for beside that it is a new and groundles distinction it is contrarie to the end of Christs promise For no assistance in matters of â—nfallible faith is fitting but that which is infallible But out of the aforesaid sayings of Protestants it is euident First that some times they grant and indeed must grant that the Church is infallible in more points then are absolutly fundamental to al men 2. that in what points she is infallible she is in them diuinitus or diuinely infallible becaus she is such by Christs foresaid promise and the Holie Ghosts special assistance 3. That in saying the Church is infallible onely in necessaries they should not dissent from Catholiks if by necessaries they would mean necessaries to alsortes of men and both for the being and better being of faith as no doubt the Apostle meant Ephes 4. by consummation of Saints and edification of the bodie of Christ For Catholiks do not think that that the Church is infallible in things altogether vnnecessarie as manie scholastical subtiltiesare 2. Their second answer is that though the Holie Ghost teach the Laude sect 25. n. 5. Chilling c. 3. §. 71. Church al truth anie way necessarie to Saluation yet it followeth not that she learneth al such truth becaus God complaineth of some that they had eyes and would not see had eares and stopped them This answer also is new and not grounded in anie word of Christ but voluntarie and irrational and iniurious to the Apostles as if they had not learnt al truth which the Holie Ghost taught them and also to the Holie Church as if she would not learne al the truth which the Holie Ghost teacheth her but were like to those reprobats who would not see nor heare Gods voice and blasphemous against Christ as if he would not promise and against the Holie Ghost as if he wold not more effectually teach the Apostles and Church then he doth teach Reprobates But before we haue proued that the Holie Ghost teacheth the Church efficaciously 3. Their third answer is that this Vvhitaker l. 1. de Script p. 77. Laud. sec 16. p. 97. Chilling c. 3. §. 72. Moulins Buâ—ler p. 51. promise was made to the Apostles onely whome indeed the Holie Ghost taught al truth of faith and who also learnt it but not to the Church or Successors of the Apostles This answer is new nor sufficiently grounded in the text as shal by and by appeare but contrarie to Christs express words of his Promise for euer For the Apostles were not to abide here for euer Contrarie to the end of his Promise which was for the good of the Church and therfore was to continue so long as the Church continueth For it was cheifly for the good of the Church that the Holie Ghost was to teach al truth Contrarie to the Fathers as we shal see in the next Chapter And finally contrarie to Protestants For thus Laude sec 16. p. 93. 96. It was made to the Apostles and their suecessors sec 25. p. 161. A large promise to the Church of knowing al points of truth And sec 33 p. 231 for necessarie truth the Apostles receaued this promise for themselues and the whole Church P. 232. The Fathers refer their speech to the Church vniuersal And Potter sec 5. p. 18. That promise was made to the Apostles in behoof of the Church and is verified in the vniuersal Church And t â—tem Cont. 2. q. 1. c. 1. Laudesect 16 p. 96. Whitaker controu 3. q. 6. c. 2. saieth that those words For euer conuince it as in truth they doe becaus the Apostles were not to be here for euer Neuertheles Chillingworth c. 3. § 74. answereth that by for euer here is not meant eternally but continually for the time of the Apostles liues becaus for euer is sometimes so taken in Scripture But fondly for in those places the v Tertul. de â—estor â—3 matter sheweth that for euer signifieth til death But the like is not here for the reasons already giuen and al words are to be vnderstood properly vnles the contrarie be manifest as the x Tertul de Carne â—hriâ— c. 13. 15. 24. de restor c. 18. Cont. Praxec 13. Augustin l. 3. dâ— Doctrin c 10. 11. Hâ—larius l. 1. 2. 4. 5. 7. Fathers teach and reason sheweth For els al vnderstanding of words should become voluntarie as men would haue it And yet Chillingworth § 75. saieth I presume I haue shewed sufficiently that this For euer hinders not but that the promise may be appropriated to the Apostles when he hath out of a few places and those vnlike as being of a quite different matter wrested a word from its proper and vsual signification to an improper and vnusual merely for to defend his heresie For the matter is quite different becaus in the places brought by Chillingworth speech is of some particuler persons who nether in themselues nor in their successors could continue eternally and therfore for euer in them must needs be mant For their life wheras the Apostles continue in their successors eternally and therfore For euer spoken to them them for the good of the Church is to be vnderstood eternally as properly and vsually it