whether this doctrine of these succeeding Pastors shal need to be the same that the doctrine of the Apostles was but onely affirmes that as the Apostles doctrine for the time they liued was the rule so the doctrine of the succeeding Pastors is the rule leauing roome enough for this doctrine of these succeeding Pastors to vary from the doctrine of the Apostles that when we shew the present abuses in the Church of Rome and decrees of their latter Popes for these last 800. yeares to haue swarued from the Apostles doctrine and practise they may pleade the authoritie of their succeding Pastors And indeede it is true that the Church of Rome holds that it is not necessary the doctrine and teaching of the present and succeeding Pastors be the same in all things that it was in the Apostolicke and Primitiue Church but the Pope hath power to make a NEW CREED and NEW ARTICLES of faith For Iacobatius m De Concil p. 310. A. saies The Pope alone may make new articles of faith according to one acceptation of the word Article that is for such as must be beleeued which before needed not be beleeued and Zenzelin a Popish doctor n Gl. extr Ioh. 22. cum inter § doclaramus saies The Vicar of Christ may make an Article of faith taking an article not properly but in a large sense for that which must be beleeued when before by the precept of the Church it was not necessary to be beleeued Augustinus Triumphus writes o August Anconit sum de eccle potest q. â—9 art 1. that it belongs to the Pope alone to make a new Creed For in a Creed those things are put that vniuersally belong to Christian faith he therefore hath authority to make such a Creed who is the head of Christian faith and in whom as in the head all the members of the Church are vnited and by whose authoritie all things pertaining to faith are confirmed and strengthened And p Art 2. againe That the Pope may dispense in adding articles may be vnderstood 3. waies First in respect of the multiplication of the articles themselues Secondly in respect of expounding the things contained in the articles Thirdly in respect of the augmentation of such things as may be reduced to the articles ALL THESE WAIES the Pope may dispense in adding articles because as he may make a new Creed so he may MVLTIPY NEW ARTICLES OVER AND ABOVE THE OTHER Secondly he may by more articles explicate the articles already placed in the Creed Thirdly because peraduenture all things beleeued in the Creed may be reduced after the aforesaid articles and by such reduction may be increased so that vnder each article MORE THINGS NECESSARY TO BE BELEEVED MAY BE PVT THEN ARE YET PVT The which being done marke what they say touching their authority q Roder. Dosm de auth script l. 3. c. 12. The Popes assertions ascend to the height of diuine testimony as the assertions of the Apostles did and of such as made the holy Scripture and there be who contend that they belong to the sacred Scripture it selfe which is contained in the bookes of the Bible This doctrine whereof all our aduersaries bookes are full shewes plainely that they intend not that this their Church teaching so much magnified to be the rule should alway be one and the same but such as shall follow the Popes lust and be altered with the time that so this Antichrist of Rome might abolish the whole Testament of Christ this is the first thing to be noted that the reader may see what he meanes by his Church doctrine that is the rule 4 The next thing is his distinction about this doctrine of the Church that it was the rule in the Apostles dayes and is the rule in succeeding ages but not as contained in onely Scripture but as deliuered by these Pastors Which speech containes 2. things a Negatiue and an affirmatiue the negatiue is that the doctrine of the Church is not the rule as it is contained in onely Scripture Meaning as * Ch. 27. n. 3. I haue shewed that all diuine doctrine belonging to the rule is not contained in the Scripture but much or the most of it in tradition vnwritten and that which is contained is not the rule by vertue of writing but by vertue of the Church that makes it authenticall Panormitan r Panorm tom 2. de praesumptione c. Sicut noxius sayes The words of the text of Scripture are not the Popes words but the words of Salomon in the Prouerbs but because this text is made Canonicall it is to be beleeued and induceth necessity so to do as if the Pope had set it foorth himselfe Because we make all those things to bee ours whereto we might impart our authority But whether without Canonization the sayings of Salomon be approued in the Church seeing they are in the body of the Bible say as the glosse saith and Ierom holdeth who seemes to conclude that they are Apocrypha which is to be noted and that because of this as also because Salomon had no power to make Canons This also must be obserued that the Reader may know the meaning of his conclusion and what it is that we deny therein For NO DOCTRINE EITHER OF THE APOSTELS IN THEIR TIME OR OF THE SVCCEEDING PASTORS OF THE CHVRCH IN ANY TIME IS THE RVLE OF FAITH BVT ONELY THAT WHICH IS CONTAINED IN THE SCRIPTVRE As I haue Å¿ In the WAY digr 3. shewed His affirmatiue is that the doctrine of the Church is the rule as it is deliuered by the Pastors or the Pastours deliuering this doctrine are the rule which is the same that he said a little before the doctrine as deliuered by the Church or the Church as deliuering doctrine is the rule t Pars obiecti formalis fidei est vox Ecclesiae D. Stapler relect p. 484. Saltem aequalis est Ecclesiae Scripturae authoritas ibi pag. 494. His meaning is that the Churches testimony and authority mingles it selfe with the authority of the doctrine and is ioyntly with it or aboue it the rule of faith as when diuers simples haue their ingredience into one compound and two men equally carry betweene them one burthen Their doctrine this way is knowne wel enough how the Scriptures in regard of vs haue all their authority from the Church the sense of the Scripture is to be fetched from the Church whatsoeuer the Church of Rome shall teach is the word of God c. The which things being couched in the Iesuites conclusion as he vnderstands it we detest and spit vpon when he shall thus debarre the Scripture from being the rule to set vpon the bench his Papall Antichristian authority If the shame either of God or men or any respect of truth were with them they durst not thus presumptuously and basely steale the authority to themselues whereby both themselues and we and all the world
which must be acknowledged when tyrants and such as feare not God by their euill gouernement and neglect of religion many times darken the aire and hinder the raine and make the fields barren and riuers empty Pliny enquiring the reason why the fields adioyning to Rome in old time were so fruitfull saies It was because they were tilled by the chiefe gouernours such as Fabritius and Cincinnatus were Ipsorum tunc manibus Imperatorum colebantur agri gaudente terra vomere laureato triumphali aratore Which your Maiesty doing so painefully with your owne hands in a more noble field the Church of God all godly minded shall bid God speed the plow and daily waite till the briars and thornes be rooted out and the dew of Gods grace fall on the barren part that the Plowman may neuer be wearie nor his hand weake nor his workmen vnfaithful to him but all that are about him and his Noble seruants by his example may giue ouer sleeping and put their hand without looking backe to the same worke that the enuious man that soweth tares may be driuen forth and their owne houses may be the greenest and cleanest part of the field till he come that shall giue end and rest to euery labour and recompence beyond all that can be thought the workmans trauell and binding the good corne in sheaues cast the tares into vnquenchable fire God euermore continue and increase his mercies to your Highnesse and lay your enemies at your feete that you may see an end of all dissentions and stablish peace and vnity in the Church Your Maiesties most humble subiect IOHN WHITE To the Reader IT is now fiue yeares since I published a booke called THE WAY TO THE TRVE CHVRCH wherein my purpose was nothing else but onely to shew the weakenesse and insufficiency of those Motiues which leade so many to Papistrie and to bring to triall such reasons as the Iesuites and Seminaries ground themselues vpon in perswading their people against vs making it more then plaine that the corruptions of the Church of Rome are maintained and the communion of our Church in the doctrine preaching and the Sacraments thereof is refused by such as follow the Papacy vpon weake and false grounds that cannot be defended This poore booke it seemes hath not a little incensed my Aduersary and discontented many that yet should follow reason and the truth of things and not be transported with rumor and common impression For man being a noble creature endued with reason and faculty to discourse and hauing a rule left him of God whereby to examine things should not tie his faith and conscience to the authority or person of any more then the truth and the reason and euidence of that be saies will beare him out It was neuer heard of in the world till now of late yeares that the Pope and his definitions were the rule of faith or that men were bound to follow whatsoeuer he should appoint but the Church of God euery where till tyranny oppressed it examined his doctrine accepting and allowing that which agreed with the sacred Scriptures and the first antiquity and reiecting the rest and albeit many errors had long prescription yet the godly still held them to that rule of our Sauiour BVT FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO. Mat. 19.8 Our Aduersaries therefore may in some points possible pretend antiquitie but PRIORITIE which is the first and best antiquitie they cannot in any one thing wherein they refuse vs and whether the zealous and resolued Recusants will beleeue it or no yet it is certainely true there is no one point of Papistry Catholicke that is to say such as hath bene from the beginning generally receiued as an article of faith by the vniuersall Church And though it be granted that many parts of his religion haue long continued in the world yet were they neuer the certaine or generall doctrines of the Church but the corruptions of some therein which in time and by degrees obtained that strength and credit which now they haue it being the easiest thing of a thousand for the Pope and his clergie sitting at the sterne when themselues had once imbraced them with their strength and learning to giue them authority in the world when Mahomet himselfe by policy and tyrannie was able in time to spread abroad and a vniuersally the doctrine of his Alchoran which now is 800 yeare old and is followed by many and great nations as close as Papistrie is either in England or Italy But whē the Scripture makes it plaine that FROM THE BEGINNING IT WAS NOT SO and the Histories and monuments of antiquity and the bookes of the elder Papists and such as were chiefe in the Church of Rome beare witnesse that these things were misliked and in all ages complained of and that which the Church of England now professes was the faith of most godly men and holy Bishops though the power of the gouernors in the Church of Rome increasing they were suppresed they do but deceiue themselues that thinke our faith a new faith or the points of Papistrie the old religion I haue as well as I haue bene able and as diligently as I could with an vnpartiall eie and many teares to God for his direction in the businesse and with a heart hating contention and possessed as much as any mans liuing with desire of peace and vnity whereof my 17 yeares residence in Lancashire can giue plentifull witnesse read the Scriptures and trauelled through the writings of the Fathers and obserued the course of former times and well aduised my selfe of that which the learned of the Church of Rome in later times haue written from the elder Schoolemen to the later Iesuites though with all humility I acknowledge my selfe to be the meanest of any that haue taken this course and much lament my owne weaknesse yet am I readie whensoeuer God the Iudge of all secrets and the terrible reuenger of falsehood and partiality shall call me foorth of this world to testifie that my faith and religion and the points thereof maintained in my writings and preaching is the truth agreeable to the first antiquity and the contrary defended by the Iesuites and followed by Romish Recusants error and vncatholicke And if any persons presumed to be learned on the other side haue either in their life or death shewed extraordinary zeale for their Roman faith I desire I may be allowed my owne knowledge both of some such persons and of their iudgement and outward cariage and not be importuned to follow that which vnskilfull and vnable and partiall friends haue apprehended rather then my owne cleare knowledge both of them and their cause And if the Church of Rome haue in it diuers learned betweene whom and vs my Aduersaries will indure no comparison that write against vs yet my certaine experience of their manner of writing one against another and against knowne antiquitie and their strange maintenance of the foulest and
