better being of faith or perfection and consummation of Saints and as well in points necessarie to the well being or perfection of faith as simply to the being thereof they should not differ from vs about what points the church is infallible For we doe not say that she is infallible in points which are not necessarie to any nor necessarie in any sorte to the being or wel being or Stapâ—et Contr. 4. q. 2. not 7. Ad Eâ—â—lesiae infâ—l ibilitatem in docendo satis â—st vt sit in fallibilis in substantiâ fidet publico dogma te rebus ad salutem nocessarijs Et ad 4. argumentum iâ—faâ—libilâ—tas docentis Eccâ—efiae pont tur tantum in rebus ad salutem necessaris The like saith Bellarm l 4. de Pont. c. 5. Canus l. 5 c. 5. Patribus Synodi Spiritus 〈◊〉 non est praesens in omnibus sedinrebus solùm ad salutem necessarijs perfection of Christian faith as manie scholastical subtilties are as Stapleton professeth Contr. 4. q. 2. notab 7. For as in natural things God giueth not superfluities but only what is necessarie to the being or perfection of them so nether in supernatural matters But as he is not defectiue in natural things for necessaries ether for their simply being or their perfection so much lesse is he defectiue in supernatural matters according as these are of more importance then those and more regarded of him And Protestants by saying that God hath made his Church infallible only in things necessarie to all men and necessarie to her verie being make him les liberal in supernatural matters then in natural Besides o See infra 〈◊〉 6. n. 1. Chillingw c. 2. p. 54. saieth that the scripture can end all controuersies touching things necessarie and verie profitable And ib. p. 98. What one of the Euangelists hath more then an other is only profitable and not necessarie And if God hath giuen diuine infallibilitie to the scripture and Euangelists not only for necessarie points but also for such as are profitable why should we thinke that he hath not giuen to his Church the like infallibilitie not onely for simply necessarie points but also for profitable as all are which make to the edification of Christs bodie and consummation of saints vnto a perfect man as all true points Morton â—om 1. Apologa l. 2. c. 9 Quasi â—erè nou fit fidei dogma quod piriâ—us S. omnibus eredendum propinauis of faith doe For who can denie that all true points of faith reuealed clearly by God are of the integritie and perfection of faith and are profitable for vs to beleue otherwise to what end were they so reuealed And if God reuealed them clearly he would haue them beleued and if beleued he would appoint on earth some infallible authoritie to propose them which not being in the scripture must needs be in the church I ad also How al pointâ— of faith are necessarie that though al points of faith be not simply necessarie by reason of the matter which is to be beleued they al are simply necessarie by reason of the formal cause which is diuine reuelation sufficiently proposed for that is simply necessarie to be beleued in whatsoeuer it proposeth How the principal and the instrument are â—one and how different 12. The twelft ground is that as the principal agent and the instrument are but one entire cause in Kinde to witt efficient but in order and degree are far different Different causes to witt Principal and Instrumental so the authoritie of God and of the Apostles in matters of faith were one and the same entire cause of diuine faith to witt formal but in order and degree were twoe and far different for the one was principal the other ministerial one increate the other create one absolutely necessarie the other not absolutely necessarie the one sufficient of it self to beget diuine faith the other not sufficient of it self And this vnitie betwixt the authoritie of God and of the Apostles our Sauiour expressed when he said Luke c. 10. Who heareth you heareth me which could not be true vnles he and his Apostles were in some sort one and the same speaker as the king and his Embassadour are And this same Protestants sometymes confess For thus Caluin in Ioan. 20. v. 21. He bids the Apostles succeed into the same function which he had of his father he imposeth on them the same person he giueth them the same right Christ communicateth with his Apostles the same authoritie which he had of his father Whitaker Cont. 2. q. 3. c. 5. The Apostles did consigne the Canon not as men but as the person of God And lib. 1. de script p. 61. Becaus Christ left earth he gaue his office to preachers And pa. 71. I denie not that Pastors doe in some sort bear the person of God And the distinction also between these twoe authorities Christ expressed when he said Ioan. 16. The holie Ghost shal bear witnes of me and yee also shal bear