signifieth But it is the common sophistical manner of arguing among Protestaut writers to argue from some few particular improper vse of words in some matter against the proper and vsual sense of them euen in a different and dislike matter which is a verie Sophistical kinde of arguing and wel to be noted For by that nothing can be assuredly proued out of scripture Besids Christ here so promiseth the assistance of the Holie Ghost for euer as Math. 28. he promiseth his own assistance for euer but that he promiseth Laude sect 16. p. 29. eternally For he saieth Going teach al nations baptizing c. And I am with you al daies til the end of the world to wit with you teaching and baptizing Which sheweth Christs assistance for euer with his Pastors in their teaching Chillingworths proofs that this promise was made to the Apostles alone be caus in them some words pertein to them alone proue no more then that the promise was in words made to them alone but not meant to them alone As Christs promise to S. Peter Math. 16. that the Church should be built on him and that he should haue the keyes of heauen was made to him alone yet not meant to him alone but to his successors also and commandment was giuen to him alone Ioan. 21. to feed Christs sheep and yet not meant to him alone but to his successors also Math. 18. that what the Apostles should Promises are to be measured by their end loose on earth should be loosed in heauen was made onely to them but meant also to their successors and the like is of manie others such And the reason of al is one and the same becaus al these promises were made to the Apostles for
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
gross ouersight 3. The third argument may be taken from that if the Church be not infallible in matters of faith there is no external formal cause sufficient to beget diuine faith For as I e See infâ—a l. 244. shâ—wed c. 2. there is no formal cause of beleef but authoritie nor anie formal authoritie but in some Author nor anie Author but some intellectual person or companie of intellectual persons and faith we cannot haue in ordinarie course without some formal external cause sufficient to engender infallible faith f Vvhitaker l. 1. descript p. 64. l. 3. p. 39â— See infra c. 17. n. 4. And no person on earth can be pretended in which infallible authorities should be if not the Church 4. The fourth argument shal be this The Churches authoritie in preaching or proposing al Christs doctrin is not natural or humane but supernatural and diuine Therfore it is infallible in doing that The consequence is euident becaus diuine authoritie is infallible The antecedent I proue out of those words of Christ to his Apostles Teach al Nationâ— baptizing them c. teaching Math. vlt. them to keepe al that I haue commanded you Where Christ gaue no humane or natural authoritie to his Apostles but supernatural and diuine And what authoritie of teaching or baptizing he gaue to them he means also to their successors els these should haue no authoritie to preach or baptize as also becaus that authoritie was giuen to the Apostles for the good of the Church and therfore was to endure as long as the Church endureth moreouer the Churches authoritie to preach or propose al points of faith is diuine Therfore also her authoritie to testifie and persuade that it is Gods word which she preacheth is diuine The Antecedent is proued already The consequence I proue becaus persuasion that it is Gods word which the Church teacheth is the end of her preaching it And if God giue her duine authoritie for the means doubtles he giueth the like for the end becaus the end is more desired then the means and the means desired but for the end And if the Churches authoritie in testifying or perswading what she preacheth be diuine doubtles it is infallible in testifying it For diuine authoritie to perswade is infallible Further more the Churches authoritie can force vs to beleue the scripture to be Gods word Therfore her authoritie is diuine and infallible The consequence is clear becaus no authoritie can force vs to beleue diuine matters but what is diuine The antecedent Protestants grant For thus Whitaker contr 1. q. 3. c. 7. I answer as often before that we are forced by the Churches authoritie to beleue these books to be canonical And can fallible authoritie force 5. The fift argument for the Infallibilitie of the Church in matters of faith shal be taken from the great and manifold inconueniences or absurdities which necessarily follow of the denial of it As first that Christ hath giuen vs no competent or fit Iudge of controuersies of faith For if the Church be fallible she is no competent or fitt Iudge of Infallible matters and the scripture cannot be a Iudge becaus à proper iudge is an vnderstanding person and iudgment an act of vnderstanding And this is so clear as now g See infra l. 2. c. 7. sect 2. Protestants confess that the scripture is no