to stagger vs most is this Why doe you belieue or how can you know those Bookes which yee call Scriptures were from God The last and finall answere according to the Iesuiticall Catechismes wherein as you heard before out of Bellarmine they thinke they haue great aduantage of vs would be this The holy Church our Mother doth so instruct giuing vs this expresse admonition withall his amplius fili mine requiras Here vpon God their Father and the infallible Church their mothers blessing their soules are bound to rest without further doubt or demand Whence vnlesse they vse so me mentall reseruation or seeke to shrowd themselus in the former aequiuocation hetherto vnfolded they must of necessity account themselues accursed if they deny the last or finall resolution of their beliefe to be into the Churches infallibility or veracity Againe what reasonable man would demand further resolution of any doubts incident to his faculty bee it reall or verball speculatiue or practicke then into the prime and immediate rules He should surely be lasht in a Grammer schoole that eyther for quantity of syllables right accent construction of wordes or the like would seeke a fuâ—ther reason then a knowne generall rule which admitteth no exception So should he with disgrace bee turned ouer the Barre amongst the Lawyers that would demurre or seeke a deuolution of an euident ruled case which by his owne confession could neuer alter Much more grosse would his absurdity appeare that in the Mathematiques or other demonstratiue science should attempt to resolue a probleme or conclusion further then into an vnquestionable theoreme or definition Finally might wee haue a centumâ—irall Court of all professions vnder the sunne our aduersaries would bee condemned with ioint consent eyther of intollerable folly or impudency if they should with Valentian deny the last resolution of their faith to bee into the Churches infallibility seeing they make it such a Catholike inerrable perpetuall rule of Christian faith as admits no exception no deuolution from it no appeale It is to them more then he said of Logicke Ars artium scientia scientiarum a faculty of faculties a Rule of Rules able rightly to resolue all doubts concerning the very Canon of Scriptures or Gods word written or vnwritten or the true sense or meaning of both briefly able most authentically to determine define all controuersies in Religion of what kind soeuer 4 Nor will it boot them ought to say that Gods word in the Churches mouth is the Rule whereinto faith is finally resolued seeing the Church defines nothing but by Gods word eyther written or vnwritten For this is more then the party which beleeues it can know nor hath hee any other motiue to belieue it besides the Churches definition or assertion Suppose then wee should conceiue so well of a temporall Iudge as to presume hee did neuer speake but according to the true meaning eyther of statute or customary law yet if wee could not know eyther the one or the other or their right interpretation but onely by his determinations the law were little beholden to him vnlesse for a floute that should say he were resolued iointly by the Iudge and it For seeing the Law is to him altogether vncertaine but by the Iudges auouchment or interpretation his last resolution of any act of iustice must bee onely into the Iudges skill and fidelity This inference Sacroboscus would nor deny hee himselfe hath made the like to proue that not the Scripture but the Church must bee the infallible rule of faith You will obiect saith he when the Church defines it alwayes defines according to the word of God eyther written or vnwritten New reuelations it receiues none the promised assistance of the spirit helps it onely to know what is alreadie reuealed Therefore from the first to the last that which determines controuersies and is the Iudge in all questions of faith is the word of God To this obiection thus hee answeres because we cannot be certaine of the true sense of Gods word but by the voice of the Church which heares our controuersies and answeres them The Church is Iudge although it iudge according to Gods word which vpon examination and by the spirits assistance it alwayes vnderstands a right And if euery one of vs should haue the infallible gift of vnderstanding Gods word wee should not neede any other Iudge The Reader I hope will remember what was said before that those flowting hypocrites would faine beleeue the Pope saith nothing but what God saith that God may be thought to say all he sayes which is the most abhominable blasphemie that euer Hell broacht worse then worshipping of Diuels as shal appeare hereafter 5 It may be some Nouice in Artes that hath late read some vulgar Logicians vpon the demonstrations might here frame this doubt in fauour of the Romish Churches Doctrine As the finall cause may be demonstrated by the efficient and the efficient by the final so may the Church be infallibly proued by Scriptures