witnes In which words he expresseth two witnesses ad twoe testimonies And the same did the Apostles when they said Act. c. 15. It hath seemed to the holie Ghost and to vs to lay no other burden vpon you but these where they express twoe imposers of the same burden the holie Ghost and themselues and twoe authorities of imposing it one of the holie Ghost the other of themselues For they could not impose that burden without they had authoritie distinct from the authoritie of the holie Ghost though not separate from it And the same for vnitie and distinction of the authoritie of the holie Ghost and of the Church I say of the Church that the authoritie of God and of his Church is one and the same in kinde The entire formal cause of faith in ordinarie course see infra c. 11. n. 1. of causing diuine faith but far different in credit and degree of causing it though in ordinarie course neuer separated For in ordinarie course the entire formal cause of diuine faith is Gods and his churches authoritie togeither or God speaking by his Church And the Churches authoritie being one entire cause of diuine faith with Gods authoritie her authoritie must needs be in matters of faith diuine and infallible for a fallible authoritie cannot be one cause in kinde of beleef with an infallible authoritie but a quite different kinde of cause And if these grounds be compared with the grounds of Protestants for which they limit the infallibilitie of Gods Church to onely fundamental points and to mere humane infallibilitie they will appeare yet more firme and solid For theyr grounds are not founded vpon any ends of the Church expressed in scripture as these are but founded onely vpon their own ends which are only to delude the texts of Scripture which attribute infallibilitie to the Church in al points of faith by saying that they are meant of fundamental points onely
and partly to defend themselues from the authoritie of the Church in points wherein they oppose her by saying that her authoritie in anie points what soeuer is but human and fallible also in such points as they oppose her p See Chillingw c. 3. p. 146. 172. c. 2. p. 86 laude sect 16. p 93. 91. 231. Some say that the Church is efficaciter or efficaciously assisted by God in fundamental points and therefore is infallible in them but is only merely The Church is assisted efficaciously in â—l points of faith sufficiently assisted in not fundamental points and therefore fallible in them But besids that this distinction of Gods efficacious and sufficient assistance in this matter is new and therefore iustly suspected as naught it is also voluntarie without sufficient ground and therefore irrational Besids it granteth that the Church is diuinely infallible in fundamental points For to be diuinely infallible is no more but to be diuinely assisted efficaciously more ouer it maketh the Churches authoritie euen in fundamental points to be vncertain For if she be fallible in not fundamental points of faith clearely reuealed for such al true points of faith are and points but obscurely and darkely reuealed are but matters of opinion how shal we be certain that she is not fallible in fundameÌ„tal points seing not fundamental points if they be points of faith are as clearly reuealed as the fundamental as S. Augustin saieth of the scripture that if it lie in any point it may be suspected in al. It maketh also the Churches infallibilitie vnuseful to vs becaus none know which are al the fundamental points necessarie to be actually beleued of euerie one which not To omit that there are no vnfundamental points of faith in the Protestants sense but al true points of faith are fundamental to the verie being of sauing faith and to be beleued actually if they be sufficiently proposed or virtually though they be not so proposed And to omit also that meer sufficient assistance which is neuer efficient Sufficient neuer efficient iâ— vain were vain becaus as Philosophers say that power is vain which is neuer reduced to act and is such a power as is no where els to be found and also that fully sufficient and not efficacious implie contradiction For though fully sufficient assistance may be not efficient for want of our cooperation Not distinct from efficacious or coÌ„curse yet it is alwayes efficacious becaus efficacious as it is distinct from efficient is no more but what hath ful power or vertue to worke and such is that which is sufficient But whether there be anie difference betwixt sufficient and efficacious assistance or none God hath really and effectually made his Church the pillar and ground of truth and so strong that the gates of hel shal not preuail against her and therefore he hath giuen her efficacious or effectual assistance in al points of faith and