our assent vnto Diuine Truths springs from these three fountaines 1 From the Infallible Authority of the Reuelation 2 From the excellent greatnesse and worth of things Reuealed 3 From the manifest experiment of some part of their Truth knowne vnto vs. Of these in order The first and chiefest ground whereon is built the Certainty of faiths assent is The Infallible truth and Authority of Diuine Reuelations I call this the chiefest ground because it is that whereunto finally all our Beliefe is resolued For aske the question wherefore do you firmely belieue the Articles of the â—reed The answere is Because God hath reuealed them in Scriptures to be belieued The reason of which answere is this because What euer God saith istrue Now this is a principle in Nature aswell knowne to the reasonable creature as that they haue reason it is grauen deepe vpon the conscience of euery one which tels him That God is so infinitely Wise that hee can be ignorant of nothing that none can circumuent and ouer each him And againe that he is so infinitely good holy and Iust that no â—ie can come of this truth as Iohn speaketh Iohn 2. 21. Wisedome it selfe cannot bee deceiued Truth it selfe cannot deceiue and God is both Wherefore none but a Iesuite like Becaâ—… whose wits haue serued an apprentiship in the mystery of lying and aequiuocation vnder the Father of â—ies would haue affirmed that the Prophets and Apostles though they knew it was God that reuealed heauenly mysteries vnto them yet they knew not Euidently whether God was not deceiued himselfe or would not deceiue them Alying surmise much like that of the Serpent when hee tempted the Woman Yea saith he hath God indeed said so Yes the woman answeres God hath said so and we know it But Satan replies Are you sure that God spake true when hee said it The Diuell then denyed it and Becanus staggers at it as a thing very doubtfull telling vs that when God speakes man cannot be euidently certaine whether he speaks true or false But we reiect with abomination such a suggestion to Infidelity that strikes at the roote of all Christian Faith and shakes the lowest foundation-stone in all that building we know and are euidently assured That God is truth and in him or of him there is no Lie From this first ground of faith in Gods Essentiall truth wee draw another that whersoeuer any Reuelation is certainely known or belieued to be of God there the reasonable creature doth fully assent to the truth of things reuealed Whence all the holy Pen-men of Scriptures did for themselues most certainely belieue the truth of all things they deliuered though sometimes they vnderstood but darkely what was the meaning of that which they spake and wrote because they knew that they were taught them immediatly from God Yea the diuels themselues when they know as they doe these reuelations to be from God howeuer they tempt men to distrust and out of malice raises vp lies and slanders vpon Gods truth yet in the meane time are themselues cleerely conuinced of this truth and doe assent vnto it in their consciences The diuell knew well that Gods threatning to Alam was a certaine truth euen whilst he perswaded him it was but a lie And when he inspired the Pharisies to call Christ. Samaritan Belzebub a possessed Daemoniacke a Deceiuer and all to nought euen then himselfe could not but confesse that he was that Christ Iesus the Sonne of the most high God Mar. 5. 7. But this is the malice of Hell to sight against the Light and furiously to oppose what we cannot but acknowledge to be truth Well Thus far then our Faith goes vpon a sure ground That whatsoeuer God saith is true And againe When wee know euidently that God sayes it wee are ready to belieue it without further question But here in the next place is all the doubt How know wee infallibly that God is the Author of the Scriptures and that such things as therein are proposed for vs to belieue are reuealed by God himselfe This is a fundamentall Question wherein it greatly behoues euery Christian to be rightly informed It would require a large discourse to bee prosecuted through euery particular I shall but onely touch vpon the generall and giue occasion to each one carefully to bethinke himselfe that his faith be built on the rocke and not vpon the Sand. The Question is How is it knowne certenly that the Scriptures are the very word of God it hath two braÌ„ches 1 Toaching each seuerall part of Scripture as it was reuealed and giuen to the Church of God How did the People of the Iewes know that what was deliuered by Moses and other Prophets after him from time to time was the word of God To which I answere they knew the writing and Preaching of Moses and the Prophets to be of diuine Inspiration partly by the holinesse of the Doctrine which they taught the liuely power and worke whereof the hearts of the godly then felt partly by the miracles which they wrought for confirmation of their propheticall office partly by the certaine and infallible accomplishment of all their prophecies Of which triall of Prophets and their prophesies wee haue a generall rule set downe Deut. 18. 18. c. I will raise them vp a Prophet from among their brethren like vnto thee and will pur my words in his mouth and hee shall speake vnto them all that I command him 19. And whosoeuer will not hearken vnto my words which hee shall speake in my name I will require it of him 20. But the Prophet that shall presume to speake a word in my name which I haue not commanded him to speake or that speaketh in the name of other gods euen the same Prophet shall die 2â— And if thou thinke in thine heart How shall wee know the word which the Lord hathnot spoken 22. When a Prophet speaketh in the name of the Lord if the thing follow not nor come to passe that is the thing which the Lord hath not spoken but the Prophet hath spoken it presumptuously thou shalt not so be afraid of him By the same meanes were the preaching of Christ also the preaching and writing of the Apostles knowne in their times 2 Touching the whole Scripture as it is now compleatly deliuered vnto vs in writing How can it euidently and infallibly appeare vnto vs that what wee finde written in the Bible is of diuine inspiration the very oracles of God not mans Inuentions In the solution of this Question our aduersaries of the Romish and wee of the Reformed Churches differ irreconcileably Wee affirme that the Scriptures are knowne to be of God by themselues they maintaine that we cannot bee certaine of the Scriptures Diuinity by any other argument then the testimony of the Church which say they doth infallibly propose vnto vs what is to be belieued what is not to be belieued So that ask a Roman Catholike Wherfore do you
