pretended right so in the matter of doctrine an invisible Church and no Church is the same For if I cannot see nor know the Elect as being invisible to the eye of man so I cannot know that the Church composed of them speaketh to me or that this Doctrine I hear of any man is infallible more then that he is one of the Elect. Answer I am weary transseribing a number Protest Duply of wordâ— without weight that is a compleet rapsodie and no return to the former question If such digressions were heard in the School the Writter behoved to be sore censured The question was how the Scripture could be the square Seeing all agree not about the number of the books some cast at the Epistle of James as the Lutherans And the answer I gave was that although some Lutherans differre from us about the authority of that epistle yet we both agree here that uncontroverted scripture is the determiner And for the numerick question it was sufficiently answered in the second answer to the first querie so we needed not this tauâ—oligie to make the Reader nauseat If I had to do with a Lutheran then I could prove the divine authority of that Epistle but you do not deny it therefore to what purpose should I insist on that subject against you Mr. Hooker whom you cite maketh nothing against us as is alledged for that which he sayes is first that the light of reason rightly managed is a requâ—sit mean for the knowledge of scripture books and what sayeth that against us seeing we suppose the Readers of Scripture to be â—ational men that reason in its own line may be helpful to them for understanding scripture Secondly Mr. Hooker directly disclaimeth your traditions page 86. and affirmeth that they who betake themselves to that testimonie as divine have not the truth but are in an errour Thus he condemneth you as erronious so it had been your advantage to have spared this tradition neither was it needful to tell us that the Manichees denyed Moses and the Jews the New Testament We have to do with Papists who hold all the books of the Old and New Testament which we hold for Canonick At lest what some others make disputable as Melchior Canus telleth us you put it out of dispute so you are not in bona fide to reason about their number with us seeing ye question none which we mantaine albeit we justly call in question Apocryphal writtings which ye put into the Canon Is it not safer to regulate our faith by these uncontroverted Scriptures then by the dictats of mutable self-contradicting Popes When Church Rulers have been fully corrupted Believers have continued orthodoxe as in the time of the Arrian persecution The Fathers who lived the first 300. year believed without either Pope or General Council as propounders of their faith For then there was no such pretending to infallible supremacy They had no infallible testimony from the Church they acknowledged not her testimony to be such And for ought I can learn theâ—e be no testimony of your Church nor statute enacting her testimony to be infallible If so it is nor according to you de fide however ye make a great noise amongst people with it And if all the faith you have depend upon the testimony of the present Church which is your doctrine your faith is not one with Abrahams faith for the word of God did beget his faith but it is the testimony statute of the Trent Council that begettâ—th yours and I would gladly hear from you whither there was universal consent there or not Such clashing and pocket orders as the author of that history telleth to the world will not permit you to say without a blush that the Council was unanimous and Gospel-like in their way Therefore unless it be against us all their otheracts are made up of ambiguous stuffe like the Delphian responses this is purposely coÌ„trived to cover debates with general termes And if their testimony make the word of GOD Scripture to me living under Popery what rule had they for their faith who made these conclusions Their own testimony could not be the cause of their own belief if you say that the testimonie of the ancient Church was their rule then ye go contrar to your own Doctors who declare that the present Church of Rome is above all former councils and their authority dependeth on her testimony See Bell. lib. de Eccl. cap. 10. Valentia Tom. 3. disp 1. quest 1. Further that the supream power of judging is not in the Council but in the Pope that he is above a general Council that he cannot be subject to it See Bell. lib. 2. de Concil cap. 17. Valentia tom 3. disp 1. Suarez disp 5. de fide and your own Vives in his comment on Augustins 20. book de civit Dei cap. 26. telleth us how little ye make of Councils or of the ancient Church when they militat against you Illa demum videntur iis Concilia quo in rem suam faeiunt reliqua non pluris estimantur quam commenta mulierum in textrina aut thermis i. e. These appear to be Councils to them which make for them the rest are no more esteemed by them then the sables of