vnder the signes of bread and wine If there bee no such commandement of our Sauiours then 1 There is no Masse 2 The vertue of the bloody sacrifice is not applyed by the sacrifice of the Masse 3 The sacrifice of the Masse is not truely propitiatory All which are propounded for Articles of saith by the forenamed Councill sess 22. de sacrificio Messae I might say the like of many other points but these may suffice It remaineth that I proue the proposition which must be done by handling the points seuerally First therefore I thus begin with the first The sauing truth or verity taught by Christ and his Apostles Concil Trid. Sess 4. decret de Can. Script is contained saith the Councill in written bookes or in the Scriptures or in vnwritten traditions In this proposition or Article wee must vnderstand that the Scriptures and traditions are made diuers parts of that record wherein the sauing truth is contained so that neither of these parts containeth all but the one some the other some which appeareth plainly by the Council it selfe where describing Traditions it saith that They are not writen that They were receiued by word of mouth from the Apostles and were deliuered to them either by our Sauiour or by his spirit and haue beene so conueyed from hand to hand to the present Church And indeed if this were not the Councils meaning they said nothing at all against vs who make no question but that the ChristiaÌ„s which liued presently after the Apostles did truely gather diuers points out of the Scriptures which haue worthily beene receiued and maintained from time to time Such for instances were these points that our Lord Iesus is true God that the holy Ghost is true God that our Sauiour Christ consisteth of two distinct natures that He is but one person not two These points the Christians rightly drew out of the Scriptures For they bee not expressed there in so many words and these were acknowledged to bee Articles of faith by the foure first generall Councils against Arius Macedonius Eutiches and Nestorius Of this kind there are many traditions in the Church and will daily be more as it shall please God to blesse the labors of his seruants in the reading vnderstanding of the Scriptures Of these we dispute not but onely of such as are not comprised in the Scriptures It would also bee obserued that the Councill saith not barely and simply truth but sauing truth which in all likelihood was put into the decree because we grant that some things concerning rites and ceremonies were deliuered by Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto l. 4 c 3. Sect Secundo dissidemus our Lord or his Apostles which are not recorded in the Scriptures as Bellarmine confesseth Lastly whereas the Councill saith the sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles wee must inquire whether they meane vniuersally and wholly whatsoeuer our Sauiour and his Apostles taught not any one sentence excepted or onely so much as was intended for the perpetuall vse of the Church That it meaneth absolutely all sauing truth so taught it may be probably gathered out of the very words of the Councill For it saith that The preaching of Christ and his Apostles is the fountaine of all sauing truth and by and by addeth which truth is contained in written bookes and vnwritten traditions which is all one as if the Councill should haue said in plaine termes All sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in written books and vnwritten traditions Thus haue we the meaning of the Councill now that it may appeare what is true in it what false I will draw it into seuerall propositions namely these 3. 1 All sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is recorded for future ages 2 Some sauing truth is contained in written bookes 3 Some sauing truth is comprehended in vnwritten traditions The two latter propositions viz. the second and third are manifestly in tâ—at article of the Councell the first of the three is necessarily implyed For if some things taught by them remaine not to posterity then all sauing truth so taught is not to be found in the Scripture and tradition because some of it is not at all recorded In the second proposition that Some truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in the Scripture wee wholly agree with them and say farther in particular that All such truths are containd therein as the Lord appointed for the saluation of the Elect in all ages And this is the meaning of our Diuines when they say that All things necessary to saluation are comprehended in the Scriptures Which is manifest by Dr. Reynolds for D. Reynolds proface to his sixe conclusions at conclusion first D Whitaker de script q. 6. c. 6. saying that The Lord teacheth the Church all things necessary to saluation he expoundeth necessary to saluation thus which lead the faithfull to saluation and life And Dr. Whitaker propounding our opinion of the same matter in the same manner interpreteth necessary to saluation in these words by the way of life signifying thereby that Those things are necessary to saluation which teach vs the way to euerlasting life Reuerend B. Iewell speakes to the same purpose B. Iewells Apol. part .. 2. c. 9. diuis 1. that The Scriptures doe fully comprehend all things whatsoeuer bee needfull for our health and that they be the very might and strength of God to attaine to saluation Whereby it is manifest that Bellarmine dealt falsly and De verbo Dei non scripte l. 4. l. 3. Sect. Controversia deceitfully when he propounded the question The controversie saith he betwixt vs and the Heretickes is that we say The whole doctrine necessary to faith and manners is not contained in the Scriptures expresly and therefore besides the written word of God there is also an vnwritten word of God required that is to say Diuine and Apostolicall traditions Wherefore I will leaue Bellarmine with his frauds and debate the point as it is deliuered in the Councell of Trent For the first that All sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is recorded for future ages Bellarmine bringeth no proofe and yet he could not choose but see that there is no necessity in the point it selfe why we should take it for true For it might well be that our Sauiour and his Apostles taught some things which tended to the saluation of some particular men not of all men and therfore might be left vnrecorded without any losse or damage to the Church Therefore we may iustly call for proofe of a point so vncertaine that is made by Bellarmine a matter of faith The third proposition at numb 5. is that Some sauing truth is comprehended in tradition For the better vnderstanding and cleering whereof wee are first to learne what vnwritten traditions are Which the Councell of Trent teacheth vs. Vnwritten traditions are things endicted by our
this charge doth not so much as imply the appointing of an office because feeding is many times enioyned where there is no singular office ordained but the executing of an office commanded which had before been appointed So the Apostle Peter 1. Peter 5. 2. chargeth th 〈…〉 were already 1 Pet. 5. 2. Ministers to feed the flicke of God And the Apostle Paul Acts 20. 28. giues the like charge to the Elders or Ministers of Act. 10. 28. Ephesus Take heed to your selues and to all the flocke to feed the Church of God And this Dr. Reynolds well obserued Dr. Reynolds against â—art Chap. 3. diuis 2. and vrged against Hart You say true wee might therefore with good reason refuse this proposition till it be proued But I will deale more kindly with Bellarmine and shew that Luther truely affirmed there was no new office erected by those words but the execution of one formerly appointed enioyned If this feeding be the teaching for which all the Apostles had commission Mark 16 15. Goe ye into all the world and Mark 16. 15. preach the Gospell to euery creature Iohn 20. 23. Whose sinnes soeuer ye remit they are remitted to them then is it not the erecting of a new office for this was at our Sauiours third appearing to his Disciples Iohn 20. 13. that at his first Ioh. 20. Ioh. 20. 19. Bellarm. de pont Rom. lib. 1. cap. 12. Sect. Dices c. 19. 