so hath made her diuinely infallible in al such points For as Chillingw c. 3. p. 145. saieth wel The Apostles could not be the Churches foundations without freedome from error in al those things which they deliuered constantly as certain reuealed truthes So I say the Church could not be the pillar and ground of truth without freedome from error in al things she deliuereth as points of diuine truth 13. And out of these grounds first we may clearly see that the true Church of God is diuinely infallible in all points which she proposeth to be beleued with diuine faith Secondly we may easily answer al the obiections of Protestants to the contrarie Thirdly we may see what litle cause Laude had sec 16. p. 91. to make such a wonder that Catholicks should say that the present true Church of God is diuinely infallible in al matters of faith seing by diuinely infallible they mean no more then diuinely assisted efficaciously to propose nothing to be beleued but what is truth But rather we Iust wonder that the Churche of Christ should not be diuinely infallible may wonder that rational Christians wil deny her to be diuinely infallible or which is alone diuinely assisted efficaciously whom they cannot deny to be the mother of the faithfull the spouse of Christ whose head is Christ and whose soule is the holie Ghost who teacheth her al things and al truth who is the pillar and ground of truth and against whom the verie gates of hel shal not preuail Is not such a one diuinely assisted efficaciously And whome themselues confess to be infallible in fundamental points For can she be humanely Vvhitaker cont 1. q. 3. c. 11. l. 3. descript p. 19 laude Relat. sect 16. p. 65. infallible in such high matters 14. Some Protestants vrge vs much to tel whether the authoritie or infallibilitie of the Church in matters of faith be meerly diuine or no. To whom I answer that if by diuine they mean diuine in it self as hauing How the testâ—monie of the Church is diuine and now not anie diuinitie in it self we say it is not diuine meerly nor at al for it is a create authoritie as was also the authoritie of the Prophets and Apostles but if by diuine they mean diuinely instituted and diuinely assisted efficaciously not to err in matters of faith it is meâ—rly diuine it is infallible meerly by Gods efficacious assistance and not by any natural knowledg or industrie of the Church Though she must vse humane industrie as was vsed in the Councel of the Apostles Act. 15. Lastely it is wel to be noted that when we say we beleue for Gods authoritie or veracitie we mean not therby that we beleue becaus God doth efficiently cause our beleef namely by lightining our vnderstanding or stirring vp our wil to beleue becaus Gods authoritie or veracitie is no efficient cause of our beleef but onely à formal cause therof and also becaus he is in like sorte efficient cause of our hope or Charitie as he is of our beleef and yet he is not cause of them by his authoritie but our meaning is that we beleue not for anie thing which God worketh in vs but for his authoritie or veracitie which is in himselfe And therfore they say noâ— Canuâ— l 2. c. 4. Vvhitaker l. 1. descript p. 23. wel who say we beleue becaus we are moued therto by special instinct from God or that our faith is lastely resolued into such special internal instinct For such special instinct can not be anie formal cause of our beleef but onely an efficient cause therof and faith is not lastly resolued into anie efficient cause but onely into some formal besids that instinct is peculiar to him in whome it is wheras the motiue or reason of Catholik faith is common to al who haue such faith more ouer it is not euident credible by it self that such special instinct is from God and faith is to be resolued into some cause which is euidently credible as is the
Chillingworth c. 2. § 3. p. 53. scriptures being the sole Iudge of Controuersies that is the sole Rule for man to Iudge them by For wee mean nothing els § 11. p. 57. To speak properly as Not properly a Iudge men shold speak when they write of Controuersies in religion the scripture is not a Iudge of Controuersies but a Rule onely and the onely Rule for Christians to iudge them by Ibid. § 10. We denie not but a Iudge and a law might wel stand together but we denie that No iudge apointed by God there is anie such Iudge of Gods apointment § 12. Which conclusion that though the Scripture may be a Rule it cannot be a Iudge I haue already granted § 23. There is not anie publikly authorized Iudge to determin Controuersies in religion nor anie necessitie there should be anie The same he hath § 85. And § 104. speaking Scripture cannot be a Iudge truly and properly The scripture is not a Iudge nor cannot be hut onely a