nothing 2 That which he sayes is two things First he repeates and expounds his conclusion Next he touches some small portion of that I said concerning it In repeating his conclusion first he sayes he meant it against such as thinke it sufficient to beleeue some few articles onely though they deny or doubt of others which yet the Church beleeues yea rashly and obstinately denies them who these men are he names not but he meanes the Protestants Because they deny such points as the Church of Rome which he meanes by his Catholicke Church vntruly propounds vnto them For they must be the persons intended that deny any thing which the Roman Church holds for an article of faith as the Popes primacy Purgatory Images and the rest which in b Commonly printed with the Trent Councell inserted in the WAY praef n. 15. the new Creed of the Trent Councell are made articles of faith But the Protestants answer readily that they confesse no point at all may be denied or doubted of either obstinately or rashly or at all that is a point of faith reuealed in the word of God but the things holden and propounded by the Church of Rome against them are the false doctrines and heresies of Antichrist ridiculously called the faith of the Catholicke Church Then expounding his conclusion he shewes in what manner faith must beleeue all things that it may be entire and he sayes either expresly or implicitely wherein he bewrayes that which I suspected and signified in my answer for his conclusion being that faith must be entire and sound stedfastly beleeuing all things reuealed I c The WAY pag. 5. answered that this might be granted in a true sense But peraduenture his mind ran vpon a further matter which his Church teaches about infolded faith meaning thereby that howsoeuer he affirmed that we are bound to beleeue all points of faith as well one as other yet that might be done sufficiently by beleeuing as the Church beleeues without knowledge of any thing that is beleeued the which my suspition he grants in this place to be true and so his conclusion which at the first carried so good a semblance of binding men to the knowledge of particular verities and made so honest a proffer against ignorance is now resolued into this sense that by an intire faith you are bound to beleeue all things the which is done by knowing nothing but onely beleeuing implicitely as the Church of Rome beleeues Let a man neuer trouble himselfe with inquiring into the mysteries of Christian religion or controuersies of faith but onely say d Rhem. annot Luc. 12.11 he will liue and die in that faith which the Catholicke Church teaches and this Church can giue a reason of the things beleeued This is the equiuocating tongue of the Church of Rome that can ambush it selfe in words and vnder faire speeches conceale no small wickednes 3 His arguments in maintenance of this implicite faith are fiue First the authority of M. Wootton who seemes to speake against me next because to get expresse knowledge of all points contained in Scripture which are points necessary to be beleeued is impossible at least for vnlearned men Thirdly faith and knowledge are two distinct things faith being of things not knowne captiuating the vnderstanding therefore this distinct knowledge is not presupposed before Fourthly reason and experience teach that beleefe and knowledge are distinct beleefe not presupposing knowledge but going before it Fiftly the Fathers Irenaeus Hilary Austin affirme faith to be sufficient without knowledge Afore I answer his arguments note fiue things First what our aduersaries meane hy implicite or infolded faith and it is nothing else but a blind assent of the mind to whatsoeuer the Church of Rome beleeues without any knowledge at all of the things themselues e Occh. dialog part 1. l. 3. c. 1. p. 18. Dur. 3. d. 25. q. 1. â—abr ibi Notab 2. Do. Bann 22. pag. 349. The Schoolemen deliuer it in finer termes that it is the assent of the minde to some generall or vniuersall thing wherein many particulars are included with will to beleeue nothing that is contrary thereunto but the meaning is that to the essence and nature of this entire faith the distinct knowledge or apprehension of any particular truth or article is not required but onely resolution and profession to be of the Churches beleefe whatsoeuer it be in the same manner that I reported the Colliars faith Thus any man by an implicite faith beleeues the articles of Religion and particular mysteries of our faith touching the Vnity and Trinity of the Godhead the Incarnation and Office of Christ the nature of Faith the practise of Repentance the Resurrection the Sacraments Redemption of mankinde state of sinne and the last Iudgement when he will beleeue and hold touching these things as the Church of Rome doth and yet in the meane time his vnderstanding in no measure penetrates into these articles nor can distinctly explicate or conceiue them Altisiodorensis f Sum. l. 3. tract 3. c. 1. qu. 5. saies To beleeue implicitely is to beleeue in this generall that whatsoeuer the Church beleeues is true Dionysius g 3. de 25. qu. vnic p. 215. This is infolded faith to beleeue in generall all that our Holy mother the Church beleeues Summa Rosella h V. Fides n. 1. quem refert Bann vbi sup To beleue all that which our mother the Church beleeues and holds as when a Christian man is asked whether Christ were borne of the virgine Marie or whether there be one God and three Persons and he answers that he cannot tell but beleeues touching these matters as the Church holdeth This is the definition of entire faith which the Iesuite saies extends it selfe vniuersally to all points at least implicitely Note Secondly what the things are and which be the points that our aduersaries teach to be sufficiently beleeued by this infolded faith The Reply seemes to affirme that it is allowed onely in some points which a man for want of sufficient meanes cannot know I grant saith he and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts Necessitate medij and some necessary to be knowne Necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith in other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth In which wordes my aduersarie seemes to allow implicite faith only in some few cases and charges me with two grosse vntruthes because I say the Papists vtterly refuse knowledge and Canonize the Colliars implicite faith for their Creed But he should haue obserued that which was vnder his eyes and affixed to my words alledged whereby I proued what I said I alledged Iacobus
containeth no materiall error For I would faine know how they who neither haue the authenticall originall or if they had cannot reade and much lesse vnderstand and compare the translation with it neither do admit infallible authoritie in the Church to assure them can be infallibly assured that the translation doth not containe any substantiall error To this M. White answereth White pag. 25. that we know this by the same infallible meanes wherby we know other articles of beliefe namely by the light of the doctrine translated the testimony of the Spirit the ministery of the word the rules of are the knowledge of tongues and such like Here is a faire flourish of words but answer me good M. White directly to the point Are all of these ioyntly or euery one seuerally or onely some of these necessary sufficient to breed in vs infallible assurance of an article of faith All are not necessary For else how shall poore vnlearned men do who want rules of art knowledge of tongues and such like Euery one seuerally is not sufficient For neither knowledge of tongues rules of art nor the Protestant ministery are of themselues infallible and consequently cannot be of themselues sufficient to breed such infallible assurance in vs as is requisite in an article of faith Well then it remaineth that onely some of these to wit the light of doctrine translated and the testimonie of the Spirit are euen according to the ordinary course the only necessary and of themselues the sole sufficient meanes to breed this assurance but this not For then it wold follow that euery one learned and vnlearned that had the Spirit of God by the onely light of the doctrine it self without any other help should infallibly vnderstand the Greeke and Hebrew text either read by themselues or pronounced by a Minister which is most false and yet that it followeth wel is apparent because true doctrine shineth as wel yea better if M. White say true in the Originall White pag. 26. then in the English Translations We saith M. White know the diuine doctrine to be one and the same Pag. 27. immediatly in the Originall more obscurely in the Translations and God as the same M. White saith directeth the children of light by the holy Ghost who openeth their hearts that they know his voice from all others and that the light of his truth may shine vnto them Now if the light of the diuine doctrine do shine as well and better in the Hebrew and Greeke text then in the English translations and that all which be children of light haue the eies of their heart so opened as they can discerne Gods voice froÌ„ all others and that the light of his truth shineth vnto theÌ„ what need is there then of any other either priuate or publick meanes to open their eies to see this light when the holy Ghost doth sufficiently open them Or if he say the holy Ghost doth not open them sufficiently without othâ—r meanes then the light of the doctrine and the testimony of the Spirit are not the onely necessary and alone sufficient meanes to assure vs infallibly of any article of faith namely that this or that means must be assigned sufficient to breed in vs infallible assuraÌ„ce which it self cannot do vnles it selfe be and be knowne or at least may be knowne to be infallible in it selfe and infallibly to open and direct our eyes to the seeing of the infallible truth which fallible ministery of meÌ„ fallible rules of art fallible knowledge of tongs or such like infallibly do not 1 HIs reason why the Scriptures traÌ„slated into English caÌ„not be the rule of faith is because our translations are full of errors Wherby he says his mind is not to deny the true Scripture in the originall or in the translation to be infallible but only the ordinary English translations My a THE WAY §. 5. nu 2 §. 6. nu 2. 4. 8. answer was the same that D. Stapleton b Relect. pag. 525. makes for the vulgar Latin that in respect of the words onely there might be some error but in respect of the sence there is none For if the words of the traÌ„slation be not so perfect as they might yet that hinders not the truth of the matter nor the integritie of the sence For the vulgar Latin canonized by c Sess 4. the Trent Councell and d In those words J do not denie the true Scripture either in the Originall or in the Translation to be infallible granted by the Iesuite himselfe to be infallible is not free from error and corruption in words Mariana e Tract pro edit vulg Multa superius in Hebraicis Graecis codicibus vtti esse ostendimus multae mendacia in rebus minutis eorum pars aliquae non exigua in nostra editione vulgata extat c. 21. pag. 103. says There be many corruptions in the Hebrew and Greeke bookes which are the originall and many lies in small matters no small part whereof is also in the vulgar It may safely therfore be yeelded that our English translations as all other translations in the world whatsoeuer are not infallible nor free from all errors in words and yet the sence and matter of the Scripture translated which is the rule be stil maintained to be infallible This my answer yeelding such a kind of erroniousnes in words my aduersary obiects to M. Wotton who belike in his answer to this argument demanding what English Protestant euer affirmed that our translations were infallible or tooke them for the rule He replies secondly what means M. White then to say the Scripture translated into English is infallibly true in respect of the matter M. White answers that his meaning in so saying was to accord with M. Wotton by distinguishing betweene the words and the contents of the translations M. Wotton denying the words to be the rule and I affirming the matter contained in the words so to be What contradiction is this when he grants our translatioÌ„s as al humane means are to be subiect to error in one sence and I deny them to be subiect in another 2 This my assertion that our English translations as touching the matter contained in them are infallible howsoeuer there be varietie among them in words stile he entertaines after his accustomed maner with some passioÌ„ For expouÌ„ding my self that I wold not maintain this or that mans editioÌ„ but the Scriptures wel and faithfully translated in such maner as our Church allows them he cals this a starting hole neuer remeÌ„bring how himself wil not defend this or that edition in his own Church but wil retire to those editions that are approued as also the primitiue Church permitted varietie of translations and yet followed the purest as neare as it could iudge of theÌ„ for the time being I wil therfore say it again that OVR ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS AS TOVCHING THE MATTER CONTAINED THEREIN ARE INFALLIBLE AND