proper Iudge And want of a competent Iudge would make coÌ„trouersiesendles And as Hooker saieth in the preface to his book § 6 of this we are right sure that Nature Scripture and Experience it self Scripture nature experience require a â—udge of controuersies so also Tailor in lâ—bertie of prophsing sect 6. n. 1. haue al taught the world to seek for the ending of contentions by submitting it self vnto some iudicial or definitiue sentence whervnto nether parte that contendeth may vnder anie pretence or coler refuse to stand Wherfore to refuse a Iudge who can pronounce such a definitiue sentence in contentions about matters of faith is to resist Nature Scripture and Experience An other great inconueniencie which denial of the Churches infalli ilitie breedeth is that it openeth a way to heresies and schismes For vpon pretence of the Churches erring in some matters of faith a plain gap is opened to depart from her profession of faith as heretiks doe or from her communion in Sacraments as Schismatiks doe And al sufficient means of ether conserâ—â—ng or restoring vnitie in faith and communion quite taken away First becaus al sufficient external authoritie which is the secondarie formal obiect of faith is taken away Secondly becaus as we shal proue hereafter and h See infra l 2. c. 5. sec 2. Protestants now confess the Scripture nether teacheth al points of faith nor al those which it teacheth doth it teach so clearly as is requisit to beget infallible faith Thirdly Experience sheweth this in Protestants who denying the Church to be infallible haue nether vnitie in faith or communion nor yet anie hope of it as i Cataubor Epist ad R. Iacobum Caluin Antid Concil sess 7. Laâ—de sect 38. p. 360. Confess Martyr in Hospin part 2. Histor fol. 245. Whitaker contr 2. q. 〈◊〉 c. 8. cout 3 q 6. c. 2. respons ad Rainoldum p. 8. Laude sec 38. n. 23. Potter sec 2. p. 38. Chillingworth c. 2. § 85 and others Nether wil it serue them to k Laude sect 26. n 3. Chilling c. 2. p. 61. say that they haue sufficient means of vnitie in fundamental points becaus the scripâ—â—â—e teacheth them plainly and as for diuision in Not-fundamental points that destroieth not the substantial vnitie of faith or of the Church First becaus themselues confess the Scripture teacheth not 〈◊〉 See infra l. 2. c. 5. seâ—t 2. al fundamental points secondly becaus they m See part 1. 〈◊〉 1 〈◊〉 6. confess they know not which are fundamental points Which Not fundamental points Thirdly becaus diuision in anie point of faith sufficiently proposed or of communion is a substantial diuision of true faith and Church as I haue clearly proued parte 1. l. 2. c. 5. And as Laude saieth sec 32. p. 226. If controuersies arise in the Church some end they must haue or they wil tear al in sunder 6. An other great inconueniencie is that by denying the Churches infallibilitie we take away al external infallible proof that the Scripture is the word of God and therfore this question How know you the Scripture to be the word of God much troubleth Protestants and as Laude saieth sec 16. p. 65. britâ—geth some of them to infidelitie For as he confesseth ibid. p. 66. Scripture must be known to be Scripture by a sufficient Sâ—ripture must be proud by some word of God and by some infal authoritie infallible diuine proof and that such a proof can be nothing but the word of God And p. 64. It seemes to me verie necessarie that we be able to proue the books of
confessions for it is so euident as they are forced sometimes to confess it TENTH CHAPTER That Protestants doe manie vvaies confess that the true Church of God is Infallible in proposing matters of Faith 1. IT is so euident that the true Church of God is Infallible in proposing matters of faith as Protestants doe manie wayes confess it though it doe quite ouerthrow their cause becaus themselues acknowledg that for manie ages she hath opposed their doctrin whose confessions I wil endeauour to set down in order For first they plainly and absolutly grant that the Church cannot err in matters of faith Luther l. de seruo arbitrio to 2. fol. 438. Thus hath our Creed I beleue Not in the least article the holie Catholik Church that it is imposâ—ible for her to err in the least article Respons ad Syluestrum tom 1. fol. 177. I shal be an heretik if I hold it not after the Catholik Church hath determined it Ibid. The vniuersal Church cannot err as the Cardinal of Cocciustom 〈◊〉 p. 140. Cambray proueth most learnedly Libro de decem Praeceptis The Church cannot err it is gouerned by the holie Ghost In Resolutionibus Do we not see how watchful Christ is in his Church that he suffereth not them to err Tom. 7. German fol. 562. The Church nether ought nor can lie no not in the least Not in the least matter matter seing God is the mouth of the Church and God cannot lie so nether the Church can And lib. de potestate Bellarm. l. 3. de Verbo Dâ—â— c. 5. Papae We are not certain of anie priuate man that he hath reuelation from the father but the Church it iâ— of whom we may not doubt Melancthon Respons ad Clerum Coloniensem to 2. p. 113. Let the earth swallow me and al Etna ouer whelme me before I fight with the Church of God We sphalus in Hospin parte 2. Histor Sacram. fol. 237. â—h Church Not in doctrin of God can not err in doctrin Thus Luther and Lutherans 2. Caluin 4. Instit c. 1. § 3. we are Seâ— alâ—o c. 8. §. 