old women in the weavers shop or sloves Brisâ—â—erius writting against Collag a Jansenist as he is cited by learned Dalleus †See Dâ—lleus de usu Patrum saith Councils are literae mortuae nisi animentur à praesenti Ecclesia i. e. They are dead letters if they be not animated by the present Church This appeareth to be true from experience for ye agree not with the primitive either in doctrine worship or government The ancients thought that Images should not be in the Church See Epiph. epist ad Iohannem Hierosolymitanum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cum vidissem Imaginem penderâ— in Ecclesia contra authoritatem Scripturae i. e. When I saw an Image hang in the Church contrar to the authority of Scripture how grieved was I. But the Council of Trent appointed them to be had in houses and Churches and that debitus honor reverentia Sess 25. eis impertiatur i. e. Due honor and worship be given to them The Fathers thought that the Virgin Marie was conceived in sin so saith Ambrose Augustin Chrysostom as Melchior Canus de loc Theol. lib. 7. telleth The Council of Trent Sess 5. will not conclude heâ— under Original sin The Fathers excluded Tobias Judith Wisdom Ecclesiasticus and both the books of the Maccabees out of the canon of Scripture So did Hierom in his prologue ad libros Solomonis Epiph. lib. de Pond mens cap. 2. pag. 162. Gregorie Nazianzen câ—rm 3. Athanasius epist fest But the Council of Trent anathematizeth them who exclude these books out of the Canon Sess 4 Baptism was delayed till Pasch and Pentecost in the primitive Church it is not so with you The 4. Council of Carthage did forbide women
in the Church it should have this weight with us that rashly without grave and diligent enquiry after the truth it should not be rejected by us And whereas it is alleadged there will be no effectual way against Controversies and divisions in religion unlesse some one supream and infallible judge be appointed on Earth in whose â—udgement and decision parties controverting should â—â—st and acquiesce It may be well answered in your own Bellarmin his wordes lib. 2. de Concil cap. 19. It is no wonder if the Church remaine without any humane remedy seeing the welfare of it doth not primarily rely upon humane industrie but upon divine protection seeing its King is GOD therefore may and ought the Church to pray unto God and it is certaine he will care for the well-fare of it Answer second Albeit I cannot comprehend the purpose of this laxe discourse yet Pro. Duply 2 for satisfaction to the Reader I shal inform him in these 5. particulars First what Papists mean by the Church or whither they understand themselves in this Secondly Whither Church officers since the dayes of the Apostles are infallible Thirdly What kind of obedience should be tendered to them Fourthly What government the Christian Church should have whither Papal and Monarchical or Aristocratical and Ministerial Fifthly How that testimony of Augustia non credidissem Scripturae c. is to be understood For the first by the Church all the Jesuits who are the Popes life-guard understand the Pope So Valentia disk Theol. tom 1. disp 1. qu. 1. Coster Enchir de sum Pont Gretser Colloq Ratis Ses 1. Bell. hanketeth in the point for once he saith that the Pope without the Council may determine matters of faith De Christo. lib. 2. cap. 28. and de Concil lib. 2. cap. 17. Against this de verbo Dei lib. 3. cap. 3. he saith the Pope with a Council is the judge of the true sense of Scripture So speaketh this reflecter The Sorbonists Jansenists and others of the Popish partie understand by the Church the present Romish officers assisted by the Pope and stand by the Canons of the Councils of Constance Sess 4. 5. and Basil Sess 2. wherein it was decreed that the Pope should obey the Council The Council of Trent according to its manner is ambiguous herein Sess 4. decr 2. And saith that the Church should judge the true sense of Scripture yet tell us not what they mean by the Church Now whatever way it be taken whither for Pope or Council there must be another judge of controversies otherwise the Church wanted a judge 300 years for there was no such judge then pretending to the infallible supremacie now claimed Secondly The Romish Synagogue headed by the Pope cannot be our judge for they are party partial against whom we have just acception Thirdly Is not this a jugling trick that when controversies occasioned and raised by them are in the Christian Church they will have none to be judge but themselves so they would be sure of the sentence and must suspect their own cause Fourthly If by the Church they mean the Pope as now they mantain it is hard to call him judge of controversies seeing it is a great controversie whither there should be any Pope at all and beyond controversie with us that he is an usurper Fifthly According to the Popish tenet the intention of the Priest is necessar in his ordination in his Baptism succession without