and the Scriptures againe by the Churches authority both infallibly beleeved each for others sake as both the former demonstrations are true and certaine and yet mutually depending one vpon the other 6 This obiection had some late Logicians vnderstood what they said would carry some shew of truth to countenance Valentians former circular resolutioÌ„ but they lace their M rs rule vttered by him Pingui Minerua too too straightly For taking it as they do we shold admit of circular demoÌ„strations the conceit wherof can haue no place but in a giddy braine To demonstrate the finall cause in any worke of Nature were to assigne a Counsailor to the infinite wisdome of the God of Nature in whose intention the end is first and is the cause of all operation or efficiency Who could giue or who would demaund a naturall cause why life should be prescribed for this is the will of him that gaue it If question were made of the manner how the life of man and other creatures is preserued when as their heat might seeme to choake them A man might truly answere by respiration and respiration is from the lungs But it is one thing to aske how or by what meanes another for what end any effect is produced The former is an inquiry of the efficient within these precincts of meanes or motions alwayes prime and independent The later of the final cause absolutely indemonstrable becauses it implies a contradiction to giue a reason why that should be for whose sake all other things of that ranke haue being Nor is the end it selfe to speake properly euer produced though oftimes in common speech we take the effect immediately thereto destinated because most sensible for the end it selfe as we doe the starre next to the pole because visible for the pole or point immoueable Thus we confound respirations or actuall preseruation of life with the finall cause why men haue lungs when as both are effects of the lungs
both meanes of accomplishing Natures or rather the God of Naturs purpose in whose will or pleasure the finall cause of any naturall effect alwayes consists And seeing nothing in Nature can preoccupate his will no cause can be precedent to the finall This consideration of natural effects tending as certainly to their proposed end as the arrowe flyes to the marke caused the irreligious Philosopher to acknowledge the direction of an intelligent supernaturall agent in their working the accomplishment of whose will and pleasure as I said must bee the finall cause of their motions as his will or pleasure which bestowes the charges not the Architect vnlesse he be the owner also is the finall cause why the house is built Finally euery end supposeth the last intention of an intelligent agent whereof to giue a reason by the efficient which onely produceth works or meanes thereto proportioned would be as impertinent as if to one demaunding why the bell rings out it should bee answered because a strong fellow puls the rope 7 Now that which in our aduersaries Doctrine answeres vnto the cause indemonstrable whereinto finall resolution of Natures workes or intentions of intelligent agents must be resolued is the churches authoritie Nor can that if wee speake properly be resolued into any branch of the first truth for this reason besids others alleadged before that all resolutions whether of our perswasiōs or intentions or of their obiects works of Art or Nature suppose a stability or certainty in the first links of the chaine which wee vnfolde the latter alwayes depending on the former not the former on the latter As in resolutions of the latter kinde lately mentioned imitating the order of composition actuall continuation of life depends on breathing not breathing on it breathing on the lunges not the lunges mutually on breathing so in resolutions of the other kind which invertes the order of composition the vse or necessitie of lunges dependes vpon the vse or necessitie of breathing the necessity or vse of breathing vpon the necessity or vse of life or vpon his will or pleasure that created one of these for another Thus againe the sensitiue facultie depends vpon the vital that vpon mixtion mixtion vpon the Elements not any of these mutually vpon the sensitiue faculty if wee respect the order of supportance or Natures progresse in their production Whence hee that questions whether some kinds of plants haue sense or some stones or mettals life supposeth as vnquestionable that the former haue life that the second are mixt bodies But if we respect the intent or purpose of him that sets nature a working all the former faculties dpend on the sensitiue the sensitiue not on any of them For God would not haue his creatures indued with sense that they might liue or liue that they might haue mixt bodies but rather to haue such bodies that they might liue to liue that they might enioy the benefit of sense or the more noble faculties 8 Can the Iesuite thus assigne any determinate branch of the first truth as stable and vnquestionable