doth not teach that 't is honest to beleeve him Can any thing be more senselesse or will not every man in the world excepting a Iesuite confesse that the very light of nature teacheth him to acknowledge that it is a very good and honest thing to beleeve Gods authority let him reveale his will unto us which way hee please But t is the fashion of these writers to dorre their readers with a distinction and so to leave them with a prius conceditur posterius negatur distracted and confounded rather than any whit satisfied This of the first reason That a man may beleeve without the helpe of Gods grace the second followes which also confirmes the former viz. 2. That is no act of Iustifying Faith which is found in Divells Heretickes Hypocrites and Reprobates But this assent unto divine Revelations because of Gods authority is in those both divells and men Ergo It is no act of Iustifying Faith The major is agreed upon that the acts of Iustifying Faith are found onely in those who are justified which cannot be said those persons mentioned The minor is likewise evident That Divells Hereticks Hypocrites and Reprobates may and doe assent unto such propositions as God reveales and that because of Gods authority who doth reveale them This hath beene formerly shewed unto you in the explication of the nature of a generall Faith and t is so cleere by Scriptures and experience that our adversaries cannot deny it The forenamed Schoole-man grants it manifestly as concerning Hypocrites and wicked livers who yet professe the Catholicke Faith for disputing Cap. 8. de Habit. Fidei touching that vertue which is infused into the Will whereby it may if it list command the Supernaturall assent of the Vnderstanding heetelleth us that this Vertue is a distinct vertue from all others and is neither Charity nor Obedience § 10. in conclus and that it is perfect in it selfe though it be without them according as other morall habites of justice temperance c. are Whence hee tells us § 11. in plaine termes Potest esse sinâ— charitate ut patet in Christiano peccatorâ— qui Fidem habet siue gratia charitate A Christian that is a sinner may have Faith without grace and charity What Iustifying Faith yea according to the Romish Divinity for he may beleeve the truth of the articles of Religion because of Gods authority who hath revealed them and to do this is a Supernaturall assent and the proper act of Iustifying Faith as these men teach Now touching the Divells and Heretickes the man is a little more coy He will not confesse that the Divels yeeld that assent of Faith he speakes of They doe not beleeve the mysteries of Religion Per assensum supernat uralem i. e. because of Gods authority but Per assensum quendam naturalem qui non oritur ex pio affectu sed ex vi pondere argumentorum quibus intellectus illorum convincitur cap. 11. quaest 2. § 4. We grant willingly that they doe not assent out of any good affection nor is that needfull to make their assent supernaturall for in hypocriticall impenitent and reprobate Catholickes there 's no pious affection moving them to beleeve and yet if wee beleeve their Doctors there is in them a supernaturall assent of Faith But for that other thing That the divells beleeve onely ex vi pondere argumentorum t is utterly false seeing it cannot be doubted but that they beleeve the truth of many future contingents wherof they are not convinced by any force of argument from the things themselves but from authority of Gods Revelations in his Word or otherwise Which infallible truth of God in all his revelations is so cleerely apprehended by these damned Spirits that it makes them to acknowledge the truth and goodnesse of that which otherwise they abhorre Wherefore that comparison which hee makes betweene the faith of 〈◊〉 and wicked Christians is most vaine and erroneoâ—… 〈◊〉 â—…ith hee you consider the faith of either of them wâ—…â—egard to the Object there 's par ratio both being â—…d about the same things But if you take it with râ—â—ard 〈◊〉 honesty of the act so the assent of the Divells is farrâ—… 〈◊〉 than that of bad Christians who have faith anâ—â—…rkes But wherein He tells us The Faith of Châ—… Supernaturalis Voluntaria Honesta The Faith of Divells is Naturalis Coacta pravis circumstantijs vitiata All which are false For the Faith of Divells is Supernaturallas much as that of wicked Christians seeing both beleeve propter authoritatem Dei revelantis which is formalis ratio of Supernaturall assent Againe the Faith of divells is as voluntary as that of wicked men for it cannot bee wrought in either by compulsion simply and if the Majesty of Gods infallible truth command the assent of Divells to that which they love not doth not the same cause also prevaile with ungodly men who beare as little true affection to God and Goodnesse as the divells doe Lastly the Faith of Divells is as Honest as that of wicked men For let any man speake Is it not as Honest a thing for wicked angâ—lls to beleeve what God saith as it is for wicked men If not wherein lies the dishonesty of that act in the angells or wherein stands the honesty of that act in men Can there be named any circumstances which make the Divels Faith dishonest but that the same or as bad may bee alledged against the honesty of the Faith of wicked Christians Sure I am what everthese men conceit of the Honesty of Faith without workes in men Saint Iames is plaine in his comparison that t is no whit better than the Faith of Divells Iames 2. 19. Thou beleevest that there is one God thou doest well the Divells also beleeve it and doe not they doe well too Yes haply better than thou for they beleeve and tremble which thou doest not To conclude in the last place we object that Heretickes have such a kinde of Faith as the Romanists call Iustifying For though they erre in some articles of Faith yet others they assent unto because of Gods authority revealing them This Becanus denies telling us that Heretici qui veâ— in uno articulo sunt infideles omnem fidem amiserunt cap. 11. quaest 3. § 4. which answer hee makes upon this ground That the Habite of Faith is lost by any one act of infidelity § 2. and therefore whereas Heretickes beleeve many things t is but upon a kinde of custome and by a humane faith We reply and say that that position One act of infidelity destroyes the habit of Faith is false and contrary to reason and Scriptures as hereafter I shall have occasion to shew speaking of the opposites of Faith For the point we grant that He who is a persevering Heretick though but in one fundamentall article he hath no justifying faith not because he hath lost it but because he never had it But