Scripture D. Stapleton a Relect. p. 462. sayes The Church is the ground and pillar of truth in a higher kind then the Scripture namely in the kind of the efficient cause And b Pag. 494. in explicat qu. the authority of the Church may be vnderstood to be greater then the authority of the Scripture because it is not simply subiect or bound to it but may by it authority teach decerne something which the Scripture hath neither determined nor taught The things which the Church teaches do as much binde the faithfull as those things which the Scripture teacheth we Catholickes affirme that the Church is to be heard more certainely then the Scriptures because the doctrine thereof is more manifest and euident then the doctrine of the Scriptures or at the least equally with the Scriptures because the authority thereof is no lesse irrefragable and infallible The Scripture is the booke of the Church the testimonie of truth which the Church testifies the law of God which the Church hath publisht the rule of faith which the Church hath deliuered We had wont to maruell at the blasphemies c Illyric clau script p. 541. Hos de express verb. Dei of Cusanus Verratus Hosius That the Church hath authoritie aboue the Scripture The Scripture as it is produced by heretikes is the word of the Diuell A Councell is the highest tribunall and hath the same power to determine any thing that the Councell of the Apostles and Disciples had The things written in the Gospell haue no soundnesse but through the determination of the Church c. But now you see the same renewed in that Church to this day and the Iesuits in the midst of their learned subtilties to be as grosse as the grossest Friars preferring their Church authority farre aboue the Scriptures or any vse that a Candlesticke can haue in shewing the candle Note FOVRTHLY what it is that the Protestants say touching the authority of the Scripture and the Church so much as belongs to the present occasion First that the Scriptures haue in them a light and an authoritie of their owne sufficient to prooue themselues to be the word of God and to giue infallible assurance to all men of the true sense and this light and authority is not added increased or multiplied by the Ministry of the Church or any thing that it doth about the Scripture Secondly this light and authoritie of the Scripture shines in vs and takes effect in vs then onely when the Spirit of God opens our hearts to see it The defect of which heauenly illumination is the reason why some neuer and the elect themselues at all times do not see it but it argues no defect of light in the Scriptures Thirdly the means whereby God opens our eies and hearts to see this light and authoritie in the Scripture is the Ministry of the Church I expound my selfe it is the ordinary and publike meanes wherto he referres men And this Ministry is by preaching and expounding the Scripture out of it selfe and perswading and conuincing the consciences of men yet priuately and extraordinarily when and wheresoeuer this Ministry failes or ceasses the light and sense of the Scripture is obtained by the Scripture alone without this Church Ministry and the Scripture alone in this sort immediately at sundry times by it selfe giues full assurance and workes all other effects in our consciences that it doth when the Church propounds it Fourthly the Scripture is so sufficient of it selfe both to reueale whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne and to establish and assure our heart in the infallible faith of that it reueales that the Church hath nether authority to adde so much as one article more then is contained therein nor power to giue this assurance from any thing but from the Scripture it selfe So farre forth that THE WHOLE TEACHING AND DOCTRINE AND AVTHORITIE OF THE CHVRCH IS TO BE ADMITTED AND YEELDED TO OR REFVSED ACCORDING AS IT CONSENTS OR DISAGREES WITH THE SCRIPTVRE the fountaine of truth the rule of faith Note FIFTLY what our aduersaries meane by the Church and the meanes whereby the Church executes her authority what the things are which by her authority she may do and what the proper effect is that this authority workes in vs. First by this Church d This is shewed c. 35. nu 1. c. 36. nu 1. they vnderstand the Church of Rome for the present time being and therein the Pope in whom they say the whole power and vertue of the Church abideth Secondly the meanes whereby it executeth her authority is vnwritten Tradition out of the which it supplies all things pretended to be needfull for the exposition of the Scripture or the defining of matters that must be beleeued Thirdly the things that she may do by her authoritie are all things that appertaine to the questions of religion 1 Cus epi. 2. 3. 7. to expound the Scripture after her owne iudgement 2 Conc. Trid. sess 24. can 3. to dispense against the Scripture 3 Stapl. princip l. 9. c. 14. relect pag. 514. to canonize new Scripture that before was none 4 Stapl. ibi relect p. 494. inde to giue authority to the Scripture 5 August de Ancon qu. 59. art 1. 2. to make new articles of faith 6 Gl. de transl episc Quanto §. veri to make that to be the sence of the Scripture that is not Lastly the effect of this power is the same that the Scripture breeds and more 7 Grets defens Bel. tom 1. pag. 1218. c. obedience in all that will be saued so that the world is bound as much to the Popes definitiue sentence as to the Scripture or the voice of God himselfe 8 The speech of all the canonists for Christ and the Pope make but one tribunal 9 Capistran de author Pap. pag 130. He is aboue al like him that came downe from heaueÌ„ 10 Capist ibi For with God and the Pope his will is sufficient reason and that which pleases him hath the vigor of a law 11 Palaeot de consist part 5. q 9. after his sentence pronounced no man must doubt or delay to yeeld 12 Petrisedes in Romano solâ—o collocata libertate plena in suis agendis per omnia poteri debet nec vlli subesse homini Gl. ibid. vbi sup yea all the CouÌ„cels and Doctors and Churches in the world must stoop to his determination 5 These fiue things thus obserued it is easie to se that our aduersaries attribute more to the Church then to be onely a meanes for the communicating of that which is in the Scripture to vs expounding the authority thereof that it exceedes the latitude of a Candlesticke and is turned into the Candle it selfe And so to returne to my aduersaries answer and to conclude I thus reason The Ministery and authority of the Church is required either
the Papists must shew by some certaine and pregnant proofe that Luther and we that refuse the Papacie haue not this light and testimonie which is not done by saying it is a priuate spirit not common to the Church For all this is denied The Spirit that giues vs this assurance is the Spirit of God the same which is common to the true Church The Spirit which inclines to humilitie order and vnitie And the persons that lay claime to this Spirit did neither presume nor rush into the text The reformation that Luther began was sought with peace and order and euen with teares nor expound it as they listed but what they held they learned of the Church not of the Romish faction and contagion that ouerspread the Church but of the true Church of God that remained in the midst of the Papacie and in former ages followed the Scripture And of this I forewarne all Papists that when they please to leaue these emptie clamours and go roundly to the point enquiring what order and humilitie Luther vsed when he first dealt against the Papacie and what Church he followed it will be iustified against him that the pride and peruersnesse and disorder that was was on their owne side and themselues were departed from the true Church These priuate men whom the Replier meanes with all humilitie and good order by supplication disputation mediation both to the Pope and Christian Princes sought the redresse of abuses their complaints were laid open before all the Courts in Germanie France Spaine England Italy Denmarke and the Christian world all countries laid downe their grieuances against the Church of Rome and openly complained of the Papacie o The Pope in his businesse with the States of the Empire about the reformation of the Church could not denie this We know saith Pope Adrian that in this holy Sea of Rome there haue bene of late yeares many abhominable things many abuses in spirituall things and excesses and all things peruersly turned vpside downe And no maruell if the disease be gone downe from the head to the members and from the Popes to inferior Prelates All we the Prelates of the church haue turned aside euery one to his owne wayes of a long time therehath not bin one that did good no not one We took vpon vs the yoke of this great dignitie to be Pope onely that we might reforme the deformed Catholik Church Adrian 6. instr pro Fra. Cheregat pag 173. Fascic rer exp fug edit Colon. 1535. The abuses errors tyrannie and oppression preuailing in this Church of Rome noted complained of by many in all ages as they grew Bernard Agobard Occham Marsil de Rosate Clemangis Aluarus Gerson Alliaco Auentine c. See this point handled by D. Field l. 3. c. 7. and in his Append. added to that chapter as departed from the doctrine and canons of the ancient Church But particularly what order humilitie and respect of vnitie was in Luther when he opposed himselfe shall best appeare by p Tom. 7. Wittemb 22. pag â— his owne words All this time wherein the cause of Religion hath bene heard before the Emperour and in many great assemblies touching that which belongs to the Pope and his Bishops vpon desire of publicke peace and safetie as much as could stand with Gods truth we haue caried our selues lowly enough that they might if they would haue vnderstood long ago that we did not aime at the weakening of their power to change the present state of things or the Ecclesiasticall pollicie of the Church WE PLAINLY AND EXPRESLY PROFESSED AS OVR BOOKES BEARE WITNES THAT IF THEY WOVLD NOT CONSTRAINE VS TO ARTICLES OPENLY IMPIOVS AND BLASPHEMOVS WE WOVLD DEFEND THEM IN OTHER THINGS But when reuerently and suppliantly PROSTRATE at their feete we onely demanded MOST IVST THINGS IN THE GREATEST MATTERS and for the publicke good we were not counted worthy to obtaine any thing but wisedome is driuen away from among them and THINGS ARE CARIED WITH STRONG HAND They will constraine vs from the manifest truth against our wils to receiue their abominations WITH WHAT RIGHR OR WRONG THEY DEALE WITH VS THEY CARE NOT BVT THE VPSHOT IS THIS THEY WOVLD HAVE THE TRVTH AND VS BY ANY MEANES SVPPRESSED THIS THOV LORD IESVS CHRIST THE SONNE OF THE LIVING GOD WILT IVDGE For when as like Pharaoh they be hardened against THE TEARES of suppliants peraduenture their end presses vpon them c. Thus the Pope with his Cleargie proudly contemning all things and deluding the world with promises of reformation and persecuting with fire and sword such as complained the first reformers by this tyrannie and dissembling were driuen to leaue the Papacie as the seate of Antichrist and the neast of all heresie and abhominations The which is so true that our aduersaries haue purged and forbidden the bookes containing these complaints and raile vpon vs when wee produce or mention them as this Replier doth vpon mee throughout his booke and most impudently denie them and vse other the most dishonest shifts that euer were which makes it plaine that they dare not enter this triall but with noise and scurrilitie outface all things that leade that way I haue said it often in my writings and here I say it again * Nec moueor clamoribus Epicureorum aut hypocritarum qui aut rident aut damnanâ— manifestam veritatem sed verè statuo consensum perpetuum esse Catholicae Ecclesiae Dei hane ipsam doctrina vocem qua sâ—naâ— in Ecclesiis nostris Philip. Melancth praef in 2 tom Luth. THE ABVSES AND CORRVPTIONS OF THE COVRT AND CHVRCH OF ROME WERE SEEN MISLIKED AND COMPLAINED OF BY THE BEST MEN AND WISEST STATES THAT WERE BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER LVTHER OPPOSED HIMSELFE AND THE ARTICLES OF RELIGION WHEREIN THE REFORMED CHVRCHES STAND AGAINST THE IESVITES ARE THE MANIFEST DOCTRINE OF THE SCRIPTVRES AND ANCIENT FATHERS AND WERE HELD BY DIVERS OF THE BEST LEARNED IN THE CHVRCH OF ROME EVEN IN THESE LAST 700 YEARES THE DOCTRINE LATELY DETERMINED BY THE TRENT COVNCELL AND NOW SO VIOLENTLY DEFENDED BY THE IESVITES BEING NEVER GENERALLY OR VNIFORMLY RECEIVED IN THE CHVRCH OF ROME BVT BROACHED AND PVT FORWARD BY THE FACTION OF SOME THEREIN AGAINST THE REST. 7 And whereas the Replier sayes we haue no ground to assure vs which may not in like maner and with as good colour be alledged by others whom our selues confesse to be deceiued I answer that we do not onely alledge the Scripture the Spirit of God the Church the Pastors therein which any hereticke may do but we alledge them truly q Varim quideÌ„ diuersus ex vno tamen fonto haereticâ— prauttatis error emersit cardo pessimus origo maloruÌ„ quae ex se cunctarum impâ—etatum occasioneÌ„ peperit haec estâ— dum celestium dictorum virtus vitio male intelligentium temerata non secundùm sui qualitateÌ„ sensus perpenditur sed in alias res pro