12. sure that we shal alwayes haue truth whiles we are in the lapos the Church lib. de scandalis p 102. I willingly add that the sense of the Church is so ioined with the true doctrin of the law and Gospâ—l that she is rightly iudged a faithful teacher and Interpreter of it And in Antidoto Concil sess 4. None of vs but submitts his writings to the iudgment of the Church Sadeel ad Repetit Turiani loco 30. p. 643. If the Church be the ground of truth as Paul auoucheth if faith be the fundation of the Church as Ambrose affirmeth it followeth that whersoeuer the true Church is there true faith is Moulins l. 1. contra Peron c. 1. It is true that who is assured that he is in the true Church is assured that he hath true faith and doctrin 3. Cranmer in Fox Acts p. 1709. I am readie in al things to follow the iudgment of the most sacred word of God and of the holie Catholik Church Latimer Ibid. p. 1603. I confes there is a Catholik Church to the determination of which I wil stand Philpot. ibid. p. 1637. I doe not think the Catholik Church can err in doctrin P. 1640. If they can proue themselues to be the Catholik Church I wil neuer be against their doctrin but reuoke al that I haue saied Ridley ibid. p. 1597. I acknowledg an vnspotted Church in the which no man can err Whitaker controu See Vvhitaker â—ont 1. q. 5. c. 3. q. 3. c. 5. cont 2. q. 4. c. 2. l 2. cont Bâ—â— sect 1. 2. q. 5. c. 18. It cannot hold anie heretical doctrin and yet be a Church Ibid. Truth maketh the Church and the Church teacheth where is truth and which is truth C. 19. which place 1. Timoth. 3. sheweth that truth abideth alwaies in the Church nor can be separated from her other companies may err but it is proper and a Note of this companie that it can not err as they confess Ibid. this place Isaiae 53. sheweth that true preaching of the word shal be perpetual in the Church And controu 4. q. 4. c. 2. The Church is the Mistress of faith and manners to her al must submit And l. 3. de Scriptura p. 453. They slander vs that we make the iudgment of the Church merely humane P. 412. Tradition was once of the same authoritie as Scripture is now White in his way p. 79. No man denieth but that it is a good way not to be deceaued in an obscure question to ask and follow the Iudgment of the Church so it be the true Church P 80. The Church is to vs a witnes and vpholder of the faith and alwaies preserueth it which we denie not P. 67. These words be tolerable The doctrin teaching and beleif of the true Church Infallible rule is the infallible Rule in al points to be followed In his defence p. 318. wee wold frâ—ely grant this conclusion if his meaning weâ—e no more but that the doctrin and faith of the vniuersal Church is the Rule of faith See him also p. 339. â—ulk in Ioan. 14. Nota 5. The true Church of Christ neuer fals into Apostaâ—ie heresie or to nothing Therfore it is an impudent slander we say so Feild in Appendice part 1. p. 69. Nether D. Humfrey nor we condemne the Vniuersal Madnes to condemne the Church Church but think it verie madnes so to doe Laude sec 20. p. 142. A verie dangerous thing it is to crie out in general tearmes The whole Catholik Church can err sec 18. p. 139. We hold that the Church neuer fals into heresie That the whole visible Church neuer fals into heresie we most willingly grant sec 16. p. 113. First comes in the tradition of the Church the present Tradition of the Church is not heretical Church so it is no heretical or schismatical beleif sec 36. p. 344. we doe relie vpon the infallible authoritie of the word of God and the whole Catholik Church Ibid. p. 346. T is true that after à General Councel is ended and admitted by the whole Church is then infallible Moulins in Arnolds flights c. 8. It is fals that we say simply The Church can err Andrews Respons ad 1. Epist Molinei Arrius his name is iustly in the Catalogue of Heretiks becaus he opposed the consent of the Vniuersal Church Chillingworth c. 2. § 124. p. 100. That the liuing Iudge in the Iewish Church had an infallible direction is that which the Doctor Potter attributes to the Iews Potter sec 2. p. 25. The high Priest had an absolutly infallible direction If anie See Chilling c 2 p. 106. such promise from God to assist the Pope could be produced his decisions might then iustly pass for oracles without examination Ibid. p. 34. The Catholik Church is the faithful keeper of al