wee affirme that for that other generall faith in assenting to the truth of divine things because of Gods authority this faith as he had when hee was a Catholike so hee still hath it in part now he is an Hereticke and by the same faith he beleeved matters of Religion before his Heresie by the same he beleeves them afterward And those that are Heretickes indeed or such whom wee stile by that name let them bee asked why they beleeve such and such points of religion they 'le answer truly and resolutely they beleeve them because of Gods authoritie that hath revealed them in his Word and for such things wherein they dissent could they be perswaded the Scripture did teach the contrary they would for the same authority sake beleeve the contrary The Iesuite is yet urgent upon us and tells us that no Calvinist or Lutheran beleeves Gods authority but doubts of it Wee tell him againe that 's a foule slander and more than hee can make good yes that he will by a distinction too Gods authority considered Abstractivè in it selfe so indeed we doubt not of But Gods authoritie considered practicé in respect of the Church as it is proposed unto us by the Pastors of the Church so we doubt of it because wee admit not the judgement of the Church but follow our owne phantasie ibid. § 7. To this we answer that we passe very little to be judged Infidells upon such a ground because wee call in question the supposed infallibility and authority of the Romish Church We finde in Scriptures no such straight relation betweene her authority and Gods authority that if wee call hers in question wee must needs doubt of his Wee doubt not of the authority of Scriptures but we denie that the Romish Church hath any infallible authority of judging and interpreting them No one man nor all men ought to usurpe such authority over our faith And let the truth be judge who be the greater Insidells Calvinists and Lutherans that beleeve the Scriptures authority for its owne sake or popish Catholikes that will not beleeve but for mans saying Thus you have this second reason somewhat largely that Faith which our Adversaries call Iustifying is in Divells and ungodly men therefore it is not that justifying faith which the Scriptures speake of and appropriate unto the Elect Tit. 1. 1. Here it is but a vaine shift our Adversaries make to runne unto that poore distinction of Fides Formata and Informis namely that Faith may exist two wayes 1. Vt est conjuncta cum charitate ut in homine iusto and then Faith is called formata viva because Charity is Vita animae In this case Faith can Elicere operationes vitales seu aeternae vitae moritorias Gal. 5. 6. Faith worketh by Charity 2. Vt est separata à charitate quod fit in homine peccatore qui amissa per peccatum mortale charitate retinet fidem quamdin Catholicus est This Faith is called Informis mortuâ— nec potest habere operationes vitales seu meritorias Iam. 2. 17. Faith if it have no workes is dead in it selfe and ver 26. as the body without the spirit c. Becan tom 3. cap. 10. § 4. 5. 6. Thus they would have the quality and proper act of justifying Faith to be in reprobate men and divells but yet it doth them no good because t is without Charity Faith without Workes may be in its nature justifying Faith because t is an assent to the articles of Religion upon Gods authority but yet it justifies not because t is without workes Hereunto we reply that in this distinction there is not a syllable of sound doctrine nor yet of reasonable sense Thus much we grant that there is according to St. Iames. a kinde of â—aith without Workes namely a generall assent unto the truth of divine things but we denie that this kinde of Faith is for the substance one and the same with that Faith which is properly called Iustifying Faith without workes is of one kinde Faith with workes is of another not onely in regard of consequent because one hath workes the other hath not but in regard of their proper nature because the quality and acts of the one differ from the quality and acts of the other Wherefore in vaine doe they tell us that the same Faith is sometime with sometime without Charity Iustifying Faith is never without Charity and that which is is not Iustifying Vnto that conceit that Charity is the forme of Faith wee say t is Metaphysicall and such as no good construction can be made of it He saith Charity is Vita animae hee would say Vita fidei but take his meaning Faith lives by Charity as the body by the forme or soule Here 1. T is absurd to make one habite of the minde the forme of the other wee may as well say that Temperance is the forme of Liberality Each habite of the minde is distinguished by its proper object and actions and this the Schooleman cap. 18. quaest 2. § 3. grants in the strict sense 2. How doth Faith live by Charity We say it lives with Charity as its fellow-grace not by Charity as its soule We say without Charity it is dead yet t is not Charity that gives it life The Iesâ—it saith it doth for being joined with it Faith can elicere vitales operationes performe vitall acts Yea but what are these actions Faith hath but two acts 1. proper and immediate viz. Credere seu Assentiri 2. by consequent Iustificare Neither of these comes from Charity even by these mens owne doctrine Not the first for Catholickes without Charity may assent to the articles of Faith for Gods authority sake Not the second for to Iustifie in the Popish sense is to Sanctifie of a bad man to make a good Now how absurd is it to say Faith by Charity Iustifies i. e. Faith by the love of God and our neighbour sanctifies us or taking Charity for the Act not the Habite Faith by good workes of prayer fasting almes-deeds c. sanctifies us Both these are senselesse propositions for t is manifest that hee who hath Charity i. e. loves God and his Neighbour and doth good workes is not as yet to bee sanctified and made good of bad but is thereby sanctified already T is true that Faith is one part of our sanctification or inherent grace and Charity is another but neither doth Faith sanctifie by Charity nor Charity by Faith but we are sanctified by both together If there by any other vitall acts of Faith they should have beene named The glosse which the Iesuit addeth whereby he interpreteth what hee meaneth by vitall operations viz. aeternae vitae meritorias such as deserve eternall life carrieth with it as absurd a sense as the other Thus Charity is the forme and life of Faith i. e. Charity makes the acts of Faith to be Meritorious sâ—il our love of God and man or our good
