15. §. 3. Ipsa Symboli 〈◊〉 admonemur perpetuam residâ—…re in Ecclesia Christi remission m Peccatorum Calv. L. 4. Inst. c. 1. §. 17. Now remission of sins cannot be perpetuall in the Church if the Church it selfe be 〈◊〉 perpetuall But the Church it selfe cannot be perpetuall if it fall away all Divine Ancient and Moderne Romanists and Reformers agree in this That the whole Militant Church of Christ cannot fall away into generall Apostacy And if She Erre in the Foundation that is in some one or more Fundamentall Poynts of Faith then Shee may bee a Church of Christ still but not Holy but becomes Hereticall And most certain it is that no * Spiritus Sanctificationis non pâ—…ost inveniri in Haereticorum mentibus S. Hierom in Ierom. 10. Assemâ—…ly be it never so generall of such Hereticks is or can be Holy Other Errors that are of a meaner alay take not Holinesse from the Church but these that are dyed in graine cannot consist with Holinesse of which Faith in Christ is the very Foundation And therefore if we will keepe up our Creed the whole Militant Church must be still Holy For if it be not so still then there may be a time that Falsum may subesse Fidei Catholicae that falshood and that in a high degree in the very Article may be the Subject of the Catholike Faith which were no lesse then Blasphemy to affirme For we must still believe the Holy Catholike Church And if She be not still Holy then at that time when She is not so we believe a Falshood under the Article of the Catholike Faith Therefore a very dangerous thing it is to cry out in generall termes That the whole Catholike Militant Church can Erre and not limit nor distinguish in time that it can erre indeed for Ignorance it hath and Ignorance can Erre But Erre it cannot either by falling totally from the Foundation or by Hereticall Error in it For the Holinesse of the Church consists as much if not more in the Verity of the Faith as in the Integrity of Manners taught and Commanded in the Doctrine of Faith Now in this Discourse A. C. thinkes he hath met with me For he tells me that I may not only safely grant A. C. p. 56. that Protestants made the Division that is nâ—…w in the Church but further also and that with a safe Confidence as one did was it not you saith he That it was ill done of those who did first made the Separation Truly I doe not now remember whether I said it or no. But because A. C. shall have full satisfaction from me and without any Tergiversation if I did not
no where so steddily placed in this world but it will be in some danger And men that care neither for the Hive nor the Bees have yet a great minde to the Honey And having once tasted the sweet of the Churches Maintenance swallow that for Honey which one day will be more bitter then Gall in their Bowells Now the King and the Priest more then any other are bound to looke to the Integrity of the Church in Doctrine and Manners and that in the first place For that 's by farre the Best Honey in the Hive But in the second place They must be Carefull of the Churches Maintenance too els the Bees shall make Honey for others and have none left for their owne necessary sustenance and then all 's lost For we see it in daily and common use that the Honey is not taken from the Bees but they are destroyed first Now in this great and Busie Worke the King and the Priest must not feare to put their hands to the Hive though they be sure to be stung And stung by the Bees whose Hive and House they preserve It was King Davids Case God grant it be never Yours They came about mee saith the Psal. 118. 12. Psal. 118. * Apum Similitudine ardorem not at vesanum Non est enim in illis multum roboris sed mira Excandescentia Calv in Psal. 118. like Bees This was hard usage enough yet some profit some Honey might thus be gotten in the End And that 's the Kings Case But when it comes to the Priest the Case is alter'd They come about him like VVaspes or like Hornets rather all sting and no Honey there And all this many times for no offence nay sometimes for Service done them would they see it But you know who said Behold I come shortly and my reward is with mee to give to every man according as his VVorkes shall bee Revel 22. And he himselfe is so Revel 22. 12. * Gen 〈◊〉 exceeding great a Reward as that the manifold stings which are in the World howsoever they smart here are nothing when they are pressed out with that exceeding weight of Glory which shall be revealed Rom. 8. Rom. 8. 18. Now one Thing more let me be bold to Observe to Your Majesty in particular concerning Your Great Charge the Church of England 'T is in an hard Condition Shee professes the Ancient Catholike Faith And yet the Romanist condemnes Her of Novelty in her Doctrine Shee practises Church Government as it hath beene in use in all Ages and all Places where the Church of Christ hath taken any Rooting both in and ever since the Apostles Times And yet the Separatist condemnes Her for Antichristianisme in her Discipline The plaine truth is She is between these two Factions as betweene two Milstones and unlesse Your Majesty looke to it to VVhose Trust She is committed Shee 'll be grownd to powder to an irrepairable both Dishonour and losse to this Kingdome And 't is very Remarkeable that while both these presse hard upon the Church of England both of them Crye out upon Persecution like froward Children which scratch and kicke and bite and yet crye out all the while as if themselves were killed Now to the Romanist I shall say this The Errors of the Church of Rome are growne now many of them very Old And when Errors are growne by Age and Continuance to strength they which speake for the Truth though it be farre Older are ordinarily challenged for the Bringers in of New Opinions And there is no Greater Absurdity stirring this day in Christendome then that the Reformation of an Old Corrupted Church will we nill wee must be taken for the Building of a New And were not this so we should never be troubled with that idle and impertinent Question of theirs VVhere was your Church before Luther For it was just there where their's is now * There is no other difference betweene Vs Rome then betwixt a Church miserably Corrupted and happily purged c. Ios. Hall B. of Exon. In his Apologeticall Advertisement to the Reader p. 192. Approved by Tho. Morton B. then of Cov. Lich. now of 〈◊〉 in the Letters printed by the B. of Exeter in his Treatise called The Reconciler p. 68 And D. Field in his Appen to the third part c. 2. where he cites Calv. to the same purpose L. 4. Inst. c. 2. §. 11. One and the same Church still no doubt of that One in Substance but not one in Condition of state and purity Their part of the same Church remaining in Corruption and Our part of the same Church under Reformation The same Naaman and he a Syrian still but Leprous with them and Cleansed with us The same man still And for the Seperatist and him that layes his Grounds for Separation or Change of Discipline though all hee sayes or can say be in Truth of Divinity and among Learned Men little better then ridiculous yet since these fond Opinions have gain'd some ground among your people to such among them as are wilfully set to follow their blinde Guides thorough thicke and thin till * S. Matth. 15. 14 they fall into the Ditch together I shall say nothing But for so many of them as meane well and are onely misled by Artifice and Cunning Concerning them I shall say thus much only They are Bells of passing good mettle and tuneable enough of themselves and in their owne disposition and a world of pity it is that they are Rung so miserably out of Tune as they are by them which have gotten power in and over their Consciences And for this there is yet Remedy enough but how long there will bee I know not Much talking there is Bragging Your Majesty may call it on both sides And when they are in their ruffe they both exceed all Moderation and Truth too So farre till both Lips and Penns open for all the World like a Purse without money Nothing comes out of this and that which is worth nothing out of them And yet this nothing is made so great as if the Salvation of Soules that Great worke of the Redeemer of the World the Sonne of God could not be effected without it And while the one faction cryes up the Church above the Scripture and the other the Scripture to the neglect and Contempt of the Church which the Scripture it selfe teaches men both to honour and obey They have so farre endangered the Beliefe of the One and the Authority of the Other as that neither hath its Due from a great part of Men. Whereas according to Christs Institution The Scripture where 't is plaine should guide the Church And the Church where there 's Doubt or Difficulty should expound the Scripture Yet so as neither the Scripture should be forced nor the Church so bound up as that upon Just and farther Evidence Shee may not revise that which in any Case hath slipt by Her
other Whether you have related the two former truly appeares by D. White the late Reverend L. Bishop of Ely his Relation or Exposition of them I was present at none but this Third of which I here give the Church an Account But of this Third whether that were the Cause which you alledge I cannot tell You say F. It was observed That in the second Conference all the Speech was about particular matters little or none about a continuall infallible visible Church which was the chiefe and onely Point in which a certaine Lady required satisfaction as having formerly setled in her minde That it was not for her or any other unlearned Persons to take up on them to judge of Particulars without depending upon the Iudgement of the true Church B. The Opinion of that Honourable Person in § 2 this was never opened to mee And it is very fit the people should looke to the Iudgement of the Church before they bee too busie with Particulars But yet neither a 1 Cor. 10. 15. Scripture nor any good Authority denies them some moderate use of their owne understanding and Iudgement especially in things familiar and evident which even b Quis non sine ullo Magistro aut interprete ex se facilè cognoscat c. Novat de Trin. c. 23. Et loquitur de Mysterio Passion is Christi Dijudicare est Mensurare c. Unde Mens dicitur a Metiendo Tho. p. 1. q. 79. A. 9. ad 4. To what end then is a m nde and an understanding given a Man if he may not apply it to measure Truth Et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. ab eo quod confiderat discernit Quiadecernit inter verum falsum Damasc. l. 2. Fid. Orth. c. 22. And A. C. himselfe p. 41. denyes not all Iudgement to private men but sayes they are not so to relie absolutely upon their private Iudgement as to adventure salvation upon it alone or chiefly which no man will deny ordinary Capacities may as easily understand as reade And therefore some Particulars a Christian may judge without depending F. This Lady therefore having heard it granted in the first Conference That there must bee a continuall visible Company ever since Christ teaching unchanged Doctrine in all Fundamentall Points that is Poynts necessary to salvation desired to heare this confirmed and proofe brought which was that continuall infallible visible Church in which one may and out of which one cannot attaine salvation And therefore having appointed a time of Meeting betweene a B. and me and thereupon having sent for the B. and me before the B. came the Lady and a friend of hers came first to the roome where I was and debated before me the aforesaid Question and not doubting of the first part to wit That there must be a continuall visible Church as they had heard granted by D. White and L. K. c. B. What D. White and L. K. granted I heard § 3 not But I thinke both granted a continuall and a visible Church neither of them an infallible at least in your sense And your selfe in this Relation speake distractedly For in these few lines from the beginning hither twice you adde infallible betweene continuall and visible and twice you leave it out But this concernes D. W. and he hath answered it Here A. C. steps in and sayes The Iesuite did not speake distractedly but most advisedly For saith he A. C. p. 40. where he relates what D. White or L. K. granted hee leaves out the word Infallible because they granted it not But where he speakes of the Lady there he addes it because the Iesuite knew it was an infallible Church which she sought to rely upon How farre the Catholike Militant Church of Christ is infallible is no Dispute for this Place though you shall finde it after But sure the Iesuite did not speake most advisedly nor A. C. neither nor the Lady her selfe if she said she desired to relie upon an Infallible Church For an Infallible Church denotes a Particular Church in that it is set in opposition to some other Particular Church that is not infallible Now I for my part doe not know what that Lady desired to relie upon This I know if she desired such a Particular Church neither this Iesuite nor any other is able to shew it her No not Bellarmine himselfe though of very great ability to make good any Truth which he undertakes for the Church of Rome †Feritas vincat necesse est sive Negantem sive confitentem c. S. Aug. Epist. 174. Ocâ—…ultari potest ad tempus veritas vinci non potest S. Aug. in Psal. 61. But no strength can uphold an Error against Truth where Truth hath an able Defendant Now where Bellarmine sets himselfe purposely to make Lib. 4. De Rom. Pont. Cap. 4. §. 1. Romana particularis Ecclesta non potest errare in Fide this good That the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in matter of Faith Out of which it followes That there may be found a Particular infallible Church you shall see what he is able to performe 1. First then after he hath Distinguished to expresse his meaning in what sense the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in things which are de Fide of the Faith he tells us this Firmitude is because the Sea Apostolike is fixed there And this he saith is most true * Ibid. §. 2. And for proofe of it he brings three Fathers to justifie it 1. The first S. Cyprian a Navigare audent ad Petri Cathodram Ecclesiam principalem c. Nec cogitare eos esse Romanos ad quos Perfidia habere non potest accessum Cypr. l. 1. Ep. 3. whose words are That the Romanes are such as to whom Perfidia cannot have accesse Now Perfidia can hardly stand for Error in Faith or for Misbeliefe But it properly signifies malicious Falsehood in matter of Trust and Action not error in faith but in fact against the Discipline and Government of the Church And why may it not here have this meaning in S. Cyprian For the Story there it is this b Bin. Concil To. 1. p. 152. Edit Paris 1636. Baron Annal. an 253. 254. 255. In the Yeare 255. there was a Councell in Carthage in the cause of two Schismatiks Felicissimus and Novatian about restoring of them to the Communion of the Church which had lapsed in time of danger from Christianity to Idolatry Felicissimus would admit all even without penance and Novatian would admit none no not after penance The Fathers forty two in number went as the Truth led them between both Extreames To this Councell came Privatus a knowne Heretick but was not admitted because he was formerly Excommunicated and often condemned Hereupon he gathers his Complicies together and chooses one Fortunatus who was formerly condemned as well as himselfe Bishop of Carthage and set him up against S. Cyprian This done
and after that by Pope Stephen and after both in the first b Can. 1. Councell of Carthage yet no one word is there in that Councell which mentions this as an Error That hee thought Pope Stephen might erre in the faith while he proclaimed he did so In which though the particular Censure which he passed on Pope Stephen was erroneous for Stephen erred not in that yet the Generall which results from it namely That for all his being in the Popedome he might erre is most true 2. The second Father which Bellarmine cites is S. Ierome d Attamen scito Romanam sidem Apostolica vove laudatam ejusmodi praestigias non recipere etiamsi Angelus aliter annunciet quà m semel praedicatum est Pauli authoritate munitam non posse mutari S. Hicron L. 3. Apol. contra Ruffinum Tom. 2. Edit Paris 1534. sol 84. K. Peradventure it is here to be read jam si For so the place is more plaine and more strong but the Answer is the same His words are The Romane Faith commended by the Apostle admits not such praestigia's deceits and delusions into it though an Angell should preach it otherwise than it was preach'd at first and being armed and fenced by S. Paul's authority cannot be changed Where first I will not doubt but that S. Ierome speakes here of the Faith For the Praestigiae here mentioned are afterwards more plainely expressed For he tels us after a Deinde ut Epistolas contra te ad Orientem mitteret cauterium tibi Haereseós inureret Diceretque libros Origenis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à te translatos simplici Ecclesiae Romanae plebi traditos ut fidei veritatem quam ab Apostolo didicerant per te perderent S. Hicron ibid. fol. 85. K. That the Bishop of Rome had sent Letters into the East and charged Heresie upon Ruffinus And farther that Origen's Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were translated by him and delivered to the simple people of the Church of Rome that by his meanes they might loose the verity of the Faith which they had learned from the Apostle Therefore the Praestigiae before mentioned were the Cunning Illusions of Ruffinus putting Origen's Book under the Martyr Pamphilus his name that so he might bring in Heresie the more cunningly under a name of Credit and the more easily pervert the Peoples Faith So of the Faith he speakes And secondly I shall as easily confesse that S. Ierome's speech is most true but I cannot admit the Cardinal's sense of it For he imposes upon the word Fides For by Romana Fides the Romane Faith he will understand the Particular Church of Rome Which is as much as to say Romanos Fideles the Faithfull of that Church And that no wilie Delusions or Cousenage in matter of Faith can be imposed upon them Now hereupon I returne to that of S. Cyprian If Fides Romana must signifie Fideles Romanos why may not Perfidia before signifie Perfidos Especially since these two words are commonly used by these Writers as Termes a Qui cum Fidei dux esse non potuit perfidiae existat S. Cyprian L. 1. Epist. 7. Fidem perfidi c. Ibid. Facti sunt ex Ovibus Vulpes ex fidelibus perfidi Optatus L. 7. Quomodo iis prosit quum baptizantur Parentum Fides quorum iis non potest obesse perfidia S. Aug. Epist. 23. Quantò potiùs Fides aliena potest consulere parvulo cui sua perfidia c. S. Aug. L. 3. de lib. Arbit c. 23. Opposite And therefore by the Law of Opposition may interpret each other proportionably So with these great Masters with whom 't is almost growne to be Quod volumus rectum est what we please shall be the Authours meaning Perfidia must signifie absolutely Errour in Faith or Misbeliefe But Fides must relate to the Persons and signifie the Faithfull of the Romane Church And now I conceive my Answer will proceed with a great deale of Reason For Romana Fides the Romane Faith as it was commended by the Apostle of which S. Ierome speakes is one thing and the Particular Romane Church of which the Cardinall speakes is another The Faith indeed admits not Praestigias wilie delusions into it if it did it could not be the Whole and Vndefiled Faith of Christ which they learned from the Apostle And which is so fenced by Apostolicall Authority as that it cannot be changed though an Angell should preach the contrary But the Particular Church of Rome hath admitted Praestigias diverse crafty Conveyances into the Faith and is not fenced as the Faith it selfe is And therefore though an Angell cannot contrary that yet the bad Angell hath sowed tares in this By which meanes Romana Fides though it be now the same it was for the words of the Creed yet it is not the same for the sense of it Nor for the super and praeter-structures built upon it or joyned unto it So the Romane Faith that is the Faith which S. Paul taught the Romanes and after commended in them was all one with the Catholike Faith of Christ. For S. Paul taught no other than that One. And this one can never be changed in or from it selfe by Angell or Divell But in mens hearts it may receive a change And in particular Churches it may receive a change And in the particular Church of Rome it hath received a change And yee see S. Hierome himselfe confesses that the Pope himselfe was afraid b Ne fidei veritatem quam ab Apostolo didicerant per te perderent ut suprà ne perderent least by this Art of Ruffinus the People might loose the verity of the Faith Now that which can be lost can be changed For usually Habits begin to alter before they be quite lost And that which may be lost among the People may be lost among the Bishops and the rest of the Clergie too if they looke not to it as it seemes they after did not at Rome though then they did Nay at this time the whole Romane Church was in danger enough to swallow Origen's Booke and all the Errors in it comming under the Name of Pamphilus and so S. Ierome himselfe expresly and close upon the Place cited by Bellarmine For he desires a Muta titulum Romanam simplicitatem tanto periculo libera ibid. fol. 84. K. Ruffinus to change the Title of the Booke that Error may not be spread under the specious Name of Pamphilus and so to free from danger the Romane simplicity Where by the way Romane unerring Power now challenged and Romane simplicity then feared agree not very well together 3. The third Father alledged by Bellarmine is a Uetus Roma ab antiquis temporibus habet rectam Fidem semper eam retinet sicut decet Urbem quae toti Orbt prâ—…sidet semper de Deo integram fidem habere Greg. Naz. in Carmine de vità suà Ante medium p. 9. Edit
explicandi Emanationem Sp. S. quà m in ipsá re c. Iodocus Clictoveus in Damase L 1. Fid Orth. c. 11. Et quidam ex Graecis concedunt quòd sit á Filio vel ab eo prostuat Thom. p. 1. q. 36. A. 2. C. Et Thomas ipse dicit Sp. S. procedere mediatè à Filio ib. A. 3. ad 1. salâ—…em ratione Personarum Spirantium Respondeo cum Bessarione Gennadio Damascenum non negâsse Sp. S. procedere ex Filio quod ad rem attinet quùm dixerit Spiritum esse Imaginem Filii per Filium sed existimásse tutiùs dici per Filium quà m ex Filio quantum ad modum loquendi c. Bellarm. L. 2. de Christo c. 27. §. Respondeo igitur Et Tollet in S. Iohn 15. Ar. 25. Lutheran Resp. ad Resp. 2. Ieremiae Patriarchae The Master and his Schollers agree upon it The Greeks saith he confesse the Holy Ghost to bee the Spirit of the Son with the Apostle Galath 4. and the Spirit of truth S. Iohn 16. And since Non est aliud it is not another thing to say The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Father and the Sonne then that He is or proceeds from the Father and the Sonne in this They seeme to agree with us in candem Fidei sententiam upon the same Sentence of Faith though they differ in words Now in this cause where the words differ but the Sentence of Faith is the same d Eadem penitùs Sententia ubi suprà Clictov penitùs eadem even altogether the same Can the Point be fundamentall You may make them no Church as e Bellarm. 4. de Notis Eccl. cap. 8. §. Quod autem apud Graecos Bellarmine doth and so deny them salvation which cannot be had out of the true Church but I for my part dare not so do And Rome in this Particular should be more moderate if it be but because this Article Filióque was added to the Creed by her selfe And 't is hard to adde and Anathematize too It ought to be no easie thing to condemne a man of Heresie in foundation of faith much lesse a Church least of all so ample and large a Churchas the Greeke especially so as to make them no Church Heaven Gates were not so easily shut against multitudes when S. Peter wore the Keyes at his owne girdle And it is good counsell which a Lib. 3. cont Hares fol. 93. A. 〈◊〉 vidcant ht qui famile de haerest pronumiant quaÌ„ facile etiam ipsi errent Et intelligant non esse tam leviter de Haeresi censenduÌ„ c. In verbo Beatitudo Alphonsus à castro one of your owne gives Let them consider that pronounce easily of Heresie how easie it is for themselves to erre Or if you will pronounce consider what it is that separates from the Church simply and not in part only I must needs professe that I wish heartily as well as b Iunius Animad in Bellar. cont 2. L. 3. c. 23. others that those distressed men whose Crosse is heavie already had beene more plainly and moderately dealt withall though they thinke a diverse thing from us then they have beene by the Church of Rome But hereupon you say you were forc'd F. Whereupon I was forced to repeate what I had formerly brought against D. White concerning Points Fundamentall B. Hereupon it is true that you read a large § 10 Discourse out of a Booke printed which you said was yours The Particulars all of them at the least I do not now remember nor did I then approve But if they be such as were formerly brought against Doctor White they are by him formerly answered The first thing you did was the * P. First righting the Sentence of S. Austine Ferendus est Disputator errans c. Here A. C. p. 44. tells us very learnedly that my corrupt Copy hath righting instead of reading the Sentence of S. Austine Whereas I here use the word righting not as it is opposed to reading as any man may discerne A. C. palpably mistakes but for doing right to S. Austine And if I had meant it for writing I should not have spelled it so righting of S. Augustine which Sentence I doe not at all remember was so much as named in the Conference much lesse was it stood upon and then righted by you Another place of S. Augustine indeed was which you omit But it comes after about Tradition to which I remit it But now you tell us of a great Proofe made out of this †By which is proved That all poynts Defined by the Church are Fundamentall Place For these words of yours containe two Propositions One That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall The other That this is proved out of this Place of S. Augustine 1. For the first That all Poynts defined by the Church are fundamentall It was not the least meanes by which Rome grew to her Greatnesse to blast every Opposer she had with the name of Hereticke or Schismaticke for this served to shrivel the credit of the Persons And the Persons once brought into contempt and ignominie all the good they desired in the Church fell to dust for want of creditable Persons to backe and support it To make this Proceeding good in these later yeares this Course it seemes was taken The Schoole that must maintaine and so they doe That all Points Defined by the Church are thereby a Your owne word Fundamentall b Inconcussâ fide ab omnibus Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. Art 10. C. necessary to be believed c Sco us 1. Sent. d. 11. q. 1. of the substance of the Faith and that though it be determined quite d Ecclesiae Voces etiam extra Scripturam Stap. Relect. Con. 4. q. 1. Ar. 3. Quae maturo judicio definivit c. Solidum est etiamsi nullo Scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili testimonio confirmaretur bid Extra Scripturam And then e Et penes Cercopes Victoria sit Greg. Naz. de Differen vitae Cercopes 1. Astutos veteratoriae improbitat is Episcopos qui artibus suis ac dolis omnia Concilia perturbabant Schol. ib. leave the wise and active Heads to take order that there be strength enough ready to determine what is fittest for them But since these men distinguish not nor you betweene the Church in generall and a Generall Councell which is but her Representation for Determinations of the Faith though I be very slow in sifting or opposing what is concluded by Lawfull Generall and consenting Authority though I give as much as can justly be given to the Definitions of Councels truly Generall nay suppose I should grant which I doe not That Generall Councells cannot erre yet this cannot downe with me That all Poynts even so defined are Fundamentall For Deductions are not prime and native Principles nor are Superstructures Foundations That which is a