they mutually confirme each other yet with this difference that the true Church giueth sufficient testimonie to her self sufficient I say to beleue her with diuine faith to be the true Church of God becaus her authoritie in matters of faith is diuine as the Apostles was and therfore needeth not the testimonie of the Scripture to be beleued to be such as Christ gaue sufficient testimonie to himself Ioan. 5. S. Ihon Baptist to himself If particular men were credible of themselues why not the whole Church of God Math. 3. S. Ihon Euangelist to himself Ioan. 21. and S. Paul to himself Galat. 1. 2. Cor. 4. and so doth the pillar and ground of truth to her self But the Scripture giueth not sufficient testimonie of it self to be infallibly beleued to be Gods word but needeth authoritie of some infallible Author or Person becaus Scripture is onely the material obiect which is to be beleued and authoritie is the formal obiect or cause of beleef without which there can be no true or formal beleef but onely science or opinion For as S. Austin saieth That we beleue we owe to authoritie And Whitaker l. 3. de Script p. 408. Faith relieth vpon authoritie Authoritie is the foundation of faith Yet Scripture being beleued to be Gods word is a sufficient testimonie to confirme the beleef already had of the Church and also to produce such beleef in those who beleue not the Church And thus much for answer to that question How we beleue the Church to be infallible For we first beleue the Church God speaketh by the mouth of the Church Vvhitaker l. 3 de Scrip 414. so also Contr. 1 q. 3. c. 11. see c. 4. n. 4. and c. 14. n. 1. to be infallible for Gods vocal word vttered by the Church And we are confirmed in that beleef for Gods written word in the Scripture And to Catholiks we giue Gods vocal word as the first subordinat cause of that our beleef but to such as beleue the Scripture and not the Church we giue onely Gods written word And therfore no maruel if to Protestants who admit not the authoritie of Gods Church or his vocal word we proue the infallibilitie of the Church onely by Scripture wheras if they did equally admit as wel Gods vocal word as his written word or his true Church as his Scripture we might without anie vitious Circle at al mutually proue Gods vocal word by his written word and his written by his vocal and his Church by his Scripture and his Scripture by his Church becaus Gods testimonie is sufficient for proof of whatsoeuer and by what means soeuer it be vttered to wit by speech by writing or howsoeuer els Wherfore this is no vitious Circle God saieth by his Church that God speaketh by his Church Vvhitaker supra such Scripture is his word Therfore it is so God saieth by his Scripture that such are his Church Therfore they are so 5. And as for answer to the question How know you the true Church to be infallible in al matters of faith I say that beside the reasons grounded in Scripture giuen before we may giue a natural reason therof For as S. Austin saieth rightly If God haue L. de vâ—il cred c. 16. prouidence of mankinde he hath on earth setled some authoritie on which we relying may mount to him And this authoritie must not be blinde or deceiptful in matters of saluation as al matters of faith are as al fallible authoritie is and therfore is infallible in al such matters And as the same S. Austin saieth of the Scripture that if the lest lie be found in it the authoritie of al the rest faileth so if in the authoritie which God hath setled on earth for matters of Saluation there were found anie error we could not securely relie vpon it And the same reason teacheth vs that if God would setle this infallible authoritie on earth in anie he would setle it in his Church who is his beloued Spouse and Mother of the Faithful whome he hath apointed to conceaue them by the diuine seed of his word to beare nourish and guide them in their way to saluation For who can be imagined to be more fit to be infallible in matters of Saluation then the spouse of God the mother Nurse and Guide of the Faithful Would God apoint to mankinde a blinde or deceiptful guide to saluation surely no if he effectually meant to saue mankinde Nether wil it suffice to grant as Protestants doe that the Church is infallible in fundamental points first becaus there are no fundamental points 〈◊〉 their sense that is such as suffice to saluation though others sufficiently proposed be not beleued Secondly becaus if as S. Austin saied of the Scripture she lie in some points of faith we cannot be sure she doth not in others Wherfore wel saied Chillingworth c. 3. n. 36. An authoritie subiect to error can be no stable or firme foundation of my beleef in anie thing Thirdly becaus Protestants cannot tel which precisely are such fundamental points as they imagin and therfore cannot be certain in which points the Church erreth not Fourthly becaus they say the Church is fallible euen in their most fundamental point of al which is That Scripture is the word of God and sometimes also in other fundamental points as