arbitrio legentis sic us quam veri ratio postulat deriuatur Vigil l. 2. pag. 553. contr â—utych 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Clem. Alexan. Strom. l. 7. pag. 322. edit Commelin ann 1592. which no hereticke may do The Papists alledge the Church So do the Greekes theirs the Armenians and Ethiopians theirs The Papists alledge the successions of their Popes so do the Greeks the succession of their Patriarks Chrysostome sayes r Op. imperâ— hom 49. pag 1101. All those things that belong to Christ in truth heresies may haue in schisme and in shew Churches Scriptures Bishops the orders of Cleargie men Baptisme the Eucharist and all things else The diuell also alledged Scripture but did he therefore giue ouer the Scripture No. But as Ierome Å¿ Comment in Math. 4. sayes The false darts of the diuell which he tooke out of the Scripture our Sauiour breakes with the true shield of the Scripture A Scripture ill cited t Concord c. 14 saith Iansenius he beateth backe with another Scripture truly alledged as it were one naile with another The Replier must therefore proue that they which alledge the Scripture or the Church or the Spirit of God against vs do it in like manner with as probable colour as wee alledge it for our selues But this cauill I answered in the WAY on the same page that my aduersarie quotes whereto he replies onely by repeating that I answered and so comes to railing 8 For hauing obiected that it is not Gods manner to teach men immediatly by himselfe but by the meanes of his Church and the Pastors therein I answered that these whom he cals priuate men had their knowledge by meanes of the Scripture truly taught in the Church but the Papacie was not this Church nor the Priests thereof those Pastors whom God had put into his Church To this he replies as you see that I am impudent and it is maruell his owne blacke face blushes not to vtter such a shamelesse vntruth Let him name if he can what Pastors those were that taught Luther and Caluin vnlesse he will allow the Diuell to be a Pastor whom Luther confesses to haue taught him his doctrine against the Masse I answer that the Pastors which taught Luther and Caluin their doctrine were of foure sorts First the blessed Apostles whose ministerie extends it selfe to all ages Next the Doctors and Pastors of the Primitiue Church and long after whose doctrine also in all substantiall points and namely in that wherein they forsooke the Papacie they stedfastly embraced when the Papacie had cast it off Thirdly the learned men whom God in many ages afterward raised vp to preach against the Papacie as it grew Such as were Bernard Wickliffe Husse the Waldenses and diuers others Fourthly many ordinary Pastours of the Church of Rome it selfe who being defiled with much of the Romish corruption yet in many things were sound and taught soundly the truth which truth such as Luther was might learne euen among Heretickes as S. Austin did a good exposition of Tyconius the Hereticke by the Scripture might be able to iudge betweene that they taught truly and that they taught otherwise u Refert Gabr. lect in can 57. h There were in the Church of Rome that taught pardons to be of no force to helpe soules in Purgatory * Durand 4. d. 20. qu 3. Caiet tract de indulg c. 1. p 211. b. that their vse is by no authority of the Scripture or Fathers diuers taught x Occh. Lyr. Hug. Dionys Turrecrem Picus Caietan whom see before the Apocrypha not to be Canonicall Gerson y Declarat compend defect eccl n. 67. complained of the abuse of images The same z Serm. de Natiu Mar. consid 2. Gerson a 3. part q. 68. art 1. 2. 11. Caietan taught that Infants vnbaptised might be saued b Sacramental pag. 30. Waldensis against the merit of workes c 2. d. 26. per tot Ariminensis against the power of nature and freewill d Lect. 4. in rom 3. lect 4. in Gal. 3. Aquinas for iustification by faith onely e De vit spiritual anim concl vnic Coroll 1. in 3. part operum Gers Paris 1606. Gerson that all sinne is against the law of God and none is veniall of it nature f Almain Occh. Gers Maior others to this day famously knowne The Sorbonistes of Paris taught against the Popes Monarchy the Greeke Church also held many things against the Papacy touching Priests mariage Purgatory c. There is no article of Luthers or Caluins doctrine but it was taught in the Church of Rome before them g Praef. in tom 2. operum Luther Melancthon sayes that he often heard Luther make report how an old man among the Austine Friars at Erford confirmed him in that opinion which is so much obiected to him touching speciall faith and he adds that before he stirred there were many in the Church of Rome which did inuocate God aright and held the doctrine of the Gospell some more some lesse such as was that old man who shewed Luther the doctrine of faith 9 That Luther confesses the Diuell to haue taught him the doctrine against the Masse is vntrue He onely reports how the Diuell in a spirituall h That it was no more will appeare to him that reads the whole discourse especially toward the latter end temptation to bring him to despaire accused him for saying Masse and the more to terrifie him layed many true reasons against the Masse before him whereby to let him see the foulenes thereof that so he might driue him to desperation as to bring any man to despaire of Gods mercy he vses ordinarily by true and effectuall reasons to accuse the sinne whereof he is guilty Not to perswade him to hate or leaue the sinne but to bring him to say with Cain My sinne is greater then can be forgiuen i An easie thing it were to obiect as much to the Iesuites touching their fellowes and Ignatius himselfe their founder but let God be iudge of these things Hasenmuller who spent much time among the Iesuites and was of their religion makes this report Turrian the Jesuite hath often told me that Ignatius Loiola both at meat and Masse and in his recreations vsed to be vexed with the Diuel that he should sweate as cold as one that were ready to die Bobadilla told him that he would oftentimes complaine that he could neuer be quiet for the Diuel molesting him Turrian said the Diuel was his daily companion euen to the altar where he vsed to say Masse c. Hasenmull hist Iesuit c. 11 pag. 427. We can giue them a bead-role of Popes that haue had familiarity with the Diuel more then this commed to I know how scurrilously our aduersaries obiect this of Luther but their malice armed with all the wit and skill they haue can neuer euince it to be otherwise then I
nisi ille ad imitandum proponitur qui despectis Angelorum legionibus secum socialiter constitutis vt solus omnibus praeesse videretur Ep. 38. Ego fidenter dico quia quisquis so vniuersalem Sacerdotem vocat vel vocare desiderat in elaâ—ione sua Antichristum praecurrit l. 6. ep 30. called a proud pompaticall prophane sacrilegious Antichristian and diuellish title and the man that should assume it a follower of the diuel and the forerunner of Antichrist b 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb l. 5. c. 17. spoken of Montanus FASTING by distinction of meates and daies c Sectae Simonis â—uisse videtur soâ—ta quaedam Mâ—rcellina quae colebat imagines Iesu Pauli Homeri adorado incensumque ponendo August de haer Irenae l. 1. c 24. Epiph. haer 27. Theodor haer fab l. 1. Jnueni ibi velâ—m habeâ—s imaginem quasi Christs vel Sancti cuiusdam contra authoritatem Scriptiâ—rarum Epiph. ep â—d Ioh. Hicrosol Images d Cathari propter munditiem gl riantes de suis meritis Isido Orig. l. 8. c. 5. Perfection of our workes without sinne and abilitie to keepe the law e 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Clem. Rom. constit pag 57. Womens baptizing f Conc. Laod. can 35 Oecum pag 697. Veron graec the worship of Angels g Cruces nec colimus nec optamus Arâ—ob the worshipping of the Crosse h Vâ—rgo erat sed non ad adorationem nobis data Epiph. pag. 344. the worshipping of the virgin Marie i Nec exhorrescunt beatae Trinitatis imaginem facere Euthym. Panopl pag. 690. the Images of the Trinitie k Haereticâ— cum ex Scripturis arguuntur in accusationem ipsarum conuertuntur quasi non rectè habeant nec sint ex authoritate quia vartè sunt dicta quâ—a non possit ex his inueniri veritas abhis qui nesciunt Traditionem Irenae l. 3. c 2. the obscuritie and insufficiencie of the Scripture l Auditores apud eos Manichaeos si vâ—luerint vxores habent quorum nihil faciunt qui vocantur electi August ep 74. the necessitie of single life in the Cleargie and many other points defended by our aduersaries are mentioned and named in the Fathers but it is to shew that they were holden by hereticks and to confute them This first grant I returne my aduersary for a fauour because he hath replied without railing in this Chapter and I do it in the name of all Protestants that hereafter he may not say but they are tractable and wil yeeld much of his Romish religion to be if not defended yet mentioned in the writings of the Fathers Secondly that some ceremonies and doctrines also holden at this day by the Church of Rome which we refuse were held by some particular ancient Fathers and practised in the Church of those times though * It is the rule of Vincentius Lirinensis â—hat what the Fathers thus hold is not the Catholicke faith but what they hold resolutely and with generall consent Monitor c. 39. doubtfully vncertainly and without vniuersalitie and vniformitie and which is chiefly to be obserued by him that wil see the truth otherwise and to other intents then the Church of Rome now holds theÌ„ the reason whereof is manifest For the Apostle m 2. Thess 2.7 sayes the mysterie of iniquitie began to work in his time And n Niceph. l. 4. c 7. Euseb hist l 3 c. 32. Hegesippus that liued immediatly after the Apostles The Church continued a virgin vndefiled as long as the Apostles liued but when that generation was passed the conspiracy of wicked heresie through the seducement of those which taught otherwise tooke beginning And o 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isid Pelus l. 3 ep 408. pag 668. Isidorus Pelusiota that liued in the fourth age The Church is like a woman fallen from her ancient state and hauing nothing but the signes of it bereaued of her goods through their naughtinesse that held the administration Thus some particular ceremonies and doctrines began to be vsed and got increase with vsing as Prayer for the dead Purgatorie Necessitie of Baptisme for the saluation of infants and not many more doctrines agreeing with the Church of Rome which yet were vsed and holden as I said vncertainly and to other purposes then now they are for it cannot be shewed that they were the resolued doctrine of the Church vniuersally embraced The most that our aduersaries can shew in the writings of antiquitie being some part of their ceremonies as Tapers Crosses Vigils Oile Spittle Commemorations of the dead and such like wherein also they haue altered or forsaken many things as well as we as they haue with vs abandoned some points of their doctrine also which yet p It is coÌ„fessed that all the Fathers held the B. Virgin to haue bin conceiued in originall sinne by Turrecrem de consecr d. 4. Firmissime nu 11. Dom. Ban. part 1 q 1 art 8. dub 5. And most of the Fathers that the soules of the iust see not God till the day of iudgement Sixt Senens bibl l. 6 an 345. Barthol Medin in 12. pag 56. and others whom see below c. 57. n. 3. In which two points the now Church of Rome hath forsaken them by their owne confession they held as well as they did that which the Church of Rome still retaines which proues vnanswerably that it is no disaduantage to our side if some few particular doctrines thus vnsufficiently held be found in the Fathers which we refuse Thirdly we grant that we hold many negatiues against our aduersaries in the Church of Rome which are not expresly controlled or condemned by the Fathers in that maner that we condemne them that is to say directly purposely and namely but onely by discourse and consequence from those truths which they maintaine and those errors which they condemne in the heretiks of their times The reason is because in the Fathers daies such errors now denied and refused by vs were not broached but came vp since and the Fathers could not denie or speake against that which was not then in rerum natura This is the true reason why we denie sundrie things that the Fathers in their time denied not 2 These three things being granted that which we obiect against the Repliers Catalogue is that the ancient Fathers in their writings neither defend nor acknowledge the substantiall articles of Papistry wherein we really differ There is q You mâ—y see it in the Pref. before B. Iewels workes of the last impression And in the Pref. of THE WAY n. 15. And in the Councel of Trent at the end a new Creed made by the Councell of Trent and imposed vpon all men to beleeue the articles whereof are particularly expounded in the decrees and catechisme of the said Councel and in the writings of the moderne Schoole-men and Iesuites LET THEM SHEW IF THEY CAN THAT THE DOCTRINE CONTAINED IN THAT CREED