Foundation for all cannot be one and another to different Christians in regard of it selfe for then it could be no common Rule for any nor could the soules of men rest upon a shaking foundation No If it be a true Foundation it must be common to all and firme under all in which sense the Articles of Christian Faith are Fundamentall And f Quum exim una cadem sides sit neque is qui multum de ipsà dicere potest plusquam oportet dicit neque qui parùm ipsam imminuit Iren. L. 1. advers haeres c. 3. Ireneus layes this for a ground That the whole Church howsoever dispersed in place speakes this with one mouth He which among the Guides of the Church is best able to speake utters no more then this and lesse then this the most simple doth not utter Therefore the Creed of which he speaks is a common is a constant Foundation And an Explicite faith must be of this in them which have the use of Reason for both Guides and simple people All the Church utter this Now many things are defined by the Church w ch are but Deductions out of this which suppose them deduced right move far from the Foundation without which Deductions explicitly believed many millions of Christians go to Heaven and cannot therefore be Fundamentall in the faith True Deductions from the Article may require necessary beliefe in them which are able and do go along with them from the Principle to the Conclusion But I do not see either that the Learned do make them necessary to all or any reason why they should Therfore they cannot be FundameÌ„tall yet to some mens Salvation they are necessary Besides that which is Fundamentall in the Faith of Christ is a Rocke immoveable and can never be varied Never a Resolutio Occhami est quòd nâ—… tota Ecclesia nec Concilium Generale nec summus Pontifex potest facere Articulum quod non suit Articulus Sed in dubiis propositionibus potest Ecclesia determinare an sint Cathilicae c. Tamen sic determinando non facit quod sint Catholicae quum prius essent ante Ecclesiae Determinationem c. Almain in 3. D. 25. Q. 1. Therefore if it be Fundamentall after the Church hath defined it it was Fundamentall before the Definition els it is mooveable and then no Christian hath where to rest And if it be immooveable as b Regula Fidei una omnino est solailla immobilis irreformabilis Tertul. de Virg. vel cap. 1. In hac fide c. Nihil transmutare c. Athan. Epist. ad Iovin de side indeed it is no Decree of a Councell be it never so Generall can alter immooveable Verities no more than it can change immooveable Natures Therefore if the Church in a Councell define any thing the thing defined is not Fundamentall because the Church hath defined it nor can be made so by the Definition of the Church if it be not so in it selfe For if the Church had this power she might make a New Article of the Faith c Occham Almain in 3. Sent. D. 25. q. 1. which the Learned among your selves deny For the Articles of the Faith cannot increase in substance but onely in Explication d Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. Ar. 7. C. And for this I 'le be judg'd by Bellarmine f Fides Divina non ideo habet certitudinem quia toti Ecclesiae communis est sed quia nititur Authoritate Dei qui nec falli nec fallere potest quum sit ipsa Veritas L. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Quod verò Concilium Probatio Ecclesiae facit ut omnibus innotescat Objectum Fidei Divinae esse revelatum à Deo propter hoc certum indubitatum non autem tribuit firmitatem verbo Dei aliquid revelantis Ibid. §. At inqust who disputing against Amb. Catharinus about the certainty of Faith tels us That Divine Faith hath not its certainty because 't is Catholike .i. common to the whole Church but because it builds on the Authority of God who is Truth it self and can neither deceive nor be deceived And he addes That the Probation of the Church can make it known to all that the Object of Divine Faith is revealed from God and therefore certaine and not to be doubted but the Church can adde no certainty no firmenesse to the word of God revealing it Nor is this hard to be farther proved out of your owne Schoole For a Scotus in 1. Sent. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus professeth it in this very particular of the Greeke Church If there be saith he a true reall difference betweene the Greekes and the Latines about the Point of the Procession of the Holy Ghost then either they or we be verè Haeretici truly and indeed Hereticks And he speakes this of the old Greekes long before any Decision of the Church in this Controversie For his instance is in S. Basil and Greg. Nazianz. on the one side and S Ierome Augustine and Ambrose on the other And who dares call any of these Hereticks is his challenge I deny not but that Scotus adds there That howsoever this was before yet ex quo from the time that the Catholike Church declared it it is to be held as of the substance of Faith But this cannot stand with his former Principle if he intend by it That whatsoever the Church defines shall be ipso ficto and for that Determination's sake Fundamentall For if before the Determination supposing the Difference reall some of those Worthies were truly Hereticks as he confesses then somewhat made them so And that could not be the Decree of the Church which then was not Therefore it must be somwhat really false that made them so and fundamentally false if it made them Hereticks against the Foundation But Scotus was wiser than to intend this It may be he saw the streame too strong for him to swim against therfore he went on with the doctrine of the Time That the Churches Sentence is of the substance of Faith But meant not to betray the truth For he goes no further than Ecclesia declaravit since the Church hath declared it which is the word that is used by diverse b Bellarm. L. 2. de Conc. Auth. c. 12. Concilia cùm definiunt non faciunt aliquid esse infallibilis veritatis sed declarant Explicare Bonavent in 1. d. 11. A. 1. q. 1. ad sinem Explanare declarare Tho 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. 2. 2. q. 1 A. 10. ad 1. Quid unquam aliud Ecclesia Câ—… ili rum Decretis enisa est nisi ut quod anica simplicitèr credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur Vin. Lyr. cont 〈◊〉 c. 32 Now the a Sent. 1. D. 11 Master teaches and the b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11 Art 7. Schollers too That every thing which belongs to the Exposition or Declaration of
another intùs est is not another contrary thing but is contained within the Bowels and nature of that which is interpreted from which if the Declaration depart it is faulty and erroneous because instead of Declaring it gives another and contrary c Hoc semper nec quicquam praeterea Vin. Lyr. c. 32. sense Therefore when the Church declares any thing in a Councell either that which she declares was intùs or extrà in the Nature and verity of the thing or out of it If it were extrà without the nature of the thing declared then the Declaration of the thing is false and so farre from being Fundamentall in the Faith d In novâ Haeresi Veritas prius erat de Fide et si non ita deâ—… rata Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 〈◊〉 fine Haeretici multa quae erâ—… implicita sidei nostra compâ—… runt explicare Bonavent in 〈◊〉 D. 11. A. 1. Q. 1. ad finem Tho. 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. Quamvis Apostolica Sedes aut Generale Concilium de Haeresi censere possit non tamen ideò Assertio aliqua erit Haeresis qui. Ecclesia definivit sed quia 〈◊〉 dei Catholica repugnat Ecclesia siquidèm suâ definitione 〈◊〉 facit talem Assertionem esse Haeresin quùm etiamsi ipsa non definivisset esset Haeresis sed id efficit ut paeteat c. Alphon à Castro L. 1. Advers Haeres c. 8. fol. 21. D. If it were intùs within the Compasse and nature of the thing though not open and apparent to every eye then the Declaration is true but not otherwise Fundamentall than the thing is which is declared for that which is intùs cannot be larger or deeper than that in which it is if it were it could not be intùs Therefore nothing is simply Fundamentall because the Church declares it but because it is so in the nature of the thing which the Church declares And it is a slight and poore Evasion that is commonly used that the Declaration of the Church makes it Fundamentall quoad nos in respect of us for it doth not that neither For no respect to us can varie the Foundation The Churches Declaration can binde us to peace and externall Obedience where there is not expresse Letter of Scripture and sense agreed on but it cannot make any thing Fundamentall to us that is not so in its owne nature For if the Church can so adde that it can by a Declaration make a thing to be Fundamentall in the faith that was not then it can take a thing away from the Foundation and make it by Declaring not to be Fundamentall which all men grant no power of the Church can doe e Ecclesia non amputat necessaria non apponit superâ—…ua Vin. Lir. c. 32. Deut. 4. 2. For the power of adding any thing contrary and of detracting any thing necessary are alike forbidden * Thom. Supp q. 6. A. 6. C. and alike denyed Now nothing is more apparent then this to the eye of all men That the Church of Rome hath determined or declared or defined call it what you will very many things that are not in their owne nature Fundamentall and therefore neither are nor can be made so by her adjudging them Now to all this Discourse That the Church hath not power to make any thing Fundamentall in the Faith that intrinsecally and in its owne nature is not such A. C. is content to say nothing 2. For the second That it is prooved by this place of S. Augustine That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall You might have given me that Place cited in the Margin and eased my paines to seeke it but it may be there was somewhat in concealing it For you doe so extraordinarily right this Place that you were loth I thinke any body should see how you wrong it The place of S. Augustine is this against the Pelagians about Remission of Originall sinne in Infants * August Serm. 14. de verb. Apost c. 12. Fundata res est In aliis Quastionibus non diligentèr digestis nondum plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate sirmatis ferendus est Disputator errans ibi ferendus est error non tantum progredi debet ut etiam Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliâ—… This is a thing founded An erring Disputer is to be borne with in other Questions not diligently digested not yet made firme by full Authority of the Church there error is to be borne with but it ought not to goe so farre that it should labour to shake the Foundation it selfe of the Church This is the Place but it can never follow out of this Place I thinke That every thing defined by the Church is Fundamentall For first he speakes of a Foundation of Doctrine in Scripture not a Church definition This appeares for few lines before he tels us b Ibid. cap. 20. There was a Question moved to S. Cyprian Whether Baptisme was concluded to the eight Day as well as Circumcision And no doubt was made then of the c Origine Peccati beginning of sin and that d Ex eâ re unde nulla erat Quaestio soluta est exorta Quaestio out of this thing about which no Question was mooved that Question that was made was Answered And e Hoc de Fundamento Ecclesiae sumpsit ad confirmandum Lapidem nut antem againe That S. Cypryan tooke that which he gave in answer from the Foundation of the Church to confirme a stone that was shaking Now S. Cyprian in all the Answer that he gives hath not one word of any Definition of the Church therefore ea res That thing by which he answered was a Foundation of prime and setled Scripture-Doctrine not any Definition of the Church Therefore that which he tooke out of the Foundation of the Church to fasten the stone that shooke was not a Definition of the Church but the Foundation of the Church it selfe the Scripture upon which it is builded as appeareth in the f Concil Milevit c. 2. Milevitane Councell where the Rule by which Pelagius was condemned is the Rule of g Rom. 5. 15. Scripture Therefore Saint Augustine goes on in the same sense That the Disputer is not to be borne any longer that shall h Vt Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliatur endeavour to shake the Foundation it selfe upon which the whole Church is grounded Secondly if S. Augustine did meane by Founded and Foundation the definition of the Church because of these words This thing is Founded this is made firm by full Authority of the Church and the words following these to shake the foundation of the Church yet it can never follow out of any or all these Circumstances and these are all That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall in the faith For first no man denies but the Church is a c 1 Tim. 3. 15. Foundation That things defined
by it are founded upon it And yet hence it cannot follow That the thing that is so founded is Fundamentall in the Faith For things may be d Mos fundatissimus S. Aug. Ep. 28. founded upon Humane Authority and be very certaine yet not Fundamentall in the Faith Nor yet can it follow This thing is founded therefore every thing determined by the Church is founded Again that which followes That those things are not to be opposed which are made firme by full Authority of the Church cannot conclude they are therefore Fundamentall in the Faith For full Church Authority alwayes the time that included the Holy Apostles being past by and not comprehended in it is but Church Authority and Church Authority when it is at full sea is not simply e Staple Rebect cont 4. q. 3. A. 1. Divine therefore the Sentence of it not fundamentall in the Faith And yet no erring Disputer may be endured to shake the foundation which the Church in Councell layes But plaine Scripture with evident sense or a full Demonstrative Argument must have Roome where a wrangling and erring Disputer may not be allowed it And ther 's f Quae quidem si tam manifesta monstratur ut in dubium venire non possit praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholicâ teneor Ita si aliquid apertissimum in Evangelio S. Aug. contra Fund c. 4. neither of these but may Convince the Definition of the Councell if it be ill founded And the Articles of the faith may easily proove it is not Fundamentall if indeed and verily it be not so And I have read some body that sayes is it not you That things are fundamentall in the Faith two wayes One in their Matter such as are all things which be so in themselves The other in the Manner such as are all things that the Church hath Defined and determined to be of Faith And that so some things that are de modo of the manner of being arc of Faith But in plaine truth this is no more then if you should say some things are Fundamentall in the faith and some are not For wrangle while you will you shall never be able to proove that any thing which is but de modo a consideration of the manner of being only can possibly be Fundamentall in the faith And since you make such a Foundation of this Place I will a little view the Mortar with which it is laid by you It is a venture but I shall finde it a Ezek. 13. 11. untempered Your Assertion is All poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall Your proofe this Place Because that is not to be shaken which is setled by b Plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate full Authority of the Church Then it seemes your meaning is that this poynt there spoken of The remission of Originall sinne in Baptisme of Infants was defined when S. Augustine wrote this by a full Sentence of a Generall Councell First if you say it was c 1. 2. de Author Concil c. 5. §. A solis particularibus Bellarmine will tell you it is false and that the Pelagian Heresie was never condemned in an Oecumenicall Councell but only in Nationalls But Bellarmine is deceived For while the Pelagians stood out impudently against Nationall Councels some of them defended Nestorius which gave occasion to the first d Can. 1. 4. Ephesine Councell to Excommunicate and depose them And yet this will not serve your turne for this Place For S. Augustine was then dead and therefore could not meane the Sentence of that Councell in this place Secondly if you say it was not then Defined in an Oecumenicall Synode Plena authoritas Ecclesiae the full Authority of the Church there mentioned doth not stand properly for the Decree of an Oecumenicall Councell but for some Nationall as this was condemned in a * Concil Milevit Can. 2 Nationall Councell And then the full Authority of the Church here is no more then the full Authority of this Church of †Nay if your owne Capellus be true De Appell Eccl Afric c. 2. n. 5. It was â—…ut a Provinciall of Numidia not a Plenary of Africk Africk And I hope that Authority doth not make all Points defined by it to be Fundamentall You will say yes if that Councell be confirmed by the Pope And then I must ever wonder why S. Augustine should say The full Authority of the Church and not bestow one word upon the Pope by whose Authority only that Councell as all other have their fulnesse of Authority in your Iudgement An inexpiable Omission if this Doctrine concerning the Pope were true But here A. C. steps in againe to helpe the Iesuite and he tells us over and over againe That all A. C. p. 45. points made firme by full Authority of the Church are Fundamentall so firme he will have them and therefore fundamentall But I must tell him That first 't is one thing in Nature and Religion too to be firme and another thing to be fundamentall These two are not Convertible T is true that every thing that is fundamentall is firme But it doth not follow that every thing that is firme is fundamentall For many a Superstructure is exceeding firme being fast and close joyned to a sure foundation which yet no man will grant is fundamentall Besides what soever is fundamentall in the faith is fundamentall to the Church which is one by the vnity a Almain in 3. Sent. Dis. 25. q. 2. A Fide enim unà Ecclesia dicitur una of faith Therefore if every thing Defined by the Church be fundamentall in the faith then the Churches Definition is the Churches Foundation And so upon the matter the Church can lay her owne foundation and then the Church must be in absolute and perfect Being before so much as her Foundation is laide Now this is so absurd for any man of learning to say that by and by after A. C. is content to affirm not only that the prima Credibilia the Articles of Faith but all which so pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith as that thereby Christ doth dwell in our hearts c. is the Foundation of the Church under Christ the Prime Foundation And here he 's out againe For first all which pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith is not by and by b Aliquid pertinet ad Fidem dupliciter Uno modo directè sicut ea quae nobis sunt principalitèr divinitùs tradita ut Deum esse Trinum c. Et circa haec opinari falsum hoc ipso inducit Haeresin c. Alio modo indirectè Ex quibus consequitur aliquid contrarium Fidei c. Et in his aliquis potest falsum opinari absque periculo Haeresis donec Sequela illa ei innotescat c. Tho. p. 1. q. 32. A. 4. C. There are things Necessary to the Faith and
things which are but Accessory c. Hooker L. 3. Eccl. Pol. §. 3. Fundamentall in the Faith to all men And secondly the whole Discourse here is concerning Faith as it is taken Objectivè for the Object of Faith and thing to be Beleeved but that Faith by which Christ is said to dwell in our hearts is taken Subjectivè for the Habit and Act of Faith Now to confound both these in one period of speech can have no other ayme than to confound the Reader But to come closer both to the Iesuite and his Defender A. C. If all Poynts made firme by full Authority of the Church be Fundamentall then they must grant that every thing determined by the Councell of Trent is Fundamentall in the Faith For with them 't is firme and Catholike which that Councell Decrees Now that Councell decrees b Si quis dixerit Ordines ab Episcopis collatos sine populi vel potestatis saecularis consensu aut vocatione irritos esse Anathema sit Con. Trid. Sess. 23. Can. 7. That Orders collated by the Bishop are not void though they be given without the Consent or calling of the People or of any secular Power And yet they can produce no Authour that ever acknowledged this Definition of the Councell Fundamentall in the Faith 'T is true I do not grant that the Decrees of this Councell are made by full Authority of the Church but they do both grant and maintaine it And therefore 't is Argumentum ad hominem a good Argument against them that a thing so defined may be sirme for so this is and yet not Fundamentall for so this is not But A. C. tels us further That if one may deny or doubtfully dispute against any one Determination of the A. C. p. 45. Church then he may against another and another and so against all since all are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which being weakened in any one cannot be firme in any other First A. C. might have acknowledged that he borrowed the former part of this out of a Cont. Haer. c. 31. Abdicatà enim qualibet parte Catholici Dogmatis alia quoque at que item alia c. Quid aliud ad extremum sequetur nisi ut totum pariter repudictur Vin. Lir. And as that Learned Father uses it I subscribe to it but not as A. C. applies it For Vincentius speaks there de Catholico Dogmate of Catholike Maximes and A. C. will force it to every Determination of the Church Now Catholike Maximes §. 30. N. 21. which are properly Fundamentall are certaine Prime Truths deposited with the Church and not so much determined by the Church as published and manifested and so made firme by her to us For so b Ecclesia Deâ—…sitorum apud se Dogmatum Custos c. Denique quid unquam Conciliorum Decretis enisa est nisi ut quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur c. Vin. Lir. cont Harcs c. 32. Vincentius expresly Where all that the Church doth is but ut hoc idem quod anteà that the same thing may be believed which was before Believed but with more light and cleerenesse and in that sense with more firmenesse than before Now in this sense give way to a Disputator errans every cavilling Disputer to deny or quarrell at the Maximes of Christian Religion any one or any part of any one of them and why may he not then take liberty to do the like of any other till he have shaken all But this hinders not the Church her selfe nor any appointed by the Church to examine her owne Decrees and to see that she keepe Dogmata deposita the Principles of Faith unblemished and uncorrupted For if she do not so but that c Vin. Lir. cont haer c. 31. Impiorum turpium Errorum Lupanar ubi erat antè castae incorruptâ—… Sacrarium Veritatis Novitia veteribus new Doctrines bee added to the old the Church which is Sacrarium Veritatis the Repository of Verity may be changed in lupanar errorum I am loth to English it By the Church then this may nay it ought to be done however every wrangling Disputer may neither deny nor doubtfully dispute much lesse obstinately oppose the Determinations of the Church no not where they are not Dogmata Deposita these deposited Principles But if he will be so bold to deny or dispute the Determinations of the Church yet that may be done without shaking the Foundation where the Determinations themselves belong but to the Fabricke and not to the Foundation For a whole Frame of Building may be shaken and yet the Foundation where it is well lay'd remaine firme And therefore after all A. C. dares not say the Foundation is shaken but onely in a sort And then 't is as true that in a sort A. C. p. 46. it is not shaken 2. For the second part of his Argument A. C. must pardon me if I dissent from him For first all Determinations of the Church are not made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation For some Determinations of the Church are made firme to us per a Vin. Lir. cont Haer. c. 32. chirographum Scripturae by the Hand-writing of the Scripture and that 's Authenticall indeed Some other Decisions yea and of the Church too are made or may be if b Relect. cont 4. q. 1. Art 3. Etiamsi nullo Scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili Testimonio c. Stapleton informe us right without an evident nay without so much as a probable Testimony of Holy-Writ But c Non potest aliquid certum esse certitudine fidei nisi aut immediatè contineatur in Uerbo Dei aut ex Uerbo Dei per evidentem consequentiam deducatur Bellar. L. 3. de Justifica c. 8. §. 2. Bellarmine fals quite off in this and confesses in expresse termes That nothing can be certaine by Certainty of Faith unlesse it be contained immediately in the Word of God Or be deduced out of the Word of God by evident Consequence And if nothing can be so certaine then certainly no Determination of the Church it selfe if that Determination be not grounded upon one of these either expresse Word of God or evident Consequence out of it So here 's little Agreement in this great Point betweene Stapleton and Bellarmine Nor can this be shifted off as if Stapleton spake of the Word of God written and Bellarmine of the Word of God unwritten as he cals Tradition For Bellarmine treats there of the knowledge which a man hath of the Certainty of his owne Salvation And I hope A. C. will not tell us There 's any Tradition extant unwritten by which particular men may have assurance of their severall Salvations Therefore Bellarmine's whole Disputation there is quite beside the matter Or els he must