20. when as Bellarmine affirmeth they had power giuen them both of iudisdiction to gouerne and of order to execute their sacrificing Priesthood And it had beene a thing not beseeming our Sauiours wisdome to giue a new Commission when there was no need nor occasion of so doing Yea to say the truth it had beene altogether in vaine because the former being as sufficient and in force there could be no place for this later But this feeding Ioh. 21. 15. is the teaching for which they had commission Mark. 16. 15. Ioh. 20. 23. For wee finde no other kinde of feeding but this one practised by the Apostles in the new Testament namely feeding by way of reuealing This appeareth touching the Scriptures Bellarm. de Coâ—cil authorit lib 2. cap. 12. Sect. Obseruandum c. and Sect. Diâ—untur Counc Trent Sess 4 decretde Canon scripturatum 2. Tim. 4. 15. The Scriptures were giuen by inspiration 2. Pet. 1. 21. Holy men of God spake as they were moued by the holy Ghost as Bellarmine also confesseth The Scripture is the word of God immediatly reuealed The holy writers had immediate reuelation and writ the words of God As for traditions which the church of Rome makes a second part of the diuine testimony or word of God by their owne confession they are also by reuelation for so saith the Councell of Trent Traditions were either receiued by the Apostles from the mouth of our Sauiour or deliuered by themselues the holy Ghost enditing them Indeed this feeding Ioh. 21. 15. is nothing else but an exhortation or charge for the performance of that duty which was enioyned in that Commission Mark 16. 15. That it was such an exhortation the manner of deliuering the words sheweth which is by repeating the same thing three seuerall times For this course is very fit to make an impression of a duty commanded no way beseeming the giuing of a Commission Besides it answereth to Peters denying of his Master thrice as Cyril noteth in Ioh. Because Cyril supra Ioh. lib. 12. cap. 64. he denied him thrice at his passion therefore there is a threefold confession of loue required of him A threefold confession saith S. Austin answereth to a threefold negation that the tongue may Aug. Tract in Ioh. 123. expresse as much loue as it did feare Adde hereunto that our Lord calls for the performance of this duty as a proofe of Peters loue to him wherein hee had failed more then the rest because he had made more protestation of it then the rest For thus lies the reason If thou loue me as thou hast professed thou doest shew thy loue by the performing of the duty of feeding But what proofe had it beene of Peters loue to our Sauiour to become the visible Monarch of the whole Church Well might the giuing of such an office argue our Sauiours loue to Peter but the taking it vpon him could not testifie any great loue of his to our Sauiour For who would haue refused such an offer The burthen of teaching was laid vpon the other Apostles as well as vpon him the honour of the Supremacy if this were true was appropriated to him yea the rest of the Apostles who before were equall to him were now made inferiour and subiect to him Lastly in giuing a commission the authority of him that giues is ordinarily expressed alwaies implyed Mat. 28. 18 19. All power is giuen to me in heauen and earth Goe therefore and teach all nations Ioh. 20. 21 22 23. As my father sent me so send I you receiue the holy Ghost whose sins c. But here although as they say it is the onely place that speaks of this commission there is no authority either expressed or implyed onely as Cyrill saith It was a duty of loue to feed as it had beene formerly a proofe of feare to deny What else then can this Feeding be but the teaching which was enioyned all the Apostles at our Sauiours first appearing to them Whereupon I may safely conclude that the word neither necessarily nor in any likelihood of reason importeth the erection of any new office in the Church Let vs now proceed to debate the second point yet with this memorandum that although it be neuer so plainly proued yet Bellarmines proposition of a new office appointed Ioh. 21. 15. is false because the first point contained in it of a singular office here ordained is neither true nor likely The thing now to be discussed is this Feeding Christs sheepe Ioh. 21. 15. is teaching This sentence is plainly deliuered by Bellarmine in that proposition as he that looks vpon it cannot choose but see and proued also by two reasons the former that Reasonable sheepe are fed by teaching the latter that The Lord saith by Ieremy I will giue you Pastors according to my heart which Ier. 3. 15. shall feed you with knowledge and vnderstanding But these proofes might haue been spared for we acknowledge that Feeding is Teaching But for the fuller discussing of this matter wee must remember that Bellarmine as we saw chap. 4. numb 9. telleth vs Teaching is double by reuealing or propounding things reuealed Wee say that the teaching here spoken of is by reuelation not by propounding matters already reuealed as they would haue it But if they will haue vs yeeld to it they must proue it and not take it for granted as Bellarmine doth For without it be proued as I signified chap. 6. numb 6. his proposition cannot be true It is therfore
that the first part of it and the proofe thereof suppose that those two propositions There are Scriptures These we haue be they are formally that is expresly contained either in the Scriptures or tradition But this say we is false they are contained formally in neither where then shall we finde them Radically and originally in the Scriptures themselues which of themselues afford iust occasion to all men to conceiue both that There are Scriptures and that These are they They are contained formally in the apprehension of euery mans vnderstanding that beleeueth them and that this beleife is diuine faith not humane coniecture it appeareth because it is wrought in men by a speciall prouidence of God which perswadeth and draweth men to acknowledge the things to be as they are in themselues and is farther grounded vpon the diuine authoritie vertually affirming that they are both true indeed And yet wee make not a priuate spirit the ground or rule of our faith or the iudge to determine what is matter of faith what is not As Bellarmine slandereth vs and Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto lib. 3. cap. 5. Sect. Norum cap. 9. sect quod 〈◊〉 after him Mr. Fâ—sher and other But wee onely attribute to that speciall prouidence the office of in lightening and mouing the vnderstanding in lightened to giue assent to the bookes of Scripture that they are the word of God as indeed and truth they are Now to this assent it moueth vs by many reasons fit and effectuall for such a worke as namely by the continuall consent and testimonie of the Church by the matter deliuered in the bookes them selues by the stile or maner of deliuering it and the like as diuers of our diuines haue shewed at large and that this assent of ours is a true faith it is very manifest because it conceiueth of the thing deliuered as in truth it is which is the very rule of truth and wherein the nature of truth consisteth The assumption is false The last proposition is not part of sauing truth taught by our Sauiour Christ and his Apostles Neither all nor any of the Apostles for ought appeareth in the word did euer set downe a Catalogue of the Bookes of the New or Old Testament neither indeede was it possible for any of them to doe it but S. Iohn who out liued them all and writt after them all As for S. Iohn he neither might nor could doe it because that was onely Peters office or his successors to declare which were Scriptures and which were not as we learned out of Bellar. Chap. 3. 11. 