downe all with his hands and fight with Iupiter with his new termes and larger explications he coniures the old faith out of the Church His golden Vincentius hath another point to this purpose that the Repliar ouersees d Monitor c. 30 It is lawfull that those ancient articles of heauenly doctrine be dressed and filed and polished but villanie to change them villanie to maime and curtall them Let them receaue if you will euidence light distinction but withall let them hold their fulnesse integritie and proprietie This rule the Church of Rome hath not obserued but contrary thereunto it hath not onely expounded the articles of the ancient faith corruptly but also added many new articles which in the ancient Church were neuer knowne CHAP. XLVI 1 The errors broached by the later Diuines of the Church of Rome 2 Their errors maintained by that Church And their writings to good purpose alledged by the Protestants 3 How that which they speake for the Protestants is shifted off 5 One reason why we alledge their sayings 6 That which is said in excuse of their disagreement answered A. D. The second obiection My Aduersaries may secondly obiect that all this notwithstanding it cannot be denied Pag. 274. but that in particular mens writings set out in these latter ages there haue bene are found diuers errors cōtrary to the former faith of the Fathers To iustifie the truth of this obiection it seemeth that M. White hath with great paines raked together all the riffe-raffe and odde opinions he could finde in any particular Catholicke Authors as thinking be like this way to discredit the Catholicke cause But he is very shallow witted if hee thinke by this meanes to ouerthrow or shake the vniuersall faith of the Catholicke Church Introduct quest 3. For as I noted in the Introduction the Catholicke Church doth not binde her faith vpon any priuate Doctors opinion nor indeed do those priuate Doctors deliuer their said opinions as any points of their owne or other mens faith euen then when in these their priuate opinions they hold this or that matter to pertaine to faith which other men thinke not to pertaine to faith but rather submit all their opinions as hereticall Doctors which haue no faith but priuate opinions wil not to the faith iudgement and censure of the Catholicke Church being also ready to renounce any of their opinions whensoeuer by lawfull definitiue sentence of the present Pastours or otherwise they may perceiue them to be contrary to the ancient faith of the Church Hence M. White may see how vainely he hath spent his time in seeking the sinkes and sweeping together so many odde sentences of some Catholicke Authors as here and there he noteth in his writings the which haue no more force against the sincere vnity of doctrine of faith maintained by the authority of our Church then that heape of filth and ordure of ill life of some particular men which he hath scraped together doth proue against the sanctitie of the profession of the Catholicke Church And it is maruaile that the man hath so little wit as to labour so much either in shewing the contrariety of opinions among Catholickes which altogether is impertinent to the vnity of their faith or in discouering the faults of some leude persons which is altogether impertinent to the sanctity of the profession of the Church especially when if he did but looke into the bosome of his owne Protestant congregation and particularly into the life and doctrine of the very primitiue parents thereof he may finde it no lesse but all circumstances considered namely of the smalnesse of the number of men and the little space of time since it came into the world c. far more faulty in either kinde And so he ought to haue bene affraid least when he had said all against Catholickes that his blind zeale or malice could deuise that the shame would be returned so much the more against his Euangelicall brethren some of which as Luther confesseth haue bene for their ill liues far worse then euen themselues were when they were Papists and as I may boldly say for odde errors absurd and impious opinions far worse then any Papists Which their absurd and impious opinions who list to reade he may finde set downe in Caluino-Turcismo and other Authors See Caluino-Turcismus and may oppose them to these which M. White relateth with this aduantage that whereas if by ignorance or passion some Catholicke writers hold any vnfit opinions yet actually or virtually they submit them to the faith and censure of the Church and so are not to be thought obstinately to erre in faith but in priuate opinion about some matter not sufficiently knowne to them to be contrary to the faith of the Catholicke Church But Protestant Doctors who haue no other faith but their owne firmely setled opinion gathered as it seemeth to them out of Scripture who also will not neither actually nor virtually submit these their opinions to the faith and censure of any Church ours or their owne may by their erronious opinions obstinately mainteined against the Church be conuinced of so many absurd and impious obstinate errors in faith as they haue absurd and impious opinions grounded as it seemeth to them vpon Scriptures White p. 349. But it seemeth M. White regardeth not what may be obiected against his brethren so that he may say something against vs and therefore in one place he doth in effect vrge this argument against vs If the ancient Catholicke truth did continue among vs in all points then there could not be among our Doctors variety of opinions in any point no more then there is in the doctrine of the blessed Trinity or Incarnation I answer first that this may better be vrged against the Protestants who as appeareth in Caluino-Turcismo haue not onely vncertainty and variety of opinions in other points but euen about the doctrine of the blessed Trinity and Incarnation neither haue they any such sufficient meanes as we haue to take away this variety of opinions Secondly I answer that the variety of opinions which is among our Doctors either is not in matters pertaining to faith or if the matter pertaine to faith the varietie is not in the substance of the point but in some circumstance which may be held this or other waies without preiudice to faith or if in some rare case any priuate Doctors hold opinion against the substance or circumstance so far as pertaineth to faith this is in ignorance and with readines to put away this opinion so soone as they vnderstand the contrary to pertaine to faith by some euident proofe of Scripture or tradition or by declaration of the present Church which is an argument that although they erre in opinion yet they erre not in implicite beleefe euen of the very point wherein through ignorance they do erre in opinion Now the reason why this ignorance and consequently variety of opinion may
moraliter id fieri sine magnus incommodis periculis contra reuereÌ„tiam huit sacramento debitam quae vel propter multitudinem comunicantiuÌ„ vel propter eorum varietatem tam in conditionibus affectibus corporu quà m in animi prudentia circumspectione vel denique propter ministraÌ„tiuÌ„ incuriaÌ„ nullatenus possent iuxta humanaÌ„ conditionem euitarâ— Suar. defens fid cathol l. 2. c. 5. n. 20. giues First for the reuerence and decencie of the Sacrament that the cup be not spilled and the wine shed in so great and confused a companie Next for vniformitie that all people euery where might receiue alike which should not be if the cup were ministred for some people loue no wine Thirdly to auoid their error that hold it may not be ministred in one kind Fourthly for the preseruation of the Sacrament and that it might be carried to the sicke which in wine it could not for sowring and spilling Lastly for the instruction of the ignorant that they may know Christ by Thomas his concomitancie is perfectly vnder either kind It were no hard matter throughly to shew the vanitie of these reasons and merrily to whip them but the Cardinall had forgot that all these reasons in his owne opinion held in the primitiue Church and yet then they moued not the Church to take away the cup. I haue read of words vttered in a great frost which freezed in the venting as they were spoken and were not hard till a thaw came a long time after so belike our aduersaries will answer These reasons might be vttered in the ancient Church but they could not be conceiued till d Praeterea nosse debueras quod fecit Deus duo magna luminaria c. de maiorit obed Solitae in decr l. 1. tit 33. the great light in the firmament of the Church had shewed them with his beames now of late within these three hundred yeares CHAP. LVI Touching Transubstantiation 1. It was made an article of faith by the Lateran Councell 1200 yeares after Christ 2. How it came in by degrees 3. The Fathers neuer beleeued nor knew it Pag. 286. A. D. Lastly concerning Transubstantiation 1 White pag. 343. 350. M. White setteth down some coniectures whereby he endeuoureth to perswade his Reader that the beliefe of Transubstantiation came into the Church of late to wit at the Lateran Councell But 2 See the Prot. Apol. tract 1. §. 3 n. 2. where it is shewed that eueÌ„ ProtestaÌ„ts far better learned then M. White will be in haste doe grant the Transubstantiation was beleeued long before the Lateran Councel See Bellar. l. 3. de sacram euchar c. 19.20 21. Gre. de Val. tom 4. disp 6. q. 3. p. 2. §. 2. 3. this is false For although the name Transubstantiation was not perhaps vsed before the Councell of Lateran yet the thing signified by this name to wit the reall presence of Christs body succeeding in the place of the substance of bread was held and beleeued from the beginning as appeareth by plaine and sound authorities of Scriptures and Fathers set downe by Bellarmine and others And although the Church had no necessary occasion to make expresse determination what was to be held in that point before contrary heresies arose which might be one cause that some men did not or were not bound to know it so expresly as after the matter was explaned and determined by full authoritie from the Church yet at least implicitè all did were bound from the beginning to beleeue it And although some in their ignorance did before this declaratioÌ„ of the Church doubt or hold opinion to the contrary yet this hindreth not that they might beleeue this by implicite faith in regard priuate doubts and opinions so long as they are in ignorance without obstinacie especially with resolution and readinesse to yeeld to the Church do not take away implicite faith infolded in the generall assent which euery Catholicke giueth to that article I beleeue the Catholicke Church 1 TO shew the doctrine of Transubstantiation to be contrary to the faith of the Primitiue Church and to be brought in afterward and neuer to haue bin an article of faith before the Lateran Councell I set not downe coniectures but direct full testimonies first * Another like hereticall and most daÌ„gerous aâ—sertion of theirs the Iesuites is that the ancient Fathers Rem transubstantiationis ne attigerunt Quodl p. 31. of the Fathers expounding the words of Christ touching the Sacrament and auouching the substance of bread and wine to remaine as we do then of diuers great Papists Schoole-men and others who confesse the same I say either in expresse words or in effect that not only the NAME of Transubstantiation but the DOCTRINE and thing it selfe was made a matter of faith by the Lateran Councell no man being bound to beleeue it before Their words are reported in the Digression and will giue testimonie to themselues without my contending about them The Reply sayes though the name Transubstantiation were not perhaps vsed before the Councell of Lateran yet the thing to wit the reall presence of Christs bodie succeeding in the place of the substance of bread was held from the beginning as Bellarmine and others haue shewed and euen Protestants farre better learned then M. White will be in hast do grant But the authorities alledged in the Digress shew the contrary not onely the name but the thing it selfe to be new as will appeare by viewing them And though Bellarmine take vpon him to proue Transubstantiation by the Scripture and Fathers yet he confesses it is not improbable that Scotus said There is not extant any place of Scripture so expresse that without the Church declaration can euidently constraine vs to admit it For though the Scripture which I haue brought seeme to vs so cleare that it may constraine a man not froward yet whether it be so or not IT MAY WORTHILY BE DOVBTED when men MOST LEARNED AND ACVTE doe thinke the contrarie Let this be noted he bring a De Euch. l. 3. c. 23. §. Non dissimili Scripture to proue that which may worthily be doubted whether it be so or no and such Scripture as cannot conuince without his Churches declaration b Decernit Synodus vt nemo sacraÌ„ ScripturaÌ„ contra eum sensum quem tenuit tenet sancta mater Ecclesia cuius est iudicare de vero sensiâ— interpretari audeat Con. Trid. sess 4. that is to say vnlesse it be expounded so as shall agree with the doctrine of the Church of Rome The Reply therefore must not call them sound authorities of Scripture which without this wresting proue nothing and with all this wresting proue not so much but a man may still worthily doubt and most learned and acute men do doubt and the reader may see in what case he is that shall follow Bellarmine and the Reply in this opinion of Transubstantiation