speake of the Written Word and so lie crosse to Stapleton as is mention'd But to returne If A. C. will he may but I cannot believe That a Definition of the Church which is made by the expresse Word of God and another which is made without so much as a probable Testimony of it or a cleare Deduction from it are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation Nay I must say in this case that the one Determination is firme by Divine Revelation but the other hath no Divine Revelation at all but the Churches Authority onely 2. Secondly I cannot believe neither That all Determinations of the Church are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church For the Authority of the Church though it be of the same fulnesse in regard of it self and of the Power which it commits to Generall Councels lawfully called yet it is not alwayes of the same fulnesse of knowledge and sufficiency nor of the same fulnesse of Conscience and integrity to apply Dogmata Fidei that which is Dogmaticall in the Faith For instance I thinke you dare not deny but the Councell of Trent was lawfully called and yet I am of opinion that few even of your selves believe that the Councell of Trent hath the same fulnesse with the Councell of Nice in all the fore-named kinds or degrees of fulnesse Thirdly suppose That all Determinations of the Church are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation and sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority yet it will not follow that they are all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I hope A. C. himselfe will not say that the Definitions of the Church are in better condition than the Propositions of Canonicall Scripture Now all Propositions of Canonicall Scripture are alike firme because they all alike proceed from Divine Revelation but they are not all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For this Proposition of Christ to S. Peter and S. Andrew Follow me and I will make you fishers of men a S. Matth. 4. 19 is as firm a Truth as that which he delivered to his Disciples That he must die and rise againse the third day b S. Matth. 16. 21 For both proceed from the same Divine Revelation out of the mouth of our Saviour and both are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which receives the whole Gospell of S. Matthew to be Canonicall and infallible Scripture And yet both these Propositions of Christ are not alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I dare say No man shall be saved in the ordinary way of salvation that believes not the Death and the Resurrection of Christ. And I believe A. C. dares not say that No man shall be saved into whose Capacity it never came that Christ made S. Peter and Andrew fishers of men And yet should he say it nay should he shew it sub annulo Piscatoris no man will believe it that hath not made shipwrack of his Common Notions Now if it be thus betweene Proposition and Proposition issuing out of Christ's own Mouth I hope it may well be so also betweene even Iust and True Determinations of the Church that supposing them alike true and firme yet they shall not be alike Fundamentall to all mens beliefe F. Secondly I required to know what Points the Bishop would account Fundamentall He said all the Points of the Creed were such B. Against this I hope you except not For § 11 since the a Tertull. Apol. contra Gentes c. 47. de veland virg c. 1. S. August Serm. 15. de Temp. cap. 2. Ruffin in Symb. apud Cyprian p. 357. Fathers make the Creed the Rule of Faith b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. since the agreeing sense of Scripture with those Articles are the two Regular Precepts by which a Divine is governed about the Faith since your owne Councell of c Concil Trident Sess. 3. Trent decrees That it is that Principle of Faith in which all that professe Christ doe necessarily agree Fundamentum firmum unicum not the firme alone but the onely Foundation since it is Excommunication d Bonavent ibid. Dub. 2. 3. in literam ipso jure for any man to contradict the Articles contained in that Creed since the whole Body of the Faith is so contained in the Creed as that the e Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. Art 7. c. substance of it was believ'd even before the comming of Christ though not so expresly as since in the number of the Articles since f Bellar. L. 4. de Verb. Dei non Script c. 11. §. Primum est Bellarmine confesses That all things simply necessary for all mens salvation are in the Creed and the Decalogue what reason can you have to except And yet for all this everything Fundamentall is not of a like nearenesse to the Foundation nor of equall Primenesse in the Faith And my granting the Creed to be Fundamentall doth not deny but that there are g Tho. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 7. C. quaedam prima Credibilia certaine prime Principles of Faith in the bosome whereof all other Articles lay wrapped and folded up One of which since Christ is that of S. h 1. S. Iohn 4. 2. Iohn Every spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ come in the flesh is of God And one both before the comming of Christ and since is that of S. Paul i Heb. 11. 6. He that comes to God must believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him Here A. C. tels you That either I must meane that those Points are onely Fundamentall which are expressed A. C. p. 46. in the Creed or those also which are infolded If I say those onely which are expressed then saith he to believe the Scriptures is not Fundamentall because 't is not expressed If I say those which are infolded in the Articles then some unwritten Church Traditions may be accounted Fundamentall The truth is I said and say still that all the Points of the Apostles Creed as they are there expressed are Fundamentall And therein I say no more than some of your best Learned have said before me But I never either said or meant That they onely are Fundamentall That they are a Conc. Trident. Sess. 3. Fundamentum unicum the only Foundation is the Councell of Trent's 't is not mine Mine is That the Beliefe of Scripture to be the Word of God and infallible is an equall or rather a preceding Prime Principle of Faith with or to the whole Body of the Creed And this agrees as before I told the Iesuite with one of your owne great Masters Albertus Magnus b In 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. Regula Fidei est concors Scriptururum sensus cum Articulis Fidei Quia illis duobus regularibus Praeceptis regitur Theologus who is not farre from
that Proposition in terminis So here the very Foundation of A. C ' s. Dilemma fals off For I say not That onely the Points of the Creed are Fundamentall whether expressed or not expressed That all of them are that I say And yet though the Foundation of his Dilemma be fallen away I will take the boldnesse to tell A. C. That if I had said That those Articles onely which are expressed in the Creed are Fundamentall it would have beene hard to have excluded the Scripture upon which the Creed it selfe in every Point is grounded For nothing is supposed to shut out its owne Foundation And if I should now say that some Articles are Fundamentall which are infolded in the Creed it would not follow that therefore some unwritten Traditions were Fundamentall Some Traditions I deny not true and firme and of great both Authority and Vse in the Church as being Apostolicall but yet not Fundamentall in the Faith And it would be a mighty large fold which should lap up Traditions within the Creed As for that Tradition That the Bookes of holy Scriptures are Divine and Infallible in every part I will handle that when I come to the proper place * §. 16. N. 1. for it F. I asked how then it happened as M. Rogers saith that the English Church is not yet resolved what is the right sense of the Article of Christs Descending into Hell B. The English Church never made doubt that § 12 I know what was the sense of that Article The words are so plaine they beare their meaning before them Shee was content to put that a Art 3. Article among those to which she requires Subscription not as doubting of the sense but to prevent the Cavils of some who had beene too busie in Crucifying that Article and in making it all one with the Article of the Crosse or but an Exposition of it And surely for my part I thinke the Church of England is better resolved of the right sense of this Article then the Church of Rome especially if shee must be tryed by her Writers as you try the Church of England by M. Rogers For you cannot agree whether this Article be a meere Tradition or whether it hath any Place of Scripture to vvarrant it a Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus and b Stapleton Relect. Con. 5. q. 5. Art 1. Stapleton allow it no footing in Scripture but c Bellarm 4. de Christo. c. 6. 12. Scripturae passim hoc docent Bellarmine is resolute that this Article is every where in Scripture and d Thom. 2 â—…ae q. 1. A 9 ad 1. Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed The Church of England never doubted it and S. e S. Aug. Ep. 99. Augustine prooves it And yet againe you are different for the sense For you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ in triduo mortis in the time of his Death did go downe into Hell really and was present there or vertually and by effects only For g Tho. p. 3. q. 52. A. 2. c. per suam essentiam Thomas holds the first and h Dur in 3. d. 22. q. 3. Durand the later Then you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ did descend really and in essence into the lowest pit of Hell and Place of the Damned as i Bellar. L. 4. do Christo. c. 16. Bellarmine once held probable and prooved it or really only into that place or Region of Hell which you call Limbum Patrum and then but vertually from thence into the Lower Hell to which k Bellar. Recog p. 11. Bellarmine reduces himselfe and gives his reason because it is the l Sequuntur enim Tho. p. 3. Q. 52. A. 2. common Opinion of the Schoole Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in the Creed and believes them without farther Dispute and in that sense which the ancient Primitive Fathers of the Church agreed in And yet if any in the Church of England should not be throughly resolved in the sense of this Article Is it not as lawfull for them to say I conceive thus or thus of it yet if any other way of his Descent be found truer then this I deny it not but as yet I know no other as it was for m Non est pertinaciter asserendum quin Anima Christi per alium modum nobis ignotum potuerit descendere ad Infernum Nec nos negamus alium modum esse for sit an veriorem sed fatemur nos illum ignor arc Durand in 3. sent Dist. 22. q. 3. Nu. 9. Durand to say it and yet not impeach the Foundation of the Faith F. The Bishop said That M. Rogers was but a private man But said I if M. Rogers writing as he did by publike Authority be accounted only a private man c. B. I said truth when I said M. Rogers was a private § 13 man And I take it you will not allow every speech of every man though allowed by Authority to have his Bookes Printed to be the Doctrine of the Church of Rome * And this was an Ancient fault too for S. Augustine checks at it in his time Noli colligere calumnias ex Episcoporum scriptis sive Hillarii sive Cypriani Agrippini Primò quia hoc genus literarum ab Authoritate Canonis distinguendum est Non enim sic leguntur tanquam it a ex iis testimonium proferatur ut contrà sentire non liceat sicubi fortè aliter sentirent quà m veritas postulat S. Aug. Ep. 48. c. And yet these were farre greater men in their generations then M. Rogers was This hath beene oft complained of on both sides The imposing particular mens assertions upon the Church yet I see you meane not to leave it And surely as Controversies are now handled by some of your party at this day I may not say it is the sense of the Article in hand but I have long thought it a kinde os descent into Hell to be conversant in them I would the Authors would take heed in time and not seeke to blinde the People or cast a mist before evident Truth least it cause a finall descent to that place of Torment But since you will hold this course Stapleton was of greater note with you then M. Rogers his exposition of Notes upon the Articles of the Church of England is with us And as he so his Relection And is it the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which Stapleton affirmes †Stapl. Cont. 5. q. 5. A. 1. The Scripture is silent that Christ descended into Hell and that there is a Catholike and an Apostolike Church If it be then what will become of the Popes Supremacie over the whole Church Shall he have his Power over the Catholike Church given him expresly in Scripture in the a S. Mat. 16. 19. Keyes to enter and in b S. Ioh. 21. 15. Pasce
Scripture or not directly to be concluded out of it Vpon this Negative ground A. C. inferres againe That the Baptisme of Infants is not expresly at least not evidently affirmed in Scripture nor directly at least not A. C. p. 49. demonstratively concluded out of it In which case he professes he would gladly know what can be answered to defend this doctrine to be a Point of Faith necessary for the salvation of Infants And in Conclusion professes he cannot easily guesse what Answer can be made unlesse we will acknowledge Authority of church-Church-Tradition necessary in this Case And truly since A. C. is so desirous of an Answer I will give it freely And first in the Generall I am no way satisfied with A. C. his Addition not expresly at least not evidently what means he If he speake of the Letter of the Scripture then whatsoever is expresly is evidently in the Scripture and so his Addition is vaine If he speake of the Meaning of the Scripture then his Addition is cunning For many things are Expresly in Scripture which yet in their Meaning are not evidently there And what e're hee meane my words are That our Negative Articles refute that which is not affirmed in Scripture without any Addition of Expresly or Evidently And he should have taken my words as I used them I like nor change nor Addition nor am I bound to either of A. C s. making And I am as little satisfied with his next Addition nor directly at least not demonstratively concluded out of it For are there not many things in Good Logicke concluded directly which yet are not concluded Demonstratively Surely there are For to be directly or indirectly concluded flowes from the Moode or Forme of the Syllogisme To be demonstratively concluded flowes from the Matter or Nature of the Propositions If the Propositions be Prime and necessary Truths the Syllogisme is demonstrative and scientificall because the Propositions are such If the Propositions be probable onely though the Syllogisme be made in the clearest Moode yet is the Conclusion no more The Inference or Consequence indeed is cleare and necessary but the Consequent is but probable or topicall as the Propositions were Now my words were onely for a Direct Conclusion and no more though in this case I might give A. C. his Caution For Scripture here is the thing spoken of And Scripture being a Principle and every Text of Scripture confessedly a Principle among all Christians whereof no man a Habitus enim Pidâ—…i 〈◊〉 se habet in ordine ad Theologiam siâ—…ut se habit Habitus intelleclus ad Scâ—…s humnas M. Canus L 2. de Loc. c. 8. desires any farther proofe I would faine know why that which is plainely and apparently that is by direct Consequence proved out of Scripture is not Demonstratively or Scientifically proved If at least he think there can be any Demonstration in Divinity and if there can be none why did he add Demonstratively Next in Particular I answer to the Instance A. C. p. 49. which A. C. makes concerning the Baptisme of Infants That it may be concluded directly and let A. C. judge whether not demonstratively out of Scripture both that Infants ought to be baptized and that Baptisme is necessary to their Salvation And first that Baptisme is necessary to the Salvation of Infants in the ordinary way of the Church without binding God to the use and meanes of that Sacrament to which he hath bound us †S. Aug. expresly of the Baptisme of Infants l. 1. de Pecâ—…ato Meâ—… Râ—…ss c. 30. Et 〈◊〉 2. c 27. Et L. 3. de Aâ—… ejus Origine c 13. Nay they of the Romane Party which urge the Baptisme of Infants as a matter of Faith and yet not to be concluded out of Scripture when they are not in eager pursuit of this controversie but look upon truth with a more indifferent eye confesse as much even the Learned st of them as we ask Adâ—…â—…dum autem Salvato em dum dâ—…cit Nisi quis renatus c. neâ—…ssitatem 〈◊〉 omnibus at prâ—…de Parvulos debere renasâ—…i ex aquâ—… Spiritu Iansen Harm in Euang. c. 20. So here 's Baptismo Necessary for Infants and that Necessity imposed by our Saviour and not by the Church onely Hâ—… nâ—…llo alio quà m hoc Scripturae testimonio probare possunt Infantes essé baptizandos Mald. in S. Ioh. 3. 5. So Maldonat confesses that the Hereticks we know whom he meanes can prove the Baptisme of Infants by no Testimony of Scripture but this which speech implies That by this Testimony of Scripture it is and can be proved and therefore not by Church-Tradition only And I would faine know why Bellâ—… L. 1. de Baptism C. 8. §. 5. should bring three Arguments out of Scripture to prove the Baptisme of Infants Habemus in Scripturis tria argumenta c. if Baptisme cannot be proved at all out of Scripture but only by the Tradition of the Church And yet this is not Bellarmine's way alone but Suaâ—… in Tho. p. 3 q 68. Disput. 25. Sect. 1. §. 2. Ex Scripturâ possunt vaâ—… Argumenta sumi ad consirmandum Paed 〈◊〉 Et fiâ—… c And Gâ—…g de 〈◊〉 L. de Bapt s. Parâ—…um c. 2. §. 1. And the Pope himselfe Innocent 3. L. 3 Dâ—… 〈◊〉 it 42. Cap Majores And they all jump with S. Amb. L. 10. Epist. 84. ad Demâ—…dem â—…nem who expresly assirmes it Paedobaptismum esse Constitutionem Salvator is And proves it out of S. Joh. 3. 5. is expresse in S. Iohn 3. Except a man be borne againe of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdome of God So no Baptisme no Entrance Nor can Infants creepe in any other ordinary way And this is the received Opinion of all the Ancient Church of Christ a Infanâ—…s â—…os esse Originalis peccati iâ—…o baptizandos esse Antiquam Fidei Regulam vocat S. Aug. Ser. 8. de ver Apos c. 8. Et nâ—…mo vobis susurret doctrinas aliâ—…nas hoâ—… Ecclesia semper habuit semper tâ—…nuit hoc a majorum side recepit c. S. Aug. Ser. 10. de verb. Apost c. 2. S. Ambâ—…os L. 10. Ep. 84. cirâ—…a medium Et S. Chrysost. Hom. dâ—… Adam Eva. Hoc praedicat Ecclesia Catholica ubique dissusa And secondly That Infants ought to bee baptized is first plaine by evident and Direct Consequence out of Scripture For if there be no Salvation for Infants in the ordinary way of the Church but by Baptisme and this appeare in Scripture as it doth then out of all Doubt the Consequence is most evident out of that Scripture That Infants are to be baptized that their Salvation may be certaine For they which cannot b Egi causam corum qui pro se loqui non possunt c. S. Aug. Serm. 8. de verb. Apost c. 8. help themselves must not be left onely to Extraordinary Helpes of which wee have no
assurance and for which we have no warrant at all in Scripture while wee in the meane time neglect the ordinary way and meanes commanded by Christ. Secondly 't is very neare an Expression in Scripture it selfe For when S. Peter had ended that great Sermon of his Act. 2. he Act. 2. 38 39. applies two comforts unto them Vers. 38. Amend your lives and be baptized and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost And then Verse 39. hee inferres For the promise is made to you and to your children The Promise what Promise What Why the Promise of Sanctification by the Holy Ghost By what meanes Why by Baptisme For 't is expresly Be baptized and ye shall receive And as expresly This promise is made to you and to your children And therefore A. C. may finde it if he will That the Baptisme of Infants may be directly concluded out of Scripture For some of his owne Party a Nullum excipit non Iudaeum non Gentilem non Adultum non Puerum c. Ferus in Act. 2. 39. Ferus and b Et ad Filios vestros quare debent consentire quum ad usum rationis perveniunt ad implenda promissa in Baptismo c. Salm. Tract 14. upon the place Salmeron could both find it there And so if it will doe him any pleasure he hath my Answer which he saith he would be glad to know 'T is true a Bellar. L. 4. de Verbo Dei c. 9. §. 5. Bellarmine presses a maine Place out of S. Augustine and he urges it hard S. b S. Aug. Gen. ad Lit. c. 23. Consuetudo Matris Ecclesia in Baptizandis parvulis nequaquam spernenda est nec omninò credenda nisi Apostolica esset Traditio Augustine's words are The Custome of our Mother the Church in Baptizing Infants is by no meanes to be contemned or thought superfluous nor yet at all to be believed unlesse it were an Apostolicall Tradition The Place is truly cited but seemes a great deale stronger than indeed it is For first 't is not denyed That this is an Apostolicall Tradition and therefore to be believed But secondly not therefore onely Nor doth S. Augustine say so nor doth Bellarmine presse it that way The truth is it would have beene somewhat difficult to finde the Collection out of Scripture onely for the Baptisme of Infants since they do not actually believe And therefore S. Augustine is at nec credenda nisi that this Custome of the Church had not been to be believed had it not been an Apostolicall Tradition But the Tradition being Apostolicall led on the Church easily to see the necessary Deduction out of Scripture And this is not the least use of Tradition to lead the Church into the true meaning of those things which are found in Scripture though not obvious to every eye there And that this is S. Augustine's meaning is manifest by himself who best knew it For when he had said c Cur Antiquam fidei Regulam frangere conaris S. Aug. Ser. 8. de ver Apos c. 8. Hoc Ecclesia semper tenuit Ib. Ser. 10. c. 2. as he doth That to baptize children is Antiqua fidei Regula the Ancient Rule of Faith and the constant Tenet of the Church yet he doubts not to collect and deduce it out of Scripture also For when Pelagius urged That Infants needed not to be baptized because they had no Originall Sin S. Augustine relies not upon the Tenet of the Church only but argues from the Text thus a Quid necessarium habuit Infans Christum si non aegrotat S. Matth. 9. 12. Quid est quod dicis nisi ut non accedant ad Iesum Sed tibi clamat Iesus Sine Parvulos venire ad me S. Aug. in the fore-cited places What need have Infants of Christ if they be not sicke For the sound need not the Physitian S. Mat. 9. And againe is not this said by Pelagius ut non accedant ad Iesum That Infants may not come to their Saviour Sed clamat Iesus but Iesus cries out Suffer Little ones to come unto me * S. Marc. 10. 14. S. Mar. 10. And all this is fully acknowledged by b Nullus est Scriptor tam vetustus qui non ejus Originem ad Apostolorum seculum pro certo referat Calv. 4. Inst. c. 16 §. 8. Calvine Namely That all men acknowledge the Baptisme of Infants to descend from Apostolicall Tradition †Miserrimum alylum foret si pro Defensione Paedubaptismi ad nudam Ecclesiae authoritatem fugere cogeremur Calv. 4. Inst. c. 8. §. 16. And yet that it doth not depend upon the bare and naked Authority of the Church Which he speakes not in regard of Tradition but in relation to such proofe as is to be made by necessary Consequence out of Scripture over and above Tradition As for Tradition * §. 15. Num. 1. A. C. p. 49. I have said enough for that and as much as A. C. where 't is truly Apostolicall And yet if any thing will please him I will add this concerning this particular The Baptizing of Infants That the Church received this by c Orig in Rom 6 6. tom 2 p. 543. Pro hoc Ecclesia ab Apâ—…stolis Traditionem suscepit etiaÌ„ parvulis BaptismuÌ„ dare Et S. Aug. Ser. 10. de verb. Apos c. 2. Hoc Ecclesia à MajoruÌ„ side percepit And it is to be observed that neither of these Fathers nor i believe any other say that the Church received it à Traditione solâ or à Majorum side sola as if Tradition 〈◊〉 exclude collection of it out of Scripture Tradition from the Apostles By Tradition And what then May it not directly be concluded out of Scripture because it was delivered to the Church by way of Tradition I hope A. C. will never say so For certainly in Doctrinall things nothing so likely to be a Tradition Apostolicall as that which hath a * Yea and Bellarmine himself avers Omnes Traditiones c. contineri in Scripturis in universali L. 4. de verb. Det non scripto c. 10. §. Sic etiam And S. Basil. Serm. de fide approves only those Agrapha quae non sunt aliena à piâ secunduÌ„ ScripturaÌ„ Sententid root and a Foundation in Scripture For Apostles cannot write or deliver contrary but subordinate and subservient things F. I asked how he knew Scripture to be Scripture and in particular Genesis Exodus c. These are believed to be Scripture yet not proved out of any Place of Scripture The Bishop said That the Books of Scripture are Principles to be supposed and needed not to be proved B. I did never love too curious a search into § 16 that which might put a man into a wheele and circle him so long betweene proving Scripture by Tradition and Tradition by Scripture till the Divell finde a meanes to dispute him into Infidelity and make him believe neither I
other And even in those Fundamentall Things in which the Whole Vniversall Church neither doth nor can Erre yet even there her Authority is not Divine because She delivers those supernatural Truths by Promise of Assistance yet tyed to Meanes And not by any speciall Immediate Revelation which is necessarily required to the very least Degree of Divine Authority And therefore our †Hook l. 3. §. 9 VVorthies do not only say but prove That all the Churches Constitutions are of the nature of Humane Law a Stapl. Relect. Con. 4. q. 3. A. 1. 2. And some among you not unworthy for their Learning prove it at large That all the Churches Testimony or voyce or Sentence call it what you will is but suo modo or aliquo modo not simply but in a manner Divine Yea and A. C. himselfe A. C. p. 51. after all his debate comes to that and no further That the Tradition of the Church is at least in some sort Divine and Infallible Now that which is Divine but in a sort or manner bee it the Churches manner is aliquo modo non Divina in a sort not Divine But this Great Principle of Faith the Ground and Proofe of whatsoever else is of Faith cannot stand firme upon a Proofe that is and is not in a manner and not in a manner Divine As it must if we have no other Anchor then the Externall Tradition of the Church to lodge it upon and hold it steddy in the midst of those waves which daily beate upon it Now here A. C. confesses expresly That to prove the Bookes of Scripture to bee Divine we must bee A. C. p. 49. warranted by that which is Infallible Hee confesses farther that there can be no sufficient Infallible Proofe of A. C. p. 50. this but Gods Word written or unwritten And he gives his Reason for it Because if the Proofe be meerely Humane and Fallible the Science or Faith which A. C. p. 51. is built upon it can be no better So then this is agreed on by mee yet leaving other men to travell by their owne way so bee they can come to make Scripture thereby Infallible That Scripture must bee knowne to bee Scripture by a sufficient Infallible Divine Proofe And that such Proofe can be nothing but the Word of God is agreed on also by me Yea and agreed on for me it shall be likewise that Gods Word may be written and unwritten For Cardinall †Verbum Dei non est tale nec habet ullam Authoritatem quia scriptum est in membranis sed quia à Deo profectum est Bellar. l. 4 de Verb. Dei 2 §. Ecclesiasticae Traditiones Bellarmine tells us truly that it is not the writing or printing that makes Scripture the Word of God but it is the Prime Vnerring Essentiall Truth God himselfe uttering and revealing it to his Church that makes it Verbum Dei the Word of God And this Word of God is uttered to men either immediately by God himselfe Father Sonne and Holy Ghost and so 't was to the Prophets and Apostles Or mediately either by Angels to whom God had spoken first and so the Law was given * Lex ordinata per Angelos in manu 〈◊〉 Gal. 3 19. Gal. 3. and so also the Message was delivered to the Blessed Virgin a S. Luk. 1. 0. S. Luke 1. or by the Prophets b The Holy Ghost c. which spake by the Prophets in Symb. Nicen. and Apostles and so the Scriptures were delivered to the Church But their being written gave them no Authority at all in regard of themselves VVritten or unwritten the VVord was the same But it was written that it might bee the better c Nam Psiudoprophetae etiam viventibus adâ—…c Apostolis multas fingebant corruptelas sub â—…oc praetextu titulo quasi ab Apostolis vivà veccessent traditae propter hanc ipsâ—…m causam Apostoli Doctrinam suam coeperunt Literis comprehendere Ecclesiis commendare Chem. Exam. Concil Trid. de Traditionibus sub octavo genere Tradit And so also Iansâ—…n Comment in S. Ioh 5. 47. Sicut enim firmius est quod mandatur Literis ita est culpabiliâ—…s majus non credere Scriptis quam non credere Verbis preserved and continued with the more integrity to the use of the Church and the more faithfully in our d Labilis est memoria ideo indigâ—…mus Scripturâ Dicendum quod verum est sed hoc non habet nisi ex inundantia peccatorum Hent a Gand. Sum. p. 1 Ar. 8. q. 4. sine Christus ipse de pectore morituro Testamentum transfert in tabulas diù duraturas Optat. L 5. Christus ipse non transtulit sed ex Optati sew entiâ Ejus Inspiratione si non Iussâ—… Apostoli transtulerunt Memories And you have been often enough told were truth and not the maintaining of a party the thing you seek for that if you will shew us any such unwritten word of God delivered by his Prophets and Apostles we will acknowledge it to be Divine and Infallible So written or unwritten that shall not stumble us But then A. C. must not tell us at least not thinke we shall swallow it into our Beliefe that every thing which he sayes is the unwritten VVord of God is so indeed I know Bellarmine hath written a whole Booke * Bellar. L. 4. De Verbo Dei non script De Verbo Dei non scripto of the Word of God not written in which he handles the Controversie concerning Traditions And the Cunning is to make his weaker Readers believe that all that which He and his are pleased to call Traditions are by and by no lesse to be received and honoured then the unwritten word of God ought to be Whereas 't is a thing of easie knowledge That the unwritten VVord of God and Tradition are not Convertible Termes that is are not all one For there are many Vnwritten VVords of God which were never delivered over to the Church for ought appeares And there are many Traditions affirmed at least to be such by the Church of Rome which were never warranted by any unwritten Word of God First That there are many unwritten words of God which were never delivered over to the Church is manifest For when or where were the words which Christ spake to his Apostles during the a Acts 1. 3. forty dayes of his Conversing with them after his Resurrection first delivered over to the Church or what were the unwritten Words He then spake If neither Heâ—… nor His Apostles or Evangelists have delivered them to the Church the Church ought not to deliver them to her Children Or if she doe b Annunciare aliquid Christianis Catholicis praeter id quod acceperunt nunquam licuit nusquam licet nunquam licebit Vincen. Lir. c. 14. Et praeâ—…ipit nihil aliu â—…innovari nisi quo 〈◊〉