is shewed parte 1. l. 1. c. 7. Fiftly Chillingworth denieth that there is anie one certain Church vniuersal or particular which is infallible euen in fundamental points but onely that there are alwaies some vncertain men who hold al the fundamental points and therfore denieth that anie certain Church is an infallible Guide euen in fundamentals and saieth c. 2 n 139. p. 105. you must know there is a wide difference between infallible in No certain Church infaâ—lible euen â—â—fundamental points fundamentals and being an Infallible guide euen in fundamentals and we vtterly denie the Church to be the latter For to say so were to oblidge ourselues to finde some certain societie of men of whome we might be certain that they nether doe nor can err in fundamentals nor in declaring what is fundamental what not fundamental and consequently to make anie Church an infallible Guide in fundamentals would be to make it infallible in al things which Note this she proposeth and requireth to beleued Which he often times repeateth c. 3. as n. 39. 55. 58. and 60. where he addeth that it is falsly supposed that they grant that in some certain points No certain Church to be obeied vnder pain â—f damnation fundamental some certain Church is infallibly assisted and vnder pain of damnation to be obeyed So that no certain Church vniuersal or particular is ether an infallible Guide or to be beleued or obeyed vnder pain of damnation euen in fundamental points Beside The Church and Some Church are different For The Church signifieth the whole true Church as himself confesseth c. 5. n. 26. p. 263. or The
152. The word of God is perfect and easie to be vnderstood of those that desire their saluation as wel of it self as compared with it self c. 4. p. 111. S. Peter saieth not that there is anie obscuritie in the Epistles of S. Paul Brentius in his Prolegomenies contra Sotum They babble that the scripture is obscure and therfore needeth interpretation Sutclif in his Chalenge c. 3. p. 94. Papists slander the scriptures as if they were dark and hard to be vnderstood And thus they write when they exhort al men weemen and Children to read the Scripture or say that they know euerie parcel of the Scripture to be Gods words by the matter contained therin For how can they know euerie parte of the Scripture to be Gods word by the matter vnles they know the matter of euerie parte therof SECOND SECTION Sometimes denie it LVther praefat in psalmos It is Impudencie to brag of vnderstanding al Scripture most impudent rashnes to say one vnderstands anie book of scripture in al points Whitaker Contro 1. q. 4. c. 1. We neuer saied that al things in scripture are easie plain nothing obscure nothing hard to be vnderstood but we openly confess that manie places of scripture are obscure and hard Ibid. Luther was far from that madnes to say that nothing in the scriptures is hard and that it need no interpretation C. 3. p. 340. When the◠proue that there is great difficultie to vnderstand scripture they dispute not against vs. Et c. 4. p. 345. Nether did we euer say or think that al things in scripture be open Lib. 1. de Script p. 56. What man on earth canst thou finde who vnderstandeth al the Misteries of scriptures who is ignorant of nothing who can declare al See him p. 102. and 149. Potter sec 5. p. 19. How manie obscure texts of scriptures which she the Church vnderstands not Moulins of the Iudge of Controuersies c. 17. p. 281. Whosoeuer should vaunt of the vnderstanding al scripture shold vaunt of◠perfection to which the Angels are not comen as I think Chillingworth c. 3. § 25. some texts of scripture are so obscure and ambiguous that to say this and this is the certain sense of them were high presumption Morton tom High presumption 1. Apologiae l. 1. c. 19. denieth that this is the Controuersie betwixt Catholiks and Protestants Whether scripture be of it self so plain as it needeth no interpreter Plessie of the Church c. 4 p. 113. yea but yet are not there some places in Scripture plainly known to be hard Who can denie that Feild l. 4. Eccles c. 15. There is no question but there are manifold difficulties in the scripture Fulk against Heskins p. 7. who is so mad to deny but that there are diuers places both in the old and new testament which be obscure and hard to be vnderstood not onely of the ignorant but euen of the best learned Idem p. 12. And if it be impudencie and madnes for anie to say He vnderstands the Scripture in al points how can Protestants say they know the Scripture to be the word of God by the matter therof as diuers Protestants doe say who affirme that al the Scripture is infallibly known to be the word of God not by the authoritie or testimonie of the Church of God but by the matter therof THIRD CHAPTER VVhether al points necessarie to be belued be actually or expresly in scripture or no. FIRST SECTION Protestants sometimes affirme THe confession of Scotland c. 18. In which