Graffius a Friar lately writing from Capua i Decis aurear l. 2. c. 8. nu 16. that euery Christian is not bound to know the articles of faith explicitely but only Cleargy meÌ„ I cited Antonine an Archbish and a Saint in the Church of Rome k Sum. mor. part 1. tit 5. c 2. §. 1. who reporting the tale of the Colliar first saies that a great Doctor being demanded what he beleeued answered as the Church and being further demanded what the Church beleeued answered that it beleeued the articles contained in the Creed And then falles to commending that faith which shewes that he thought it was the entirest beleeuing eueÌ„ of the Creed to do it by implicite faith I alledged Pighius and Hosius the Cardinall who l Pigh hier l. 1. c. 5. Hos cont Brent l. 3 p. 146 in the places cited affirme that it is the safest way to hold a mans selfe to the faith of the Church though it should erre in the faith And that this Colliars faith is more safe then any meditation or exercise in the Scripture And whosoeuer shall view the places Hosius especially shall well perceiue that I speake the truth which I will yet iustifie further by shewing Catholicke Diuines as my aduersaries stiles a packe of heretikes to teach that it is sufficient by this implicite faith to beleeue euen the principall articles of faith contained in the Creed m Tract de fid William the B. of Paris n L. 3. tract 3. c. 1. qu. 5. Altisiodorensis o V. Fides nu 1. Summa Rosella and others p refeâ—t D. Ban. 22. qu. 2. art 8. § Dubitatur secundo hold that it is not necessary to beleeue any article of faith expressely but it is enough to beleeue all that our mother the Church beleeues and holds So that if a man were demanded whether Christ were borne of the Virgine and whether there were one God and 3. Persons he might sufficiently answer I cannot tell but I beleeue as the Church holds and this faith would iustifie and saue him The Iesuits q Lorin in Act. Apost p. 438. 1. b. Grego de Valent. tom 3. disp 1. qu. 2. punct 4. pag. 311. A. report that it is the opinion of many Authors in the Church of Rome that the explicite faith of Christ as he is true God and man and the Redeemer of mankinde euen after the sufficient publishing of the Gospell is not necessary necessitate medij either for Iustification or saluation and he cites Richardus Mediauillanus Vega and Soto Which is true for these are Vegaes expresse words r Pro. Concil TrideÌ„t l. 6. c. 15. p. 92. edit Colon 1572. It is to be affirmed that men are so iustified by the faith of the Mediator that yet the vnfolded faith neither of this article nor of any other must be thought requisite vnto iustice because the explicite faith of other articles belonging either to Speculation or morall life suffices thereunto and this is it which our Diuines commonly teach when they say the Faith of one mediator either vnfolded or infolded is enough for iustificatioÌ„ neither can they hold otherwise that thinke as Å¿ Reported before c. 22. n. 1. many in the Romane Church do the Gentiles without any knowledge of Christ or supernaturall faith at all may be saued 5 I know well enough some of our aduersaries speake otherwise and seeme to require a more vnfolded faith whose doctrine I will not conceale t Eymeric part 1. q. 7. n. 8 The Directorie of the Inquisitors out of u 22. qu. 2. art 5. Aquinas saies A man is bound explicitely to beleeue the articles of faith but other points of faith onely implicitely That which * D. Bann vbi sup Alexand Pezant 22. q. 2. art 8. disp 1. Greg. Val. tom 3. disp 1. qu. 2. punct 3. 4. 5. Vasqu 12. disp 121. others speake more at large First * These are the Propositions of Pezantius a Iesuite Schoolman that in the state both afore and after sinne it was necessary for all of yeares of discretion both by the command and necessity of the meanes to beleeue some supernaturall thing by explicite faith Secondly The things thus to be beleeued are all points needfull for the ordering of their life as to beleeue there is a God and his diuine prouidence and the immortality of the soule that he is the Creator Rewarder and Gouernor of all Thirdly that now in the state of the Gospell it is also necessary to beleeue in Christ as the Redeemer of mankinde by faith explicite Fourthly by the Commandement all are bound to beleeue explicately the Mysterie of the Incarnation and the Trinitie the principall articles of faith contained in the Creed which by themselues pertaine to the substance of faith and some other things which tend to direct them in working aright But what those articles of the Creed are which thus belong to the substance of faith Pezant saies the Doctors are not agreed but he laies downe his owne iudgement that they are the articles touching the Vnitie Essence and Trinitie of the Persons in the Godhead touching the Creation the Remission of sinnes Eternall life the Natiuitie Passion Resurrection and Second comming of Christ the Sacraments of Baptisme Eucharist and Confession the precepts also of Faith Hope and Charity the ten Commandements and Praiers deliuered in the Catechisme It is also probable he saies that all good Catholickes should beleeue explicitely the virginity of Mary that they may worship her but it is certain that the article touching the Church that there is but one congregation thereof which is of the faithfull * Were you there Sir that obey the Pope Christs Vicar must be beleeued explicitely and some say also certaine traditions touching the signe of the Crosse and the adoration of Saints and Images This is the largest and most particular explication that I finde in any of them touching the things that all men vnlearned as well as learned are bound either by Commandement or absolute necessity to beleeue by faith explicite Yea the Scholiast vpon the Directory of the Inquisition x Pag. 60. requires the articles of faith to be gotten perfectly without Booke which the Iesuits y Grego Val. p. 320. c Pezant pag. 505. d. deny But how shall I know this is the doctrine of their Church how will my aduersary assure me that other Diuines in his Church as Catholicke as these are of the same minde that I might truely say I mistooke them when I said they vtterly refuse knowledge and canonize the Colliar If they would hold them euery where and constantly to this it were a good step to an end in this controuersie and our doctrine were iustified that particular knowledge is to be ioyned with the assent of faith and we must not so beleeue the Church but that we be able also in some measure to conceiue and penetrate the things themselues If my
aduersarie will vrge me with this and stand vpon it that it is the doctrine of his Church I will not striue with him onely I will commend 2. things to his consideration First how he will pleade the saluation of innumerable lay people I will not say in Lancashire but in France Spaine and Italy euery where that haue no knowledge of these things but onely beleeue as the Church beleeues whom the Church of Rome hath hitherto trained vp in this implicite faith of the Colliar how will he excuse the Colliar whom Staphylus commends so that knew not these things and what if it should fall out that the Gentleman his friend whom he mentions z A person of good esteeme and place in that your country p. 39. Repl. before in this Reply being catechized by his ghostly father should be able to say no more then the Colliar Next that euen the Iesuites and these Diuines who make shew to maintaine this explicite faith yet vtter that besides that vnanswerably makes for the implicite in all articles Henriquex a De sin hom c. 17. n. 1. lit x. sayes A man may be iustified by the implicite faith of Christ * Si planè contritus cum plena satisfactione vel cum martyrio aut indulgentia plenaria decedat and if he die be saued also with a pardon b Relect. de Sacram. part 2. q. 2. concl 3. Canus and c In Tho. 22. q. 2. art 8. dub vlt. concl 1. Bannes affirme that the explicite faith or distinct knowledge of Christ is not necessary as a meanes to iustifie vs. And Bannes d Concl. 4. addes that it were neither heresie nor error nor rashnes nor scandall to auouch that a man may also in the same manner be saued because iustification being the last disposition to glory it is very probable that he which is iustified by an implicite faith may also by the same faith without alteration be saued Vasquez e In Tho. 12. q. 2. disp 121. c. 2. sayes He doubts not but many countrie people without fault are ignorant of some necessary mysteries Vega f Pro concil pag. 92. sayes as I alledged before It is to be affirmed that men are so iustified by the faith of the Mediator that yet the vnfolded faith neither of this article nor of any other must be thought requisite vnto iustice because the explicite faith of other articles belonging either to speculation or morall life suffices thereunto I could alledge many other such doctrines but these are enough to shew my aduersary that his Diuines deale but doubly in our point of implicite faith and such as make faire offer against it yet are fast friends to the Colliar 6 Note thirdly concerning the persons who they be that our aduersaries allow to beleeue implicitly who are bound to expresse knowledge Mediauillanus g 3. d. 25 p. 89. edit Venet. per Laz. Soard 1508. sayes that such as are superiors in the Church must haue a fuller knowledge concerning faith then inferiours So that I beleeue such superiours are bound to beleeue all the articles of faith expresly though euery one of thē be not bound to beleeue their number or artificiall distinction Syluester h Sum Syluest v. fides n. 6. sayes Euery one that hath cure of soules as Prelates Priests Prophets Doctors and Preachers are bound expresly to beleeue the whole distinction of the articles of faith according to their substance but others are not so bound i Direct Inquisit part 1. q. 4. n. 3. Eymericus out of k 22. q. 2. art 6. Thomas Prelats and Curats are bound to haue the expresse faith and knowledge of all the articles of faith wherefore the explication of things to be beleeued is not alike in respect of all sorts of men necessary to saluation because Superiors which haue the charge of instructing others are bound to beleeue expresly more things then others are l 22. q. 2. art 8. disp vnic sub sin Pezantius thinks thus of the matter that Bishops are bound * A hard taske for the Boy Bishops mentioned by Gerson and others see Vers sign ruin Eccl. sign 3. 8. Pic. Mirand orat ad Leo. and for some men Bishops too mentioned by Theod. Niem nemor Semita de scism p. 66. Cathar n. specul haeret p. 71. Clemang de stat Eccl. p. 15. 30. concil delect card Alliac reform Eccl. consid 3. and for some Popes also See specul Pontif. p. 110. and possible for our yong Iesuites and Seminaries to say nothing of the old Mas Priests in times past expresly to know the articles of Faith contained in the Creed and Scripture and in the definitions of the Church so that they can both expound teach and perswade them Simple Priests must know those things that belong to the making of the Sacrament and other things contained in the Creed Preachers such things as are necessary to teach the people how to beleeue and liue parish Priests are not bound to be so perfit in the knowledge of the articles of faith that they can assoile hard questions but it is sufficient if they can instruct their charge in such things as they are tied to beleeue and do and if they haue sufficient knowledge of the Cases of Conscience And so the implicite knowledge and faith is admitted onely in the vnlearned Laity and not in Clergie men of any sort if our aduersaries will hold them to their doctrine but they dubble and perseuere not in it as will appeare by viewing the places of the Archbishop and the Cardinal whom m The WAY §. 2. n. 6. I alledged in my booke 7 Note fourthly that the things which we mislike and speake against in this matter of implicite faith are these First that in teaching of it the Church of Rome seemes manifestly to seeke her owne soueraignty euen aboue the Scripture in the consciences of men rather then the true knowledge of God and his will To what purpose they do this n 2. Th. 2.4 apoc 18.7 I sit a Queene we are not ignorant but we see it tends to the stupifying of the word by blind and brutish obedience that there need be no trauell in religion it selfe but onely a religious care that the Church of Rome be not offended Whereunto whosoeuer will cleaue resolutely to obey all her drudgery and tyrannie that man by some fine distinction or other and that by the Iesuites themselues and such as talke most of explicite knowledge shall be iustified to be of an entire faith extending it selfe vniuersally to all points one as wel as another though he were as ignorāt as a sheepe or as mad as o Suid. v. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Amphistides in Suidas that could not tell fiue nor whether his father or his mother bare him Secondly we mislike that ignorance so much condemned by the word of God should thus be bolstered out whereby true faith