certainely belieue such and such Articles of Faith His answere will bee Because the Church which can discerne what is what is not of God hath infallibly decreed such and such things to be belieued Against which impious doctrine we except and say That by this meanes our Faith is resolued either into nothing at all or at the furthest but only into humane Authority 1 That is resolued into iust nothing but runs round in a Circle like a mill-horse For aske a Roman Catholike why doe you belieue the Pope cannot erre His answere is because the Scripture saith so Tues Petrus c. and Orauipro te ne deficiat sides tua and Sum vâ—b scum ad consummationem saculs with such other places But how know you that those places are Scripture and that that is the right meaning of those places He answeres because the Councell of Trent and the Pope say so Yea but how know you infallibly they doe not erre in saying so Hee answeres Because the Scripture affirmes they cannot erre for Thou art Peter vpon this rocke c This is the Fayries dance wherein men smitten with the spirit of giddinesse are led round in a ring being neuer able to free them or finde any resting place whereon to fixe the assurance of their Faith 2 That at best their faith is resolued finally into Mans Authority Which appeares thus aske a Papist Why doe you belieue Purgatory He will say Because God in his word hath reuealed it as an Article of Faith Zach. 9. 11. I haue loosed thy prisoners out of the pit wherein is no water i. out of Purgatory and Luke 16. Lazarus was carried into Abrahams bosome i. into Purgatory with such like Well but why doe you infallibly belieue that this is Gods word and that this is the meaning of it Hee sayes Because the Church i. Counceis and Popes say so Hee can goe no further vnlesse hee will runne round Here then hee must stay resting his Faith on mans Testimony and Authority Which hee doth manifestly forasmuch as it appeares not by any argument from the Scriptures themselues that such a doctrine as Purgatory is contained in them and therefore he assents to the truth of it finally and onely because the Church for sooth hath conceiued the meaning of those places to be such Now this is not to belieue the Scriptures but to belieue the Opinion of the Church that is to say of men like our selues Heere Becanus helpes at a dead lift by a schoole distinction thus Fidesresoluitur Formaliter in Deumprimam veritatem reuelantem Directiuè in EcclesiaÌ„ propter infallililitateÌ„ proponeÌ„dt The shift of a Sophister What Faith is it that is thus resolued Theologicall or Humane Neither saith hee Theologicall Faith is resolued into Gods authority Humane is resolued into mans authority as to belieue an Article because Caluiâ— or Lutber teach it or say wee because Pope Paul the fift Gregory the 13. or any other Pope Cardinall Bishop or Bishops teach it What saith is it then which is resolued into the Churches authority It is saith the Iesuite neither saith neque purè diuina neque purè humana sed quasi media inferior is cuinsdam ordinis Iust so I take it men vse to speak when they cannot tell what to say It is Quasi and Aliquomodò and Alicuius generis c. It is something if they could tell what But be it what it may be if it be not a diuine Faith What shall become of the vulgar sort in their Church must they bee saued by such a middle kinde of Faith betweene Diuine and Humane This is a new way to heauen of the Iesuiâ—es inuention wherein it will bee a matter beyond his skill so to conduct a poore vnlearned Catholike that he step not aside leaning too much vpoÌ„mans authoriti whereon he should not trust at all and too little on Gods on whom he should altogether relie Plaine folke haue no skill in such nice distinctions of belieuing God Formaliter and the Church Directiuè and it will trouble the authors of them to giue a reasonable meaning of them For what is it to belieue the Church Directiuè is it to be drawne by the Churches direction in the ministeriall Preaching and application of the Scriptures vnto beleefe of the Articles of Faith Wee grant such a resolution of our faith into the Churches authority as a motiue to induce and persivade vs to belieue But Becames denies that the Church is to be reckoned inter motiua fidei and therefore he must needs account it inter formales rationes fidei as a case of reason and proper foundation of our faith whereinto it is resolued formaliter And so it is for there is neuer a Papist that wil belieue any thing that God saith but onely for this reason because the Church allowes of it It is not the light and Euidence of Gods word by it owne selfe Euincing its owne Diuinity and Interpreting its owne meaning t is not this they rest vpon if they did what need they goe further but it is meerely formally and directly the Testimony and Opinion of men whether Fathers Councels Popes or whomsoeuer they please to style the Church This impiery is horrible and so maine an errour in the foundation of Faith that it makes the whole frame to â—otter fastening the consolation and Hope of man vpon the vncertainty of another mans testimony therby throwing him into inextricable difficulties and doubts besides offering intollerable indignity vnto God in giuing such authority vnto his seruant and vassall as tends to the contumely of the Lord and Master For so it is when a few men met together in a Councell-house or one poore sinfull illeterate Pope shal be deemed of power sufficient and iudgement infallible to set themselues downe vpon the bench and to call that word which shall iudge them at the last day vnto the bar and there to interpret ratifie or nullifie what and how themselues best pleaseth Wee might wellbe ashamed of our religion when wee dispute with Athiests and infidels if wee had no better reason to confirme our Religion but our owne testimonie because we say it is the truth and the Romish Church might blush when she pleads for her infallibilitie from those places formerly mentioned yet in sine hath no other warrant from them but onely this it is so and it shall be so because shee her selfe hath decreed that onely to bee the true meaning of those Scriptures But to leaue these absurdities blasphemies and come to the truth that which we maintaine touching the Certaintie of the Scriptures Diuine authoritie is this viz. That we are infallibly ascertained of the Scriptures Diuinitie by the Scriptures themselues I or as in other Sciences there are alwayes some principles Per se not a indemonstrabiliâ— whence other things are proued so in Diuinitie all conclusions in point of Beliefe and Practise are proued by the Scriptures but for the Scriptures they