9. Pâ—â—ar ubi supra sect dâ—nique The second and last argument lieth thus This Proposition There is no word of God besides that which is written is contained in tradition not written This proposition is a sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles Therefore some sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in tradition not written First it is to be considered that Bellarmine bringeth this assumption as a proposition of ours and from thence concludeth for the Church of Rome against vs For if hee brought it as his owne and acknowledged by him for true he should thereby gaine say the Councell of Trent affirming that There is some part of the word of God contained in tradition which is not to be found in the Scriptures But in this Bellarmine doth vs wrong for although we say that there is no word of God but that which is contained in the Scriptures as a Rellar de verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 3. Sect. adipsi Bellarmin alleageth out of b Caluin Instit lib 4. cap. 8. â— 8. Caluin yet we say uot that this proposition is a sauing truth taught by Christ his Apostles neither indeed need we say so For by that propositioÌ„ we only deny that which the CouÌ„cell affirmeth and set it downe as a contradictory thereto and Bellarmine himselfe in the place for enamed bringeth it to the same end The reason of our deniall is that the Scripture doth no where send vs to tradition nor hath any word to that purpose as hath appeared in the former disputation And this reason is very sufficient because nothing is to be receiued for an Article of faith but that which is taught in the word of God The like answer is to be made to the proposition If it be true in Bellarmines iudgement then the doctrine of the Church of Rome in his iudgement is salfe For the Councell of Tâ—ent teacheth that There is some word of God contained in tradition but this proposition affirmes that There is no word of God besides that which is written If Bellarmine would father it vpon vs he accuseth vs falsly For we neuer saiâ— nor thought that that proposition was contained in tradition but perhaps he thinketh it will follow vpon that wee say but in so thinking hee thinkes idly for we doe no more hereby but denie that which they say and neither do nor neede affirme that it is contained either in the Scriptures or in tradition It is enough for vs in matter of faith to refuse whatsoeuer is not taught in the Scriptures But it may be said that this proposition There is no word of God besides that which is written is either true or false we grant it because it is certainely true that in euerie contradiction properly so called the one proposition is true the other false What of this It will farder be said If it be false then the contradictory to it which we hold is true We grant this too what more If this be true it is contained either in the Scripture or in tradition This we denie It may be true and yet contained in neither of them For the truth of this proposition is not positiue whereby one thing is affirmed of or ioyned to another but negatiue by which one thing is denied of or seuered from another Now propositions of this kinde are then true when the things comprehended in them are indeed seuered the one from the other for then the proposition speaketh of the thing as it is Therefore it is enough to make this negatiue proposition true that the Scripture is silent in that which they affirme and doth not ioyne Heb. 1. 5. them together as they doe And this is the ground of those negatiue disputations wee find in the Scriptures P. Iewels answ to Dâ— Coles second 〈◊〉 let O. P. especially To which of the Angells said be c. He that desireth to see more of this may reade the reuerend Bishop Iewel in his answer to Dr. Cole I should now goe on according to the order followed in the Councell of Trent to examine the rest of the Articles set downe by me chap. 11. num 3. But for this time I thinke it enough that I haue debated these two questions because if these proue false as I trust they haue done all the other differences betwixt vs and the
cause of this Separation lyeth in the Church of Rome namely the cup of abomination in the whores hand which is their haereticall and schismaticall religion Vpon this foundation of these learned men I set this frame of disputation Euery erroneous faith is to be refused The faith of the Church of Rome is an erroneous faith Therefore the faith of the Church of Rome is to be refused Can there be any question made of the first part or proposition of this reason when the holy Apostle Saint Iude exhorts all men without exception of person time or matter to striue for the faith delivered to the Saints Iudev 3. But how striue we for that faith which is the reuealed truth of God if we can be content to beleeue errours which are against the truth Yea what doe we else by holding errours for truth but adde to the diuine reuelation giuen by the Lord God himselfe contrary to his charge Deut. 4. 2. You shall put nothing to the word that I command you The second part which we call the assumption or minor Deutr. 4. 2. is that wherein all the doubt lieth for what is the Church of Rome the worse for granting that an erroneous faith is to be refused vnles their faith can be proued erroneous And whereas I say in my question and disputation erroneous rather then hereticall I doe it od of purpose because I would shunne all needlesse wrangling about the word for it seemes to many somewhat doubtfull what is properly to be called heresy For my part I can not see that any false proposition deliuered for an Article of faith can be lesse then heresie I doubt not but a man may thinke somthing to be true which is false be no heriticke buâ— he thâ— shall obstinately hold such a point for an Article of faith necessarily to be beleeued by all men vpon paine of damnation cannot for ought I see be freed from heresie As for the errours of the Papists Dr. Reynolds Dr. Whitakers and Mr. Perkins as we haue seene make no doubt to call them heresies Now that we may the better vnderstand whether the faith of the Church of Rome be erroneous or no we must enquire how the truth and falsenesse of faith is to be discerned which we cannot doe either better or otherwise then by considering how the Article of faith or proposition enioyned to be beleeued agreeth with the diuine testimonie concerning that point or Article for the diuine testimonie is the thing or rule to which the Article must be applied and by which it must be squared so that if it agree wholy with it it is true if in any part it differ from that testimonie it is false and erroneous This Sess 14. caâ— Decret de necessitate satiffaction is Decâ—ct de sacram paenitentiae can 6. description of errour and falsehood in matters of faith is warranted by the Councell of Trent where they make falsehood consist in differing from the word of God and That which differs from the institution of Christ is called an humane tradition and therefore is erroneous According to this declaration of a false and erroneous faith I proceed now to shew that the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous That faith which hath a false and ertoneous foundation is false and erroneous Wherein first I take it for granted that Faith must haue an extrinsecall foundation out of the shings themfelues which are to be beleeved This outward and extrinsecall foundation is the credit and authority of him that delivereth those things for true and requires assent or agrement to them Secondly I hold it for certaine and agrred vpon by all that faith is true or false according to the foundation whereon it stands as the diuine restimonie begets a diuine faith an humane testimonie breeds an humane which may thus appeare What makes the faith of the ancient heathen and the now heathenish Turks and all sorts of Infidels who beleeue that there is but one God to be humane false and erroneous and the faith of Christians concerning the same point to be diuine and true but the diuerse foundations of these faiths the former depending vpon the coniectures and testimonies of men the other arising out of the witnesse of God himselfe To come nearer home why doe the Papists denie that wee are of their faith although they confesse wee hold the very same Articles of the Creed that they professe and aagree with them in most points of religion but for that we haue not the same foundation of our faith which they haue of theirs It is then the goodnesse or badnesse of the foundation that make the faith good or bad so that where the foundation is false the faith whatsoeuer it be cannot be true The proposition thus prooued I will adde the assumptition to it The foundation of the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous For the foundation of their faith is the authority of the Pastors of their Church as it Sect. 4. Decret de edit scriptur sect praeterea is manifest by the Councell of Trent It is the office