before it be ratified by the Churches authoritie Euident it is by his positions that he cannot and as euident that beliefe of the churches authority cannot depend vpon any determinate branch of the first truth much lesse can it distinctly be thereinto resolued But contrariwise presse him with what Diuine precept soeuer written or vnwritten though in all mens iudgements the churches authoritie set aside most contradictory to their approoued practises for example That the second Commaundement forbids worshipping Images or adoration of the consecrate host he straight inuerts your reason thus Rather the second commandement forbids neyther because the holy Church which I beleeue to bee infallible approueth both Lastly hee is fully resolued to beleeue nothing for true which the Church disproues nothing for false or erroneous which it allowes Or if he would answere directly to this demaund To what end did God cause the Scriptures to be written He could not consonant to his tenents say That wee might infallibly rely vpon them but rather vpon the Churches authoritie which it establisheth For Gods word whether written or vnwritten is by their Doctrine but as the testimonie of some men deceased indefinitely presumed for infallible but whose materiall extent the Church must first determine and after wards iudge without all appeale of their true meaning Thus are all parts of Diuine truthes supposed to be reuealed more essentially subordinate to the Churches authoritie then ordinary witnesses are to royall or supreme iudgment For they are supposed able to deliuer what they know in termes intelligible to other mens capacities without the Prince or Iudges ratification of their sayings or expositions of their meanings and iudgment is not ordained for producing witnesses but production of witnesses for establishing iudgement Thus by our aduersaries Doctrine Gods word must serue to establish the Churches authority not the Churches authority to confirme the immediate soueraigntie of it ouer our soules 9 Much more probably might the Iew or Turke resolue his faith vnto the first truth then the moderne Iesuited Papist can For though their deductions from it be much what alike all aequally sottish yet these admit a stabilitie or certainty of what the first Truth hath said no way dependant vpon their authority that first proposed or commended it vnto them The Turkes would storme to heare any Mufti professe he were as well to be beleeued as was Mahomet in his life time that without his proposall they could not know eyther the olde testament or the Alcoran to bee from God So would the Iewes if one of their Rabbines should make the like comparison betwxit himselfe and Moses as the Iesuite doth betwixt Christ and the Pope who besides that hee must bee as well beleeued as his Master leaues the authority of both testaments vncertaine to vs vnlesse confirmed by his infallibility But to speake properly the pretended deriuation of all three heresies from the first truth hath a liuely resemblance of false petigrees none at all of true doctrine and resolutions Of all the three the Romish is most ridiculous as may appeare by their seuerall representations As imagine there should be three Competitors for the Romane Empire all pleading it were to descend by inheritance not by election all pretending lineall succession from Charles the Great The first like to the Iew alleageth an authentique petigree making him the eldest The second resembling the Turke replyes that the other indeede was of the eldest line but long since disinherited often conquered and enforced to resigne whence the inheritance descended to him as the next in succession The third like the Romanist pleades it was bequeathed him by the Emperours last wil and testament from whose death his Ancestors haue beene intitled to it and produceth a petigree to this purpose without any other confirmation then his owne authority adding withal that vnlesse his competitors and others will beleeue his
proue as principally whether their beliefe of the Churches authoritie can bee resolued into any diuine testimonie pag. 46. CHAP. VI. That neither our Sauiours Prayers for the not failing of Peters faith Luke 22. 32. nor his commending his sheepe vnto his feeding Iohn 21. 15. prooue any Supremacie in Peter ouer the Church from which the authoritie of the Pope can with probabilitie be deriued p. 49. CHAP. VII That Christ not S. Peter is the Rocke spoken of Matth. 16. 18. that the Iesuites Exposition of that place demonstrateth the Pope to be the great Antichrist pag. 64. In the marginall note parag 24. for That Romish faith is that faith reade that Romish faith is not that faith In the marginall note parag 31. for a paralile reade a paralell In the marginall note parag 3. for Plinius reade Pintus Parag. 