will also evidently appeare to him that shall but a little survey the writings of Philosophers both those that are extant in whole or in part and such whose titles onely wee have remaining recorded by those that have written their lives For among so many hundred volumes written by the Ancients how few or none almost shall we finde touching the matter of Religion Those great scriblers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as Chrysippus was called who left no part of Logicke Oratory Mathematickes Morality Policy and Nature it selfe unattempted but with a curious and inquisitive eye pried into the smallest matters yet in those higher speculations concerning the Nature of Divine things were either miserably blinde or wilfully negligent Aristotle a man of the deepest reach that Antiquity ever bred among so many bookes that he wrote and are in part yet extant hath not left us any one discourse by which it might appeare that hee bestowed any paines in searching after the knowledge of God except a little here and there in some poore pitifull disputes Theophrastus his schollar who exceeded the master in numbersome writings composed sixe bookes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 three which we wish had remained to posterity albeit by the very titles we may suspect what stuffe they were not unlike to Hesâ—ods Theogonia and such other fooleries and that both his bookes and others written of the same subject by Crito Simon Xenocrates Strato Cleanthes Epicurus and many more as may be seene in Laertius were they now extant would give us but small satisfaction in this point unlesse it were to discover the grosse stupidity and dulnesse of those otherwise refined and sublimated wits Tullie who had read them and sets downe the summe of their opinions gives us cause to beleeve that the wisest of them all and himselfe too 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were here starke fooles and forsaking the right way of searching out the Deity in the footsteps of Nature by a due proceeding from the lower to the higher they gave heede to old fond fables or vanished away in their idle imaginations and new opinions Nor could it be otherwise if we respect either the corruption of Nature which how quick and forward soever it bee in other matters is dull enough in sacred imploiments as the experience of many dispositions proves who are excellent in many sorts of Learning yet dunces in Divinity or if wee regard the policy of Satan who blinding the eies of so learned and wise men made use of their wits and pens in darkning the cleerer light of divine knowledge by senselesse fables and foolish fancies which passed unto the ignorant vulgar with approbation under the authority of their deepe learning Wherefore seeing neyther the most wise and learned in former times have alwaies applied their industry in this part of knowledge nor yet the labours of such as have beene busied therein are preserved to our times nor those few monuments that are left doe give sufficient proofe that men have done their best in going so farre as they might we must without consideration of particulars first dispute in generall how deepe the eye of Naturall reason can pierce into divine mysteries and then see in briefe how far men whose inventions are come to our knowledge have proceeded therein Concerning the first you are to call to minde that Religion containes in it two chiefe branches 1. All Divine truths to bee knowne and beleeved in way of Spirituall contemplation and assent and the Summary of these are the Articles of our Creed which in general declare unto us what is to be beleeved touching God as Creator in the first Article Redeemer in the rest 2. All Divine and Morall duties to be done and practised by us the briefe wherof is in the Decalogue describing unto us the rules of 1. Pietie in Gods worship 2. Of Charity in righteousnesse towards man Within these bounds wee must seeke for the utmost extent of the meere naturall mans knowledge which wee will doe beginning with the knowledge of God the Redeemer touching which I lay downe this position as infallible and undeniable that The meere naturall man cannot by the most industrious use of all Natures helpes attaine unto any the least knowledge of God as hee is mans Redeemer in Christ. This is most apparant by the Scriptures wholly ascribing the knowledge of this mystery to the Sonne of God revealing it from the bosome of the Father and to the Spirit of God but utterly denying so much as a thought of it to any of the greatest or wisest of this world yea unto the blessed Angells themselves And t is no lesse agreeable to good reason which forbids to imagine that a man fallen corrupted by sin should ever attaine to the understanding of those things which Adam in his perfection never had knowledge of Now the knowledge of God as Redeemer with all the dependances thereupon as Adam had no need of it so was hee before his fall utterly ignorant of it and had so remained forever if God had not vouchsafed to reveale it to him Which revelation though made to Adam when wee were in his loynes yet was not as I may speake Generall and deriveable to all his posterity as the first connaturall and inprinted knowledge was but particular for the benefit of Adam and so many of his seed as were elect And though no doubt but Adam did instruct his children and they theirs for some descents in this mysterie yet wickednesse increasing in men as fast as men multiplied in the earth and by reason of the darksome obscurity of this mysterie in those first times of the world it came to passe that this knowledge quickly decreased being almost decayed even among the sonnes of God the Few of Gods Church whom therefore God was faine by new revelations continually to instruct but for the Sonnes of men the rest of the wicked world it was utterly extinct and no sparke of it left alive They soone forgot what they cared not to beleeve Wherefore wee must confine the meere naturall mans knowledge within these two limits 1. The knowledge of God as Creator 2. The knowledge of the morall Law and beyond these it is not possible for him to goe The knowledge of which though very much eclipsed in Adam himselfe but more and more darkned in his posterity as they further degenerated from his originall purity yet is it not so farre obscured except in such whose brutish and savage education have made them equall to the beasts that perish but that by carefull education and vigilant industry in the use of all helpes it may be somewhat repaired though this some what is but a very little part almost nothing of its first clearenesse Wherefore in the second place touching the knowledge God as Creator I suppose a meere naturall man may know these things touching God in his nature and attributes 1. That there is a God 2. That