be because it rests upon Divine Authority which cannot deceive whereas Knowledge or at least he that thinks he knowes is not ever certaine in Deductions from Principles †§. 16. 〈◊〉 13. But the Evidence is not so deere For it is c Heb. 11. 1. of things not seene in regard of the Object and in regard of the Subject thatsees it is in d 1 Cor. 13. 12. And A. C. confesses p. 52. That this very thing in Question may be known infallibly when 't is knowne but obscurely Et Scotus in 3. Dist. 23 q. 1. fol. 41. B. Hoc modo sacile est videre quomodo â—…ides est cum aenigmate obscuritate Quia Habitus Fidei non credit Articulum esse verum ex Evidentia Objâ—…cti sed propter hoc quod assentit veracitati infâ—…ndentis Habitum in hoc revelantis Credibilia aenigmate in a Glasse or darke speaking Now God doth not require a full Demonstrative Knowledge in us that the Scripture is his Word and therefore in his Providence hath kindled in it no Light for that but he requires our Faith of it and such a certaine Demonstration as may fit that And for that he hath left sufficient Light in Scripture to Reason and Grace meeting where the soule is morally prepared by the Tradition of the Church unlesse you be of Bellarmine's e Bellar. l. 3. de Eccles. c. 14. Credere 〈◊〉 esse divinaâ—… Scripturas non est omninò necessarium ad salutem I will not breake my Discourse to risâ—…e this speech of Bellarmine it is bad enough in the best sense that favour it selfe can give it For if he meane by omninò that it is not altogether or simply necessary to believe there is Divine Scripture and a written Word of God that 's false that being granted which is among all Christians That there is a Scripture And God would never have given a Supernaturall unnecessary thing And if he meanes by omninò that it is not in any wise necessary then it is sensibly false For the greatest upholders of Tradition that ever were made the Scripture very necessary in all the Ages of the Church So it was necessary because it was given and given because God thought it necessary Besides upon Romane Grounds this I thinke will follow That which the Tradition of the present Church delivers as necessary to believe is omninò necessary to salvation But that there are Divine Scriptures the Tradition of the present Church delivers as necessary to believe Therefore to believe there are Divine Scriptures is omninò be the sense of the word what it can necessary to Salvation So Bellarmine is herein foule and unable to stand upon his owne ground And he is the more partly because he avouches this Proposition for truth after the New Testament written And partly because he might have seene the state of this Proposition carefully examined by Gandavo and distinguished by Times Sum. p. 1. A. 8. q. 4. fine Opinion That to believe there are any Divine Scriptures is not omninò necessary to Salvation The Authority which you pretend against this is out of a Lib. 1. §. 14. Hooker Of things necessary the very chiefest is to know what Bookes we are bound to esteeme Holy which Point is confessed impossible for the Scripture it selfe to teach Of this b Protest Apol. Tract 1. §. 10. N. 3. Brierly the Store-house for all Priests that will be idle and yet seeme well read tels us That c L. 2. §. 4. Hooker gives a very sensible Demonstration It is not the Word of God which doth or possibly can assure us that wee doe well to thinke it is His Word for if any one Booke of Scripture did give Testimony to all yet still that Scripture which giveth credit to the rest would require another to give credit unto it Nor could we ever come to any pause to rest our assurance this way so that unlesse beside Scripture there were something that might assure c. And d L. 2. §. 7. L. 3. §. 8. this he acknowledgeth saith Brierly is the Authority of Gods Church Certainely Hooker gives a true and a sensible Demonstration but Brierly wants fidelity and integrity in citing him For in the first place Hooker's speech is Scripture it selfe cannot teach this nor can the Truth say that Scripture it selfe can It must needs ordinarily have Tradition to prepare the minde of a man to receive it And in the next place where he speaks so sensibly That Scripture cannot beare witnesse to it selfe nor one part of it to another that is grounded upon Nature which admits no created thing to bee witnesse to it selfe and is acknowledged by our Saviour e S. Ioh. 5. 31. He speakes of himselfe as man If I beare witnesse to my selfe my witnesse is not true that is is not of force to bee reasonably accepted for Truth But then it is more then manifest S. Ioh. 8. 13. that Hooker delivers his Demonstration of Scripture alone For if Scripture hath another proofe nay many other proofes to usher it and lead it in then no question it can both prove and approve it selfe His words are So that unlesse besides Scripture there be c. Besides Scripture therefore he excludes not Scripture though he call for another Proofe to lead it in and help in assurance namely Tradition which no man that hath his braines about him denies In the two other Places Brierly falsifies shamefully for folding up all that Hooker sayes in these words This other meanes to assure us besides Scripture is the Authority of Gods Church he wrinkles that Worthy Authour desperately and shrinkes up his meaning For in the former place abused by Brierly no man can set a better state of the Question betweene Scripture and Tradition then Hooker doth a L. 2. §. 7. His words are these The Scripture is the ground of our Beliefe The Authority of man that is the Name he gives to Tradition is the Key which opens the doore of entrance into the knowledge of the Scripture I aske now when a man is entred and hath viewed a house and upon viewing likes it and upon liking resolves unchangeably to dwell there doth he set up his Resolution upon the Key that let him in No sure but upon the goodnesse and Commodiousnesse which he sees in the House And this is all the difference that I know betweene us in this Point In which do you grant as you ought to do that we resolve our Faith into Scripture as the Ground and we will never deny that Tradition is the Key that lets us in In the latter place Hooker is as plaine as constant to himselfe and Truth b L. 3. §. 8. His words are The first outward Motive leading men so to esteeme of the Scripture is the Authority of Gods Church c. But afterwards the more wee bestow our Labour in reading or learning the Mysteries thereof the
Scripture is first yeelded unto For all other necessary Poynts of Divinity may by undenyable Discourse bee inferred out of Scripture it selfe once admitted but this concerning the Authority of Scripture not possibly But must either be prooved by Revelation which is not now to bee expected Or presupposed and granted as manifest in it selfe like the Principles of natâ—…rall knowledge which Reasm alone will never Grant Or by Tradition of the Church both Prime and Present with all other Ratinall Helpes preceding or accompanying the internall Light in Scripture it selfe which though it give Light enough for Faith to believe yet Light enough it gives not to bee a convincing Reason and proofe for knowledge And this is it which makes the very entrance into Divinity inaccessible to those men who standing high in the Opinion of their owne wisdome will believe nothing but that which is irrefragably prooved from Rationall Principles For as Christ requires a Deniall of a mans selfe that he may be able to follow him S. Luke 9 So as great a part as any of S. Luke 9. 23. this Denyall of his Whole-selfe for so it must bee is the denyall of his Vnderstanding and the composing of the unquiet search of this Grand Inquisitor into the Secrets of Him that made it and the over-ruleing the doubtfulnesse of it by the fervency of the a Intellectus Credentis determinatur per Voluntatem non per Rationem Tho. 2. 2. q. 2. A. 1. ad tertium And what power the Will hath in Case of mens Believing or not Believing is manifest Jer. 44. But this is spoken of the Will compared with the Vnderstandinâ—… onely leaving the Operations of Grace free over Both. Will. Seventhly That the knowledge of the Supreme Pun. 7. Cause of all which is God is most remote and the most difficult thing Reason can have to do with The Quod sit That there is a God b Communis enim sententia est Patrum Theologorum aliorum demonstrari posse naturali ratione Deum esse Sed à postâ—…riori per effectus Sic Tho. p. 1. q. 2. A. 2. Et Damasâ—… L. 1. Orth. Fid. c. 3. Almain in 3. sent D. 24 q. 1. But what may be demonstrated by naturall reason by natural light may the same be known And so the Apostle himselfe Rom. 1. 20. Invisibilia Dei à Creatur â mundi per ca quae facta sunt intellecta conspiciuntur And so Calvin most clearely L. 1. Inst c. 5. §. 1. Aperire Oculos nequeunt quin aspicere cum coguntur though Bellarmine would needes be girding at him L. 4. de Grat. Lib. Arbit c 2. Videtur autem Ratio iis quae apparent attestari Omnes enim homines de Diis ut ille loquitur habent existimationem Arist. L. 1. de Coelo T. 22. bleare-eyed Reason can see But the c Damasc. L. 1. Ortho. Fid. c. 4. Quid sit what that God is is infinitely beyond all the fathoms of Reason He is a Light indeed but such as no mans Reason can come at for the Brightnes d 1 Tim. 6. 16. Et ne Vâ—…stigium sic accedendi 〈◊〉 S. Aug. nisi augeas imaginari ne cogitationis lucem soliâ—… innumerabiliter vel quid aliud c. L. 8 de Tâ—…in c. 2 Solus modus accedendi Preces sunt Boet. de consolâ—… Philos. L. 5. prosa 3. 1 Tim. 6. If any thing therefore bee attainable in this kinde it must bee by c Prater Scientias Philosophicas necesse est ut ponatur alia Scientia 〈◊〉 revelata de iis quae hominis captum 〈◊〉 Tho. p. 1. q. 1 A. 1. Revelation And that must bee from Himselfe for none can Reveale but f And therefore Bid is exâ—…sse That God could not reveale any thing that is to come nisi illud esset a Deo praesâ—…um sâ—…u praevisum i. e. unlesse God did fully comprehend that which He doth reveale Biel in 3. sent D. 239. 2. A. 1. hee that Comprehends And g Nullus Intellectus Creatus videndo Deum potest cogno 〈◊〉 omâ—…ia quae Deus sacit vel potest saccre Hoc enim esset Comprehendere ejus virtutem c. Tho. p. 1. q. 12. A. 8. C. Ad Argumentum Quod Deus ut Speculum est Et quod Omnia quae sieri possunt in co resplendent Respondet Thom. Quod non est necessarium quod videns speculum omnia in speculo videat nisi speculum visu suo comprâ—…hendat Tho. p. 1. q. 12. A. 8. a 12. Now no man can comprehend this Glasse which is God Himselfe none doth or can comprehend God but Himselfe And when he doth Reveale yet He is no farther discernable then h Deus enim est Speculum voluntarium revelans quae quod vult alicui beato non est Speculum naturalitèr repraesentans omnia Biel. Suppl in 4. Sent. D. 49. q. 3. propos 3. Himself pleases Now since i For if Reason well put to its search did not finde this out how came Arist. to assirme this by rationa l disquisition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Restat ut mens sola extrinsecùs accedat eaque sola divina sit nibil enim cum ejus Actione communicat Actio corporalis Aâ—…st l. 2. de gen Anim. c. 3. This cannot be spoken of the Soule were it mortall And therefore I must needs be of Paulus Benius his opinion who sayes plainly and proves it too Turpiâ—…r assixam à quibâ—…sdam Aristoteli Mortalitatis Animae Opinionem Benius in Timaeum Platonis Decad. 2ae L. 3. Reason teaches that the Soule of man is immortal and k For it Reason did not dictate this also whence is it that Aristotle disputes of the way and meanes of attaining it L. 1. Moral c. 9. And takes on him to proove That Felicity is rather an Honourable then a Commendable thing c. 12. And after all this he addes Deo 〈◊〉 tota vita est hominibus autem catenus quatenus similitudo quaedam ejusmodi Operationis ipsis in est Arist. l. 10. Moral c. 8. capeable of Felicity And since that Felicity consists in the Contemplation of the highest Cause w ch againe is God himselfe And since Christ therin Confirmes that Dictate that mans eternal Happines is to know God and Him whom he hath sent S. k S. Iohn 17. 3. Ultima Beatitudo hominis consistit in quadam supernaturali visione Dei Ad hanc autem visiâ—…m Homo pertingere non potest nisi per modum Addisâ—…is à Deo Doctore Omnis qui audit a Patre didicit S. Iohn 6. 45. Thom. 2. 2. q. 2. A. 3. in c. Ioh. 17. And since nothing can put us into the way of attaining to that Contemplation but some Revelation of Himselfe and of the way to himselfe I say since all this is so It cannot reasonably be thought by any prudent man that the All-wise God should create man with a Desire of
esso non potest hos esse Libros Canonicos Wal. Doct. fid l. 2. a. 2. c. 20. cui subesse non potest falsum into which no falshood can come but by a Divine Testimony This Testimony is absolute in Scripture it selfe delivered by the Apostles for the Word of God and so sealed to our Soules by the operation of the Holy Ghost That which makes way for this as an b Canus Loc. l. 2 c. 8. facit Ecclesiam Causam sine quanon Introduction and outward motive is the Tradition of the present Church but that neither simply Divine nor sufficient alone into which we may resolve our Faith but only as is †§. 16. before expressed And now to come close to the Particular The time was before this miserable Rent in the Church of Christ which I thinke no true Christian can looke upon but with a bleeding heart that you and Wee were all of One Beliefe That beliefe was tainted in tract and corruption of times very deepely A Division was made yet so that both Parts held the Creed and other Common Principles of Beliefe Of these this was one of the greatest †Inter omnes penè constat aut certè id quod satis est inter me illos cum quibus nunc agitur convenit hoc c. Sic in aliâ Causá cont Manichaos S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccl. Cath. c. 4. That the Scripture is the VVord of God For our beliefe of all things contained in it depends upon it Since this Division there hath beene nothing done by us to discredit this Principle Nay We have given it all honour and ascribed unto it more sufficiency even to the containing of all things necessary to salvation with * Vin. Lir. cont Hares c. 2. Satis super que enough and more then enough which your selves have not done do not And for begetting and setling a Beliefe of this Principle we goe the same way with you and a better besides The same way with you Because we allow the Tradition of the present Church to be the first induceing Motive to embrace this Principle onely we cannot goe so farre in this way as you to make the present Tradition alwayes an Infallible VVord of God unwritten For this is to goe so farre in till you be out of the way For Tradition is but a Lane in the Church it hath an end not only to receive us in but another after to let us out into more open and richer ground And We go a better way then you Because after we are moved and prepared and induced by Tradition we resolve our Faith into that Written Word and God delivering it in which we finde materially though not in Termes the very Tradition that led us thither And so we are sure by Divine Authority that we are in the way because at the end we find the way proved And doe what can be done you can never settle the Faith of man about this great Principle till you rise to greater assurance then the Present Church alone can give And therefore once againe to that known place of S. Augustine * Contr. Epist. Fund c. 5. The words of the Father are Nisi commoveret Vnlesse the Authority of the Church mooved me but not alone but with other Motives eâ—…se it were not commovere to move together And the other Motives are Resolvers though this be Leader Now since we goe the same way with you so farre as you goe right and a better way then you where you go wrong we need not admit any other Word of God then We doc And this ought to remaine as a Presupposed Principle among all Christians and not so much as come into this Question about the sufficiency of Scripture betweene you and us But you say that F. From this the Lady called us and desiring to heare VVhether the Bishop would grant the Romane Church to be the Right Church The B. granted That it was B One occasion which mooved Tertullian to § 20 write his Booke de Praescript adversùs Haereticos was That he * Pamel in Summar Lib Uiaens Disputationibus â—…ihil ant parum profici saw little or no Profit come by Disputations Sure the Ground was the same then and now It was not to deny that Disputation is an Opening of the Vnderstanding a sifting out of Truth it was not to affirme that any such Disquisition is in and of it selfe unprofitable If it had S. Stephen a Acts 6 9. would not have disputed with the Cyrenians nor S. Paul with the b Acts. 9. 29. Grecians first and then with the Iewes c Acts 19. 17. and all Commers No sure it was some Abuse in the Disputants that frustrated the good of the Disputation And one Abuse in the Disputants is a Resolution to hold their own though it â—…e by unworthy means and disparagement d Debilitaetur generosa indoles conjecta in argutias Sen. Aep 48. of truth And so I finde it here For as it is true that this Question was asked so it is altogether false that it was asked in this * Here A. C. hath nothing to say but that the Iesuite did not affirme That the Lady askâ—…d this Question in this or any other precise forme No why the words preceding are the Iesuites own Therefore if these were not the Ladies words he wrongs her not I him forme or so Answâ—…red There is a great deale of Difference especially as Romanists handle the Question of the Church between The Church and A Church and there is some betvveene a True Church and a Right Church vvhich is the vvord you use but no man else that I knovv I am sure not I. For The Church may import in our Language The only true Church and perhaps as some of you seeme to make it the Root and the Ground of the Catholike And this I never did grant of the Romane Church nor ever meane to doe But A Church can imply no more then that it is a member of the Whole And this I never did nor ever will deny if it fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a True Church I granted also but not a Right as you impose upon me For Ens and Verum Being and True are convertible one with another and every thing that hath a Being is truly that Being which it is in truth of Substance But this word Right is not so used but is referd more properly to perfection in Conditions And in this sense every thing that hath a true and reall Being is not by and by Right in the Conâ—…itions of it A man that is most dishonest and unworthy the name a very Thiefe if you will is a True man in the verity of his Essence as he is a Creature endued with Reason for this none can steale from him nor he from himselfe but Death But he is not therefore a Right or an upright man And a Church that is
the Protestants had to make that Rent or Division if I did not grant that they made it Why truly in this reasonable demand I will satisfie him I did it partly because I had granted in the generall that Corruption in Manners was no sufficient cause of Separation of one Particular Church from another and therefore it lay upon me at least to Name in generall what was And partly because he and his Partie will needes have it so that we did make the Separation And therefore though I did not grant it yet amisse I thought it could not be to Declare by way of Supposition that if the Protestants did at first Separate from the Church of Rome they had reason so to doe For A. C. himselfe confesses A. C. p. 56. That Error in Doctrine of the Faith is a just Cause of Separation so just as that no Cause is just but that Now had I leasure to descend into Particulars or will to make the Rent in the Church wider 't is no hard matter to proove that the Church of Rome hath erred in the Doctrine of Faith and dangerously too And I doubt I shall afterwards descend to Particulars A. C. his Importunity forcing me to it F. Which when the Generall Church would not Reforme it was lawfull for Particular Churches to Reforme themselves B. Is it then such a strange thing that a Particular § 24 Church may reforme it selfe if the Generall will not I had thought and do so still That in Point of Reformation of either Manners or Doctrine it is lawfull for the Church sinoe Christ to doe as the Church before Christ did and might do The Church before Christ consisted of Iewes and Proselytes This Church came to have a Separation upon a most ungodly Policie of a 3. Reg. 12. 27. Ieroboam's so that it never peeced together againe To a Common Councell to reforme all they would not come Was it not lawfull for Iudah to reforme her selfe when Israel would not joyne Sure it was or els the Prophet deceives me that sayes expresly b Hos. 4. 15. Though Israel transgresse yet let not Iudah sinne And S. Hierome c Super Haereticis prona intelligentia est S. Hier Ibid. expounds it of this very particular sinne of Heresie and Errour in Religion Nor can you say that d Non tamen cessavit Deus populum hunc arguere per Prophetas Nam ibi extiter unt Magni illi insignes Prophetae Elias Elizaeus c. S. Aug. L. 17. de Civit. Dei c. 22. Multi religiosè intra se Dei cultum habebant c. De quo numero eorumvè Posteris septem illa miâ—…ia fuisse statuo qui in Persecutione sub Achabo Deum sibi ab Idololatriâ immunes reservârunt nec genua ante Baal flexerunt Fran. Monceius L. 1. de Vit. Aureo c. 12. Israel from the time of the Separation was not a Church for there were true Prophets in it e 3. Reg. 17. sub Achabo Elias and f 4. Reg. 3. sub Iehoram filio Achabi Elizaeus and others and g 3. Reg. 19. 18. thousands that had not bowed knees to Baal And there was salvation for these which cannot be in the Ordinary way where there is no Church And God threatens h Hos. 9. 17. to cast them away to wander among the Nations and be no Congregation no Church therefore he had not yet cast them away in Non Ecclesiam into No-Church And they are expresly called the People of the Lord in i 4. Reg. 9. 6. Iehu's time and so continued long after Nor can you plead that Iudah is your part and the Ten Tribes ours as some of you doe for if that bee true you must grant that the Multitude and greater number is ours And where then is Multitude your numerous Note of the Church For the Ten Tribes were more then the two But you cannot plead it For certainly if any Calves be set up they are in Dan and in Bethel They are not ours Besides to reforme what is amisse in Doctrine or Manners is as lawfull for a Particular Church as it is to publish and promulgate any thing that is Catholike in either And your Question Quo Judice lies alike against both And yet I thinke it may be proved that the Church of Rome and that as a Particular Church did promulgate an Orthodoxe Truth which was not then Catholikely admitted in the Church namely The Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne If she erred in this Fact confesse her Errour if she erred not why may not another Particular Church doe as shee did A learned Schoole-man of yours saith she may †Non oportuit ad hac cos vocare quum Authoritas fuerit publicandi apud siaâ—… Romanam pracipuè cùm unicuique ctiam particulari Ecclesiaeliceat id quod Catholicum est promulgare Alb. Mag. in 1. Dist. 11. A. 9. The Church of Rome needed not to call the Grecians to agree upon this Truth fince the Authority of publishing it was in the Church of Rome especially since it is lawfull for every particular Church to promulgate that which is Catholike Nor can you say he m anes Catholike as fore determined by the Church in generall for so this Point when Rome added Filioque to the Creed of a Generall Councell was not And how the Grecians were used in the after-Councell such as it was of Florence is not to trouble this Dispute But Catholike stands there for that which is so in the nature of it and Fundamentally Nor can you justly say That the Church of Rome did or might do this by the Pope's Authority over the Church For suppose he have that and that his Sentence be Infallible I say suppose both but I give neither yet neither his Authority nor his Infallibility can belong unto him as the particular Bishop of that Sea but as the * Non errare convenit Papa â—…t est Caput Bell. L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. Ministeriall Head of the whole Church And you are all so Iodged in this that †L. 2. de Christo. c. 21. §. Quando autem So you cannot finde Record of your own Truths which are farre more likely to be kept but when Errours are crept in we must bee bound to tell the place and the time and I know not what of their Beginnings or els they are not Errours As if some Errours might not want a Record as well as some Truth Bellarmine professes he can neither tell the yeare when nor the Pope under whom this Addition was made A Particular Church then if you judge it by the Schoole of Rome or the Practice of Rome may publish any thing that is Catholike where the whole Church is silent and may therefore Reforme any thing that is not Catholike where the whole Church is negligent or will not But you are as jealous of the honour of Rome as a