sufficient Rule for those to Iudge by who beleue it to be the word of God § 155. This assertion That scripture alone is Iudge of al Controuersies in faith if it be taken properly is nether a fundamental nor an vnfundamental point of faith nor no point of faith at al but a plain falshood It is not a Iudge of Controuersies but a Rule to iudge them by Potter sec 2. p. 32. The Scripture is Iudge or rather Rule of Controuersies Whitaker Contro 1. q. 1. c. 2. The Scripture is the same in the Church which the law is in the common wealth Moulins de Iudice Contro c. 13. If our aduersaries think not that the title of Iudge ought to be giuen to the Scripture at least they shold not deny it title of Rule and this is that which we require namely that our faith be ruled by onely Gods word But nether wold this content them vnles Gods word be expounded as they would haue it which were to make themselues the rule of iudging EIGHTH CHAPTER VVhether Scripture be to beleued to be Gods vvord vvith diuine and infallible assurance FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme LAude Relat. sec 16. p. 72. suppose it aggreed vpon that there must be a diuine faith cui subesse non potest Scripture must be known with diuine faith falsum vnder which can rest no possible error That the books of scripture are the written word of God Ibid. p. 66. This is agreed on by me that scripture must be known to be scripture by a sufficient infallible diuine pro of See him p. 64. and p. 75. After a man once beleue his faith growes stronger then ether his reason or his knowledg p. 86. Beleif is firmer then anie knowledg can be becaus it rests vpon diuine authoritie which cannot deceaue See ibid. p. 105. and p. 114. 115. Likewise sec 33. p. 227. Moral certaintie is not Moral certaintie not sufficient strong enough in points of faith See him sec 19. p. 125. sec 16. cit p. 74. Reason without grace cannot see the way to heauen nor beleue this book Reason not sufficient in which God hath written the way Potter sec 5. p. 2. Faith is saied to be diuine and supernatural First in regard of the Author or efficient cause of the habit and act of diuine infused faith which is the special grace of God Secondly in regard of the obiect as things beleued which are aboue the reach of mere nature or reason Thirdly in regard of the formal reason or principal ground on which faith chiefly relyeth and into which it is finally resolued which is diuine Reuelation or authoritie of God If it faile in anie of these it is no diuine or supernatural faith P. 7. The assent of diuine faith is absolutly diuine which Faith is absolutly diuine requires an obiect and motiue so infallibly true as that it nether hath nor can possibly admit anie mixture of error or falshood p. 10. supernatural faith must be absolutly vndoubted and certain Sec. 6. p. 59. The assent of faith is more certain if it be possible then that of sense or science or demonstration becaus it rests on diuine authoritie which cannot possibly deceaue Sec. 5. cit p. 40. diuine faith must haue a diuine foundation that can not deceaue Caluin 1. Instit c. 7. § 5. Lightned by his vertue we beleue not by our own or other mens iudgment that the scripture is from God but aboue humane iudgment we resolue most assuredly euen as if we saw God there that it came from Gods own mouth by the ministerie of men See him ibid. § 4. and c. 6. § 2. And both he 3. Instit c. 2. § 6. 7. 16. in Cathechismo c. de fide Beza in Confes c. 4. sec 5. Luther in psalm 14. to 3. define faith to be Faith most certain and infallible A most certain assurance and Fulk in Rom. 8. Nota 9. to be an Infallible assurance White in his Way p. 2. Faith must be infallible or certain that is free from error and such as cannot deceau◠vs. P. 10. Our faith must be withful assurance and perswasion SECOND SECTION Sometimes they denie CHillingworth c. 1. § 8. p. 36. Of this hypothesis That al the articles of our faith were reuealed by God we cannot ordinarily haue anie rational and acquired certaintie more then moral But moral certaintie C. 2. § 3. p. 53 The controuersie wherin the scripture it self is the subiect of the question cannot be determined but by natural reason Ibid. § 32. p. 65. Natural reason built on principles common to Reason last resolution of Protest faith al men is the last resolution into which the Churches authoritie is but the first inducement Item § 24. p. 62. I know no other natural and rational means to be assured herof of the incorruption of Scripture then I haue of anie other books incorrupted For though I haue a greater degree of rational and humane Humane assurance assurance of that then this in regard of diuers considerations which make it more credible That the Scripture hath been preserued from anie