22. for melang reade felang CHAP. VIII That the Romanists beliefe of the Churches in fallible authoritie cannot bee resolued into any testimonie better then humane whence the maine conclusion immediatly followes That the Romanist in obeying the Church-decrees without examination of them by Gods word preferre mans Lawes before Gods pag. 89. CHAP. IX In what sence the Iesuites may truely denie they beleeue the words of man better then the words of God In what sence againe our Writers truely charge them with this blasphemie pag. 99. SECTION III. CHAP. I. What restraint precepts for obedience vnto the Priests of the Law though seeming most vniuersall for their forme did necessarily admit How vniuersall Propositions of Scriptures are to be limited pag. 105. In the marginall note parag 3. for suscitaturus read sciscitaturus CHAP. II. The authoritie of the Sanhedrim not so vniuersal or absolute amongst the Iewes as the Papists make it but was to bee limited by the former Rules pag. 119. In the marginall note parag 2. for sarcedotem reade sacerdotem Margine parag 11. for Canala reade Cabala CHAP. III. That our Sauiours iniunction of obedience to the Scribes and Pharisees though most vniuersall for the forme is to be limited by the former rules that without open blasphemie it cannot be extended to countenance the Romish cause that by it we may limit other places brought by them for the Popes transcendent vniuersall authoritie pag. 128. In the marginall note parag 11. quae ad populi salutem fuit reade vt quae ad populi salutem sint CHAP. IIII. What it would disaduantage the Romish Church to denie the infallibilitie of the Synagogue pag. 139. Mar. par 3. inueniebant read inueniebantur negat read negatur CHAP. V. That iustly it may be presumed the Iewish Church neuer had any absolute infallibitie in proposing or determining Articles of faith because in our Sauiours time it did so grieuously erre in the fundamentall point of saluation pag. 142. Mar. par 2. darmauit read damnauit sunt enim read sicut enim CHAP. VI. That Moses had no such absolute authoritie as is now ascribed vnto the Pope That the manner of his attaining to such as he had excludes all besides our Sauiour from iust challenge of the like pag. 151. CHAP. VII That the Churches authoritie was no part of the rule of faith vnto the people after Moses death That by experiments answerable vnto the precepts and predictions the faithfull without relying vpon the Priests infallible proposalls were as certaine both of the diuine truth and true meaning of the law as their forefathers had beene that liued with Moses and saw his miracles pag. 159. CHAP. VIII That the societie or visible companie of Prophets had no such absolute authoritie as the Romish Church vsurpes pag. 169. CHAP. IX That the Church representatiue amongst the Iewes was for the most part the most corrupt iudge of matters belonging to God and the reason why it was so pag. 178. CHAP. X. That the Soueraigntie giuen by Iesuits to the Pope is greater then our Sauiours was pag. 186. CHAP. XI Confirming the truth deliuered in the former Chapter from the very Law giuen by Moses for discerning the great Prophet further exemplifying the vse and force of miracles for begetting faith The manner of trying prophesies Of the similitude betwixt Christ and Moses p. 197 In the marginall note par 19. for for sorcerie reade from sorcerie CHAP. XII That the method vsed by the great Prophet himselfe after his resurrection for planting faith was such as we teach The excesse of Antichrists exaltation aboue Christ The Diametrall opposition betwixt the spirit of God and the spirit of the Papacie pag. 221. CHAP. XIII That the authoritie attributed to the present Pope and the Romish rule of faith were altogether vnknowne vnto Saint Peter the opposition betwixt S. Peters and his pretended successors doctrine pag. 226. CHAP. XIIII That S. Paul submitted his doctrine to examination by the wordes before written That his doctrine disposition and practise were quite contrarie to the Romanists in this argument pag. 232. CHAP. XV. A briefe taste of our aduersaries blasphemous and Atheisticall assertions in this argument from some instances of two of their greatest Doctors Bellarmine and Valentian That if faith cannot be perfect without the solemne testification of that Church the raritie of such testifications will cause infidelitie pag. 239. SECTION IIII. Containing the third branch of Romish blasphemie or the last degree of great Antichrists exaltation vtterly ouerthrowing the whole foundation of Christian Religion preposterously inuerting both Law and Gospell to Gods dishonor and aduancement of Sathans Kingdome pag. 245. CHAP. I. The Iesuits vnwillingnesse to acknowledge the Churches proposall for the true cause of his faith of differences and agreements about the finall resolution of faith either amongst the aduersaries themselues or betwixt vs and them p. 245. CHAP. II. That the Churches proposall is the true immediate and prime cause of all absolute beliefe any Romanist can haue concerning any determinate diuine reuelation p. 249. CHAP. III. Discouering