Councell which shall be lawfully called and fairely and freely held with indifferency to all parties And that must judge the Difference according to Scripture which must be their Rule as well as Private Mens And here after some lowd Cry against the Pride and Insolent madnesse of the Protâ—…stants A. C. addes That A. C. p. 58. the Church of Rome is the Principall and Mother Church And that therefore though it be against common equity that Subjects and Children should be Accusers Witnesses Iudges and Executioners against their Prince and Mother in any case yet it is not absurd that in some Cases the Prince or Mother may Accuse Witnesse Iudge and if need be execute Iustice against unjust and rebellious Subjects or evill Children How farre forth Rome is a Prince over the whole Church or a Mother of it will come to be shewed at after In the meane time though I cannot grant her to be either yet let 's suppose her to be both that A. C s. Argument may have all the strength it can have Nor shall it force me as plausible as it seemes to weaken the just power of Princes over their Subjects or of Mothers over their Children to avoid the shocke of this Argument For though A. C. may tell us 't is not absurd in some Cases yet I would faine have him name any one Moderate Prince that ever thought it just or tooke it upon him to be Accuser and VVitnesse and Iudge in any Cause of moment against his Subjects but that the Law had Libertie to Iudge betweene them For the great Philosopher tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arist. Eto c. 6. That the Chiefe Magistrate is Custos juris the Guardian and keeper of the Law and if of the Law then both of that equity and equality which is due unto them that are under him And even Tiberius himselfe in the Cause of Silanus when Dolabella would have flatter'd him into more power then in wisdome he thought fit then to take to himselfe he put him off thus No †Minui Jura quoties gliscat Potestas nec utendum Imperio ubi Legibus agi possit Tacit. L. 3 Annal. the Lawes grow lesse where such Power enlarges Nor is absolute Power to be used where there may be an orderly proceeding by Law And for * Heb. 12. 9. Parents 't is true when Children are young they may chastise them without other Accuser or VVitnesse then themselves and yet the children are to give them reverence And 't is presumed that naturall affection will prevaile so far with them that they will not punish them too much For all experience tells us almost to the losse of Education that they * God used Samuel as a Messenger against Eli for his overmuch indulgence to his sonnes 1 Sam. 3. 13. And yet Samuel himselfe committed the very same fault concerning his own sonnes 1 Sam. 8. 3. 5. And this Indulgence occasioned the Change of the Civill government as the former was the losse of the Priesthood punish them too little even when there is cause Yet when Children are growne up and come to some full use of their owne Reason the Apostles Rule is †Coloss. 3. 21. Colos. 3. Parents provoke not your Children And if the Apostle prevaile not with froward Parents there 's a Magistrate and a Law to relieve even a sonne against a Crimini ci Tribunus inter eatera dabat quod filium juvenem nullius probri compertum extorrem urbe domo penatibus foro luce congressu aequalium prohibituÌ„ in opus servile propè in carcerem atque in ergastulum dederit Liv. dec 1. l. 7. unnaturall Parents as it was in the Case of T. Manlius against his over Imperious Father And an expresse Law there was among the Iewes Deut. 21. when Children Deut. 21. 19. were growne up and fell into great extremities that the Parents should then bring them to the Magistrate and not be too busie in such cases with their own Power So suppose Rome be a Prince yet her Subjects must be tryed by Gods Law the Scripture And suppose her a Mother yet there is or ought to be Remedy against her for her Children that are growne up if she forget all good Nature and turne Stepdame to them Well the Reason why the Iesuite asked the Question Quo Iudice Who should be Iudge He sayes was this Because there 's no equity in it that the Protestants should be Iudges in their owne Cause But now upon more Deliberation A. C. tells us as if he A. C. p. 57. knew the Iesuites minde as well as himselfe as sure I thinke he doth That the Iesuite directed this Question chiefly against that speech of mine That there were Errors in Doctrine of Faith and that in the Generall Church as the Iesuite understood my meaning The Iesuite here tooke my meaning right For I confesse I said there were Errours in Doctrine and dangerous ones too in the Church of Rome I said likewise that when the Generall Church could not or would not Reforme such it was Lawfull for Particular Churches to Refâ—…rme themselves But then I added That the Generall Church not universally taken but in these Westerne parts fell into those Errours being swayed in these latter Ages by the predominant Power of the Church of Rome under whose Government it was for the most part forced And all men of understanding know how oft and how easily an Over-potent Member carries the whole with it in any Body Naturall Politick or Ecclesiasticall Yea but A. C. telles us That never any Competent Iudge did so censure the Church And indeed that no Power A. G. p. 57. on Earth or in Hell it selfe can so farre prevaile against the Generall Church as to make it Erre generally in any one Point of Divine Truth and much lesse to teach any thing by its full Authority to be a Matter of Faith which is contrary to Divine Truth expressed or involved in Scriptures rightly understood And that therefore no Reformation of Faith can be needfull in the Generall Church but only in Particular Churches And for proofe of this he cites S. Mat. 16. and 28. S. Luk. 22. S. Iohn 14. and 16. In this trouâ—…lesome and quarrelling Age I am most unwilling to meddle with the Erring of the Church in generall The Church of England is content to passe that over And though * Art 19. She tels us That the Church of Rome hath Erred even in matters of Faith yet of the Erring of the Church in generall She is modestly silent But since A. C. will needs have it That the whole Church did never generally Erre in any one Point of Faith he should doe well to Distinguish before he be so peremptory For if he mean no more then that the whole Vniversal Church of Christ cannot universally Erre in any one Point of Faith simply necessary to altmens salvation he fights against no Adversary that I know
the Church of Christ. And this is said to have amounted into a formall Separation from the Church of Rome and to have continued for the space of somewhat more then one hundred yeares Now that such a Separation there was of the African Church from Rome and a Reconciliation after stands upon the Credit and Authority of two publike Instruments extant both among the Ancient Councels The one is an a Epist. Bonifacii 2. apud Nicol. To. 2. Concil p. 544. Epistle from Boniface the second in whose time the Reconciliation to Rome is said to be made by Eulalius then Bishop of Carthage but the Separation Instigante Diabolo by the Temptation of the Divil The other is an b Exemp PrecuÌ„ apud Nicolin Ibid. p. 525. Exemplar PrecuÌ„ or Copie of the Petition of the same Eulalius in which he damnes and curses all those his Predecessors which went against the Church of Rome Amongst which Eulalius must needes Curse S. Augustine And Pope Boniface accepting this Submmission must acknowledge that S. Augustine and the rest of that Councell deserved this Curse and dyed under it as violating Rectae Fidei Regulam the Rule of the Right Faith so the Exemplar Precum beginnes by refusing the Popes Authority I will not deny but that there are divers Reasons given by the Learned Romanists and Reformed Writers for and against the Truth and Authority of both these Instruments But because this is too long to be examin'd here I wil say but this and then make my use of it to my present purpose giving the Church of Rome free leave to acknowledge these Instruments to be true or false as they please That which I shall say is this These Instruments are let stand in all Editions of the Councels and Epistles Decretall As for Example in the Old Edition by Isidor Anno. 1524. And in another Old Edition of them Printed Anno. 1530. And in that which was published by P Crabbe Anno. 1538. And in the Edition of Valentinus Ioverius Anno. 1555. And in that by Surius Anno. 1567. And in the Edition at Venice by Nicolinus Anno. 1585. And in all of these without any Note or Censure upon them And they are in the Edition of Binius too Anno. 1618. but there 's a Censure upon them to keepe a quarter it may be with * Baron Annal. An. ad 4 9. Nu. 93. 94. Baronius who was the first I think that ever quarrelled them and he doth it tartly And since †Ualde mihi illa Epistola suspecta sunt Bellar. L. 2. de Ro. Pont. c. 25. § Respondeo primum Sed si fortè illa Epistola verae sunt nihil enim affirmâ—… c. Ibid. § ult Bellarmine followes the same way but more doubtfully This is that which I had to say And the Vse which I shall make of these Instruments whether they be true or false is this They are either true or false that is of necessity If they be false then Boniface the Second and his Accomplices at Rome or some for them are notorious Forgers and that of Records of great Consequence concerning the Government and Peace of the whole Church of Christ and to the perpetual Infamie of that Sea and all this foolishly and to no purpose For if there were no such Separation as these Records mention of the Africane Churches from the Romane to what end should Boniface or any other counterfeit an Epistle of his owne and a Submission of Eulalius On the other side if these Instruments be true as the sixth Councell of Carthage against all other Arguments makes me incline to believe they are in Substance at least though perhaps not in all Circumstances then 't is manifest that the Church of Africk separated from the Church of Rome That this Separation continued above one hundred yeares That the Church of Africke made this Separation in a Nationall Councell of their owne which had in it two hundred and seventeene Bishops That this Separation was made for ought appeares only because they at Rome were too ready to entertaine Appeales from the Church of Africke as appeares in the Case of * And so the Councell of Carthage sent word to Pope Calestine plainly that in admitting such Appeales he brake the Decrees of the Councell of Nice Epist. Concil Africa ad Calestinum c. 105. Apud Nicolin Tom. 1. Concil p. 844. Apiarius who then appealed thither That S. Augustine Eugenius Fulgentius and all those Bishops and other Martyrs which suffered in the Uandalike Persecution dyed in the time of this Separation That if this Separation were not just but a Schisme then these Famous Fathers of the Church dyed for ought appeares in Actuall and unrepented Schisme †Planè ex Ecclesiae Catholicae albo Expâ—…ngenda fâ—…issent Sâ—…nctorum Africanorum Martyrum Agâ—…ina qui in persecutione Vandalica pro Fide Catholica c. Baron Ann. 419. Num. 93. Et Binius In Notis ad Epist. Bomfacii 2. ad Eulalium and out of the Church And if so then how comes S. Augustine to be and be accounted a Saint all over the Christian world and at Rome it selfe But if the Separation were just then is it farre more lawfull for the Church of England by a Nationall Councell to cast off the Popes Vsurpation as * §. 24. Nu. 5. She did then it was for the African Church to separate Because then the African Church excepted only against the Pride of Rome †Belâ—… 2. de Ro. Pont. c. 25. §. 2. in Case of Appeales and two other Canons lesse materiall But the Church of England excepts besides this Grievance against many Corruptions in Doctrine belonging to the Faith with which Rome at that time of the African Separation was not tainted And I am out of all doubt that S. August and those other Famous men in their generations durst not thus have separated from Rome had the Pope had that powerfull Principality over the whole Church of Christ And that by Christs owne Ordinance and Institution as A. C. pretends he had A. C. p. 58. I told you a little * §. 25. Nu. 10. before that the Popes grew under the Emperors till they had over-grown them And now lest A. C. should say I speake it without proofe I will give you a briefe touch of the Church-story in that behalfe And that from the beginning of the Emperors becomming Christians to the time of Charles the Great which containes about five hundred yeares For so soone as the Emperors became Christian the Church which before was kept under by persecutions began to be put in better order For the calling and Authority of Bishops over the Inferiour Clergie that was a thing of kâ—…owne use and benefit for Preservation of Unity and Peace in the Church And so much †Quòd autem postea Vxus electus est qui cateris praporerâ—…ur in Schismatis remedium fallum est ne unusquisque ad se trahens Christi
power then other Churches but not over all other Churches And as they understand Irenae a Necessity lay upon all other Churches to agree with this but this Necessity was laid upon them by the Then Integrity of the Christian Faith there professed not by the Universality of the Romane Jurisdiction now challenged And let Rome reduce it selfe to the Observation of Tradition Apostolike to which it then held and I will say as Irenaeus did That it will be then necessary for every Church and for the Faithfull every where to agree with it Lastly let me Observe too That Irenaeus made no doubt but that Rome might fall away from Apostolicall Tradition as well as other Particular Churches of great Name have done For he does not say in quâ servanda semper erit sed in quâ servata est Not in which Church the Doctrine delivered from the Apostles shal ever be entirely kept That had beene home indeed But in which by God's grace and mercy it was to that time of Irenaeus so kept and preserved So wee have here in Irenaeus his Iudgement the Church of Rome then Intire but not Infallible And endowed with a more powerfull Principality then other Churches but not with an Universall Dominion over all other Churches which is the Thing in Question But to this place of Irenaeus A. C. joynes a reason of his owne For he tels us the Bishop of Rome is A. C. p. 58. S. Peter's Successour and therefore to Him we must have recourse The Fathers I deny not ascribe very much to S. Peter But 't is to S. Peter in his owne person And among them Epiphanius is as free and as frequent in extolling S. Peter as any of them And yet did he never intend to give an Absolute Principality to Rome in S. Peter's right There is a Noted Place in that Father where his words are these †Ipse autem Dominus constituit â—…um Primum Apostolorum Petram firmam super quam Ecclesia Dei adificat a est portae inferorum non valebunt adversus illam c. Juxta omnem enim modum in Ipso firmata est fides qui accepit Clavem Coelorum c. In hoc enim omnes Questiones ac Subtilitates fidei inveniuntur Epiphan in Ancorato Edit Paris Lat. 1564. fol. 497. A. Edit verò Grace Latin To. 2. p. 14. For the Lord himselfe made S. Peter the first of the Apostles a firme Rocke upon which the Church of God is built and the Gates of Hell shall not prevaile against it c. For in him the Faith is made firme every way who received the Key of Heaven c. For in him all the Questions and Subtilties of the Faith are found This is a great Place at first sight too and deserves a Marginall Note to call young Readers eyes to view it And it hath this Note in the Old Latine Edition at Paris 1564. Petri Principatus Praestantia Peter's Principality and Excellency This Place as much shew as it make for the Romane Principality I shall easily cleare and yet doe no wrong either to S. Peter or the Romane Church For most manifest it is That the authority of S. Peter is a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For there bâ—…gins the Arâ—…ument of Epiphanius urged here to proove the Godhead of the Holy Ghost And then follow the Elogyes given to S. Peter the better to set off and make good that Authority As that hee was b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Princeps Apostolorum the Prince of the Apostles and pronounced blâ—…ssed by Christ because as God the Father revealed to him the Godhead of the Sonne so did the Sonne the Godhead of the Holy Ghost After this Epiphanius calls Him c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 solidam Petram a solid Rocke upon which the Church of God was founded and against which the Gates of Hell should not prevaile And addes That the Faith was rooted and made firme in him d 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. every way in him who received the Key of Heaven And after this he gives the Reason of all e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. S. Mâ—… 16. 17. Because in Him mark I pray 't is still in Him as he was blessed by that Revelation from God the Father S. Matthew 16. were found all the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the very Niceties and exactnesse of the Christian Faith For he prosessâ—…d the Godhead of the Sonne and of the Holy Ghost And so Omni modo every Point of Faith was 〈◊〉 in Him And this is the full meaning of that Learned Father in tâ—…is passage Now therefore Building the Church upon Saint Peter in Epiphanius his sense is not as if He and his Successors were to be Monarchs ovâ—…r it for ever But it is the edifying and establishing the Church in the true Faith of Christ by the Confession which S. Pâ—…ter made And so f 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Qui factus est nobis rever à solida Petra firmans fidem Domini In quâ Petrá aedificata est Ecclesia juxta omnem modum Primò quòd confessus est Christum esse Filium Dei vi vi statim audivit super hanc Petram soliâ—… 〈◊〉 adisicabo Ecclesiam 〈◊〉 Etiam de Sp. Sancto idem c. Epipha L. 2. Hares 59. contra Catharos To. 1. p. 500. Edit Graeco-Lat Hee expresses himselfe elsewhere most plainly Saint Peter saith he who was made to us indeed a solid Rock firming the Faith of our Loâ—…d On which Rocke the Church is built juxta omneÌ„ modum every way First that he Confessed Christ to be the Sonne of the Living God and by and by he heard Upon this Rocke of solid Faith I will build my Church And the same Confession he made of the Holy Ghost Thus was S. Peter a solid Rocke upon which the Church was founded omni modo every way That is the Faith of the Church was a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ibid. confirmed by him in every Point But that S. Peter was any Rocke or Foundation of the Church so as that he and his Successours must be relied on in all matters of Faith and governe the Church like Princes or Monarchs that Epiphanius never thought of And that he did never thinke so I prove it thus For beside this apparent meaning of his Context as is here expressed how could hee possibly thinke of a Supremacy due to S. Peter's Successour that in most expresse termes and that b Ille primus speaking of S. Iames the Lords Brother Episcopalem Cathedram capit quum ei ante â—…teros omnes suum in terris Thronum Dominus tradidisset Epiphan L. 3. Hares 78. To. 2. p. 1039. Et ferè similiter To. 1. L. 1. Hares 29. twice repeated makes S. Iames the brother of our Lord and not S. Peter succeed our Lord in the Principality of the Church And Epiphanius was too full both of Learning and Industrie to
speake contrary to himselfe in a Point of this moment Next since A. C. speeds no better with Irenaeus he will have it out of Scripture And he still tels us the A. C. p. 58. Bishop of Rome is S. Peter's Successour Well Suppose that What then What Why then he succeeded in all S. Peter's c Bellar. L. 1. de Ro. Pont. c. 9. §. Respondeo Pontificatum Prerogatives which are Ordinary and belonged to him as a Bishop though not in the Extraordinary which belonged to him as an Apostle For that 's it which you all say d §. 25. Nu. 10. but no man proves If this be so yet then I must tell A. C. S. Peter in his Ordinary Power was never made Pastour of the whole Church Nay in his Extraordinary he had no e Bellar. Ibid. more powerfull Principality then the other Apostles had A a The Fathers gave three Prerogatives to S. Peter Of Authority Of Primacy And of Principality But not of Supremacy of Power Raynold cont Hart. c. 5. Divis. 3. And he proves it at large Primacy of Order was never denied Him by the Protestants And an Vniversall Supremacy of Power was never granted him by the Primitive Christians Yea but Christ promised the keyes to S. Peter b S. Mat. 16 18. S. Mat. 16. True but so did he to all the rest of the Apostles c S. Mat. 18. 18. S. Ioh. 20. 22. S. Mat. 18. and S. Ioh. 20. And to their Successours as much as to His. So 't is Tibi Illis not Tibi non Illis I give the Keyes to thee and them not to thee to exclude them Vnlesse any man will thinke Heaven Gates so easie that they might open and shut them without the Keyes And S. Augustine d Si hoc Petro tantùm dictum est non sacit hoc Ecclesia c. S. Aug. Tract 50. in S. Ioh. is plaine If this were said onely to S. Peter then the Church hath no power to doe it which God forbid The Keyes therefore were given to S. Peter and the rest in a Figure of the Church to whose power and for whose use They were given But there 's not one Key in all that Bunch that can let in S. Peter ' Successour to a more powerfull Principality universall the the Successors of the other Apostles had Yea but Christ prayed That S. Peteâ—… Faith might A. C. p. 58. not faile e S. Luk. 22. 32. S. Luke 22. That 's true And â—…n that sense that Christ prayed S. Peter's Faith faileâ—… not That is in Application to his person for his Perseverance in the Faith as f Deum dare ut in fide perseveretur S. Prosper L. 1. de Vocat Gent. c. 24. S. Prosper applies it Which Perseverance yet he must owe and acknowledge to the grace of Christ's Prayer for him not to the power and ability of his owne Free-Will as g Rogavi ut non deficeret c. Et certè juxta vos in Apostoli erat positum potestate si voluisset ut non deficeret fides ejus c. S. Hieron L. 2. adversus Pelagianos S. Ierome tels us h Aliquid speciale Bellar. L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. §. Secundo quia sine Bellarmine likes not this Because saith he Christ here obtained soâ—…e speciall Priviledge for S. Peter whereas Perseverance in Grace is a Gift common to all the Elect. And he is so farre right And the Speciall Grace which this Prayer of Christ obtained for S. Peter was That he should not fall into a finall Apostacy no not when Sathan had sisted him to the branne that he fell most horribly even into a threefold Denyall of his Master and that with a Curse And to recover this and Persevere was aliquid speciale I trow if any thing ever were But this will not down with Bellarmine No The a Vt nec ipse ut Pontifex doceret unquam aliquid contra fidem sive ut in Sede ejus inveniretur qui doceret Bellar. L. 4 de Rom. Pont. c. 3. §. Alterum Privilegium est Aliquid speciale the speciall Thing here obtained was saith he That neither S. Peter himselfe nor any other that should sit in his Seat should ever teach any thing contrary to the true Faith That S. Peter after his recovery should preach nothing either as Apostle or Bishop contrary to the Faith will easily be granted him But that none of his Successors should doe it but be all Infallible that certainly never came within the Compasse of Rogavi pro te Petre I have prayed for thee Peter And Bellarmines Proofe of this is his just Confutation For he prooves this Exposition of that Text only by the Testimony of seven Popes in their owne Cause And then takes a leape to Theophylact who sayes nothing to the purpose So that upon the matter Bellarmine confesses there is not one Father of the Church disinteressed in the Cause that understands this Text as Bellarmiue doth till you come downe to Theophylact. So the Popes Infallibility appeared to no body but the Popes themselves for above a Thousand yeares after Christ. For so long it was before * Theophylactus floruit circa An. Dom. 1072. Theophylact lived And the spite of it is Theophylact could not see it neither For the most that Bellarmine makes him say is but this †Quia 〈◊〉 habco Principem disâ—…ipuloruÌ„ confirma caeteros Hoc enim decet Te qui post me Ecclesia Petraes Fundamentum Bellar. L. 4. De Rom. Pont. c. 3. §. Praeter hos Ex Theophyl in 21. S Luc. Because I account thee as chiefe of my Disciples confirme the rest for this becomes Thee which art to be a Rock and Foundation of the Church after me For this is â—…ersonall too and of S. Peter and that as he was an Apostle For otherwise then as an Apostle he was not a Rocke or Foundatiâ—…n of the Church no not in a Secondary sense The speciall priviledge therefore which Christ prayed for was personall to S. Peter and is that which before I mentioned And Bellarmine himselfe sayes That Christ †Impetravit c. ibid. §. Est igitur tertia obtained by this Prayer two Priviledges especiall ones for S. Peter The one That he should never quite fall from the true Faith how strongly soever he were tempted The other That there should never be found any sitting in his Seate that should teach against it Now for the first of these * Ex quibus pri vilegiis primum fortasse non manavit ad posteros at secundum sine dubio manavit ad Posteros sive Successores Bellar. Ibid. §. Alterum Privilegium Bellarmine doubts it did not flow over to his Successors Why then 't is true which I here say That this was Personall to S. Peter But the second he sayes Out of all doubt passed over to his Successors Nay that 's not out