interruption is necessar and Simony maketh him no Pope as Gratian telleth from the Canon law causa 2. qu. 1. Now if so he may be a Pagan for who knoweth the Priests intention who baptized him He may be a Laick and yet without ordination upon the same ground if one be such it marreth uninterrupted succession and so ceaseth the Pope Then by your own writters it is clear that many Popes entered by Simony as Barronius testifieth Annal tom 9. ad annum Christi 912. And Alexander the 6. was notorious that way This un Popeth all for it breaketh the chain of succession and leaveth the Church collective without any judge It is clear hence how slipperie the Romish Church is in its foundations seeing he whom they call the Church may be a Pagan Secondly As to the second thing proposed viz. Whither Church officers since the days of the Apostles are infallible The Church whither taken for Pope or Council or Pope Council is not infallible When the Councils condemned hereticks of old they did it not pro arbitratu imperio but judged by the Scriptures which is indeed an infallible rule but the church taken whither for Pope or Council or Pope and Council is not infallible First If the Jewish-church erred in matter of faith and worship then may the christian-church erre also For they had statutes judgements and promises to them were committed the oracles of GOD. Rom. 3. 2. But Aaron and the people erred grosly Ex 32. So did Uriah the Priest 2. Kings 16. May not then Popes erre Seeing Aaron the saint of the Lord was not infallible Yea both Priest and Prophet erred in judgement see Is 28. 7. on which words Sanctius the Jesuit saith Priests Prophets and people were spiritually drunk Did not the Church rulers while the Levitical Priest-hood lasted procure the death of Christ Secondly Under the Gospel Popes and Councils have erred Ergo they are not infallible Tertullian telleth contra Praxetam that Eleutherius the Pope approved Montanus heresie and obtruded it on the Church as his Irenicum Your own Barronius telleth ad ann 302. that Marcellus the Pope sacrificed to Idols Athaudsius †Athanasius in epist ad Solitariam vitam agentes testifieth that Liberius the Pope was Arrian Honorius was condemned in the sixth General Council as a Monothelit Anastasius the Pope saith Alphonsus de cast lib. 5. cap. 25. was Nestorian Now can Monothelism Nestorianism Arrianism Montaaism and Idolatry be â—nherent to a man infallible Or can a chair make that man who is Arrian Orthodoxe or him who sacrificeth to Idols unerring who will believe this Councils may erre adversaries being judges Occam asserteth so much and Petrus Alliaco Cardinalis qu. vespert art 3. for he saith that this promise the gates of hell shal not prevail against the Church is made universo catui fidelium to the whole number of the faithful not to the representative Church which may erre Panor sup 1. part sib decret Dicit Ecclesiam quae non potest errare esse totam collectionem fidelium nam ista est Ecclesia quae non potest errare that is the whole company of believers which cannot erre Nic. de Clemang in his disp with the Parisians saith the promise Matth. 18. as likewise that Iohn 16. The spirit of truth shal lead you into all truth belongeth only to spiritual ones and it were better to be much in fasting and prayer for direction then to bragge we cannot erre So then I reason the Pope may erre
Councils may erre Ergo the Pope and Council may erre The argument will hold here a divisis ad conjugata as well as thus the Magistrat may be diseased and his council infected therefore both Magistrat and Council are subject to sickness It is a deluding evasion to say that the Councils confirmed by the Pope cannot erre for the Jesuits place the infallibility in the Pope the Parlsians in the Council and they are not agreed in this amongst themselves In the sense of the one a Church Session confirmed by the Pope is as infallible as a Council And in the sense of the other a Council confirmed by a privat Bishop is at infallible as if it were confirmed by the Pope Thus then we argue that must have no entity which can find no subject but Papists cannot agree upon the subject of this infallibility therefore it is not ens Further General Councils have been of this judgement that the Popes consent is not requisit for making their decrees right For in the Council of Chalcedon where were conveened 630. fathers in the year 454. where Martianus the Emperour was present it was contrar to the desire of the Popes Legats appointed that seeing the seat of Rome had no divine warrand for its supremacie Constantinople should have alike priviledges with it This was as full a Council as we read of and yet all these fathers thought the Popes coÌ„sent not necessary for their statutes Yea they declared his supremacie not to be Juris Apostolici in the first Council of Constantinople which was the second generall Council The Councills of Constance and Basil judged the Council to be above the