either the grosse ignorance or notorious craft of the Iesuit in denying his faith is finally resolued into the Churches veracitie or infallibilitie that possibly it cannot be resolued into any branch of the first truth pag. 256. Mar. par 3. faith reade the Romanists faith CHAP. IIII. What manner of causall-dependance Romish beliefe hath on the Church that the Romanist truly and properly beleeues the Church only not God or his Word pag. 268. CHAP. V. Declaring how the first maine ground of Romish faith leads directly vnto Atheisme the second vnto preposterous Heathenisme or Idolatrie pag. 277. Mar. par 12. efferunt reade afferunt CHAP. VI. Prouing the last assertion or generally the imputations laid vpon the Papacie by that authoritie the Iesuites expresly giue vnto the Pope in matters of particular fact as in the Canonizing of Saints pag. 294. CHAP. VII What danger by this blasphemous doctrine may accrew to Christian States that of all heresies blasphemies or idolatries which haue beene since the world beganne or can be imagined till Christ come to iudgment
they could be made For so it had beene a labour altogether lost yea a matter no lesse prophane then rebaptization to haue confirmed them by suffrages of Bishops after their Cathedrall confirmation by the Pope Euen of his Holinesse himselfe whose verdict as in this case must finally be supposed addes diuine credence vnto testifications in their owne nature fallible and merely humane the question proposed in the former Section remaines still insoluble For without the relation of some Historian or Register or especiall reuelation from aboue no Pope can diuine how many Councels haue beene held much lesse what was finally determined in euery ancient Canon confirmed by the Bishops assembled at Trent Speciall reuelations such as the Prophets had they acknowledge none And yet distinctly to tell what hath been done in times past or places a farre off without relying on others relations is an extraordinarie effect of speciall reuelation a worke of higher nature and greater difficultie then Propheticall prediction of things to come Are then the relations of Historians or Registers of Ancient Councels diuine and authentique Not without the Popes ratification with it they are Yes or else a great part of Roman faith by Bellarmines reason can bee but humane 5 Hence may we safely annex a corollary as necessary as suretable to the maine conclusion proposed for the principal subiect of this section As the Popes authority is by Iesuitical Doctrine made much greater then our Sauiours so may the assistance or countenance of his omnipotent spirit make the reports of any tēporizing Historian or mercenary Register as diuine authentique and certaine as any Propheticall or Apostolicall testimonies of the Messiah Yea if it should please him to authorize Baronius Annals or relations of former Councels their credit should be no lesse than the Euangelists Yea hence it followes as the discreet Reader without further repetition of what hath here beene said or new suggestion of the reasons whereon the inference is grounded will I hope of his owne accord hereafter collect That determinations proceeding vpon any knaues or loose companions testimonies though more loosely examined so examined at all or taken for examined by the Pope shall by his approbation be of force as all-sufficient eyther for producing Diuine beliefe of mens spirituall worth wee neuer heard of or for warranting daily performance of Religious worship to their memorie as any declaration he can make vpon our Sauiours promises vnto his Apostles For we may no more doubt of any Religion he shall authorize or any mans saluation canonized by him whosoeuer be the Relatours of their life and death then of Saint Peters though our Sauiour promised hee should bee saued The reason is plaine The Pope is sole Iudge of all diuine Oracles our Sauiour as you haue heard out of Valentian is but a witnesse and so may others be whomsoeuer he shall admit SECT IIII. Containing the third branch of Romish blasphemie or the last degree of great Antichrists exaltation vtterly ouerthrowing the whole foundation of Christian Religion preposterously inuerting both Law and Gospell to Gods dishonour and aduancement of Sathans Kingdome THat the authoritie chalenged by the Romish Church is altogether preiudiciall to Gods word greater then eyther the visible Church of Israel from Moses till Christ or Christ himselfe or his Apostles eyther before or after his resurrection did eyther practise or lay claime to is euident from the former treatise It remaines we demonstrate how the acknowledgement of this most absolute most infallible authority doth quite alienate our faith and allegeance from God and the Trinitie vnto the Pope and his triple Crowne The Proposition then wee are to proue is this Whosoeuer stedfastly beleeues the absolute authoritie of the Romish Church as now it is taught doth truly and properly beleeue no article of