Reformation or a free Councell And the * Leo 10. Bull. Inn. 8. 1520. Pope himselfe to shew his Charity had declared and pronounced the Appellants Hereticks before they were Condemned by the Councell I hope an Assembly of Enemies are no Lawfull Councell and I thinke the Decrees of such a one are omni jure nulla and carry their Nullity with them through all Law Againe is that Councell Generall that hath none of the Easterne Churches Consent nor presence there Are all the Greekes so become Non Ecclesia no Church that they have no Interest in Generall Councels Iâ—… numbers indeed among the Subscribers sixe Greekes They might be so by Nation or by Title purposely given them but dare you say they were actually Bishops of and sent from the Greeke Church to the Councell Or is it to be accounted a Generall Councell that in many Sessions had scarce Ten Archbishops or Forty or Fifty Bishops present And for the West of Christendome nearer home it reckons one English S. Assaph But Cardinall Poole was there too And Fnglish indeed he was by birth but not sent to that Councell by the King and Church of England but as one of the †Concil Trid. Sess. 5. Popes Legates And so we finde him in the fift Session of that Councell but neither before nor after And at the beginning of the Councell he was not Bishop in the Church of England and after he was Archbishop of Canterburie he never went over to the Councell And can you prove that S. Assaph went thither by Authority There were but few of other Nations and it may be some of them reckoned with no more truth then the Greekes In all the Sessions under Paul the third but two French-men and sometimes none as in the sixt under Iulius the third when Henr. 2. of France protested against that Councell And in the end it is well known how all the French which were then a good part held off till the Cardinall of Loraigne was got to Rome As for the Spaniards they laboured for many things upon good Grounds and were most unworthily over-borne To all this A. C. hath nothing to say but That it is not Necessary to the Lawfulnesse and Generalnesse of a A. C. p. 61. Councell that all Bishops of the World should be actually present subscribe or consent but that such Promulgation be made as is morally sufficient to give notice that such a Councell is called and that all may come if they will and that a Major part at least of those that are present give assent to the Decrees I will forget that it was but p. 59. in which A. C. p. 59. A. C. speakes of all Pastours and those not onely summoned but gathered together And I will easily grant him that 't is not necessary that all Bishops in the Christian world be present and subscribe But sure 't is necessary to the Generalnesse of a Councell that some be †Ut aliqui mittantur advcniant conveniant c. Bellar L. 1. de Concil c. 17. §. Quarta ut saltem there and authorized for all Particular Churches And to the freedome of a Councell that all that come may come safe And to the Lawfulnesse of a Councell that all may come uningaged and not fastened to a fide before they sit downe to argue or deliberate Nor is such a Promulgation as A. C. mentions sufficient but onely in Case of Contumacy and that where they which are called and refuse to come have no just Cause for their not comming as too many had in the Case of Trent And were such a Promulgation sufficient for the Generalnesse of a Councell yet for the Freedome and the Lawfulnesse of it it were not F. So said I would Arrians say of the Councell of Nice The B. would not admit the Case to be like B. So indeed you said And not you alone It is § 28 the Common Objection made against all that admit not every latter Councell as fully as that Councell of Nice famous through all the Christian world In the meane time nor you nor they consider that the Case is not alike as I then told you If the Case be alike in all why doe not you admit that which was held at Ariminum and the second of Ephesus as well as Nice If you say as yours doe It was because the Pope approved them not That 's a true Cause but not Adequate or full For it was because the Whole Church refused them * §. 26. N. 1. with whom the Romane Prelate standing then entire in the Faith agreed and so for his Patriarchate refused those Councels But suppose it 〈◊〉 that these Syâ—…s were not admitted because the Pope refused them yet this ground is gamed That the Câ—…e is not alike for mens Assent to all Councells And if you looke to have this granted That the Pope must coâ—…me or the Councel's not lawfull we have farre more reason to looke that this be not denied Thâ—…t Scripture must not be departed from in a Here A. C. tels us that the 〈◊〉 thought so of the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Namely that they departed from 〈◊〉 and Sense of Scripture They said to â—…deed But the Testimony of the whole Clutch both then and sinâ—… went wâ—… the Councell against the Arrian So is it not â—…ere against the Protestant â—…or I râ—…t For they offer to be tâ—…ed by that very Councell of Nice and all the 〈◊〉 Councells and Fathers of the Châ—… within the first foure hundred yeares and somewhat farther letter or necessary sense or the Councell is not lawfull For the Consent and Confirmation of Scripture is of farre greater Authority to make the Councell Authenticall and the Decisions of it de fide then any Confirmation of the Pope can bee Now of these two the Councell of Nâ—…e we are sure had the first the 〈◊〉 of 〈◊〉 and you say it had the second the 〈◊〉 Confirmation The Councell of Trent we are able to prove had not the first and so we have no reason to respect the second And to what end do your Learâ—… Men maintaine that a Councell may make a Conclusion de sâ—…e though it be simply b So Staplâ—… often but the Fathers quite otherwise 〈◊〉 extra Evangeliâ—…m sâ—…nt 〈◊〉 sâ—…am Hâ—… L. 2. 〈◊〉 Câ—… extra out of aâ—…l â—…nd oâ—… Scrâ—…ure but out of a Iealousie at least that this of Trent and some others have in their Determinâ—…s left both â—…ter and Sense of Scripture Shew this against the Councell of Nice and I will grant so much of the Case to be like But what will you say if c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 L. 2. 〈◊〉 Syâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Niâ—…linum Constâ—… required That 〈◊〉 thus brought into Question 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 by Testimony out of Scripture And the 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 Councell never refused that â—…e And what will you say if they professe they depart not from it 〈◊〉
prâ—…ng can be questioned in another unlesse it to tall out that 〈◊〉 Scriptuâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appeare against it Buâ—… eâ—…t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thâ—…se aâ—…e â—…o 〈◊〉 and manâ—…t and â—…ving the it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whâ—… or 〈◊〉 wiâ—…h 〈◊〉 without a Councell §. 33. 〈◊〉 5. Nâ—… 1. 2. another Councell of equall authority did reverse it And indeed I might have returned upon you againe If a Generall Councell not Confirmed by the Pope may erre which you affirme to what end then a Generall Councell And you may Answer yes For although a Generall Councell may erre yet the Pope as Head of the Church cannot An excellent meanes of unity to have all in the Church as the Pope will have it what ever Scripture say or the Church thinke And then I pray to what end a Generall Councell Will his Holinesse be so holy as to confirme a Generall Councell if it Determine against him And as for * 〈◊〉 L 4. dâ—… 〈◊〉 Pâ—…t â—…7 §. 3. c. Bellarmines reasons why a Generall Councell should be usefull if not necessary though the Pope bee Iâ—…fallible they are so weake in Part and in part so unworthy that I am sory any necessity of a bad cause should force so learned a man to make use of them Here A. C. tels mee The Caution mentioned as omitted makes my Answer werse then the Iesuite related A. C. p. 63. â—…4 it And that in two things First in that the Iesuite relates it thus Although it may erre but the Caution makes it as if it did actually erre Secondly in that the Iesuite relates That wee are bound to hold it till another come to reverse it that is wâ—…e not knowing whether it doe erre or not but onely that it may erre But the Caution puts the Case so as if the Determination of a Generall Councell actually erring were not ipso jure invalid but must stand in force and have externall Obedience yeelded to it till not onely morall Certainty but Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the errour appeare And when it appeares wee must yeeld our Obedience till a Councell of equall Authority reverse it which perhaps will not bee found in an whole Age. So either the Iesuite relates this speech truly or lesse disgracefully And A. C. thinkes that upon better Iudgement I Will not allow this Caution Truly I shall not thanke the Iesuite for any his kindnesse here And for the Caution I must and doe acknowledge it mine even upon advisement and that whether it make my Answer worse or better And I thinke farther that the Iesuite hath no great Cause to thanke A. C. for this Defence of his Relation First then the Iesuite so sayes A. C. doth in his Relation make it but a supposition That a Generall Councell A. C. p. 63 may erre But the Caution expresses it as actually erring True But yet I hope this Expression makes no Generall Councell actually erre And then it comes all to one whether I suppose that such a Councell may erre or that it doe erre And 't is fitter for clearing the Difficulties into which the Church fals in such a Case to suppose and more then a supposition it is not a Generall Councell * Synodum Generalem aliquoties errâsse percepimus Wald. L. 2. de Doctrin Fidri Art 2. c. 19. §. 1. actually erring then as only under a Possibility of Erring For the Church hath much more to doe to vindicate it selfe from such an Errour actually being then from any the like Errour that might be Secondly A. C. thinkes he hath got great advantage A. C. p. 63. by the words of the Caution in that I say A Generall Councell erring is to stand in force and have externall Obedience at least so farre as it consists in silence Patience and forbearance yeelded to it till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the Error appeare and untill therupon another Councell of equal Authority did reverse it Well! I say it again But is there any one word of mine in the Caution that speakes of our knowing of this Errour Surely not one that 's A. C s. Addition Now suppose a Generall Councell actually Erring in some Point of Divine Truth I hope it will not follow that this Errour must bee so grosse as that forthwith it must needes be knowne to private men And doubtlesse till they know it Obedience must be yeelded Nay when they know it if the Errour be not manifestly against Fundamentall verity in which case a Generall Councell can not easily erre I would have A C. and all wise men Consider Whether Externall Obedience be not even then to be yeelded For if Controversies arise in the Church some end they must have or they 'll teare all in sunder And I am sure no wisdome can thinke that fit Why then say a Generall Councell Erre and an Erring Decree be ipso jure by the very Law it selfe invalid I would have it wisely considered again whether it be not fit to allow a Generall Councell that Honour and Priviledge which all other Great Courts have Namely That there be a Declaration of the Invalidity of its Decrees as well as of the Laws of other Courts before private men can take liberty to refuse Obedience For till such a declaration if the Councel stand not in force A. C sets up Private Spirits to controll Generall Councels w ch is the thing he so often and so much cryes out against in the Protestants Therefore it may seeme very fit and necessary for the Peace of Christendome that a Generall Councell thus erring should stand in force till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration make the Errourto appeare * It is not long since A C. compared Councels to Parliaments it was but p. 60. And I hope a Parliament and the Acts of it must stand in force thoughsomthing bemistaken in them or found hurtfull till another Parliament of equal Authority reverse it and them For I presume you will not have any inferiour Authority to abrogate Acts of Parliament as that another Councell of equall Authority reverse it For as for Morall Certainty that 's not strong enough in Points of Faith which alone are spoken of here And if another Councell of equall Authority cannot be gotten together in an Age that is such an Inconvenience as the Church must beare when it happens And far better is that inconvenience then this other †§. 33. Consid. 4. N. 1. that any Authority lesse then a Generall Councell should rescinde the Decrâ—…es of it unlesse it erre manifestly and intolera'ly Or that the whole Church upon peaceable and just complaint of this Errour neglect or refuse to call a Councell and examine it And there come in Nationall or Provinciall Councels to a § 24. Nu. 1. reforme for themselves But no way must lye open to private men to b §. 38. Nu. 15. Refuse obedience till the Councell be heard
aliorum salutem expetunt c. Quidigitur mirum si in hoc Concilio fuerit Spiritus Sanctus c. Nos aliter Convenimus 〈◊〉 cum magnâ pompâ—… nâ—…sque ipsos quâ—…rimus atque nobispollicemur nihil nobis non licere de Plenitudine Potestatis Et quomodo Sp. Sanctus ejusmodi Concilia probare possit Fetus in Act. 15. 7 One of their owne who tels us plainly That the Apostles in their Councell delt very prudently did not precipitate their Iudgement but waighed all things For in Matters of Faith and which touch the Conscience it is not enough to say Volumus Mandamus We Will and Command And thus the Apostles met together in simplicity and singlenesse seeking nothâ—…ng but God and the Salvation of men Anâ—… what wonder if the Holy Ghost were present in such a Councell Nos alitèr But we meet otherwise in great pompe and seeke our selves and promise our selves that we may doe any thing out of the Plenitude of our power And how can the Holy Ghost allow of such meetings And if not allow or approove the Meetings then certainly not concurre to make every thing Infallible that shall be concluded in them And for all the Places together waigh them with indifferency and either they speake of the Church including the Apostles as all of them doe And then All grant the Uoyce of the Church is Gods Voyce Divine and Infallible Or else they are Generall unlimited and applyable to private Assemblies as well as Generall Councels which none grant to be Infalliâ—…le but some mad Enthusiasts Orels they are limited not simply into All truth but All necessary to salvation in which I shall easily grant a Generall Councell cannot erre suffering it selfe to be led by this Spirit of Truth in the Scripture and not taking upon it to lead both the Scripture and the Spirit For Suppose these Places or any other did promise Assistance even to Infallibility yet they granted it not to every Generall Councell but to the Catholike Body of the Church it selfe and if it be in the whole Church principally then is it in a Generall Councell but by Consequent as the Councell represents the Whole And that which belongs to a thing by consequent doth not otherwise nor longer belong unto it then it consents and cleaves to that upon which it is a consequent And therefore a Generall Councell hath not this Assistance but as it keepes to the whole Church and Spouse of Christ whose it is to heare His word and determine by it And therefore if a Generall Councell wil go out of the Churches way it may easily goe without the Churches Truth Fourthly I Consider That All agree That the Consid. 4. Church in Generall can never erre from the Faith necessary to Salvation No Persecution no Temptation no †S. Mat. 16 18. Gates of Hell whatsoever is meant by them can ever so prevaile against it For all the Members of the Militant Church cannot erre either in the whole Faith or in any Article of it it is impossible For if all might so erre there could be no union betweene them as Members and Christ the Head And no Vnion betweene Head and Members no Body and so no Church which cannot be But there is not the like consent That * Ecclesia Vniversalis fideÌ„ habet indefectibilem c. Non quidem in Generali Synodo congregata quam aliquoties errâsse percepimus c. Wald. L. 2. Doct. Fid. Ar. 2. c. 19. §. 1. §. 38. N. 4. Generall Councels cannot erre And it seemes strange to me the Fathers having to doe with so many Hereticks and so many of them opposing Church Authority that in the condemnation of those Hereticks this Proposition even in termes A Generall Councell cannot erre should not be found in any one of them that I can yet see Now suppose it were true That no Generall Councell had erred in any matter of moment to this day which will not be found true yet this would not have followed that it is therefore infallible and cannot erre I have no time to descend into Particulars therefore to the Generall still S. Augustine a Aug. L. 2. de Bapt. contra Donat cap. 3. puts a Difference betweene the Rules of Scripture and the Definitions of men This Difference is Praeponitur Scriptura That the Scripture hath the Prerogative That Prerogative is That whatsoever is found written in Scripture may neither be doubted nor disputed whether it be true or right But the Letters of Bishops may not only be disputed but corrected by Bishops that are more learned and wise then they or by Nationall Councels and Nationall Councels by Plenary or Generall And even b Ipsaque Plenaria saepâ—… priora à posterioribus emendari Plenary Councels themselves may be amended the former by the later It seemes it was no newes with S. Augustine that a Generall Councell might erre and therefore inferiour to the Scripture which may neither be doubted nor disputed where it affirmes And if it be so with the Definition of a Councell too as Vox Ecclesia â—…Word est ut non de 〈◊〉 judicenius rectene an secùs docuerit So. Stap. Relect c. 4 q. 1. Aâ—… Stapleton would have it That that may neither be doubted nor disputed Where is then the Scriptures Prerogative I know there is much shifting about this Place but it cannot be wrastled off b De Regulis Morum Disciplinâ Relect. Con. 6. q. 3. A. 4. Stapleton sayes first That S. Augustine speaks of the Rules of Manners and Discipline And this is Bellarmines last shift Both are out and Bellarmine in a Contradiction Bellarmine in a Contradiction For first he tels us Generall Councels cannot erre in c L. 2. de Concil c. 2. Princip Precepts of Manners and then to turne off Saint Augustine in this Place hee tels us That if Saint Augustine doth not speake of matter of Fact but of Right and of universall Questions of Right then he is to be understood d Ib. cap. 7. §. Potest etiam of Precepts of Manners not of Points of Faith Where he hath first runne himselfe upon a Contradiction and then we have gained this ground upon him That either his Answer is nothing or els against his owne state of the Question A Generall Councell can erre in Precepts of Manners So belike when Bellarmine is at a shift A Generall Councell can and cannot erre in Precept of Manners And Both are out For the whole Dispute of Saint Augustine is against the Errour of Saint Cyprian followed by the Donatists which was an Errour in Faith Namely That true Baptisme could not be given by Hereticks and such as were out of the Church And the Proofe which Stapleton and Bellarmine draw out of the subsequent words e Quando aliquo rerum experimeÌ„to quod clausum erat aperitur VVhen by any experiment of things that which was shut is opened is too weake For
their own and are with all submission to be observed by every Christian where Scripture or evident Demonstration come not against them Nor doth it make way for the Whirlewind of a private Spirit For Private Spirits are too giddy to rest upon Scripture and too heady and shallow to be acquainted with Demonstrative Arguments And it were happy for the Church if she might never be troubled with Private Spirits till they brought such Arguments I know this is hotly objected against c Praefat. p. 29. Hooker the d Dialogus â—…ctus Deus Rex Authour cals him a e Cordatus Protestans Wise Protestant yet turnes thus upon him If a Councell must yeeld to a Demonstrative Proofe Who shall Iudge whether the Argument that is brought be a Demonstration or not For every man that will kicke against the Church will say the Scripture he urges is evident and his Reason a Demonstration And what is this but to leave all to the wildenesse of a Private Spirit Can any ingenuous man read this Passage in Hooker and dreame of a Private Spirit For to the Question Who shall judge Hooker answers as if it had beene then made f Praef. p. 29. And therefore A. C. is much to blame after all this to talk of a pretext of seeming evident Scripture or Demonstration As he doth p 59. An Argument necessary and Demonstrative is such saith he as being proposed to any man and understood the minde cannot chuse but inwardly assent unto it So it is not enough to thinke or say it is Demonstrative The Light then of a Demonstrative Argument is the Evidence which it selfe hath in it selfe to all that understand it Well but because all understand it not If a Quarrell be made Who shall decide it No Question a § 32. Nu. 2. but a Generall Councell not a Private Spirit first in the intent of the Authour for Hooker in all that Discourse makes the Sentence of the Councell b Praesat p. 28. binding and therefore that is made Judge not a Private Spirit And then for the Judge of the Argument it is as plaine For if it be evident to any man then to so many Learned men as are in a Councell doubtlesse And if they cannot but assent it is hard to thinke them so impious that they will define against it And if that which is thought evident to any man be not evident to such a grave Assembly it is probable 't is no Demonstration and the producers of it ought to rest and not to trouble the Church Nor is this Hooker's alone nor is it newly thought on by us It is a Ground in Nature which Grace doth ever set right never undermine And c 2 de Bapt cont Don. cap. 4. S. Augustine hath it twice in one Chapter That S. Cyprian and that Councell at Carthage would have presently yeelded to any one that would d Uni verum dicenti demonstr anti demonstrate Truth Nay it is a Rule with e Cont. Fund cap. 4. him Consent of Nations Authority confirmed by Miracles and Antiquity S. Peters Chaire and Succession from it Motives to keepe him in the Catholike Church must not hold him against Demonstration of Truth f Quae quidem si tam manifesta monâ—…ratur ut in dubtum â—…enire non possit praeponenâ—…a est omâ—…ibus ills rebus quiius in Catholica 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aciquid apertissimâ—… in Euangelâ—… 〈◊〉 c. 4. which if it bee so clearely demonstrated that it cannot come into doubt it is to be preferred before all those things by which a man is held in the Catholike Church Therefore an evident Scripture or Demonstration of Truth must take place every where but where these cannot be had there must be Submission to Authority And doth not Bellarmine himselfe grant this For speaking of Councels he delivers this Proposition That Inferiours may not judge whether their Superiours and that in a Councell do proceed lawfully or not But then having bethought himselfe that Inferiours at all times and in all Causes are not to be cast off he adds this Exception a L. 2 de Concil c. 8. §. Alii dicunt Cencilium Nisi manifestissimè constet intolerabilem Errorem committi Unlesse it manifestly appeare that an intolerable Errour be committed So then if such an Errour be and be manifest Inferiours may do their duty and a Councell must yeeld unlesse you will accuse Bellarmine too of leaning to a Private Spirit for neither doth he expresse who shall judge whether the Errour be intolerable This will not downe with you but the Definition of a Generall Councell is and must be infallible Your Fellowes tell us and you can affirme no more That the Voice of the Church determining in Councell is not b Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. Q. 3. Ar. 1. Humane but Divine That is well Divine then sure Infallible yea but the Proposition stickes in the throat of them that would utter it It is not Divine simply but in a c Divina suo modo Ibid. And so A. C. too who hath opened his mouth very wide to proove the Succession of Pastors in the Church to be of Divine and infallible Authority yet in the close is forced to add At least in some sort p. 51. manner Divine Why but then sure not infallible because it may speak lowdest in that manner in which it is not Divine Nay more The Church forsooth is an infallible Foundation of Faith d In altiori genere viz. in geners causae efficientis atque adeò aliquâ exparte formalis Ibid. Q. 4. Ar. 3. in an higher kinde then the Scripture For the Scripture is but a Foundation in Testimony and Matter to be believed but the Church as the efficient cause of Faith and in some sort the very formall Is not this Blasphemie Doth not this knock against all evidence of Truth and his owne Grounds that sayes it Against all evidence of Truth For in all Ages all men that once admitted the Scripture to be the Word of God as all Christians doe doe with the same breath grant it most undoubted and infallible But all men have not so judged of the Churches Definitions though they have in greatest Obedience submitted to them And against his owne Grounds that sayes it For the Scripture is absolutely and every way Divine the Churches Definition is but suo modo in a sort or manner Divine But that which is but in a sort can never be a Foundation in an Higher Degree then that which is absolute and every way such Therefore neither can the Definition of the Church be so infallible as the Scripture much lesse in altiori genere in a higher kinde then the Scripture But because when all other things faile you flie to this That the Churches Definition in a Generall Councell is by Inspiration and so Divine and infallible My haste shall not carrie mee from a little Consideration of that too Sixtly then If the