In the like manner the Revelations of Scripture are like a cleere well polished glasse free from dust â—lawes crackes or other deformities in them wee may behold all the mysteries of Religion cleerly represented in their shapes and proper colours so farre forth as is needfull for us to see them in this life and when attentively we marke what is shewne unto us wee may take distinct notice of every thing that is to be beleeved by us in all articles of Christian Faith And this knowledge is in it selfe distinct and cleere though compared with that other proper immediate beholding of the things themselves face to face as the Apostle speakes it may justly be termed Darke and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let one instance make all plaine in Gal. 3. 1. the Apostle saith that Christ was described unto the Galatians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before their eyes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being crucified among them Why this was not possible that what was done at Ierusalem on mount Golgatha should bee seene in Galatia many hundred miles from it How then was Christ described and crucified in the sight of these Galatians It was in the cleere and manifest declaration of him by the Apostles preaching Which though it could not make the sufferings of Christ so evident unto the Galatians as they were unto such as stood by the crosse of Christ and saw him suffer yet so cleere and distinct was the representation thereof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the mirrour of the Apostles preaching that the Galatians faith in this case was not an assent to things obscure which they understood not It s one thing then for a matter to be present unto us in it owne nature another for it to be perspicuously plainly set forth in a narration in which latter sense we affirm against the Romanist that all objects of Faith are not Obscure but Evident in those Revelations of them which are made in Scriptures 2. Ex parte Dei Revelantis For non constat nobis clarè evidenter revelationemillam propter quam credimus articulas fidei à Deo factam esse No is it not evident to us that the Scriptures are of God To whom then was it evident to the holy men of God to whom they were first inspired Yes the Iesuite grants that but yet heare his words Num. 12. Prophetae Apostolâ— saith hee habuerunt tantùm evidentiam revelationis non autemevidentiam Primae veritatis Tamet si enim evidenter cognoscerent Deum esse qui ipsis revelabat mysteria fides non tamen evidenter cognoscebant Deum esse summè veracem qui nec falli possit nec fallere Vnde sequitur assensum illorum quem habuerunt circa mysteria fidei fuisse obscurum ejusdem speciei cum assensu fidei nostrae See ye this Iesuite how hee would blow away with one blast all the certainty of Christian faith and so bring the matter about that there shall be no sure footing for it unlesse it be in the authority of the Church and the Popes infallible fancy Revelations of Scripture are not evident to us that they are of God to the Prophets and Apostles they were indeed evidently knowne to bee of God but yet see the mischiefe the Truth of God the Revealer was not evidently knowne unto these holy men nor were they infallibly certaine but that God might and would tell them a lie A foule blasphemy and I know not whether hee doe deserve the name of a Reasonable creature who is not himselfe or thinkes there is any that is not infallibly evidently and most certainly convinced of this truth that God cannot bee deceived himselfe nor will deceive any But touching this point that wee have no such obscure tottering foundation for our faith but a most sure and cleere word full of brightnesse and majesty like light shining into our soules and by it owne characters discovering it owne divine originall of this hereafter more fitly in handling the certainty of Faiths assent Now in the meane time for conclusion of this first point touching the Objects of Faith How farre forth they are Evident or Inevident these two confectaries may be noted out of what hath been said 1. Knowledge by sight takes away Faith that is so far as sight goes but no further for as we said of Beliefe in generall so here Evident Experience of the truth in some things doth helpe our Faith in other Whence t is usuall with the godly to strengthen their faith in the promises for time to come by calling to minde Gods mercies of old and that evident triall of them they have had in time past And Thomas because hee saw the Evident truth of Ghrists Resurrection did more firmely beleeve the rest of the mystery of mans Redemption by him But otherwise in the same things as sight waxeth so Faith waineth the greater light certainty drownes the lesse where Knowledge is perfect the Faith though it remains in the Habit yet it ceaseth in the Act. This is manifest by that opposition which the Apostle makes betweene Faith and Sight 2. Cor. 5. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what this walking by Faith is is plaine Chap. 4. 18. We looke not on the things which are seene but on the things which are not seen for the things which are seene are temporall but the things which are not seene are eternall 2. A distinct explicite knowledge of divine things in the Revelations of them in Scripture is necessary to the being of Christian Faith By explicite knowledge I meane the understanding of the articles of Beliefe so farre forth as they are plainly declared in Scriptures This Historicall knowledge for so we may terme it synecdochicâ—â— of the letter and meaning of the Scriptures in such things as it proposeth to be beleeved is required to the being of Christian Faith as a necessary antecedent thereof For though this knowledge may be where Faith is not yet Faith can never be where this knowledge goes not before Ignorant in this sense and Vnbeleeving are termes reciprocall As perfect knowledge by sight excludes Faith of the thing seene so doth perfect ignorance of any thing destroy all Faith of the same thing I say of the same thing for a man may bee absolutely ignorant in some things yet a beleever in others and therefore wee doe not meane that such an explicite knowledge is necessary to faith as that wee must distinctly apprehend all points of Faith before wee beleeve for the Apostles when yet they were true beleevers were ignorant in many articles of Faith as Christs Resurrection Ascention c. But this wee affirme that where there is totall ignorance of any one article of Faith there can be no Beliefe at all of that article as for example Hee that saith I beleeve a holy Catholike Church and yet knowes not what a holy Catholike Church is what ever hee say hee doth not beleeve it That such a blinde credo is