Christian faith no God no Trinitie no Christ no redemption no resurrection no heauenly ioyes no hell CHAP. I. The Iesuites vnwillingnesse to acknowledge the Churches proposall for the true cause of his faith of differences and agreements about the finall Resolution of faith eyther amongst the Aduersaries themselues or betwixt vs and them 1 THE conclusion proposed followes out of their principles before mentioned and afterwards to bee reiterated that they may be more throughly sounded But ere wee come to raze the very foundation of their painted walles a few weake fortes must be ouerthrowne which some haue erected in hope thereby to saue their Church from battery Valentian as you heard before seeing his Mother wouldly more open to our assaults if they should admit this manner of speech I beleeue this or that proposition or article of faith because the holy Church doth so instruct me would mitigate the harshnesse of it thus If you aske me why I beleiue a Trinitie or God to be one in three persons I would answere because God hath reuealed this mysterie The diuine reuelation then is the cause of your beleefe in this particular But how doe you know how can you beleeue that God hath reuealed this by an other diuine reuelation No. For so we should runne from reuelation to reuelation without end If by reuelation you doe not beleeue it by what meanes else By the infallible proposall of the Church as a condition without which I could not beleeue it Marke the mysticalnesse of this speech Ob propositionē Ecclesiae infallibilem For the Churches infallible proposall Is not this as much as if he had said because the Church which is infallible proposeth it to me Why then doth he make it but a cōdition necessary or requisite to this assent Belike he ment not so but would haue vs to see the cōditiō not the true principal cause of his beleefe The Churches authority by his doctrine may in diuers respects be truly said both a cause and condition Or to speake more distinctly the Churches proposal is a condition without which no man can ordinarily beleeue propositions of faith the infallibility of her proposall is the true and only cause of euery Romane Catholikes beleefe in all points This denial of the churches authority to be according to their principles the true cause of beleef Is the sconse that must first be ouerthrown but after a frendly parly of the differēce betwixt vs. 2 Valentian if we wel obserue his processe in the forecited place proues only that which none in reformed churches did euer deny albeit hee profer more in his premises which whilest hee seekes to performe he hath only proued himselfe a ridiculous Atheist as partly is shewed in the former treatises shal more fully appeare in the end of this To ease his fellowes hereafter of such vnnecessary or impertinent paines as oft times they take I dare auouch in the behalfe of all my brethren in reformed Churches no Iesuite shal be more forward to demand then wee to grant That God in these latter dayes doth not teach men the Gospel in such sort as he did S.
grace it selfe would rather haue held the Negatiue For if wee beleeue as the Papists generally instruct vs that wee our selues all priuate spirites may erre in euery perswasion of faith but the Church which onely is assisted by a publike spirite cannot possibly teach amisse in any Wee must vpon termes as peremptory and in equall degree beleeue euery particular point of faith because the Church so teacheth vs not because wee certainely apprehend the truth of it in it selfe For wee may erre but this publike spirite cannot And consequently wee must infallibly belieue these propositions Christ is the Redeemer of the world not Mahomet There is a Trinity of persons in the diuine nature for this reason only that the Church commends them vnto vs for diuine reuelations seeing by their arguments brought to disproue the sufficiency of Scriptures or certainety of priuate spirites no other means possible is left vs. Nay were they true wee should be onely certain that without the Churches proposall wee still must be most vncertain in these and all other points because the sonnes are perpetually obnoxious to error from which the mother is euerlastingly priuiledged The same propositions and conclusions we might condicionally belieue to be absolutely authentike vppon supposall they were Gods word but that they are his word or reuelations truly diuine wee cannot firmely belieue but onely by firme adherence to the Churches infallible authority as was in the second Section deduced out of the Aduersaries principles Hence it followes that euery particular proposition of faith hath such a proper causall dependance vpon the Churches proposall as the conclusion hath vpon the premisses or any particular vpon it vniuersall Thus much Sacroboseus grants 3 Suppose God should speake vnto vs face to face what reason had wee absolutely and infallibly to belieue him but because wee know his words to bee infallible