material alteration yet my assurance of both is of the same Moral assurance kinde and condition both moral assurances and nether physical or mathematical Scripture no materia obiect of faith Ibid. § 32. p. 65. The Scripture is none of the material obiects of our faith but onely the means of conueying them vnto vs. § 35. p. 66. Of this controuersie which books be Canonical wemake the Church the Iudge but not the present Church but the consent and testimonie of the ancient and primitiue Church which though it be but a highly probable inducement and no demonstratiue enforcement yet me thinks you should not denie but it may be a sufficient Probabilitie a sufficient ground of Protest faith ground of faith Ibid. § 152. p. 112. The priuiledg of not being in possibilitie of erring
Preacher nor is in ordinarie course necessarie to engender diuine faith as we shal clearly proue hereafter neuertheless becaus the letter of Scripture is a Proposal of points of faith though we cannot properly enquire whither Scripture propose al points of faith becaus that is the parte of a Proposer yet we may wel enquire whether in Scripture or by Scripture al points of faith which are anie wayes necessarie te be beleued of anie kinde of men be sufficiently proposed as Protestants commonly affirme and Catholiks euer deny So that whether the letter of Scripture be a Proposal of points of faith or a Proposer of them we may enquire whether by Scripture al such necessarie points be sufficiently proposed or no. Yet before we enquire this we wil shew the vncertaintie of Protestants touching al things belonging to Scripture that euen therby it may clearly appeare that howsoeuer they say that the Scripture is the Iudge the entire Rule or Al-sufficient Proposer of al matter of faith they can indeed think nothing less FIRST CHAPTER VVhether S. Iames Epistle be Canonical Scripture and Gods vvord or no FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme CALVIN in praefat in epistolam â—acobi I doe willingly without controuersie embrace it Epistle of S. Iames becaus I finde no sufficient cause to reiect it Whitaker ad Rationem 1. Campiani We receaue it and number it among the Canonical books For whatsoeuer Luther or anie other thought of it yet our Churches doe willingly embrace it Contro 1. q. 1. c. 16. our Church receaueth al and onely those books of the New testament which the Councel of Trent receaued If Luther and others who follow Luther otherwise thought or wrote of some books of the New testament as the Epistles of Iames and Iude let them answer for themselues Nether need we cite anie more becaus both the French English and Holland Confessions account S. Iames Epistle Canonical SECOND SECTION Protestants sometimes denie LVther in c. 22. Genes to 6. fol. 282. Iames concludeth il It Luther said S. Iames dâ—ated followes not as Iames doateth Therfore the fruits doe iustifie Let therfore our aduersaries be packing with their Iames And praefat in Epistol Iacobi I doe not think this was written of anie Apostle for this cause For it is directly against S. Paul and al other Scripture it attributeth Iustification to works Melancthon de sacris Concionibus to 2. fol. 23. If it cannot be mitigated with some exposition as that of Iames you see c. such simply are not to be receaued Magdeburgians Cent. 1. c. 4. The Epist of Iames doth not a little stray S. Iames ascribeth iustification to workes from the Apostolical doctrin whiles it adscribeth iustification to works and not to faith alone And Cent. 2. c. 4. The Epistle of Iames adscribeth iustice to works against S. Paul and al other Scriptures Pomeranus the first Protestant Pastor of Wittenberg in c. 4. Epist S. Iames erreth ad Rom. By this place thou maiest espie the error of the Epistle of Iames in Iâ—â—erreth ridiculously which thou seest a wicked argument beside that he ridiculously inferreth he citeth Scripture against Scripture which the Spirit cannot suffer Wherfore it cannot be numbred among the books which preach iustice Confessio Heluetica c. 15. The same he S. Iames saied not contradicting the Apostle otherwise he were to be reiected Which they would neuer say if they were assured that it were Gods word For I suppose they would not reiect Gods word in anie caâ—e Musculus in locis Tit. de Iustificatione they obiect to vs the places of Iames. But whosoeuer he was though â—e taught differently from Paul he could not preiudice truth And he addeth Impertiâ—ently That he impertinently bringeth in the example of Abraham that he abuseth the word Faith and setteth down a sentence different from Apostolical doctrin And Tit. de Scripturis plainly aâ—uocheth that he holdeth it not for Authentical Hence it is euident that Protestants agree not about their Canon