of the Church saith the Councel to giue sentence of the true meaning and sense of the Scriptures Now by the Church they meane the Pastours of the Church as their continuall practise declareth no man being suffered to giue a voice in any Councell but their Bishops whom onely they hold to be the Pastours of the Church By true sense and meaning they vnderstand the doctrine of faith which is nothing else but the Word of God truly vnderstood By the Scriptures they meane euery particular place of Scripture for if they should meane some places onely there could be no certainty in this their decree vnlesse they had determined what particular places they are whereof the Church may giue sentence These things thus declared I dispute thus They that haue the office to determine which is the true faith their authority is the foundation of Faith But the Church hath the office to determine which is the true faith as it appeares by the words of the Councell ere-while recited Therfore the authority of the Church is the foundation of their faith That the Church of Rome claimes this authority it may further appeare by those titles whcih it vsurpeth in the said Councell that The Bishop of Rome is Gods Vicar on Sess 6. de reformat cap. 1. Sess 14. de poenitentia cap. 7. Sess 7. de Baptism Can. 3. Sess 22. de sacrificio missae cap. 8 De verbo dei lib. 3. cap. 3. Sâ—ct Tota igitur Cap. 5. Sect. Ex his earth The Church of Rome is the mother and mistris of all Churches Yea euerie man may plainly see that Bellarmine teacheth the same things of the church of Rome The Church is the iudge of the true sense of the Scripture and all controuersies By Church hee vnderstands the Pope with a Councell and this he saith is expresly
to be found in the Councell of Trent Sess 4. which is the place I alledged ere-while It is committed singularly to Peter and his successors that they should teach all men what is to bee held concerning the doctrine of faith For the expounding whereof he saith a little after Sect. Si etiam that The Lord speakes of a singular office of teaching the whol Church by appointing and decreeing what is to be beleeued of all men And againe he saith that The Councels Popes execute the office of a Iudge committed Cap. 10. Sect. Respond aliud est to them by God What the Office of a Iudge is he shews in the same place a few lines before To explication after the manner of a Iudge there is authoritie required A Iudge deliuereth his sentence as a thing that necessarily must be followed To conclude hee tells vs in the same tenth chapter that Sect. Septiâ—um argumentum Christians who are sure the Church cannot erre in expounding the doctrine of faith are bound to receiue that doctrine and not to doubt whether those things be so or no. This matter Bellarmine makes plaine to all men by shewing the manner of this Office in this sort The Scripture for Cap. 10. Sect. Respondeâ— Christus It selfe needs not the witnes of men for it is most true in it selfe whether it be vnderstood or not but for our sake it needs the witnes of the Church because otherwise wee are not certaine what bookes are sacred and diuine nor what is the true and proper meaning In the same Chapter he giues vs to vnderstand what manner of foundation the testimony of the church is The word of God deliuered by the Prophets and Apostles is the first Sect. Respondeo Ad hoc foundation of our faith for therefore we beleeue whatsoeuer we beleeue because God hath reuealed it by his Prophets and Apostles But we adde that besides this first foundation there is another secondary foundation needfull to wit the testimony of the Church for we know not certainly what God hath reuealed but by the testimony of the Church Therefore our faith cleaueth to Christ the first truth reuealing those mysteries as to the first foundation It cleaues also to Peter that is to the Pope propounding and expounding these mysteries as to a secondary foundation And to make the matter yet more plaine he speakes thus in the same tenth chap. Sect. Respondeo verbum We are to know Sect. Respondeâ— verbum that a Proposition or article of faith is concluded in such a Syllogisme as this Whatsoeuer God hath reuealed in the Scriptures is true But this God hath reuealed in the Scriptures Therefore this is true Of the first of these Propositions no man makes any question The second is held for certaine truth amongst all Catholikes for it is grounded vpon the testimony of the Church that is the Councell or the Pope By which it appeares how little Mr. Fisher vnderstands the doctrine whereof he makes profession or how vnaduisedly he deliuereth his opinion For whereas Bellarmine will haue a two-fold foundation primary and secondary Mr. Fisher will acknowledge but one namely the authority of God speaking by the mouth of the church Christian beleefe saith hee ought onely to bee Treat of Faith in the Preface Sect of which point grounded vpon the authority of God speaking by the mouth of the Church We haue seene Bellarmines opinion of this matter which indeed agrees very well with the words of the Councell where it challengeth the office of interpreting the Scriptures For in that clayme it presumes that the diuine truth is already reuealed and that it is the first foundation of our faith to which the office of the Church is added which is but a secondary foundation Now by these places of the Counceâ—l and Bellarmine it is cleare that The foundation of the Romish faith is the authority of the Church This foundation of faith say wee is false and erroneous That our Sauiour Christ and his Prophets and Apostles are the foundation of faith wee beleeue and acknowledge and in this we and they agree That secondary foundation which lyeth in the authority and testimony of the church we refuse as false and naught and in this lyeth the true difference betwixt vs and them in this point as besides other De Script quaest 5. cap. 3. Apol. part 2. chap. 3. diuis 2. 11 Dr. Whitaker hath noted and the reuerend B. Iewell And this indeed is the main reason why we may not ioyn with them If they demand of vs VVhy we receiue not this authority of the church for a foundation of faith VVe answer Because we find no commission in the word of God wherby any such office is conueyed vnto it Neither deale wee herein any otherwise then reason and law direct men to do in the like case For is any man so destitute of reason or so ignorant of the law that he would receiue a man for L. Chancellour L. Treasurer or Lord Chiefe Iustice that were not able to shew any commission for the hauing and executing such an office And shall wee in a businesse of such importance that concernes our free-hold not onely for our present being of the church but for our future becomming heires of glory in heauen giue credit to men vpon their bare word without sight of their commission VVerfore doth our Lord and Sauiour so often in the Scriptures plead his authority from God warranted by the old Testament and vpbraid the Iewes with lightnesse and folly for being ready to receiue one that should come in his owne name If then the Papists would haue vs beleeue that their church is appointed to bee a foundation let them shew their warrant for it and we will accept it and build our faith vpon it But we looke that their commission should be very plain and certaine because it is of such a matter as no naturall reason can conceiue to be true For who would imagine or beleeue that the Apostles who had a little before receiued full power of order and iurisdiction ioyntly and equally with Peter as Bellarmine himselfe confesseth should suddenly De Rom. Poâ—t lib. 1. cap. 12. Sect. vt autem haue their authority abridged and be made subiect to Peter yea to his successors too as it fell out with S. Iohn to learne of them which wee bookes of Scripture and what was the meaning of the seuerall places or texts and what was true what false in Diuinity Besides the matter it selfe is of such importance by their doctrine that without the constant beliefe thereof and obedience according thereto there is no possibility of saluation For Whosoeuer saith Bellarmine will not be sed by Peter De verb. Dei lib 3. cap. 5. Sect. quartum that is learne of him or his successors as iudges and determiners what he is to take for matter of faith and what is the sense of the Scripture is none