Pope In the first three generall Councills the Pope did not so much as preside in them either by himself or by his legats For in the first presided Hosius Bishop of Corduba In the second Nectaâ—ius Bishop of Constantinople And in the third at Ephesus Cyril Bishop of Alexandria in which Councills Controversies were deterrained by the plurality of suffrages and every one of the fathers there did subscrive their name to the constitutions and conclusions of the Council The council of Trent again did all Proponentibus legatis therefore either it or they were in an errour so not infallible And indeed it is above dispute that the council of Trent was erronious and not the council of Chalcedon in that which Gregory the Great and all ancients so extoll and commend This is said not in the least to derogate from lawfull councills which we judge necessary helps for ordering the effaires of the house of God in diverse exigencies Yea we give more to the foure Generall Councills then Papists doe for they cast both at the second and fourth But we have another judge and determiner the Scripture of God Augustin confirmeth this Nec ego nicaenum nec tu debes Ariminense tanquaÌ„ prajudicaturus †Aug. contra Maxi. Arrian Episcop praeferre consilium nec ego hujus auctoritate nec tu illius detineris Scripturarum auctoritatibus non quorumcunque propriis sed utrisque communibus testibus res cum re causa cum causa ratio cum ratione consentiat i. e. Neither would I preferre the Nicen nor ought you as prejudged to preferre the Arimin council I am not holden by this or thou by that but by the authority of the Scriptures which are witnesses common to all appropriat to none let one thing agree with another cause with cause reason with reason Thirdly As to the third thing proposed The Church is not appointed to be obeyed Pro. An. 3 but in subordination to the law of God for I know not the Church but by the word therefore I cannot obey it but by it also Secondly Subjects should not judge the law authoritatively If thou judge the law thou art not a doer of it Iames 4. 11. The word of God is the law and all churches are subject to it Thirdly The Text you cite the 17. of Deut. from the 8. v. to the 13 where the people are commanded to go to the Priests for decision of controversiies hath this expresly in it v. 11. According to the sentence of the law which he shall teach thee Cajetan upon the place sayeth That in the Hebrew it is super oâ— legis ideo doctrina eorum esset conformis divinae legi There doctrine of decision should be warrandable by the law Glossa ordinaria explaineth the place thus non dicitur tibi ut obedias nisi â—uxta legens docuerint i. e. thou art not commanded to obey if they teach not according to the law Lyra is of the same judgement si dicant falsum non sunt credendi if they speak false they are not to be believed In Mal. 2. 7. The Lord sheweth that the Priests lips should preserve knowledge where he declareth not what was for they had gone out of the way at that time but what should be Ribera saith the words are not to be read in the present but in the future tense and according to Cyril he is called the Messenger of the Lord because he should give men of the oracles of God as he hath received them from the Lord. Also that place Matth. 23. 2. where Church rulers are appointed to be heard when they siâ— in Moses chair Theophylact expoundeth iâ— quando docent ea quae continentur in lege when they teach the things contained in the law O if your Scribes and Pharisees would do so they might be better heard That place 2. Chr. 19. 8. 11. concerning Amaziah who was over them in all matters of the Lord holdeth only forth this that Magistracy and Ministry are distinct offices And in the church of Jerusalem albeit the Apostles were infallible yet they proceed according to the word and built their sentence on the Prophets Acts 15. 14. these places prove that implicit obedience is not to be given to any Church rulers And the Bâ—reans were commended for searching the Scriptures when the message was delivered to them How gross then is Bellarmin who saith †Bell. lib. 4. de â—ont cap. 5. Sâ— Papa erraret praecipiendo vita prohibendo virtutes tenetur Ecclesia credere virtutes esse malas vitia bâ—nâ— If the Pope saith he should coÌ„mend vice and call it good which they grant he may do notwithstanding of his infallibility then people were bound to obey and call vice good Valentia saith more that the people are bound without any enquiry Valent. Tom. 3. disp 1. disp 7. qu. 3. Punct â— to erre with their rulers and errores corum in tali causa sunt actus Christianae obedientiae their errours are acts of Christian obedience Aeternae vitae meritoriae deserving eternal life When Papists speak so great absurdities what will they not do for their interest Fourthly As to the fourth thing proposed Pro. An. 4 the Church of Christ is to be ruled by its officers lawfully called but the government of it here is not Monarchical