Definition of a Generall Councell Consid. 6. be infallible then the infallibility of it is either in the Conclusion and in the Meanes that prove it or in the Conclusion not the Meanes or in the Meanes not the Conclusion But it is infallible in none of these Not in the first The Conclusion and the Meanes For there are diverse Deliberations in Generall Councels where the Conclusion is Catholike but the Meanes by which they prove it not infallible Not in the second The Conclusion and not the Meanes For the Conclusion must follow the nature of the Premisses or Principles out of which it is deduced therefore if those which the Councell uses be sometimes uncertaine as is proved before the Conclusion cannot be infallible Not in the third The Meanes and not the Conclusion For that cannot but be true and necessary if the Meanes be so And this I am sure you will never grant because if you should you must deny the Infallibility which you seeke to establish To this for I confesse the Argument is old but can never be worne out nor shifted off your great Master a Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. ad Argâ—… 1â—… Stapleton who is miserably hamper'd in it and indeed so are you all answers That the Infallibility of a Councell is in the second Course that is b And herein I must needs Commend your Wildome For you have had many Popes so ignorant 〈◊〉 ignorant as that they have beene â—…o way able to sift and Examine the Meanes And therefore you doe most advisedly make them infallible in the Conclusion without the Meanes §. 39. Nu. 8. It is infallible in the Conclusion though it be uncertaine and fallible in the Meanes and Proofe of it How comes this to passe It is a thing altogether unknowne in Nature and Art too That fallible Principles can either father or mother beget or bring forth an infallible Conclusion Well that is granted in Nature and in all Argumentation that causes Knowledge But we shall have Reasons for it c Ibid. Not. 4. First because the Church is discursive and uses the weights and moments of Reason in the Meanes but is Propheticall and depends upon immediate Revelation from the Spirit of God in delivering the Conclusion It is but the making of this appeare and all Controversie is at an end Well I will not discourse here To what end there is any use of Meanes if the Conclusion be Propheticall which yet is justly urged for no good cause can be assigned of it If it be Propheticall in the Conclusion I speake still of the present Church for that which included the Apostles which had the Spirit of Prophecie and immediate Revelation was ever Propheticke in the Definition but then that was Infallible in the Meanes too Then since it delivers the Conclusion not according to Nature and Art that is out of Principles which can beare it there must be some supernaturall Authority which must deliver this Truth That say I must be the Scripture For if you flie to immediate Revelation now the Enthusiasme must be yours But the Scriptures which are brought in the very Exposition of all the Primitive Church neither say it nor enforce it Therefore Scripture warrants not your Prophesie in the Conclusion And I know no other thing that can warrant it If you think the Tradition of the Church can make the world beholding to you Produce any Father of the Church that sayes This is an Vniversall Tradition of the Church That her Definitions in a Generall Councell are Propheticall and by immediate Revelation Produce any one Father that sayes it of his own Authority That he thinks so Nay make it appeare that ever any Prophet in that which he delivered from God as Infallible Truth was ever discursive at all in the Meanes Nay make it but probable in the ordinary course of Prophecie and I hope you go no higher nor will I offer at God's absolute Power That that which is discursive in the Meanes can be Prophetick in the Conclusion and you shall be my great Apollo for ever In the meane time I have learned this from a Prophetae audiebant à Deo interiùs inspirante Tho. 2. 24. q. 5. A. 1. ad 3. yours That all Prophecie is by Vision Inspiration c. And that no Vision admits Discourse That all Prophecie is an Illumination not alwayes present but when the Word of the b The word of the Lord came unto me is common in the Prophets Lord came to them and that was not by Discourse And yet you c Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. p. 473. say againe That this Prophetick Infallibility of the Church is not gotten without study and industry You should do well to tell us too why God would put his Church to study for the Spirit of Prophecie which never any Particular Prophet was put unto d Propheticam Revelationem nullo pacto haberi posse vel ope Naturae vel studio Contra Avicennam Algazalem Averrocm c. Fran. Picus 2. Praenot c. 4. And whosoever shall study for it shall do it in vaine since Prophecie is a e 1. Cor. 12. 10. Gift and can never bee an acquired Habit. And there is somewhat in it that Bellarmine in all his Dispute for the Authority of Generall Councels dares not come at this Rocke f L. 2. de Conc. c. 12. He preferres the Conclusion and the Canon before the Acts and the Deliberations of Councels and so do we but I do not remember that ever he speaks out That the Conclusion is delivered by Prophecie or Revelation Sure he sounded the shore and found danger here He did sound it For a little before he speaks plainly would his bad Cause let him be constant * Concilia noâ—… habent neque scribunt immediatas Revelationes c sed ex Verbo Dei per ratiocinationeÌ„ dcducunt Conclusiones Bellar. l. 2 de Concil A. 12. §. At Concilia non Councels do deduce their Conclusions What from Inspiration No But out of the Word of God and that per ratiocinationem by Argumentation Neither have they nor do they write any immediate Revelations The second Reason why a Stap. Jb. p. 374 Stapleton will have it Propheticke in the Conclusion is Because that which is determined by the Church is matter of Faith not of Knowledge And that therefore the Church proposing it to be believed though it use Meanes yet it stands not upon Art or Meanes or Argument but the Revelation of the Holy Ghost Els when we embrace the Conclusion proposed it should not be an Assent of Faith but an Habit of Knowledge This for the first part That the Church uses the Meanes but followes them not is all one in substance with the former Reason And for the later part That then our admitting the Decree of a Councell would be no Assent of Faith but an Habit of Knowledge what great inconvenience is there if it be granted For
I think it is undoubted Truth That one and the same Conclusion may be Faith to the Believer that cannot prove and Knowledge to the Learned that can And b Cont. Fund c. 4. S. Augustine I am sure in regard of one and the same thing even this the very Wisdome of the Church in her Doctrine ascribes Vnderstanding to one sort of men and Beliefe to another weaker sort And c Tho. p. 1. q. 2. A. 2. ad 1. Nihil prohibet illud quod secundùm se demonstrabile est scibile ab aliquo acciti ut Credibile qui Demonstrationem non capit Thomas goes with him Now for further satisfaction if not of you yet of others this may well be thought on Man lost by sin the Integrity of his Nature and cannot have Light enough to see the way to Heaven but by Grace This Grace was first merited after given by Christ this Grace is first kindled in Faith by which if we agree not to some Supernaturall Principles which no Reason can demonstrate simply we can never see our way But this Light when it hath made Reason submit it self cleares the Eye of Reason it never puts it out In which sense it may be is that of a L. 3. Rationabilu ubique diffusa Optatut That the very Catholike Church it selfe is reasonable as well as diffused every where By which b Ut ipsâ fide valentiores facti quod credimus intelligere mereannur non jam hominibus sed Deo intrinsecùs mentem nostram firmante illuminante S. Aug. cont Epist Fundamenti c. 14. Reason inlightened which is stronger then Reason the Church in all Ages hath beene able either to convert or convince or at least c Omnia genera Ingeniorum subdita Scripturae S. Aug. L. 22. cont Faust. cap. 96. stop the mouthes of Philosophers and the great men of Reason in the very Point of Faith where it is at highest To the present occasion then The first immediate Fundamentall Points of Faith without which there is no salvation as they cannot be proved by Reason so neither need they be determined by any Councell nor ever were they attempted they are so plaine set downe in the Scripture If about the sense and true meaning of these or necessary deduction out of these Prime Articles of Faith Generall Councels determine any thing as they have done in Nice and the rest there is no inconvenience that one and the same Canon of the Councell should be believed as it reflects upon the Articles and Grounds indemonstrable and d Almain 3. D. 24. q. 1. Tho. 2. 2a q. 1. A. 5. C. Id quod est scitum ab uno homine etiam in statu via est ab alio Creditum qui hoc Demonstrare non novit yet knowne to the Learned by the Meanes and Proofe by which that Deduction is vouched and made good And againe the Conclusion of a Councell suppose that in Nice about the Consubstantiality of Christ with the Father in it selfe considered is indemonstrable by Reason There I believe and assent in Faith But the same Conclusion e Concilium Nicanum deduxit Conclusionem ex Scripturis Bellar 2. de Concil c. 12. §. Sic etià m if you give me the Ground of Scripture and the Creed and somewhat must be supposed in all whether Faith or Knowledge is demonstrable by naturall Reason against any Arrian in the world And if it be demonstrable I may know it and have an Habit of it And what inconvenience in this For the weaker sort of Christians which cannot deduce when they have the Principle granted they are to rest upon the Definition only and their Assent is meere Faith yea and the Learned too where there is not a Demonstration evident to them assent by Faith onely and not by knowledge And what inconvenience in this Nay the necessity of Nature is such that these Principles once given the understanding of man cannot rest but it must be thus And the †S. Pet. 3. 15. Apostle would never have required a man to be alle to give a Reason and an account of the hope that is in him if he might not be able to know his account or have lawfull interest to give it when he knew it without prejudicing his Faith by his knowledge And suppose exact knowledge and meere Beliefe cannot stand together in the same Person in regard of the same thing by the same meanes yet that doth not make void this Truth For where is that exact knowledge or in whom that must not meerely in points of Faith believe the Article or Ground upon which they rest But when that is once believed it can demonstrate many things from it And Definitions of Councels are not Principia Fidei Principles of Faith but Deductions from them And now because you aske Wherein are we nearer Consid. 7. to unity by a Councell if a Councell may erre Besides the Answer given I promised to consider which Opinion was most agreeable with the Church which most able to preserve or reduce Christian Peace The Romane That a Councell cannot erre Or the Protestants That it can And this I propose not as a Rule but leave the Christian world to consider of it as I doe First then I Consider Whether in those Places of Scripture before mentioned or any other there bâ—…e promised to the present Church an absolute Infallibility Or whether such an Infallibility will not serve the turne as * Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. Notab 3 Exacta Omnimodâ Infallibilitate non indiget sed satis est semel acceptis c. Stapleton after much wrigling is forced to acknowledge One not every way exact because it is enough if the Church doe diligently insist upon that which was once received and there is not need of so great certainty to open and explicate that which lyes hid in the seed of Faith sowne and deduce from it as to seeke out and teach that which was altogether unknowne And if this be so then sure the Church of the Apostles required guidance by a greater degree of Infallibility then the present Church which yet if it follow the Scripture is Infallible enough though it hath not the same degree of Certainty which the Apostles had and the Scripture hath Nor can I tell what to make of Bellarmine that in a whole Chapter disputes five Prerogatives in Certainty of Truth a L. 2 de Con. c. 12. §. ult Cùm utraque sint infallibilis veritatis aquè certa dici possunt that the Scripture hath above a Councell and at last Concludes That They may be said to be equally certain in Infallible Truth The next thing I Consider is Suppose this not Exact but congruous Infallibility in the Church Is it not residing according to Power and Right of Authority in the whole Church and in a Generall Councell only by Power deputed b Nam si Ecclesiae Vniversitati non
est data ulla Authoritas ergo nec Concilio Generali quatenus Ecclesiam Vniversalem repraesentat Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c. 16. §. Quod si Ecclesiae with Mandate to determine The Places of Scripture with Expositions of the Fathers upon them make me apt to believe this S. Peter saith S. Augustine c Petrus personam Ecclesiae Catholicae sustinet huic datae sunt claves quùm Petro datae De Agon Chr. c. 30. did not receive the Keyes of the Church but as sustaining the Person of the Church Now for this Particular suppose the Key of Doctrine be to let in Truth and shut out Error and suppose the Key rightly used infallible in this yet this Infallibility is primely in the Church in whose person not strictly in his owne S. Peter received the Keyes But here Stapleton layes crosse my way againe and would thrust me out of this Consideration He * Rel. Cont. 6. q. 3. A. 5. Sed propter Primatum quem gerebat Ecclesiae ideoque etsi finalitèr Ecclesia accepit tamen formalitèr P â—…trus accepit grants that S. Peter received these Keyes indeed and in the Person of the Church but saith he that was because he was Primate of the Church And therefore the Church received the Keyes finally but S. Peter formally that is if I mistake him not S. Peter for himselfe and his Successors received the Keyes in his owne Right but to this end to benefit the Church of which he was made Pastor But I keepe in my Consideration still and I would have this considered whether it be ever read in any Classicke Author That to receive a thing in the Person of another or sustaining the Person of another is onely meant finally to receive it that is to his good and not in his Right I should thinke he that receives any thing in the Person of another receives it indeed to his good and to his use but in his right too And that the primary and formall right is not in the receiver but in him whose person he sustaines while he receives it A man purchases Land and takes possession of it by an Attourney I hope the †Non est idem possidere alieno Nomine possidere Nam possidet cujus nomine possidetur Procurator aliena rei praestat Ministerium L. Quod meo 18. in Princ. H. de acquir Possess Celsus Attourney being the hand to receive it Instrumentally and no more shall take nor Vse nor right from the Purchaser A Man marries a Wife by a * Quando Matrimonium fit per Procuratorem Procurator est tantùm Conditio sine quâ non Sanch. de matrim L. 〈◊〉 Dispat 11. q. 4. Nu. 28. p. 128. Proxy This is not unusuall among great Persons But I hope he that hath the Proxy and receives the woman with the Ceremonies of Mariage in the Others Name must also leave her to be the Others Wife who gave him power to receive her for him This stumbling-blocke then is nothing and in my Consideration it stands still That the Church in Generall by the hands of the Apostles and their Successors received the Keyes and all Power signified by them and by the assistance of Gods Spirit may be able to use them but still in and by the same hands and perhaps to open and shut in some things infallibly when the Pope and a Generall Councell too forgetting both her and her Rule the Scripture are to seek how to turne these Keyes in their wards The third Particular I Consider is Suppose in the whole Catholike Church Militant an absolute Infallibility in the Prime Foundations of Faith absolutely necessary to Salvation and that this Power of not erring so is not * Non omnia illa que tradit Ecclesia sub Desinitione judiciali i. in Concilio sunt de Necessitate Salutis credenda sed illa duntaxat quae sic tradit concurrente Universali totius Ecclesiae consensu implicitè vel explicitè verè vel interpretativè Gerson Tract de Declaratione veritatum quae credenda sunt c. §. 4. par 1. p. 414. communicable to a Generall Councell which represents it but that the Councell is subject to errour This supposition doth not onely preserve that w ch you desire in the Church an Infallibility but it †Possit tamen contingere quòd quamvis Generale Concilium definiret aliquid contra Fidem Ecclesia Dei non exponeretur periculo Quia possit contingere quòd congregati in Concilio Generali essent pauci viles tam in re quà m in hominum reputatione respectu illorum quâ—… ad illud Concilium Generale minimè convenissent Et tunc illorum levitèr Error exâ—…irparetur per multitndinem meliorum sapientiorum famosiorum illis Quibut etiam multitudo simplicium adhaereret magis c. Och. Dial. P. 3. l. 3. c. 13. meets w th all inconveniences w ch usually have done and daily do perplexe the Church And here is still a Remedy for all things For if Private respects if * Many of these were potent at Ariminum and Seleucia Bandies in a Faction if power and favour of some parties if weaknesse of them which have the mannaging if any unfit mixture of State Councels if any departure from the Rule of the Word of God if any thing else sway and wrench the Councell the Whole a Determinationibus quae à Concilio vel Pontisice Summo siunt super iis dubitationibus quae substantiam sidci concernunt necessariò â—…redendum est dum Vniversalis Ecclesia non reclamet Fr. Pic. Mirand Theor. 8. Church upon evidence found in expresse Scripture or demonstration of this miscariage hath power to represent her selfe in another Body or Councell and to take order for what was amisse either practised or concluded So here is a meanes without any infringing any lawfull Authority of the Church to preserve or reduce unity and yet grant as I did and as the b Artic. 21. Church of England doth That a Generall Councell may erre And this course the Church heretofore took for she did cal and represent her self in a new Councell and define against the Heretical Conclusions of the former as in the case at Ariminum and the second of Ephesus is evident and in other Councels named by †Bel. L. 2. de Concil c 16. §. Tertio Concililium sine Papâ Bellarmine Now the Church is never more cunningly abused then when men out of this Truth that she may erre infer this falshood that she is not to be Obeyed For it will never follow She may erre Therefore She may not Govern For he that sayes Obey them which have the Rule over you and submit your selves for they watch for your soules a Heb. 13. 17. Heb. 13. Commands Obedience and expresly ascribes Rule to the Church And this is not only a Pastorall Power to teach and direct but a Praetorian also to Controll and Censure too where Errors
Animas reâ—…runt Pet. Matt. Loc. Com. Class 3. Ca. 15. Nu 4. they utterly deny any Resurrection of the Body after Death So with them that Article of the Creed is gone Now then if any man will guide his Faith by this Rule of A. C. The Consent of dissenting Parties or the Confession of the Adverse Part hee must denie the Resurrection of the Body from the Grave to Glory and believe none but that of the Soule from sinne to Grace which the Adversaries Confesse and in which the Dissenting Parties agree Punct 3. Thirdly in the great Dispute of all others about the Vnity of the Godhead All dissenting parties Iew Turke and Christian Among Christians Orthodoxe and Anti-Trinitarian of old And in these later times Orthodoxe and Socinian that Horrid and mighty monster of all Heresies agree in this That there is but one God And I hope it is as necessary to believe one God our Father as one Church our Mother Now will A. C. say here 't is safest believing as the dissenting Parties agree or as the Adverse Parties Confesse namely That there is but one God and so deny the Trinity and therewith the Sonne of God the Saviour of the world Fourthly in a Point as Fundamentall in the Faith as Punct 4. this Namely whether Christ be true and very God For which very Point most of the a Hebr. 11. 37. Cyrillus Alexandrinut malè audivit quod Ammonium Martyrem appellavit quem constitit temeritatis poenas dedisse non Necessitate negandi Christi in tormentis esse mortuum Socr. Hist. Eccl. L. 7. c. 14. Martyrs in the Primitive Church laid down their lives The dissenting Parties here were the Orthodoxe Believers who affirme Hee is both God and Man for so our Creed teaches us And all those Hereticks which affirme Christ to bee Man but denie him to bee God as the b Optatus L. 4. Cont. Parmen Arrians and c Tertul. L. de Prascrip c. 48. Carpocratians and d Tertul. Ibid. Cerinthus and e Tertul. L. de Carne Christi c. 14. Hebion with others and at this day the f Si ad Iesu Christi respicias Essentiam at que Naturam non nisi Hominem eum fuisse constantèr affirmaâ—…us Volkelius Lib. 3. de Religione Christianâ cap. 1. Socinians These dissenting Parties agree fully and clearely That Christ is Man Well then Dare A. C. sticke to his Rule here and say 't is safest for a Christian in this great Point of Faith to governe his Beliefe by the Consent of these dissenting Parties or the Confession and acknowledgement of the Adverse Partie and so settle his Beliefe that Christ is a meere Man and not God I hope hee dares not So then this Rule To Resolve a mans Faith into that in which the Dissenting Parties agree or which the Adverse Part confesses is as often false as true And false in as Great if not Greater Matters then those in which it is true And where 't is true A. C. and his fellowes dare not governe themselves by it the Church of Rome condemning those things which that Rule proves And yet while they talke of Certainty nay of Infallibility lesse will not serve their turnes they are driven to make use of such poore shifts as these which have no certainty at all of Truth in them but inferre falshood and Truth alike And yet for this also men will be so weake or so wilfull as to be seduced by them I told you * §. 35. Nu. 2. fine before That the force of the preceding Argument lies upon two things The one expressed and that 's past the other upon the Bye which comes now to be handled And that is your continuall poore Out-cry against us That we cannot be saved because we are out of the Church Sure if I thought I were out I would get in as fast as I could For we confesse as well as you That a Extra Ecclesiam veminem Vivificat Spiritus Sanctus S. Aug. Epist. 5 0. ad finem Field L. 1. de Eccles. c. 13. Vna est Fidelium Vniversalis Ecclesia extra quam nullus salvatur Conc Lateran Can. 1. And yet even there there is no mention of the Romane Church Out of the Catholike Church of Christ there is no Salvation But what do you meane by Out of the Church Sure out of the b And so doth A. C. too Out of the Catholiâ—… Romane Church there is no Possibility of Salvaâ—…on A C. p. 65. Romane Church Why but the Romane Church and the Church of England are but two distinct members of that Catholike Church which is spread over the face of the earth Therefore Rome is not the House where the Church dwels but Rome it selfe as well as other Particular Churches dwels in this great Universall House unlesse you will shut up the Church in Rome as the Donatists did in Africke I come a little lower Rome and oâ—…her Nationall Churches are in this Vniversall Catholike House as so many * And Daughter Sion was God's owne phrase of old of the Church Isa. 1. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hyppol Orat. de Consum mundi Et omnis Ecclesia Virgo appellata est S. Aug. Tr. 13. in S. Ioh. Daughters to whom under Christ the care of the Houshold is committed by God the Father and the Catholike Church the Mother of all Christians Rome as an Elder Sister †For Christ was to be preached to all Nations but that Preaching was to begin at Ierusalem S. Luc. 24. 47. according to the Prophesie Mic. 4. 2. And the Disciples were first called Christians at Antioch Act. 11. 26. And therefore there was a Church there before ever S. Peter came thence to settle One at Rome Nor is it an Opinion destitute either of Authority or Probability That the Faith of Christ was preached and the Sacraments administred here in England before any settlement of a Church in Rome For S. Gildas the Ancientest monument we have and whom the Romanists themselves reverence sayes expresly That the Religion of Christ was received in Britannie Tempore ut scimus summo Tiberii Caesaris c. In the later time of Tiberius Caesar Gildas deexcid Brit. whereas S. Peter kept in Iewrie long after Tiberius his death Therefore the first Conversion of this Iland to the Faith was not by S. Peter Nor from Rome which was not then a Church Against this Rich. Broughton in his Ecclesiasticall History of Great Britaine Centur. 1. C. 8. §. 4. sayes expresly That the Protestants do freely acknowledge that this Clause of the time of Tiberius tempore summo Tiberii Caesaris is wanting in other Copies of that holy Writer and namely in that which was set forth by Pol. Virgil and others Whereas first these words are expresse in a most faire and ancient Manuscript of Gildas to be seene in S t. Rob. Cotton's Study if any doubt it Secondly these words are as expresse in
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is reproach or infamie So that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the holding of the entire Faith in such holinesse of life and conversation as is without all infamy and reproach That is as our English renders that Creed exceeding well Which Faith unlesse a man do keep whole and * Sic Ecclesia dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 5. 27. in veteri Glossario Immaculatus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 undefiled even with such a life as Momus himselfe shall not be able to carpe at So Athanasius who certainly was passing able to expresse himselfe in his owne language in the beginning of that his Creed requires That we keepe it entire without diminution and undefiled without blame And at the end that we believe it faithfully without wavering But Inviolate is the mistaken word of the old Interpreter and with no great knowledge made use of by A. C. And then fourthly though this be true Divinity that he which hopes for salvation must believe the whole Creed and in the right sense too if he be able to comprehend it yet I take the true and first meaning of Inviolate could Athanasius his word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have signified so not to be the holding of the true sense but not to offer violence or a forced sense or meaning upon the Creed which every man doth not that yet believes it not in a true sense For not to believe the true sense of the Creed is one thing But 't is quite another to force a wrong sense upon it Fiftly a reason would be given also why A. C. is so earnest for the whole faith and bawkes the word which goes with it which is holy or undefiled For Athanasius doth alike exclude from salvation those which keepe not the Catholike Faith holy as well as these which keepe it not whole I doubt this was to spare many of his †§. 33. Nu. 6. holy Fathers the Popes who were as farre as any the very lewdest among men without exception from keeping the Catholike Faith holy Sixtly I agree to the next part of his Exposition That a man that will be saved must believe the whole Creed for the true formall reason of divine Revelation For upon the Truth of God thus revealed by himselfe lies the Infallible certainty of the Christian Faith But I do not grant that this is within the Compasse of S. Athanasius his word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor of the word Inviolate But in that respect 't is a meere straine of A. C. And then lastâ—…y though the whole Catholike Church be sufficient in applying this to us and our Beliefe not our Understanding which A. C. is at A. C. p. 70. againe yet Infallible She is not in the proposall of this Revelation to us by every of her Pastours Some whereof amongst you as well as others neglect or forget at least to feed Christ's sheepe as Christ and his Church hath fed them But now that A. C. hath taught us as you see the meaning of S. Athanasius in the next place he tels us A. C. p. 70. That if we did believe any one Article we finding the same formall Reason in all and applied sufficiently by the same meanes to all wou'd easily believe all Why surely we do not believe any one Article onely but all the Articles of the Christian Faith And we believe them for the same formall Reason in all namely Because they are revealed from and by God and sufficiently applied in his Word and by his Churches Ministration But so long as they do not believe all in this sort saith A. C. Looke you He A. C. p. 70. tels us we do not believe all when we professe we do Is this man become as God that he can better tell what we believe them we our selves Surely we do believe all and in that sort too Though I believe were S. Athanasius himselfe alive againe and a plaine man should come to him and tell him he believed his Creed in all and every particular he would admit him for a good Catholike Christian though he were not able to expresse to him the formall reason of that his beliefe Yea but saith A. C. while they will as all Heretickes doe make choice of what they will and what they A. C. p. 70. will not believe without relying upon the Infallible Authority of the Catholike Church they cannot have that one saving Faith in any one Article Why but whatsoever Hereticks doe we are not such nor do we so For they which believe all the Articles as once againe I tell you we do make no choice And we do relie upon the Infallible Authority of the Word of God and the whole Catholike Church And therefore we both can have and have that one saving Faith which believes all the Articles entirely though we cannot believe that any particular Church is infallible And yet againe A. C. will not thus be satisfied but on he goes and adds That although we believe the same A. C. p. 71. truth which other good Catholikes doe in some Articles yet not believing them for the same formall reason of Divine Revelation sufficiently applied by Infallible Church Authority c. we cannot be said to have one and the same Infallible and Divine Faith which other good Catholike Christians have who believe the Articles for this formall Reason sufficiently made knowne to them not by their owne fancy nor the fallible Authority of humane deductions but by the Infallible Authority of the Church of God If A. C. will still say the samething I must still give the same answer First he confesses we believe the same Truth in some Articles I pray marke his phrase the same Truth in some Articles with other good Catholike Christians so farre his pen hath told Truth against his will for he doth not I wot well intend to call us Catholikes and yet his pen being truer then himselfe hath let it fall For the word other cannot be so used as here it is but that we as well as they must be good Catholikes For he that shall say the old Romans were valiant as well as other men supposes the Romans to be valiant men And he that shall say The Protestants believe some Articles as well as other good Catholikes must in propriety of speech suppose them to be good Catholikes Secondly as we do believe those some Articles so do we believe them and all other Articles of Faith for the same formall reason and so applied as but just * §. 38. Nu. 13. before I have expressed Nor do we believe any one Article of Faith by our own fancy or by fallible Authority of humane deductions but next to the Infallible Authority of God's Word we are guided by his Church But then A. C. steps into a Conclusion whither we cannot A. C. p. 71. follow him For he sayes that the Articles to be believed must be sufficiently made