not be without an head at Peters death and after Therefore some must succeed Peter in his pastorall office Here Bellarmine perceiued that we were like enough to deny the proposition because the disiunction in it is naught for that Christ the head of the church continued to be the head thereof at Peters death and shall do so for euer Therfore he telleth vs it is not sufficient for the Church to haue Christ for head but that the Scripture maketh mention of another head of the Church his reason lyeth thus The head 1 Cor. 12. 12. is not Christ for that head 1 Cor. 12. 12. hath need of the members which is not true of Christ The head 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church Therefore there is some head of the Church which is not Christ Wee easily yeeld the proposition is true and therfore Bellarmine needed not haue troubled himselfe to proue it especially since his proofe is no better For our Sauiour considered as the Mediatour the head of the Church cannot say to the Members which make the body I haue no neede of you although as he is God he hath absolutely no need of any of them The assumption that the head 1 Cor. 12. 12. is the head of the Church we refuse as false And how doth Bellarmine proue it As he doth many other points by saying so But this will not serue our turne in a matter of faith Belike he looketh we should disproue it Though it be no orderly course of disputation yet I say in a word the head in that 21 verse in which the words quoted by Bellarmine signifies the naturall head to which the principall members in the church are resembled which as principall as they are cannot be without the feet that is the meanest members And this interpretation is warranted by Chrysostome and Theophilact who by head vnderstand those which had receiued greater gifts So that indeed the place containeth a comparison wherein the coniunction of the parts of the mysticall body is declared by the like in the naturall body There are two other arguments in the same chapter Sect. Sexto and Sect. Denique the one is drawne from the succession of the high Priests in the old Testament the other from the necessity of monarchicall gouernment in the church But they are so sleight and idle that I should but wast time labour and paper to meddle with them where-I thus end this third point and this Chapter CHAP. X. Of Feeding committed to Peters Successours THe fourth and last point to be considered in Bellarmines 1 Chapt. 5 num 5. chap. 8. num assumption is this Feeding Ioh. 21. is committed to Peters Successors also This we say is vntrue and will make it appeare to bee 1. Ioh. 21. 25. so by answering the arguments he bringeth to proue it Bellarm. leverbo De il b. 3 cap 5. Sect. Quartum The first whereof is in this manner Either our Sauiour when he required Peter to feed his sheepe Ioh. 21. spake also to his successors or else he prouided for his church for twenty fiue yeares onely and not to the end of the world But when he required Peter to feed his sheepe Iohn 21. he prouided for his Church not for fiue and twenty years onely but to the end of the world Therefore Ioh. 21. he spake also to Peters successors Concerning the assumption we say that wee are out of doubt our Sauiour by those words prouided for his church to the end of the world For hee thereby required Peter to publish the Gospell by reuealing it Now this reuealing or preaching of the Gospell by reuelation is and shall be of great vse to the Church in all ages and times so long as the world shall enduâ—e And in this sensâ— I grant the assumption but in Bellermines sense that our Sauiour prouided for his Church by instituting such an Office as hee fancieth which the whole argument presumeth I deny the assumption and proposition too Indeed the proposition is vtterly false our Lord prouided for the Church to the end of the world though hee spake not at all in that place to Peters successors For in those words hee tooke order for the reuealing of the Gospell which reuelation of Peters containeth prouision for the Church to the end of the world There is a second argument of Bellarmines to the same Bellarm. do Pont. Rom. l. 2 cap. 12. Sect. quinto purpose In which words Christ committed all his sheepe both for place and time to Peter in those he spoke to Peters successors also for Peter was not to liue alwaies in the flesh But in those words Ioh. 21. Christ committed all his sheepe both for place and time to Peter For it behoued our Sauiour to haue no lesse care of vs then of our Predecessors Therefore in those words Iohn 21. Christ spake to Peters successors also Of the assumption which speaketh of our Lords committing his sheepe to Peter by those words there hath beene enough said already in the former chapter which needeth no repetition The proposition I reiect as false For our Sauiour might well by those words commit all his sheepe for place and time to Peters Feeding by the doctrine of the Gospell to be reuealed which was to continue as by Gods blessing it hath done and shall doe no lesse to vs and our posterity then to our predecessors from time to time whereby hee sheweth his care of vs as well as of them Now for a conclusion of this fourth point and a full satisfaction to this whole argument drawn from those words Iohn 21. 15. I will propound a reason or two out of the text it selfe by which it shall appeare if not necessarily yet with as great likelihood as any thing Bellarmine hath brought in this question that our Lord spake to Peter onely and not to his successors also Of them to whom those words were spoken our Sauiour demanded whether they loued him or no. Of Peterâ— successors Christ did not demand whether they loued him or no for they neither were there in presence nor at all in being in the world Therefore to Peters successours those words were not spoken He to whom those words were spoken had giuen occasion that our Sauiour should repeat this question thrice For it is not likely that our Lord would haue repeated them so often if there had not beene occasion giuen and wee finde iust occasion of repeating them thrice in Peters denying him thrice But Peters successors had giuen no occasion of the threefold repetition for they neither were at that time nor had beene before in the world Therefore to Peters successors those words were not spoken Thus haue I at the last examined this argument of Bellarmines with all the proofes of euery seuerall part thereof whereby it hath appeared I doubt not to euery iudicious and vnpartiall Reader that there is no force in it to proue that the Church or Pope hath a
commission from our Lord Iesus to teach the whole Church by way of iudging and determining what is to be beleeued of all men and what is not It will bee looked for perhaps that I should proceed to the discussing of some other that are brought for the proofe of this question But I thinke it would bee but lost labour for Bellarmine who was as able as any Popish writer that hath dealt with this matter and had allowance of that he wirt especially in a point that so nearely touched the Popes free-hold if not from the Consistory immediately yet with the knowledge thereof from the office appointed for that purpose in Rome setteth vp his rest vpon that place in Iohn and telleth vs confidently that Then onely Peter receiued the keyes of the kingdome as principall Bellarm. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. c. 12. Sect. vt autem and ordinary gouernour when he heard those words Feede my sheepe and then also as he saith the charge of the rest of the Apostles his brethren was committed to him Therefore since we require a commission for such an office and that is either here or no where to bee found to what purpose should we examine other arguments which can proue no such matter Now that we haue good reason to call for the sight of a commission by which such an office should be erected no reasonable man can doubt if he consider what himselfe would doe if any man should challenge to himselfe the authority of the Lord Chancellor or Lord Treasurer of England would he take his word without knowledge of his commission vnder the broad seale And why then should wee be so simple as in a businesse of such importance to take the word of a Cardinall for the Popes prerogatiue Master Fisher the Iesuit after some other Papists alleageth for the proofe of this commission Mat. 28. 