his infallibility then should be the proper cause of our beliefe For the same reason seeing he doth not speake vnto vs face to face as hee did to Moses but as our aduersaries say reueales his will obscurely so as the Reuealer is not manifested vnto vs but his meaning is by the visible Church which is to vs in stead of Prophetes Apostles and Christ himselfe and all the seuerall manners God vsed to speake vnto the world before he spake to it by his onely sonne this Pantheas infallibility must bee the true and proper cause of our beliefe And Valentian himselfe thinks that Sara and others of the old world to whom God spake in priuate eyther by the mouth of Angels his sonne or holy spirit or by what meanes soeuer did not sinne against the doctrine of faith or through vnbeliefe when they did not belieue Gods promises They did herein vnaduisedly not vnbelieuingly Why not vnbelieuingly because the visible Church did not propose these promises vnto them 4 If not to belieue the visible Churches proposals be that which makes distrust or diffidence to Gods promises infidelity then to belieue them is the true cause of belieuing Gods promises or if Sara and others did as Valentian sayth vnaduisedly or imprudently in not assenting to diuine truthes proposed by Angels surely they had done only prudently and aduisedly in assenting to them their assent had not beene truely and properly beleefe So that by this assertion the Churches proposall hath the very remonstratiue roote character of the immediat and prime cause whereby wee beleeue and know matters of faith For whatsoeuer else can concurre without this our assent to diuine truthes proposed is not true Catholike beliefe but firmely beleeuing this infallibility we cannot erre in any other point of faith 5 This truth Valentian elsewhere could not dissemble howsoeuer in his professed resolution of faith hee sought to couer it by change of apparrell Inuesting the Churches proposall onely with the title of a condition requisite yet withall so dissonant is falsity to it selfe making it the reason of beleeuing diuine Reuelations If a reason it be why wee should belieue them needs must it sway any reasonable mind to embrace their truth And whatsoeuer inclines our minds to the embracement of any truth is the proper efficient cause of beliefe or assent vnto the same Yea efficiency or causality it selfe doth formally consist in this inclination of the mind Nor is it possible this proposall of the Church should moue our minds to embrace diuine Reuelations by any other meanes then by belieeuing it And beliefe it selfe being an inclination or motion of the mind our minds must first be moued by the Churches proposall ere it can moue them at all to assent vnto other diuine truthes Againe Valentian grants that the orthodoxall or catechisticall answere to this interrogation Why doe you belieue the doctrine of the Trinity to be a diuine reuelation is because the Church proposeth it to me for such Hee that admits this answere for sound and Catholike and yet denies the Churches proposall to bee the true and proper cause of his beliefe in the former point hath smothered doubtlesse the light of nature by admitting too much artificiall subtlety into his braines For if a man should aske why do you belieue there is a fire in yonder house and answere were made Because I see the smoake go out of the Chimney should the party thus answering in good earnest peremptorily deny the sight of the smoake to bee the cause of his beleefe there was a fire hee deserued very well to haue eyther his tongue scorched with the one or his eyes put out with the other Albeit if wee speake of the things themselues not of his beliefe concerning them the fire was the true cause of the smoake not the smoake of the fire But whatsoeuer it be Cause Condition Circumstance or Effect that truly satisficeth this demand Why doe you belieue this or that it is a true and proper cause of our beleefe though not of the thing beleeued If then we admit the Churches proposall to bee but a condition annexed to diuine reuelations yet if it bee an infallible medium or meane or as our aduersaries all agree the only mean infallible whereby we can rightly beleeue this or that to be a diuine reuelation it is the true and only infallible cause of our beleefe That speech of Valentian which to any ordinary mans capacity includes as much as we now say was before alleadged That Scripture which is commended and expounded vnto vs by the Church is eo ipso euen for this reason most authentike and cleare He could not more emphatically haue expressed the Churches proposall to be the true and prime cause why particular or determinate diuine reuelations become so credible vnto vs. His second Sacroboscus hath many speeches to be inserted hereafter to the same effect Amongst others where Doctor Whittaker obiects that the principall cause of faith is by Papists ascribed vnto the Church he denyes it onely thus far What we beleeue