in another and another and so in all of like nature I say in all of like nature And A. C. may remember he expressed himselfe a little before to A. C. p. 71. speake of the Defining of such Divine Truths as are not absolutely necessary to be expresly knowne and actually believed of all sorts of men Now there is there can be no necessity of an Infallible certainty in the whole Catholike Church and much lesse in a Generall Councell of things not * §. 21. N. 5. absolutely necessary in themselves For Christ did not intend to leave an Infallible certainty in his Church to satisfie either Contentious or Curious or Presumptuous Spirits And therefore in things not Fundamentall not Necessary 't is no matter if Councels erre in one and another and a third the whole Church having power and meanes enough to see that no Councell erre in Necessary things and this is certainty enough for the Church to have or for Christians to expect especially since the Foundation is so strongly and so plainely laid downe in Scripture and the Creed that a modest man might justly wonder why any man should run to any later Councell at least for any Infallible certainty Yet A. C. hath more Questions to aske and his next is How we can according to the ordinary Course be A. C. p. 72. Infallibly assured that it erres in one and not in another when it equally by one and the same Authority defines both to be Divine Truth A. C. taking here upon him to defend M. Fisher the Jesuite could not but see what I had formerly written concerning this difficult Question about Generall Councels And to all that being large he replied little or nothing Now when he thinks that may be forgotten or as if it did not at all lie in his way he here turnes Questionist to disturbe that businesse and indeed the Church as much as he can But to this Question also I answer againe If any Generall-Councell doe now erre either it erres in things absolutely necessary to Salvation or in things not necessary If it erre in things Necessary we can be infallibly assured by the Scripture the Creeds the foure first Councels and the whole Church where it erres in one and not in another If it be in non necessariis in things not necessary 't is not requisite that we should have for them an infallible assurance As for that which followes it is notoriously both cunning and false 'T is false to suppose that a Generall Councell defining two things for Divine Truths and erring in one but not erring in another doth define both equally by one and the same Authority And 't is cunning because these words by the same Authority are equivocall and must be distinguished that the Truth which A. C. would hide may appeare Thus then suppose a Generall Councell erring in one point and not in another it doth define both and equally by the same delegated Authority which that Councell hath received from the Catholike Church But it doth not define both and much lesse equally by the same Authority of the Scripture which must be the Councels Rule as well as private mens no nor by the same Authority of the whole Catholike Church who did not intentionally give them equall power to define Truth and errour for Truth And I hope A C. dares not say the Scripture according to which all Councels that will uphold Divine Truth must Determine doth equally give either ground or power to define Errour and Truth To his former Questions A. C. adds That if we leave this to be examined by any private man this examination not being Infallible had need to be examined by another A. C p. 72. and this by another without end or ever comming to Infallible certainty necessarily required in that one faith which is necessary to salvation and to that peace and unity which ought to be in the Church Will this inculcating the same thing never be left I told the lesuite a §. 32. N. 5. §. 33. Consid. 7. Nu. 4. before that I give no way to any private man to be Iudge of a Generall Councell And there also I shewed the way how an erring Councell might be rectified and the peace of the Church either preserved or restored without lifting any private spirit above a Councell and without this processe in Infinitum which A. C. so much urges and which is so much declined in all b Arist. 1. Post Tex 6 4. Metaph T. 14. Sciences For as the understanding of a man must alwaies have somewhat to rest upon so must his Faith But a c §. 38 Nu. 〈◊〉 private man first for his owne satisfaction and after for the Churches if he have just cause may consider of and examine by the a Hic non loquimur de Decisione seu Determinatione Doctrinali quae ad unumquemque virum peritum spectare dignoscitur sed de Authoritativâ Iudiciali c la. Almain L. de Author Eccl. c. 10. princ Iudgement of discretion though not of power even the Definitions of a Generall Councell But A. C. concludes well That an Infallible certainty is necessary for that one Faith which is necessary to salvation And of that as I expressed b §. 38. Num. 1. before a most infallible certainty we have already in the Scripture the Creeds and the foure first Generall Councels to which for things Necessary and Fundamentall in the Faith we need no assistance from other Generall Councels And some of your c Sunt qui nescio quà ducti ratione sentiunt non esse opus Generali Concilio De Constantiensi loquitur dicentes omnia bene à Patribus nostris Ordinata ac Constituta modò ab omnibus legitimè fideliter servarentur Fatemur equidem id ipsum esse verissimum Tamen cùm nihil fere servetur c. Pet. de Aliaco L. de reformat Eccles. fine So that after-Councels are rather to Decree for Observance then to make any new Determinations of the Faith owne very honest and very Learned were of the same Opinion with me And for the peace and unity of the Church in things absolutely necessary we have the same infallible direction that wee have for Faith But in Things not necessary though they be Divine Truths also if about them Christian men doe differ 't is no more then they have done more or lesse in all Ages of the Church and they may differ and yet preserve the d Non omnis Error in his qua fidei sunt est aut Infidelitas aut Haeresis Holkot in 1. Sent. q. 1. ad 4. K. One necessary Faith and e Scimus quosdam quod semel imbiberint nolle deponere nec proposstum suum facilè mutare sed salvo inter Collegas pacis concordiae vinculo quaedam propria quae apud se semel sint usurpata retinere Quâ in re nec nos vim cuiquam facimus aut legem
Errour and Superstition which sutes not with my own fancy But how can this possibly be since I submit my judgement in all humility to the Scripture interpreted by the Primitive Church and upon new and necessary doubts to the judgement of a lawfull and free Generall Councell And this I do from my very heart and do abhorre in matters of Religion that my own or any private mans fancy should take any place and least of all against things generally held or practised by the Vniversall Church which to oppose in such things is certainly as d S. Aug. Epist. â—…8 〈◊〉 5. S. Augustine cals it Insolentissimae insaniae an Attempt of most insolent madnesse But those things which the Church of England charges upon the Romane Party to be superstitious and erroneous are not held or practised in or by the universall Church generally either for time or place And now I would have A. C. consider how justly all this may be turned upon himselfe For he hath nothing to pretend that there are not grosse Superstitions and Errours in the Romane Perswasion unlesse by intolerable pride he will make himselfe and his Party Iudge of Controversies as in effect he doth for he will be judged by none but the Pope and a Councell of his ordering or unlesse he will take Authority to free from Superstition and Errour whatsoever sutes with his fancy though it be even Superstition it selfe and run crosse to what hath been generally held in the Catholike Church of Christ Yea though to do so be in S. Augustine's judgement most insolent madnesse And A. C. spake in this most properly when he called it taking of Authority For the Bishop and Church of Rome have in this particular of judging Controversies indeed taken that Authority to themselves which neither Christ nor his Church Catholike did ever give them Here the Conference ended with this Conclusion And as I hope God hath given that Lady mercy so I heartily pray that he will be pleased to give all of you a Light of his Truth and a Love to it that you may no longer be made Instruments of the Pope's boundlesse Ambition and this most unchristian * §. 33. Nu 6. braine-sick device That in all Controversies of the Faith he is Infallible and that by way of Inspiration and Prophecie in the Conclusion which he gives To the due Consideration of which and God's mercy in Christ I leave you To this Conclusion of the Conference between me and the Iesuite A. C. sayes not much But that which he doth say is either the selfe same which he hath said already or els is quite mistaken in the businesse That which he hath said already is this That in matters A. C. p. 73. of Faith we are to submit our judgements to such Doctors and Pastors as by Visible Continuall Succession without change brought the Faith downe from Christ and his Apostles to these our dayes and shall so carrie it to the end of the world And that this Succession is not found in any other Church differing in Doctrine from the Romane Church Now to this I have given a full Answer a §. 57. Nu. 3 4. already and therefore will not trouble the Reader with needlesse and troublesome repetition Then he brings certaine places of Scripture to prove the Pope's Infallibility But to all these places I have likewise answered b §. 25. Nu. 5. before And therefore A. C. needed not to repeat them againe as if they had been unanswerable One Place of Scripture onely A. C. had not urged before either for proofe of this Continued Visible Succession or for the Pope's Infallibility Nor doth A. C. distinctly A. C. p. 73. set down by which of the two hee will prove it The Place is c Epheâ—… 4. 11. Ephes. 4. Christ ascending gave some to be Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists some Pastors and Teachers c. for the edification of the Church Now if he do mean to prove the Pope's Infallibility by this place in his Pastorall Iudgement Truly I doe not see how this can possibly be Collected thence d Pontificatus Summus disertè positus est ab Apostolo in illis verbis Eph. 4. 11. in illis clarioribus 1. Cor. 12. 28. Ipse posuit in Ecclesia primùm Apostolos c. Bellar. L. 1. de Ro. Pont. c. 1. §. Respondeo Pontificatum And he gives an excellent reason for it Siquidem summa potestas Ecclesiastica non solùm data est Petro sedetiam aliis Apostolis Ibid. So belike by this Reason the Apostle doth clearely expresse the Popedome because all the rest of the Apostles had as much Ecclesiasticall Power as S. Peter had But then Bellarmine would salve it up with this That this Power is given Petro ut Ordinarie Pastori cui succederetur aliis verò tanquam Delegatis quibus non succederetur Ibid. but this is meere Begging of the Question and will never be granted unto him And in the meane time we have his absolute Confession for the other That the Supreme Ecclesiasticall Power was not in S. Peter alone but in all the Apostles Christ gave some to be Apostles for the Edification of his Church Therefore S. Peter and all his Successours are infallible in their Pastorall Iudgment And if he meane to prove the Continued Visible Succession which he saith is to he found in no Church but the Romane there 's a little more shew but to no more purpose A little more shew Because it is added †Eph. 4. 13. verse 13. That the Apostles and Prophets c. shall continue at their worke and that must needs be by succession till we all meet in Vnity and perfection of Christ. But to no more purpose For t is not said that they or their Successors should Continue at this their worke in a Personall uninterrupted Succession in any one Particular Church Romane or other Nor ever will A. C. bee able to proove that such a Succession is necessary in any one particular place And if he could yet his owne words tell us the Personall Succession is nothing if the Faith be not brought downe without change from Christ and his Apostles to this day and so to the end of the world Now here 's a peece of cunning too The Faith A. C. p. 73. brought down unchanged For if A. C. meane by the Faith the Creed and that in Letter 't is true the Church of Rome hath received and brought downe the Faith unchanged from Christ and his Apostles to these our dayes But then t is apparently false That no Church differing from the Romane in Doctrine hath kept that Faith unchanged and that by a visible and continued Succession For the Greek Church differs from the Romane in Doctrine and yet hath so kept that Faith unchanged But if he meane by the Faith unchanged and yet brought down in a continuall visible Succession not only the Creed in Letter but in Sense
is in Scripture it selfe is not bright enough it cannot beare sufficient witnesseto itselfe The Testimonie of the Holy Ghost that is most infallible but ordinarily it is not so much as considerable in this Question which is not how or by what meanes we believe but how the Scripture may be proposed as a Credible Object fit for Beliefe And for Reason no man expects that that should proove it it doth service enough if it enable us to disproove that which misguided men conceive against it If none of these then be an Absolute and sufficient meanes to prove it either we must finde out another or see what can bâ—… more wrought out of these And to all this again A. C. sayes nothing For the Tradition of the Church then certaine it is wee must distinguish the Church before wee can judge right of the Validity of the Tradition For if the speech bee of the Prime Christian Church the Apostles Disciples and such as had immediate Revelation from Heaven no question but the Voyce and Tradition of this Church is Divine not aliquo modo in a sort but simply and the Word of God from them is of like Validity written or delivered And against this Tradition of which kinde this That the Bookes of Scripture are the Word of God is the most generall and uniforme the Church of England never excepted And when S. †L. 1. cont Epis. Fund c. 5. Ego vero non crederem Evangelio nisi me Catholicae Ecclesiae commoveret Authoritas Augustine said I would not believe the Gospell unlesse the Authority of the Catholike Church mooved mee which Place you urged at the Conference though you are now content to slide by it some of your owne will not endure should be understood save * Occham Dial. p. 1. L. 1. c. 4. Intelligitur solum de Ecclesiâ—… qua fuit tempore Apostolorum of the Church in the time of the Apostles only and a Biel. lect 2â—… in C. Missâ—… A tempore Christi Apostolorum c. And so doth S. August take Eccles. Contra Fund some of the Church in Generall not excluding after-ages But sure to include Christ and his Apostles And the certainety is there abundance of certainety in it selfe but how farre that is evident to us shall after appeare But this will not serve your turne The Tradition of the present Church must bee as Infallible as that of the Primitive But the contrary to this is prooved * §. 16. Nu. 6. before because this Voyce of the present Church is not simply Divine To what end then serves any Tradition of the present Church To what Why to a very good end For first it serves by a full consent to worke upon the mindes of unbelievers to move them to reade and to consider the Scripture which they heare by so many Wise Learned and Devoute men is of no meaner esteeme then the Word of God And secondly It serves among Novices Weaklings and Doubters in the Faith to instruct and confirme them till they may acquaint themselves with and understand the Scripture which the Church delivers as the Word of God And thus againe some of your owne understand the fore-cited Place of S. Augustine I would not believe the Gospell c. * Sive Infâ—…les sive in Fide Novitii Can. Loc. L. 2. c 8. Neganti aut omnino nescientâ—… Scripturam Stapl. Relect. Cent. 4. q. 1. A 3. For he speakes it either of Novices or Doubters in the Faith or else of such as were in part Infidels You at the Conference though you omit it here would needs have it that S. Augustine spake even of the †Quid si fateamur Fideles etiam Ecclesiae Authoritate commoveri ut Scripturas recipiant Non tamen inde sequitur eos hoc modo penitus 〈◊〉 aut nullâ aliâ fortioreque ratione induci Quis autem Christianus est quem Ecclesia Christi commâ—…dans Scripturam Christi non commoveat Whitaker Disp. de sacrâ Scripturá Contro 1. q 3. c. 8. vbt 〈◊〉 locum hunc S. Aug. faithfull which I cannot yet thinke For he speakes to the Manichees and they had a great part of the Infidell in them And the words immediately before these are If thou shouldest finde one Qui Evangelio nondum credit which did not yet believe the Gospell what wouldest thou doe to make him believe a Et ibid. Quibus obtemperavi dicentibus Credite Evangelio Therefore he speakes of himselfe when he did not believe Ego verò non Truly I would not c. So to these two ends it serves and there need be no Question between us But then every thing that is the first Inducer to believe is not by and by either the Principall Motive or the chiefe and last Object of Beliefe upon which a man may rest his Faith Vnlesse we shall be of b Certum est quod tenemur credere omnibus contentis in Sacro Canone quia Ecclesia credit ex caratione soluÌ„ Ergo per prius magis tenemur Credere Ecclesiae quam Evangelio Almain in 3. Dist. 24 Conclus 6. Dub. 6. And to make a shew of proof for this he falsifies S Aug. most notoâ—…ously and reads that known place not Nisi me commoveret as all read it but compelleret Patet quia dicit Augustinus Evangelio non CredereÌ„ nisi aa hoc me compelleret Ecclesiae Au. horitas Ibid. And so also Gerson 〈◊〉 In Declarat veritatum quae credendae sunt c. part 1 p. 414. §. 3. But in a most ancient Manuscript in Corp. Ch. Colledge Library in Cambridge the words are Nisi me commoveret c. Lacobus Almain's Opinion That we are per prius magis first and more bound to believe the Church then the Gospell Which your own Learned men as you may see by c Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8. fo 34. b. §. 16. Num. 6. Mel. Canus reject as Extreame foule and so indeed it is The first knowledge then after the Quid Nominis is knowne by Grammer that helpes to open a mans understanding and prepares him to bee able to Demonstrate a Truth and make it evident is his Logicke But when he hath made a Demonstration he resolves the knowledge of his Conclusion not into his Grammaticall or Logicall Principles but into the Immediate Principles out of which it is deduced So in this Particular a man is probably led by the Authority of the present Church as by the first informing induceing perswading Meanes to believe the Scripture to be the Word of God but when he hath studied considered and compared this Word with it selfe and with other Writings with the helpe of Ordinary Grace and a minde morally induced and reasonably perswaded by the Voyce of the Church the Scripture then gives greater and higher reasons of Credibility to it selfe then Tradition alone could give And then he that Believes resolves his last and full Assent That Scripture is of
known unto us by the Infallible Authority of the Church of God that is of men Infallibly assisted by the Spirit of God as all lawfully called continued and confirmed Generall Councels are assisted That the whole Church §. 21. Nu. 5. of God is infallibly assisted by the Spirit of God so that it cannot by any error fall away totally from Christ the Foundation I make no doubt For if it could the gates of hell had prevailed against it which our Saviour assures me S. Matth. 16. they shall never be able to doe Matth. 16. 18. But that all Generall Councels be they never so lawfully called continued and confirmed have Infallible Assistance I utterly deny 'T is true that a Generall Councell de post facto after 't is ended and admitted by the whole Church is then Infallible for it cannot erre in that which it hath already clearely and truly determined without Errour But that a Generall Councell à parte ante when it first sits down and continues to deliberate may truly be said to be Infallible in all its after-determinations whatsoever they shall be I utterly deny And it may be it was not without cunning that A. C. shuffled these words together Called Continued and Confirmed for be it never so lawfully called and continued it may erre But after 't is confirmed that is admitted by the whole Church then being found true it is also Infallible that is it deceives no man For so all Truth is and is to us when 't is once knowne to be Truth But then many times that Truth which being known is necessary and Infallible was before both contingent and fallible in the way of proving it and to us And so here a Generall Councell is a most probable but yet a fallible way of inducing Truth though the Truth once induced may be after 't is found necessary and Infallible And so likewise the very Councell it selfe for that particular in which it hath concluded Truth But A. C. must both speake and meane of a Councell set downe to deliberate or els he sayes nothing Now hence A. C. gathers That though everything defined to be a Divine Truth in Generall Councels is not absolutely A. C. p. 71. necessary to be expresly knowne and actually believed as some other Truths are by all sorts yet no man may after knowledge that they are thus defined doubt deliberately much lesse obstinately deny the Truth of any thing so defined Well in this Collection of A. C. First we have this granted That every thing defined in Generall Councels is not absolutely necessary to be expresly knowne and actually believed by all sorts of men And this no Protestant that I know denies Secondly it is affirmed that after knowledge that these Truths are thus defined no man may doubt deliberately much lesse obstinately deny any of them Truly Obstinately as the word is now in common use carries a fault along with it And it ought to be farre from the temper of a Christian to be obstinate against the Definitions of a Generall Councell But that he may not upon very probable grounds in an humble and peaceable manner deliberately doubt yea and upon Demonstrative grounds constantly deny even such Definitions yet submitting himselfe and his grounds to the Church in that or another Councell is that which was never till now imposed upon Believers For 't is one thing for a man deliberately to doubt and modestly to propose his Doubt for satisfaction which was ever lawfull and is many times necessary And quite an other thing for a man upon the pride of his owne Iudgement * S. 32. N. 5. to refuse externall Obedience to the Councell which to doe was never Lawfull nor can ever stand with any Government For there is all the reason in the world the Councell should be heard for it selfe as well as any such Recusant whatsoever and that before a Iudge as good as it selfe at least And to what end did †S. Aug. L. 2. de Bapt. cont Donat c. 3. Ipsaque plenaria sape priora à posterioribus emendari S. Augustine say That one Generall Councell might be amended by another the former by the Later if men might neither denie nor so much as deliberately doubt of any of these Truths defined in a Generall Councell And A. C. should have done well to have named but one ancient Father of the Primitive Church that ever affirmed this * S. 21. N. 5. For the Assistance which God gives to the whole Church in generall is but in things simply necessary to eternall Salvation therefore more then this cannot be given to a Generall Councell no nor so much But then if a Generall Councell shall forget it selfe and take upon it to define things not absolutely necessary to bee expresly knowne or actually believed which are the things which A. C. here speakes of In these as neither Generall Councell nor the whole Church have infallible Assistance so have Christians liberty modestly and peaceably and upon just grounds both deliberarely to doubt and constantly to deny such the Councels Definitions For instance the Councell of Florence first defined Purgatory to be believed as a Divine Truth and matter of Faith a I know the Greekes subscribed that Councell Sed in illo Concilio Graeca Ecclesiae diu restitit Pet. Mart. Loc. com classe tertiâ c. 9. nu 13. Et in ultimâ Sessione istius Concilii Graeci dixerunt se sine Authoritate totius Ecclesiae Orientalis Quaestionem aliam tractare non posse praeter illam de processione Sp. Sancti Postea verò consentiente Imperatore tractârunt de aliis c. Florent Concil Sess. ult apud Nicolinum To. 4. p. 894. c. This savours of some art to bring in the Greeks Howsoever this showes enough against Bellarmine That all the Greekes did not constantly teach Purgatory as he assirms L. 1. de Purgat c. 11. §. De tertio modo if that Councell had Consent enough so to define it This was afterwards deliberately doubted of by the Protestants after this as constantly denied then confirmed by the b Con. Trid. Sess. 25. in Bullâ Pii 4. super formà Iuramenti professionis Fidei Councell of Trent and an Anathema set upon the head of every man that denies it And yet scarce any Father within the first three hundred yeares ever thought of it I know a Omnes veteres Graeci Latini ab ipso tempore ApostoleruÌ„ constanter docuerunt Purgatorium esse Bel. L. 1. de Purg. c 11 §. De tertio modo Bâ—…llarmine affirmes it boldly That all the Fathers both Greeke and Latine did constantly teach Purgatory from the very Apostles times And where he brings his Proofs out of the Fathers for this Point he divides them into two Rancks b Bel. Lib 1 de Purg c 6 §. 1. In the first he reckons them which affirme Prayer for the dead as if that must necessarily inferre Purgatory Whereas