or Rule of their faith For Lutherans reiect S. Iames Epistle as also diuers others which Caluinists account parte of the Rule of their faith and parte of Gods word Euident also that Caluinists must iudge their brothers Lutherans to haue a most desperate cause For as Whitaker writeth Respon ad Rat. 1. Campiani who cannot defend their religion vnles they laie violent hands vpon the Scripture and break the sacred authoritie of diuine books they must needs haue a naughtie and desperate cause But so doe al Protestants who denie S. Iames Epist Morton to 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 1. Al corruption of Gods word deserueth Gods thunderbolt And the same Whitaker l. 2. de Script p. 218. It is most of al necessarie that the Sic etiam cont 1. q. 3. c. 3. A certain Canon most necessarie certain Canon of Scriptures be vndoubted among Christians But so it is among Protestants For they are not agreed about the certain Canon of Scriptures And yet as Laude saieth sec 38. n. 8. What scripture is Canonical is a great point of faith Sec. 3. n. 12. If she the Church at this day reckons vpmore books within the Canon then heretofore she did then she is changed in a main point of faith the Canon of scripture And Hooker l. 1. § 14. Of things necessarie the very chiefest is to know what books we are bound to esteeme holie See infra c. 15. n. 7. SECOND CHAPTER VVhether al things that are in Scripture be plain and easie to be vnderstood or no FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme LVther de seruo arbitrio to 2. fol. 426. It is published by the wicked Sophisters that some things in Scripture are hard and that al are not open Ibid. fol. 440. I say of al the No parte of Scripture obscure Scripture I wil not haue anie part of it to be saied obscure In psal 37. to 3. fol. 10. If anie of their Papists number appeal and say we need the exposition of Fathers the Scriptures are obscure Thou shalt answer that this is fals No book in al the world is more clearly written then the Scripture which if it be compared with al other books is like to the sun before al other light Whervpon said Tailor in his Epistle dedicat of his libertie of Prophesing p. 47. so confident Luther sometimes was as he said he could expound al Scripture Gerlachius to 1. Disp 1. p. 9. We say al the Scripture is so clear as it Al scripture clear needeth no interpretation at al. Zanchius de Scriptura to 8. col 408. How can the Scripture be called obscure in anie parte of it Et col 409. If the Scripture be not obscure in anie parte as we shewed before much less in In euerie parte those things which are necessarie to Saluation Whitaker contro 1. q. 4. p. 341. Al the Scripture The whole Scripture is plain and clear Plessie of the Church c. 5. p.
authoritie both of God and of his Church in matters of faith and therfore the resolution of our beleef into ether of them is sufficient and rational For as when a King sendeth an Embassadour to tel vs some thing we beleue with humane faith what is told vs for the authoritie of them both as for one entire adioint cause of our beleef yet differently prinpally for the Kings authoritie and secondarily for the authoritie of his faithful Embassador so what we beleue with diuine faith we beleue for the authoritie both of God and of his Church as for one entire and total cause of our beleef but principally for the authoritie of God See infra c. 11 n. 1. and secondarily for the authoritie of his Church but with this difference that the King nether giueth nor increaseth the fidelitie of his Embassador but God giueth to his Church al the fidelitie she hath for matters of faith Wherfore al Christian faith is lastly resolued into Christs outward speach to his Church and into her outward speaking to vs both which speakers and speakings are but one in such sorte as is *q Sup. n. 12. before declared And when the Apostle saied Rom. 10. Faith is of hearing he meant not of hearing internally by inspiration Vvitaker cont 2. q. 4. c. 2 who hear the Church heaâ— Christ him â—elf but of hearing externally by preaching and doubtles meant of a last resolution of faith For hearing Christes lawful Preachers we heare him as before we shewed And the resolution of diuine faith into the Churches authoritie is both sufficient becaus her authoritie in matters of faith is plainly diuine and is also agreable to mens manner of getting faith who in ordinarie course are to haue their faith not from God immediatly speaking to them but from the Church immediatly speaking to them from God and therfore their faith is to be resolued immediatly into the authoritie of the Church and mediatly into the authoritie of God Wherfore wel saied Bellarmin l. 6. de Grat. lib. arb c. 3. Catholiks haue infallible faith becaus what they beleue they beleue becaus God saied it and that God said it they beleue becaus the Church testifieth it For what we beleue Christ told it to his Church and she hauing euer continued til our time telleth it vnto vs. And seing Protestants grant that faith may be welresolued into the authoritie of the r Infra c. 4. 