our Church vsed This shall be granted him in respect of the matter and doctrine contained which in all translations that varie but in character of speech is alike certaine But how shall the vnlearned which can neither vnderstand the originall nor compare translations nor so much as reade nor will admit infallible authoritie in the Church to assure them be infallibly certaine the translation containes no substantiall error euen in the matter this he would faine know My answer * My answer was not touing the vnlearned alone but of the vnlearned and learned together per commodam distributionem was that we know this by the same meanes whereby we know other truths and discerne other articles of Christian faith namely by the light of the doctrine translated the testimonie of the Spirit the ministerie of the word the rules of art and such like My aduersarie replies this is but a flourish of words and bids me answer directly to the point and thus he reasons If these be the meanes whereby we are assured our translations containe no substantiall error the light of the doctrine translated the testimonie of the Spirit the ministerie of the word the rules of art the knowledge of tongues and such like then they are so either ioyntly altogether or euery one seuerally by it selfe or onely some of them But neither are all of them ioyntly nor euery one seuerally nor onely some of them Ergo these be not the meanes ergo some other meanes must be assigned and that is the authoritie of the Church I will answer directly to the point granting the first proposition and distinguishing the second which hath three members first that all of them ioyntly together are not necessarie which he proues because so the vnlearned that want tongues and art could not haue this assurance I answer they are all of them ioyntly together necessary by concurring all of them in the Church some in the learned some in the vnlearned to the working of this assurance in the learned and vnlearned for they are not ioyntly the means so that they need all of them immediatly touch euery one that shal be assured but it is sufficient that art and tongues ioyned with Gods Spirit be in the learned and the ministerie of the Spirit and the Church and the light of the doctrine translated be in the vnlearned all concurring to produce * Viz. this clear assurance that the translation cōtains at least nothing contrary to the analogie and rule of faith one effect in both though not all alike existing in them both The second member is that euery one of these seuerally is not sufficient and this I grant for no other meanes is sufficient if Gods Spirit be wanting to giue effect to it The third member is that onely some of these are not a sufficient meanes to breed this assurance this is false for the light of the doctrine translated the testimony of Gods Spirit are sufficient to assure the vnlearned that what is translated to them is true at least touching the doctrine in the same maner that Gods Spirit and the light of the truth assure vs that the things taught by word of mouth in preaching are the truth which light and testimony of the Spirit neuer go with translations or preaching which contain false doctrine His D. Stapleton * Triplic in admonit says it ouer that by the internall perswasion of the Spirit of God alone any matter of faith may be beleeued though the Church say nothing at all but the Iesuits reason to the contrary is then it would follow that an vnlearned man hauing that Spirit of God by the onely light of the doctrine shining in it without any other help should vnderstand Greeke and Hebrew because the Scriptures are written in them but this followes neuer a whit for though I grant the doctrine shines in the Scripture and God by his Spirit giues a full assurance yet he doth not this to the vnlearned but by translations which assurance I vnderstand according to the state and condition of him that is to be assured the learned seeing the heauenly doctrine in the learned tongues and translated both the vnlearned vulgar people in the translation onely and not in the originall as a man sees light by the opening of a window because that is the meanes to let it in I do not say the light of the doctrine and the testimonie of Gods Spirit giue the vnlearned assurance in the Scripture it selfe euery way but in the Scripture truly translated into the language they vnderstand neither doth the contrary follow of my words We know the diuine doctrine to be one and the same in all translations immediatly in the originall and more obscurely in the translations and God directeth the children of light by the holy Ghost who openeth their hearts that they know his voice from all others and that the light of his truth may shine vnto them for this light shineth and this testimonie of the holy Ghost worketh first not immediatly but by meanes secondly not by the same meanes in all but diuersly whiles to such as haue the light of the holy Ghost being learned it shines in the originall tongues but being vnlearned onely in translations as the words that are printed in a booke are plaine and legible of themselues without any other meanes to him that hath light and a perfect eye but if a man be dim sighted then to him they are onely legible through his spectacles and as it is necessary though the light be cleare of it selfe yet to open the window in case a man be shut vp in a house so my saying the doctrine is one and the same in all translations and God directs the children of the light to discerne it and makes the light of it shine vnto them hinders not but I may well say also the window or translation must be opened to let in this light when men are shut vp in ignorance of the tongues and so still some of the meanes I named alone are sufficient where all cannot concurre 4 My aduersary in the knitting vp replies against this that if the holy Ghost doth not sufficiently assure vs without other meanes then the light of the doctrine and the testimonie of the Spirit are not the onely necessary nor alone sufficient meanes to assure vs that the translation we vse is not corrupted By which reason he may say also that when the opening of a window is a necessary meanes to shew the light this light is not the onely necessary nor alone sufficient meanes to enlighten me for there is sufficient in the Scripture to assure me but still the helpe of Church-ministery and industry are necessary to worke it in me or else my aduersarie must proue that the subordination of the meanes where by causes are applied to their effects take away the sufficiencie and perfection of the said causes that is to say the Grammar containes not all things necessary and
Church so vniuersally that there was no visible companie of people appearing to the world free from it and whether any company at all knowne or vnknowne were free from it wholy or not I neither determine nor greatly care All that I hold touching the inuisible Church being that the true Church being ouergrowne with heresie and corruption there hath not at all times bene therein a distinct company to be seene which in all points were free from the corruption though there may be shewed a company that held all the substantiall points simply necessary to saluation Had the Iesuite vnderstood my words in this sense which I often declared all ouer my Booke he would neuer haue trifled away time in prouing the Church whose doctrine is the rule to be visible which I deny not but he would haue gone roundly to worke in shewing the visible Church to be neuer so corrupted but there is some one or more speciall companies therein visibly to be seene by all and separated from the rest that is not defiled with the corruption For the Church is visible to be seene at all time more or lesse whose teaching in the sound part thereof is to be followed to the worlds ende Neuerthelesse first he excepts that I say the question is of the Church militant containing as part of it euill men and hypocrites whereas to speake precisely he makes not the Question that way but to cut off occasions of cauill he saies he desputes whether the Church whereof he spake in the precedent Chapters whose doctrin in all ages is the rule of faith whether I say this Church be in all ages visible or sometimes inuisible as if the Church whose doctrine is the rule in all ages were any other then the militant His conclusions whereby he taught his friend how to resolue himselfe in religion were these That there is a rule left by God whereby all men may be instructed This rule is not the Scripture but the doctrin of the true Church which Church is alway visible that all men at all times may see it wherein he affirmes as I do the militant Church to be visible because that onely is it that mortall men can heare and haue accesse to and this I shew distinctly to be the question For first his owne expresse words are c In THE WAY pag 99. It is euident that the Church militant consists of good and bad but this Church consisting of good and bad is the same that before in his conclusion he affirmed to be visible confuting our supposed ground wherupon we held it inuisible Secondly in this very passage he sayes it is true that the same Church he speakes of is the Church militant or part of it Thirdly he expounds himselfe to meane that Church whose doctrine is the rule to teach vs. But the doctrine of no Church teaches vs but that of the Militant liuing here vpon earth where they that liue are taught Fourthly he meanes that Church whereto euery one may haue accesse and repaire for instruction whereto also they may ioine themselues and wherein they may admonish their brethren and therefore precisely he speakes of the Militant church vpon earth and his words that to speake precisely he makes not the question this way but onely askes whether the Church whose doctrine is the rule be visible are so precise that a man would think his head-peece were not wel seasoned when either he must grant this his visible Church to be militant or confesse it to be none of Gods Church for so much as all the Church of God whose doctrine is the rule of faith is for the time being militant here on earth and part of that which is mentioned in the Creed where we say credo Ecclesiam Therefore the question betweene vs is whether the companie of those that professe and teach the true faith of Christ without mixture of corruption among whom possible many hypocrites and wicked men liue which companie is called the Militant-church be at all times visible The Reply sayes it is and must no more denie his assertion to be meant euen precisely of this companie 4 His second exception is about the words visible and inuisible where he sayes fiue things First that by a visible Church I make him to mean a company alway so illustrious that it may be knowne to all men liuing at all times Secondly that I make him to meane this companie also to be so illustrious that actually it is thus knowne Thirdly that he meanes not the word visible in this second sence Fouthly that he knowes the Church is sometime obscured and shines not actually through the whole world Fiftly that the Church is alway visible in this sence that alway euen in the greatest obscuritie it hath some eminent professors which either are actually knowne or may in particular be assigned The first is true for he sayes it expresly in the last And I suppose he will not denie it when so many of his owne Diuines hold it Dom. Bannes d Tom. 3. pag. 103. sayes the Church is so visible that it is palpable Bellarmine e De Eccl. l. 3. c. 13. God hath at all times a Church consisting not of a few people but of a great multitude as conspicuous as any earthly kingdome Greg. of Valence f Tom. 3 p. 143. Our assertion is that in all ages there may euidently be seene and discerned and as it were pointed out with the finger a companie of men whereof euery one may beleeue that it is the true Church The second is false For though it follow manifestly vpon his words and that which the Diuines of his church teach of the visâ—â—â—lenesse of their church yet I charged him not so farre but contented my selfe with confuting that which is contained in his first and last assertion Neuerthelesse it is true that he and all Papists must by their owne principles hold the Church to be euen actually visible to all men For he sayes g Repl. p. 170. God hath giuen sufficient meanes to all men for their saluation h In THE WAY §. 13. and the teaching of this his church is the meanes But no meanes is sufficient that is not actually reuealed as i Ch. 25. n. 15.16 I haue shewed heretofore out of the Repliers owne authors Therefore if sufficient meanes be onely that which is actually reuealed and the Church be the meanes it followes the Church must be actually visible or else let vs see how the Replier will quit himselfe The third is also false as I haue said but yet allowing it to be true I haue not peruerted the question because I affirme and dispute against the visiblenesse of the Church in that sâ—nce which he holds in the first and last assertion The fourth I accept as the truth and haue shewed in k Digr 17. THE WAY that as his owne Diuines expound it it vtterly destroyes his first and last assertions and yeelds as much as