19. Goe teach all Nations But Bellarmine hath disclaimed and disproued all commission in that place and that not without reason For he saith Then onely he receiued the keyes of the Bellar. de Rom. Pont. l. 1. c. 12. Sect. Vt autem Kingdome as principall and ordinarie gouernour when he heard Feed my sheepe In this he disclaimeth it his disproofe is that the commission Mat. 28. 19. is all one with that Ioh. 20. 21. as that which by Bellarmines confession Sect. Dices containeth power both of order and iurisdiction which is also conueyed to the Apostles Math. 28. 20. Goe teach and baptize And this Master Fisher must needs acknowledge if he will haue that place be a commission for the Popes authority As for that Iohn 20. 21. the power there was not committed seuerally to Peter alone but to all the Apostles as to Legates not to ordinary pastors as Bellarmine noteth All other Sect. Vt autem places of Scripture brought by the Papists to this purpose are of the same kind and concerne all the Apostles as well as Peter wherefore all this considered I hold it altogether needlesse to meddle with those other eight arguments of Bellarmines which indeed are of another kinde and perswade my selfe that I haue said enough of that weake foundation of the Papists faith the authority of the Church in person of the Pope for the time being Whereupon I infer my former conclusion that The saith of the Church of Rome is erroneous and false euen in the very foundation of it and therefore to bee refused and reiected of all men CHAP. XI Containing a second proofe that the faith of the Church of Rome is erroneous and false SVch as the foundation of the Romish faith is such is the faith it selfe namely false and erroneous as I will shew by the argument that followes in the seuerall parts of it If some of the Articles of the faith of the Church of Rome bee false and erroneous then the faith of that Church is false and erroneous But some of the Articles of the faith of the Church of Rome are false and erroneous Therefore the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous Lest any man should hastily except against the consequence of the proposition as if I went about to proue the whole by the part which may not bee I must intreat him to remember that as I noted before in this question wee take the faith of the Church of Rome for one intire thing because of that one bond the authority of the Church or Pope by which all the parts of it are so ioyned together that they all make but one body By reason of which bond he that refuseth any one part reiecteth the whole For by that his refusall he accuseth their Church of errour and failing in determining matters of faith and so ouerthroweth the very foundation of their faith Besides the denying of any one such Article let it bee in it selfe of neuer so small importance draweth vpon the denyer that Anathema or curse which seizeth on all them which are not of the faith of the Church of Rome Wherefore I may presume without presumption that the consequence is good seeing euery Article is equally and alike a matter of faith My assumption I will make good by setting downe out of the Councill of Trent diuers Articles of the Romish saith which are false and erroneous and these they are 1 The sauing verity or truth taught by Christ and his Apostles is contained in written bookes or Scriptures and vnwritten traditions Concil Trident. Sess 4. decret de Canon Scripturae 2 The bookes of Iudith Tobit Ester chap. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16. Wisdome Ecclesiasticus Baruch Daniel chap. 3. 13 14. Macchabees 1 2. are canonicall scripture d. decret de scriptur 3 The whole bookes of Scripture and euery part of them as they are in the vulgar Latine edition are to be receiued for sacred and canonicall d. decret de scriptur 4 It is the office of the Church to iudge of the true sense or interpretation of the sacred or holy Scriptures d. sess 4. de edit vsu librorum sacrorum Sect. insuper 5 The Bishop of Rome is Gods Vicar on earth Sess 6. decret de reform cap. 1. and sess 14. de poenitentia cap. 7. 6 The Church of Rome is the mother and Mistris of all Churches Sess 7. de baptis can 3. and sess 13. de extrem vnct cap. 3. and sess 22. de sacrif missae cap. 8. 7 Grace bestowed in baptisme doth take away whatsoeuer hath the true proper nature of sin sess de pec orig can 5. 8 Concupiscence in the regenerate is not truely and properly sinne d. canon 5. 9 Man doth freely assent to and cooperate or worke together with Gods exciting and cooperating grace so that he can also reiect or refuse the same grace Sess 6. de iustif cap. 5. And dessent if he will can 4. 10 The onely formall cause of iustification is iustice or righteousnesse inhaerent d. sess de iustit cap. 7. 11 By keeping the commandements of the
That which the Apostle commanded the Thessalouians to keepe was a sauing faith Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition There is no end of Bellarmines begging We must deny as before that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is recorded and come to posteritie To the proposition I answer in particular that being vnderstood of that time when the Apostle writ that Epistle it is true he had then deliuered some things by word of mouth and not written them and those hee commandeth them to keepe But what proofe can Bellarmine make that those things were not written afterwards The assumption is not easily to be proued that those things were sauing truth Why doth not Bellarmine tell vs what they were Me thinks he dareth not so much as guesse at them otherwise he would let vs know at the least what his Catholickes worthily take them to be Would any man dally thus in a matter of faith to bee beleeued vpon paine of damnation Bellarmine will make amends for the want of weight in his reasons by the number of them and he propoundeth his fift thus to bee deliuered Bellar. ubi supra sect quaitam That which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. is contained in tradition That which was there committed to Timothy is a sauing 1. Tim. 6. 20. 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2. truth Therefore some sauing truth is contained in tradition Here he beggeth againe as before but wee cannot grant that whatsoeuer the Apostles preached is remaining vpon record to posteritie If that were granted yet should I thinke the proposition no sufficient warrant for an Article of faith Therefore Bellarmine offereth proofe of it on this maner That which Timothy had heard of Saint Paul 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other also that is contained in tradition But that which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 he had heard of Saint Paul and was to deliuer to faithfull men able to teach other also Therefore that which was committed to Timothy 1. Tim. 6. 20. and 2. Tim. 2. 1. 2 is contained in tradition Least wee should deny the first part or Proposition of this Syllogisme because the things so delivered and given in charge by the Apostle might be matter for the present vse of the Church and such as needed not to be alwayes knowne Bellarmine telleth us that by those things so heard and so to be committed the vnderstanding of the sense of the scriptures and other doctrine is signified so that the whole force of his Argument lyeth in this interpretation which he never offereth to proue Therefore vnlesse we will take his bare word for proofe wee are as farre to seeke as we were before Now that we haue no reason to doe so I thinke it may appeare by those things which I will now propound to the consideration of all reasonable men First then I would know oâ— Bellarmine whether by Vnderstanding of the sense he meane generall rules for the vnderstanding of it or the sense of particular places Secondly I demaund whether he deliuered to him the sense oâ— euery place of Scripture or of some onely Whether he answer this or that I aske thirdly what is become of those rules and expositions How will he proue to vs that they haue beene continued from time to time till now If they haue not beene continued what haue wee to do with them who dispute onely of such