〈◊〉 8. Apostles or of the s L. 2. c. 11. sect 1. scripture or vniuersal tradition becaus though their t Infra c. 10. n. 3. 6. 7. 9. authoritie be create yet by Gods efficacious assistance it is plainly diuine and infallible they shold not denie that faith may be also resolued into the authoritie of the Church becaus it is create authoritie seing Christ hath most clearly promised to assist his Church most efficaciously and also that the Apostle testifieth Rom. 10. That Faith hath its being from hearing the preaching of the Church And euerie thing is rightly resolued into that of which it hath its verie being especially seing the voice of the Church is the voice of Christ and that hearing her we hear him THIRD CHAPTER VVhat conditions are necessarie to the Al-sufficient external Proposer of pointes of faith appointed by God 1. CATHOLICKS and Protestants agree that there Twoe kindes of Proposers of faith are two kindes of Proposer of points of faith vnto men The one Internal who proposeth them internally to our mindes The other external who proposeth them externally to our senses Secondly they agree that the Internal Proposer is the Holie Ghost and the external some instituted by him Thirdly they agree that the Internal Proposer can by himself alone sufficiently propose al points of faith to vs and engender faith in vs without concurse of the external Proposer Fourethly they agree that ordinarilâ—y the Internal Proposer neuer proposeth points of faith to our mindes nor engendereth faith in vs but with the concurse and proposal of the external Proposer Fiftly they agree that the External Proposer can no way engender diuine faith in vs without the concurse of the internal So that they agree in al points touching the Internal Proposer and also concerning the External Proposer that there is such a one instituted of God that his concurse ordinariely is necessarie and that he cannot engender faith without concurse of the Internal Proposer but they disagree about the conditions necessarie to such an external Proposer and who he is but if we finde out the conditions necessarie to such a Proposer we shal easily finde who he is 2. The first condition necessarie to a sufficient external Proposer of Conditions necessarie to the external Proposer points of faith is that he be some intellectual person or Companie of Intellectual Persons This is euident out of the very word it self For a Propâ—ser signifieth a person who proposeth And also becaus to propose points to be beleued is an act of vnderstanding and as our Sauiour saied to the first Proposers instituted by himself is to teach and preach or as the Apostle also speaketh to preach and to teach or Math. vlt. Marc. vlt. Rom. 10. preach are acts of vnderstanding Secondly becaus as we shal proue hereafter the external Proposer is instituted by God for to moue men to beleue points of faith for his authoritie and al authoritie properly speaking is in some intellectual person Whervpon when the Apostle saied Rom. 10. How shal they beleue without à Preacher he added that the Preacher must be lawfully sent which lawful sending giueth him authoritie or credit that he is worthie to be beleued in what he proposeth Thirdly becaus vnles we make the proposer to be some Person or persons we confound Proposer with proposal which are things clearly distinct and the Proposer is some person his Proposal is his word or writing so that a word or writing is no Proposer but onely à Proposal If anie obiect that the Church is proposed in the Apostles Creed to be beleued as wel as other points of faith are and being a thing proposed it cannot be the Proposer of al points of faith I denie the consequence For the Church being a companie of intellectual persons it can propose it self to be beleued to be the true Church as the Prophets and the Apostles proposed themselues to be such as wel as anie other thing which they preached But a dead writing caÌ„not sufficiently propose it self as a Sup. c. 2. n. 5. Chillingworth before confessed and others b L. 2. c. 6. sect 2. hereafter wil confess of the scripture And the reason hereof is becaus a writing hath not of it self anie formal authoritie Besides though the Proposer and proposed may sometimes be the same thing yet the Proposer and Proposal cannot because the Proposal is that wher with the Proposer proposeth what is to be beleued as the writings of the Prophets or Apostles were their