hath the generall custome and consent of the times and Church wherein wee live whereby men are they know not how nor upon what firme grounds drawne to beleeve those things which they see others hold and maintaine fortruth Lastly 3. Some extraordinary worke or event confirming the truth of Religion So did Miracles in the time of Christ and his Apostles perswade many to beleeve who were notwithstanding farre from being true beleevers as Ioh. 2. 23. Many beleeved in his name when they saw the miracles which hee did but t was not good crediting of them that beleeved only upon miracles therefore Christ would not commit himselfe to them ver 24. And thus the Magitian when he saw the signes and great wonders which were done by the Apostles he beleeved and wondred when yet his heart was not right in the sight of God Act. 8. 13. 21. By these and the like meanes is this imperfect and generall kinde of Faith wrought in men destitute of all inward grace and holinesse Such motives as these cause this assent but there is no Internum principium no roote in themselves as our Saviour speakes Mat. 13. 21. whence this beliefe springeth no thorough sanctification of the soule conforming all the powers thereof unto the puritie and holinesse of divine things and inclining the affections to a constant embracing thereof These men like Religion well and commend it as men doe costly Iewells set forth to sale but when it comes to the point that this Good Pearle of great price is to be bought then if God will let them have it at their owne rates there 's a match made they 'le beleeve and be religious if God withall will spare them the use of some sinnes and pleasures they love well but if it must be purchased at Gods price with the sale of all that they have they are no merchants for such a hard bargaine with the yongue man they shrinke away sorrowfull that heaven cannot be had at a cheaper rate Thus when it comes to the proofe in particular application and practice this kinde of faith vanisheth away and comes to just nothing Thus you have the explication of this first degree of Faith withall you see that this faith falls greatly short of that perfection which is required unto that saith which is saving and justifying Neverthelesse our Adversaries of the Romish Church maintaine that this assent is that justifying Faith whereof the Scriptures speake Their opinion touching this point is sufficiently declared by Becanus who followes the rest of that rabble Hee Theol. Schol. Tom. 3. cap. 8. q. 1. disputing of the act of justifying Faith rejects the Lutherans opinion who place Faith in the will and make it to be Fiduciam de misericordia Dei propter Christum and saith that the doctrine of the Catholikes is this that faith belongs to the understanding and is nothing else but Credere sive assentiri eis quae à Deo revelata sunt Thence hee setteth downe this Conclusion § 6. Actus fidei consistit in assensu quo quis assentitur alicui propositioni à Deo revelatae propter authoritatem revelantis In this definition there are two parts 1. the Object of this assent Propositions revealed by God 2. The essentiall difference of this act taken à formaliratione credendi and that is to beleeve propter authoritatem revelantis By this saith Becanus Cap. 8. q. 2. § 2. assensus fidei constituitur in sua specie essentiall that is the assent of Faith is made supernaturall and justifying when wee beleeve things because God hath revealed them for saith he if articles of faith be beleeved upon other motives as upon mans authority c. then this assent of faith is naturall as in Heritickes and Divells So then according to Popish doctrine that faith which justifies us is nothing but a bare assent of the minde to such things as God reveales because of Gods authority that revealed them Than which explication of the nature of justifying faith nothing can be poorer and more below the majestie of so high a grace as faith is I will trouble you but with two reasons proving that this kinde of assent is not that faith whereby wee are justified 1. The act of justifying faith must needs be supernaturall such as cannot bee done without the aide of speciall grace of Gods spirit But unto this assent there is required no such speciall grace therefore it is not an act of justifying faith The Major is evident and granted by the Schooleman Cap. 8. 4. 4. that something there is in faith above nature requiring a supernaturall cause whereto the Scriptures plainely inforce him Eph. 2. 8. By grace yee are saved thorough Faith and that not of ourselves it is the gift of God Phil. 1. 29. Vnto you it is given for Christ that not only yee should beleeve in him but also suffer for his sake So Ioh. 6. 45. Wherefore § 3. he teacheth that this act of assent must be supernaturall partly in regard of the Object id est divine revelations and partly in regard of the principium or cause by which it is produced id est non per solas naturae vires sed per auxilium gratiae Wee agree then in the Proposition For the assumption That there needes not any speciall grace of the Spirit to worke this bare assent unto the truth of divine revelations this wee prove out of the same Schoolemens doctrine who teach that the Vnderstanding assents not unlesse the Will command it because say they the act of beleeving is absolutely in our treewill Cap 8. q. 5. Well be it so But now say wee the Will may without the helpe of grace command the assent of the Vnderstanding which wee prove thus Whatsoever the Vnderstanding by the only light of Nature judges to be honest that the Will can desire by the only strength of nature But by the only light of Nature the Vnderstanding judges that it is an honest thing to beleeve Gods authority revealing any thing to us therefore the Will by the only strength of Nature may desire this act of beleeving and so consequently there 's no need of Grace to move the Will to command the Vnderstanding T is Becanus owne argument against himselfe cap. 8. q. 5. § 9. Whereto he would faine giue an answer if hee could tell how Something he sayes to that Minor proposition whereof he thus distinguisheth The Vnderstanding by the only light of Nature judges it a thing honest to beleeve Gods authority when hee reveales any thing Via ac modo naturali not when he reveales any thing Via ac modo supernaturali Beleeve it a rare distinction and full of mystery Divine Revelations are of two sorts supernaturall and naturall Againe when God reveales his will to us by naturall meanes then the very light of Nature teacheth us that 't is honest to beleeve his authority But if hee reveale things to us by supernaturall meanes the light of nature