traditions as are in the possession and vse of the present Church Fourthly is it likely euen in Bellarmines iudgement that Saint Paul would take vpon him to instruct Timothy in the sense of any place of Scripture when as the office of interpreting the Scripture is committed by the Councell of Trent to the Church that is as Bellarmine expoundeth it to Peter and his successours Did he meane ambitiously to vsurpe Peters office or to send him to Peter or his successours to learne of them whether the interpretation he had giuen were true or no. Touching the second part of the first Syllogisme that Those thinges which were committed to Timothy were sauing truths Bellarmine saith nothing which argueth that he knew not what to say What reason haue we then to imagine that they were sauing truths or that this argument concludeth any thing for the doctrine of the Councell of Trent concering traditions There is yet one argument more in the same fift chapter thus to be concluded Those things which Iohn had to write 2. Ioh. 11 and Bellar. ubi supra Sect. ultimum testimonium 3. Ioh. 14. are contained in tradition for he saith he would not write them But those things which he had then to write were sauing truths taught by the Apostles Therefore some sauing truths taught by the Apostles are contained in tradition I am inforced here also to repeate my former answer that Bellaâ—mine still takes it for granted that whatsoeuer the Apostles taught is continued to posteritie which we denie and no papist can proue His assumption or minor is to weake to beare vp the weight of an Article of faith vnlesse he be able to â—â—ll 〈◊〉 certainly what the things were which the Apostle would not write and to whom hee did or at the least that hee did afterward deliuer them to some body from whom the Church hath receiued them Till we know what they were how shall we be sure they were part of the sauing truth CHAP. XV. Of two other arguments of Bellarmine VVEE haue done with the fift Chapter and are now to examine two arguments set downe chap. 4 the former I frame thus That there are Scriptures that these we haue he they is â— Bellar de verbo Dei non scripto cap. 4 Sect. quarto quinto Soxio contained in tradition For we cannot find them in the Scriptures But that there are Scriptures that these wee haue are they is part of sauing truth taught by Christ and his Apostles Therefore some sauing truthes taught by Christ and his Apostles are contained in tradition It hath appeared by my answer to Bellarmines arguments that he can find no place of Scripture that sendeth vs to tradition for any part of sauing truth taught by our Lord or his Apostles Wee might therefore conclude that there are no such traditions without troubling our selues any further But that we may dit vp the mouths of the Papists wee will bestow a little time and paines in these arguments If there had beene no more intended by the Councell of Trent in the decree touching tradition but to signifie that these three points are contained in tradition the danger had not beene great for then both the number and the particulars had been determined but the Papists by vertue of that Article take authoritie to thrust what they list vpon the Church and warrant it by tradition Thus much to the argument in generall Particularly I answer
Church of Rome will easily be decided to the confirmation of the truth we maintaine and the ouerthrow of their false and erroneous faith I haue alreadie in another disputation in Latine discouered and proued the erroneousnesse of the faith of that Church in the seuenth and tenth Articles of the eleuenth Chapter before mentioned touching grace and iustification The like I will doe in the rest if it please God to giue me opportunitie and abilitie CHAP. XVI An answer to those things which the Church of Rome bringeth against the necessitie of separating from it ALthough the point propounded by me to be disputed is sufficiently proued by that which hath past and all men may see a necessitie of separating from the Church of Rome yet that the truth may be the more cleere and all mens consciences the better satisfied and fortified against the deuises of the Romish seducers I haue thought good to examine two principall motiues of theirs by which they mis-lead many that are simple or carelesse and in handling of them I will take the same course that hetherto I haue followed for the more plainnesse and certaintie in iudging what is true what false The former of the two is this Euery man must receiue his faith by the teaching of the Romish Church That it may appeare what force there is in this to conclud any thing for the Church of Rome against the question hetherto disputed I will apply it to the matter in question and answer to it accordingly They that must receiue their faith by the teaching of the Church of Rome must ioyne in faith with that Church Euery man must receiue his faith by the teaching of the Church of Rome Therefore euery man must ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome The proposition or first part of this reason I acknowledge for true because the teaching of the Church of Rome giueth being to the faith of that Church The assumption is false being grounded vpon that false foundation that The Pope of Rome is to feede the whole Church as Peters successour by determining what is matter of faith what is not But this appeared to be manifestly false chap. 8. and 10. wherein I propounded and handled the question The second deuise is commonly deliuered by way of question Where was your Church before Luther Now this question implyeth a negation as if they should say The Protestants Church was not before Luther This must be applied to the point in question after this sort Euery man must ioyne in faith either with the Church of Rome or with the Protestant Church But no man may ioyne in faith with the Protestants Church Therefore euery man must ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome Let the proposition passe for true to which we may iustly adde an assumption contrary to theirs No man may ioyne in faith with the Church of Rome and this assumption is alreadie made good by the foregoing disputation through this whole treatise which hath shewed that the faith of the Church of Rome is false and erroneous But to answer directly to their assumption we say it is vtterly false and the contrary to it euidently true that Euery man is bound to ioyne in faith with the Protestants Church For our faith is nothing else but Euery article or proposition to be assented to or beleeued as true vpon the authoritie of God the reuealer of them by his holy seruants the Prophets and Apostles The Articles which we assent to or beleeue in this sort are either expressely set downe in the Scriptures in direct words so that the sense of them cannot reasonably be doubted of or else gathered and concluded from such places by necessarie consequence so that if the one be true the other must needs be true also Whatsoeuer proposition is not of this nature we allow not for an article of faith how likely soeuer it seeme to be Now in this faith of ours there can be no danger seeing whatsoeuer proposition is plainely expressed in the Scripture or necessarily concluded from it is vndoubtedly the diuine reuelation which is the onely foundation of true faith More particularly I say touching the said assumption that it must be vnderstood of the Protestants faith so far forth as it differeth from the faith of the Church of Rome else by it they should disswade men from the faith of their owne Church Besides It is to be considered that this assumption supposeth that the Protestants haue a faith opposite to the faith of the Church of Rome Which is vtterly false All the opposition we make to them is by refusing their faith not by deliuering any of our owne and by ansswering to their arguments so that we hold the negatiue part of the contradiction in all points wherein we dissent from them although in some we adde a contrarie affirmatiue where the Scripture affirmeth that which they denie For example they say The Pope is Gods Vicar This we oppose by saying that The diuine reuelation doth not teach vs that the Pope is Gods Vicar Againe they deliuer this for an Article of faith that Concupiscence in the regenerate is