Canonical books we affirme al things to be Sufficiently expressed beleued for mans saluation are sufficiently expressed Luther in Postilla in ferias S. Stephani Nothing is to be affirmed but what is expressed in scripture Melancthon and Brentius in Hospin parte 2 Histor Sacram. fol. 107. Of Zuinglius his doctrin we cannot be certain seing of it we haue no clear and express word of God Smidelin l. contra Hosium p. 169. Faith is not faith but an vncertain opinion which doth not rely vpon some express testimonie of scripture Wigandus apud Schusselburg to 7. Catal. Heret p. 681. Onely those dogmes are to be auoched and taught Vvhose very words or equiualent are in Scripture in the Church whose verie words or equiualent are in Scripture Protestants in Conference at Ratisbone sess 10. p. 310. There cannot by the Churches testimonie anie new or peculiar dogme be deuised which afterward may be added to the other dogmes expressed in Scripture Caluin in Gratulat ad Praecentorem p. 337. Nothing is to be beleued which is not expressed in Scripture Contra Heshusium p. 844. where is the express word of God the touchstone Moulins l. contra Peron c. 45. We receaue no doctrin as necessarie to saluation vnles it be in Scripture ether in express termes or equiualent Epist Ether in express termes or equiualent 3. ad Episcopum Wintoniensem p. 183. The Principle by which our religion mainteineth it self against Papistrie is which are of diuine law are sufficiently and euidently conteined in Scripture And D Andrews answering admitteth this Principle For those things which belong to faith and manner of life Whitaker contr 1. q. 6. c. 6. we say Al things necessarie ether to faith or life are plainly and Abundantly expressed abundantly expressed in Scripture See him l. 3. de script c. 12. p. 419. Laude Relat. sec 33. p. 268. If the Popes decision be infallible legant Let them read it to vs out of the holie Scripture and we beleue it Morton in his Appeal l. 1. c. 2. sec 15. In al doctrins of faith we are to adheare precisely to the written word as vnto the sufficient and infallible rule of faith Tom. 2. Apol. l. 1. c. 46. The holie Scripture is to be held for the onely rule of faith The absolute rule of faith the total rule of the Church And c. 49 A most exact rule Tailor of Libertie of Prophesing sec 9. n. 4. In scripture al that is necessarie is plain King Iames in his speech to the Parlament An. 1603. My faith is grounded vpon the Scriptures and the express word of God Fulk in Acts c. 15. Al things necessarie to saluation are expressed in the holie Scripture Perkins contr 16. c. 2. we say that al things which belong to faith and good life and are necessarie to saluation are clearly expressed in Scripture Chillingworth in the praeface n. Clearly expressed 21. Moderate Protestants wil damne no man without express and certain warrant from Gods word See ib. n. 10. 30. 37. Item p. 18. Author Praefationis in to 5. Iesuiticae doctrinae impressae Rupellae 1596. calleth it a detestable lye That Scripture conteineth not al the misteries Explicitly of religion explicitly Vorstius Respons ad Sladum what is necessarie to be beleued is conteined word for word in Scripture Who wil see more Protestants that there is no necessarie point of faith which is not
the good of the Church which was to continue after the Apostles Thus we haue refuted the Protestants three answers to this promise of Christ and shewed them to be mere shifts Nay indeed they turne Christs most bountiful promise made vnto his Church to nothing for to what purpose is it to teach the Church al fundamental or absolutly necessarie truths and not tel her which are those truths To what purpose were it to teach the Church vneffectually as Reprobates are taught To what purpose were it that the Apostles alone were taught al truth if the Church also were not taught it who is to teach vs as they taught her 4. An other promise of Infallibilitie in matters of faith made to the Church is Isaiae 59. v. 21. This is my Conuenant with the saieth our lord my spirit which is in the and my words which I haue put in thy mouth shal not depart from thy mouth and from the mouth of thy sred and from the mouth of thy seeds seed saith our Lord from hence forward and for euer Which words are not a command as Moulins would haue it but a conuenant or promise and that absolute not conditional as Plessiae wold and doe plainly promise to the Church continual infallibilitie and infallibilitie for euer and in al the words of God which he hath put in her mouth and are so plain as Whitaker contr 2. q. 5. c. 19. saied This place doth shew that true preaching of the word shal be in the Church perpetual Yet l. 1. de Scrip. p. 133. he saieth this promise was not made to the teaching Church but to the whole Church that is the elect But first this distinction of the teaching Church and the elest Church hath no ground in the text and therfore is a voluntarie