will we cannot conceiue any naturall thing as true but we must conceiue as Good too Witnesse all I ogicke rules Philosophy Mathematickes there is no conclusion how vnpleasant soeuer it seeme to be but if it be apprehended as True it also affects the vnderstanding with ioy delight and contentment in the goodnesse of it It delights because it is true and so Truth quatenus Truth is good So that vnto such as aske wherefore are the Mathematickes good I answer Because they are True a part of Gods created truth of which it is blasphemy to hold and affirme that any the least part is euill and nought worth nor deseruing a mans study All Truth is amiable like God the Authour of it and goodnesse is so essentially incorporated together with Truth that they cannot be seuered in our knowledge or affection Now in morall and Diuine things the case is much more plaine That their Truth consists wholly in their Goodnesse nor can it be imagined how vertue should be said to be true but onely because it is good or what the Truth of Grace is but onely the Goodnesse of it Wherefore generally that rule is Cortaine Bonum Verum conuertuntur and their praedication each of other is not onely in the Concrete Verum est bonum but also in the abstract Verâ—… est bonitas ò cont◠〈◊〉 And so the Scripture takes these two indifferently as Gen. 1. 31. When God had created all his workes he looked on them and saw that they were Very Good They were true as well as good but one includes both And Iohn 8. 44. it is said touching Satan that He abode not in the Truth that is in that perfect and good condition wherein God created him for he fell from his goodnesse as well as from his Truth By this it appeares that this distinction which is made betweene the truth and goodnesse of things is not from their Nature but from our esteeme and conceit of them We measure the goodnesse of things by our owne ends and the vse we haue of them such things as fit our purposes are proportionable to our necessities those we account good and Such things we make the Obiect of our wils because wee desire them with a more notable degree of Constancy and vehemency Other things though very good in themselues yet because they touch vs not and our desire of them is slight and vanishing we make them the obiect of our vnderstanding only as if wee apprehend in them nothing but bare Truth As for example he that shall discourse vnto an intemperate man in his temperate moode how shamefull and vnseemely a thing it is for a Christian to be ouercome of drinke to be a seruant to his appetite to wallow in filthy pleasures to bee seene in base company and hase places and shall tell him how comely and commendable a vertue sobriety is how gracious an ornament of a man how necessary a duty in euery Christian when you tell him of these things he vnderstands you and assents not only to the truth but to the goodnesse of what you say But heere is the mischeefe his resolution stands otherwise sottish delights preuaile against all sober aduise and the stronger desires of pleasures drowne those faint affectious towards Temperance How in this case the truth and goodnesse of the vertue commended is but one thing and the intemperate man did aâ—t that same time apprehend and approue of both in generall wishing that it were with him as it should be and is with other men But now when anon after he comes to put in practise what he thus knowes and allowes of long Custome and ill perswasions doe so farre darken his former apprehension of the Goodnesse of the thing that now there seemes to be nothing left in his head but a generall notion of the Truth of that which he heard at such a time So then Truth and Goodnesse are not two seuerall things nor apprehended by two seuerall faculties but one and the same thing knowne and desired by the same facultie The difference lyes onely in the diuers degree of our apprehension which varies according as the things apprehended seeme to haue more or lesse agreement with our particular vses and necessities Where matters fit vs in particular there our desires are Strong and Constant When they agree to vs onely in the generall then our Generall Desires not well rooted are choked and stisled by contrarie affections in the particular performance It fares with men as it did with Shimei Salomons commandement of not Departing the Citie is Good till Shimei haue a Seruant take his heeles and run to Gath and then Shimeis beliefe of Solomans threatning must giue way to his Couetous desire of recouering his runnagate Seruant So in matters of Religion men know and approue of their truth and goodnesse in generall wishing that themselues had all the grace and pietie which is so much spoken of but when after they compare it with their more pleasing contentments in this or that kind they renounce the Goodnesse of Religion and hold it onely as a Truth Of which diuersitie in assenting to the goodnesse of things in generall and in particular more shall be spoken hereafter in the next point For conclusion of this point touching the subiect of Faith we doe not appropriate faith either to the Vnderstanding or the Will nor yet refer it to both as vnto two distinct faculties but we place it immediately in the whole intellectuall Nature whether of mans soule or of Angels In which wee follow the sentence of the Scriptures that seate Faith in the whole heart as Rom. 10. 10. With the Heart man belieueth vnto righteousnesse and Acts 8. 37. If thou belieuest with all thine heart Now it is a thing manifest that in Scripture the heart is taken for the Whole soule with all its powers and operations as of vnderstanding 1 King 3. 9. Salomon asketh of Godan vnderstanding Heart of Willing and Choosing Act. 7. 29. In their harts they went backe to Egypt 1 Cor. 7. 37. He that stâ—nâ—â—th firme in this Heart i. in his purpose and resolution Againe of the Affections Mat. 6. 21. Where the treasure there is the Heart also i. Loue for Rom. 1. 24. of the memory Luk. 1. 16. They did those words in their hearts so Luke 21. 14. We need not goe seeke on t any trouble some distinction of faculties wherein to place faith seeing the Scriptures speake simply of the whole soule and neither Nature nor Scriptures do intimate any necessity at all of malâ—ing such a difference Wee come now to the third and last point proposed in the definition or the Genus vnder which it is comprehended that is Assent about which wee must enquire after two things 1 The Certainty of this Assent of Faith 2 The Diuers Degrees and Essentiall Differences whereby the assent of Faith in Gods Elect is distinguished from all other Faith The Certainty and strength of