not properly sinne To this we answer by way of opposition as to the former The diuine reuelation doth not say that Concupiscence in the regenerate is not properly sin Yea in this point we say further the Scripture saith it is properly sinne but our opposition to them in this point stands in this that the Scripture doth not say it is not properly sinne so that though there were no word to the contrarie of it in Scripture yet that proposâ—â—on of theirs were vtterly false By which it is manifest that in those things wherein we dissent from them we haue not articles of faith contrarie to the articles of faith which they propound but onely deny that Those they would thrust vpon vs are articles of faith If any man obiect as Stapleton and Wright doe that Our religion is negatiue we answer that if they meane we hold no articles of faith which are affirmatiue they charge vs vntruely for we consent with them in many affirmatiue articles of faith As for those points wherein we dissent from them it is no fault in vs to hold the negatiue for there is no other way for vs to oppose the errours they bring for matters of faith but by denying them to be matters of faith So theÌ„ this is that they auouch in the former assuÌ„ption No man may ioyne in faith with the Protestants Churches in those points wherein they dissent from the Faith of the Church of Rome The reason is because the faith of the Protestants in those points is false which they thus proue The true faith hath been professed so publikely in all ages since the Apostles that the professors of it from age to age may be named The Protestants faith hath not been so publikely professed in all ages since the Apostles that the professors of it from age to age may be named Therefore
of Christs sheepe CHAP. V. Of the course that is to be followed in this disputation I Haue shewed that the foundation of the saith of the Church of Rome is the authority and testimony of the church and haue refused that foundation as vnsound and erroneous It will now perhaps be looked for that I should proceed by prouing that it is false and counterfeit But I see no necessary or sufficient reason for this course and therefore haue rather chosen to follow thaâ— way in this disputation which the matter it selfe leads me to and in which it leads me The question betwixt the church of Rome and vs is this Whether the articles or propositions to which they require our assent as to certaine truths reuealed by God and commanded of him to be beleeued vpon perill of damnation if we do not assent and beleeue be reuealed and commanded by God or no as Bellarmine himselfe putteth it in the assumption of his Syllâ—gisme set down by me Chap. 3. num 9. The church of Rome saith they are and call for obedience thereto accordingly We deny that they are reuealed and enioynâ—d by God and therefore refuse to giue assent to them Who seeth not that the very nature of this difference betwixt vs layeth vpon them a necessity of prouing that those points or articles are propounded by God to be beleeued as matters of faith reuealed by him This made the reuerend and learned B. Iewell in his Apology 3 B. Iewell Apol. part 1. chap. 10. diuis 1. tell the Doctors of the Romish church that It was their part to prooue clearly and truly that the Romish Church is the true and right instructed Church of God And in his second answer to Dr. Cole lett D D. E E. to affirme that It was vnreasonable for that Dr to call for the proofes of our doctrine And therefore as it appeares in that answer lett O. he stands vpon the negatiue as he speakes and putteth the Papists to their proofes because they presse vs to receiue those points for articles of faith This course I haue holden in those bookes that I haue formerly published in this kind of writing this I meane to hold now and hereafter if it please God to afford me opportunity to goe forward in the defence of his truth Yet for their better satisfaction and clearer manifesting of the truth I will alwaies giue some reason of my denying the propositions I refuse howsoeuer it were enough for an answer to deny that which of it selfe is not apparantly true And thus much of the course of this disputation I returne now to the disputation it selfe The maine ground for the proofe of the authority of the church in this kind is taken by Bellarmine out of Iohn 21. 15 16 17. Ioh. 21. 15 16. De verbo dei lib. 3. cap. 5. Sect. quartum testimonium seqq Iesus said to Simon Peter Simon the sonne of Ionas louest thou mee more then these He said yea Lord thou knowest that I loue thee He said vnto him Feed my sheepe c. From these words Bellarmine disputeth thus Feeding of Christs sheepe Ioh. 21. 15. is a singular office of teaching the whole Church by determining and iudging what is to bee beleeued of all men To Peter and his successours the feeding of Christs sheepe is committed Ioh. 21. Therefore to Peter and his successors a singular office of teaching the whole Church by iudging and determining what is to be beleeued of all men is committed Vpon this conclusion Bellarmine inferreth that he that will not be thus taught by Peter is none of Christs sheepe Many weighty points are hudled vp together in this Syllogisme worthy of serious consideration and debating In the Proposition or first part these foure things are comprised 1. In those words Ioh. 21. 15. a singular Office is contained 2 Feeding there signifieth teaching 3 Feeding Christs sheepe is teaching the whole Church 4 Teaching the whole church is by way of determining what is to be beleeued of all men All these are contained in the Proposition and euery one of them so necessarily required to the truth thereof that if any one of them bee vntrue the Proposition of necessity must be false How then shall the conclusion be an article of faith as the Papists will haue it I will therfore examine euery one of them seuerally and then goe forward to consider of the Assumption CHAP. 6. Of the two former points of the foure THE first of the foure points to be discussed is this In the words rehearsed Ioh. 21. 15. a singular office is appointed That Bellarmine speakes of a singular Office the words themselues shew that hee must needs bee vnderstood of appointing such an office not of disposing of one already appointed it is manifest as well because there was no office yet ordained but that which was common to Peter with the rest of the Apostles and therefore not singular as also for that it will not serue Bellarmines turne to speake of an office common to all the Apostles since hee endeauors to settle such an office vpon Peter as was proper and peculiar to him and such as no other Apostle euer had This may farther appeare by another place in Bellarmine where he saith that that very thing is really giuen Iohn 21. 15. which was promised Mat 16. 19. I will giue thee the keyes of the Kingdome of heauen and as he there saith giuen to the same Simon to whom Bellar. de Rom. Pont. lib. 1. cap. 14. Sect. Ac primum cap. 12. Sect Et propterea before it was promised hee saith that the keyes were promised Math. 16. 19. and â—eliuered Iohn 21. 15 16 17. Thus haue we the first point in Bellarmines proposition now let vs try the truth of it For our parts we vtterly reiect it as false because wee are out of doubt it cannot any way bee soundly proued And we are the rather so perswaded because Bellarmine hath not once attempted to proue it although hee could not chose but see that there was necessity of prouing it for it is not so plaine and manifest in it selfe that it needs no proofe and the conclusion drawne out of it is an Article of their faith yea such an article as like Atlas beareth the waight of the whole body of their faith Besides Bellarmine knew well enough that we deny it to be true For hee brings Luthers words to that purpose Martin Luther saith Bellarmine in his booke de potestate Papae affirmes that by the word Feed Iohn 21. there is no new power giuen but only the duty of louing Bellar. de Rom. Pont. la. ca. 15. Sect. Iam vero and teaching enioyned Peter who was made an Apostle before Neither doth the text it selfe nor any other place of Scripture for ought they say or we see afford vs any proofe thereof If there bee any thing in the text for their reliefe it is in that Peter is commanded to feed But