and irrational shift Secondly words put in thy mouth shew plainly that it is made to the teaching Church and as Whitaker before cited shew that true preaching of the word shal be perpetual in the Church Thirdly if this promise be made to the whole elect Church it comprehendeth some parte at least of the teaching Church For alwries some of the teaching Church are Elect and so there are alwaies some preachers of al points of faith in the Church I omit their vsual shift of their distinction of Fundamental and not fundamental points of faith both becaus there are no not fundamental points in their sense that is not necessarie to sauing faith true Church and Saluation but al are fundamental to those ends that is necessarie to be beleued at least virtually and also actually if they be sufficiently proposedâ— And also becaus z See part 1 l. 1. c. 7. Protestants doe not constantly defend that the Church is infallible in fundamental points and a See infra l. 2 c. 10. sect 2. generally they say that she is not infallible in their most fundamental point of al to wit that scripture is the word of God and al of them denie her to be diuinely infallible in anie point of faith what soeuer And God in these words plainly testifieth that he wil make her diuinely infallible becaus he wil put his word in her mouth and make that it shal neuer depart from her which is to make her diuinely infallible as he made the Prophets or Euangelists For I cal that diuinely infallible which is infallible by Gods diuine assistance and not by anie natural insight of truth and natural fidelitie in telling it And such diuine infallibilitie God hath promised to his Church in the foresaid words of the Prophet or that can not be promised by anie words which men can speak or hear 5. And now Gentle Reader I pray thee consider First how manie places to omit others for breuitie sake I haue brought for the diuine infallibilitie of the true Church of God in al matters of faith secondly how directly they affirme the said infallibilitie so as they need no inference of ours though I haue reduced some of them to sillogistical forme becaus b Beza in Colloq mont p. 95. 96. 98. Hunnius de Condit disput thesi 18. Vvhitaker Prâ—â— Controu Morton part 2. Apol. l. 1. 〈◊〉 49. Fulco de Sucâ—es p. 493. Chilling c. 3. n. 43. Protestants do require it Thirdly how clearly that Protestants are forced to inuent so manie so new so contrarie one to the other so voluntarie and so violent expositions Fourthly how against so manie so direct so plain places of Scripture which teach the infallibilitie of the Church in al points of faith Protestants cannot bring one place of Scripture which directly so much as seemeth to teach that she is fallible in points of faith as may be seen in Whitaker contro 2. q 4. c. 3. and other Protestants who write of this matter but al their arguments are ether taken wholy from mere natural reason or at least partly from natural reason which euidently sheweth that they can haue no diuine and infallible faith that the Church is fallible in points of faith becaus the conclusion followeth the weaker part wheras Catholiks haue express and clear scripture for her infallibilitie and consequently good ground for diuine faith of it The most they can bring out of Scripture for their purpose are some examples which are the same which the Donatists brought for the perishing of the Church as may be seen in S. Augustin l. de Vnitate c. 13. to which he there fully answereth and indeed do rather proue the perishing of the Church then her erring in faith and therfore must be answered as wel of Protestants as of Catholiks For as Whitaker saieth Contro 2. q. 3. c. 1. He is mad that saieth the Church can Perish And ibid. c. 2. who denieth that the Church is founded for euer and to continue perpetually he is no Christian Morton in his replie for defence of his apologie p. 90. It is madness to say that the whole visible Church can faile and Chillingworth c. 3. § 11. we beleue the Catholik Church can not perish Though this he beleue not infallible For in answer to the preface § 18. he saieth the contrarie doctrin I doe at no hand beleue to be a damnable heresie And c. 5. § 41. Nether is it certain that the doctrin of the Churches failing is reâ—ugnant to the Creed Fiftly consider how vntruly wrote Chillingworrh c. 2. § 28. of Catholiks you yourselues doe not so much as pretend to enforce to the beleif hereof Infallibilitie of the Church by anie proofs infallible and conuincing but onely to induce vs to it by such as are by your confession onely probable motiues § 35. your faith euen of the foundation of your faith yoâ—r Churches authoritie is built lastly and wholy vpon prudential motiues And § 70. The faith of Papists relies alone vpon their Churches infallibilitie That there is anie Church infallible and that theirs is it they pretend not to beleue but onely vpon prudential motiues Are so manie so plain so