AND IN THE WRITINGS OF THESE MEN TOVCHING THE SCRIPTVRES SACRAMENTS CHVRCH POPE COVNCELS TRANSVBSTANTIATION IMAGES INVOCATION OF SAINTS IVSTIFICATION GOOD WORKS c. WAS THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHVRCH AND PROFESSED BY THE BISHOPS OF ROME FATHERS AND COVNCELS EXPRESSED IN THE FIRST 800 YEARES OF THIS CATALOGVE this is our obiection whereto the Replier answers that he can retort it more strongly against the Protestants c. But this is but wind and so let it passe and come we forward to the substance of his answer CHAP. XLIII 1. Whatsoeuer the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued is expressed in their bookes 2. The Replier is driuen to say they held much of his religion onely implicitely What implicite faith is according to the Papists The death of Zeuxis The Fathers write that which cannot stand with Papistrie Pag. â—67 A. D. Secondly I answer that to say there be diuers points held by vs whereof no mention is made in those ancient Fathers is no good argument to proue that which we hold was not holden by them For this is Argumentum ab authoritate negatiua which argument is of no force to proue this point vnles it be first proued that those Fathers held nothing explicitè or implicitè which is not expresly to be fouÌ„d in their writings But this my aduersaries will neuer be able to proue Now on the contrary side we can shew good reasons or at least probable presumptions sufficient to proue first that they held more then is expressed in their writings Secondly that they held explicitè or implicitè the same in all points of doctrine which we hold First I say we haue reason to thinke that they held more then is expressed in their writings because since ordinarily the writings of these Fathers were not by them set out of purpose to expresse in particular euery thing that they held implicitè or explicitè concerning all matters of faith but rather were written vpon some speciall occasion it is to be thought that their writings contain only some parts of the doctrine to wit so much of it as was that requisite to be written vpon that special occasion The which is confirmed euen by experience of these our times in which although learned men do ordinarily set downe more expresly in Catechismes bookes of controuersies c what the Catholik faith is in diuers points then formerly it hath bin set downe as they haue more occasion by reason of more heresies daily arising then learned men of former ages when those heresies were not haue had Yet no learned man now adaies writeth euery thing which explicitè or implicitè he beleeueth to be the Catholick faith For euery Catholicke man beleeueth explicitè or implicitè all that is contained in Scriptures and traditions in that he beleeueth whatsoeuer was reuealed by God to the Apostles deliuered by them in word or writing to the Catholicke Church and which the Church in Scriptures and vnwritten traditions propoundeth and deliuereth to vs diuers particulars whereof are not necessary to be expresly knowne to or written by any particular learned man of any age but are alwaies preserued at least in the implicite or infolded faith of the Church the which infolded faith of the Church may and shall be vnfolded the holy Ghost still assisting and suggesting all the aforesaid reuealed truth as necessitie shall require that the truth should be in any point expresly declared which necessitie chiefly is when some new heresie ariseth oppugning particularly the truth of that point 1 HEre he sayes the Fathers named in his Catalogue might hold what the church of Rome holds though there be no mentioÌ„ therof in their writings because they might hold that which is not expresly in their writings We had thought vntil now that this had bin a plain demonstration The ancient Fathers in all their writings make no mention of diuers points of the Popish religion Ergo they held them not Or thus What religion the Fathers held that they mention in their writings But the Popish religion they mention not in their writings Ergo they held not the Popish religion But he hauing good experience that the second proposition is true denies the first and will shew either by good reasons or probable presumptions that they held more then they mention and expresse in their bookes Wherein at once he hath destroyed his Catalogue and laid his religion open to the scorne of women and children For if the Fathers in all their writings handled nothing but the cause of religion teaching expounding and defending it against Iewes Gentiles hereticks schismatickes whereby they could not but mention what they held and yet neuer mentioned diuers points of Poperie it is plaine they neuer held them But the Iesuite sayes this is Argumentum ab authoritate negatiua which is not good they might hold either explicitè or implicitè that which they haue not expressed Wherein you must marke his tergiuersation For to shew a visible Church in all ages professing openly his Romane faith that all men may see it he tenders this catalogue But when we bid him proue that the Fathers of the first 600 or 800 yeares beleeued and professed that part of his Romane faith which the Church of England reiects that it may appeare so to vs and we may see it he sayes he can shew good reasons and presumptions that they beleeued more then is expressed in their writings whereas he should shew by their WRITINGS that they held and beleeued as the Romish Church now doth because it is impossible to shew what they held but by their writings and himselfe sayes in another place We cannot haue any certaintie of things past but by the writings of those times And if he will haue his Church to be so visible in the Fathers time and those Fathers to be so eminent members thereof good reason men see it yet see it they cannot by presumptions but by their writings 2 But he sayes We haue reason to thinke that they held more then expressed in their writings forsomuch as no man writes euery thing which explicitè or implicitè he beleeues I answer though it be granted that both they and we in all our writings may omit some things not belonging to faith or religion yet many articles of faith such as our aduersaries say theirs are the deniall whereof they call schisme and damnable herersie and persecute with fire sword and gun-powder cannot but be expressed for so much as such articles are simply needfull vnto saluation and are the grounds and conclusions of all theologicall writing and discourse Secondly it is impertinent to the obiection which denies the Fathers of the first 600 yeares to haue done that which the Catalogue sayes they did professed VISIBLY as the Romane Church now doth which obiection is not satisfied by saying they might explicitè or implicitè professe that they neuer writ because no man writes all he beleeues but by shewing in their writings this
implicitè all points of faith that we hold This will appeare by these ensuing considerations First it is certaine that the Apostles taught the whole corpse of Christian doctrine partly by word partly by writing which as a sacred depositum was commended by S. Paul to S. Timothy and other succeeding Bishops and Pastors of the Church to be maintained alwaies in the Church against all profane innouation of heresies in these words O Timothy keepe the depositum auoiding the profane nouelties of voices oppositions of falsly called knowledge which diuers promising haue erred about the faith The which words * Aduers haer c. 17. Vincentius Lyrinensis expoundeth thus Who saith he at this day hath the place of Timothy but either the whole Church or especially the whole bodie of Prelats who ought themselues to haue the whole knowledge of diuine religion and also to instruct others And a litle after What is meant by this Depositum it is saith he that which is committed to thee not that which is inuented by thee that which thou hast receiued not that which thou hast deuised a thing not of wit but of learning not of priuate vsurpation but of publicke tradition a thing brought to thee not a thing brought forth of thee wherein thou must not be an author but a keeper not an institutor but a secretor not a leader but a follower Keepe the Depositum preserue the talent of the Catholicke faith pure and sincere that which is committed to thee let that remain with thee and that deliuer vnto the people To the same purpose S. Irenaeus saith * l. 3. c. 14. We must not seeke the truth among others which is easie to receiue from the Church when the Apostles haue most fully laid vp all the truth in it as in a rich treasure house Also the same Irenaeus saith * l. 4. c. 43. We must heare and obey those Priests who haue succession from the Apostles who with succession of their Episcopall function haue receiued the Charisma of truth Now supposing that this sacred depositum of the whole corpse of the reuealed truth is preserued in one or other succession of Pastors of one or other companie of Christians called the Church either it must be granted that it was preserued in that succession of Pastors which my catalogue sheweth or else I must require my aduersaries to set forth another catalogue of Pastors vnto whom this sacred depositum was committed and from whom we may receiue it as need shall require For to say that the diuine truth committed to the custody of the Pastors whom God hath appointed to be alwaies in the Church of purpose to preserue men from wauering in faith Eph. 4 v. 13.14 and from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine did at any time wholy or in part by contrary error faile in them vniuersally in such sort that there should not in all ages be sound one or other company of Pastors and Priests whom we could know still to keep the Depositum inuiolate and entire and whom consequently according to Irenaeus his saying we ought to obey as being men l. 4. ◠4. who with succession of their Episcopall function receiued also the Charisma of truth if I say this were so that Gods truth all or in part had explicitè and implicitè perished from the mouth of all knowne Priests and Pastors Gods ordinance it selfe who for the generall good of the Church appointed these Pastors had bin deficient or had failed of the intended effect Eph. 4. v. 13.14 For how should men be preserued from wauering in faith or from being caried about with euery wind of false doctrine by Pastors appointed to be for that purpose vnto the worlds end if in some ages no such Pastors were or were not to be knowne or being knowne to be the Pastors yet did vniuersally faile to preserue the entire formerly receiued truth by beleeuing and teaching and so making the people beleeue contrary errors If this were so the holy Ghost had failed to teach the Church all truth and consequently Christs promise had not bin performed which said that the Spirit of truth shall teach all truth Ioh. 16. v. 13. Some Pastors therefore alwaies are in the Church who without spot or wrinkle of any error in faith shall preserue the entire truth and by the assistance of Christ and his holy Spirit shall be able as need shall require to vnfold and deliuer to the people the same truth thereby to preserue them from falling into error and from wauering in faith 1 THat the Apostles taught the whole bodie of Christian doctrine and commended the same to the succeeding Pastors of the Church to be alway maintained without innouation and that as Vincentius and Irenaeus speake the faithfull people of the Church were to be taught the truth by these Pastors shall be granted for what the Apostles reuealed and deliuered from Iesus Christ the same they intended should be continued for euer in the Church But this proues not that the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church held all things that the Church of Rome now holds vnlesse my aduersarie can shew that euery thing holden in the Church of Rome is part of the Bodie of that Christian doctrine which the Apostles commended to their successors For ouer besides the truth reuealed by the Apostles the church of Rome successiuely by degrees in these last 800 years especially hath brought in diuers pernicious and damnable errors and corruptions touching Traditions Transubstantiation Images Iustification the Masse the Popes primacie the worship of Saints innumerable other points wherin we haue forsaken it the which corruptions not belonging to the bodie of Christian doctrine which the Apostles taught but being a disease that bred in the body of the Church must not be said to haue bin the faith of the Fathers who receiued nothing from the Apostles but that doctrine which is contained in the canon of the Bible besides which doctrine if either the Fathers or Pastors of the Church succeeding taught any thing it must be reiected as no part of the Depositū mentioned Thus my answer is plain that the Apostles deliuered to their successors to be preserued against all innouation the whole Christian doctrine but the seuerall articles of the now Romish faith which we haue cast off are no part of that Christiā doctrine Secondly my aduersarie replies that it was the mind of the Apostles and the ordinance of God not onely that the whole bodie of the truth should be preserued in some successiō or other but also that it should be preserued so inuiolate and entire that no contrary error should be taught with it which being supposed he sayes it must be granted that it hath bin so preserued in that succession of Pastors which his Catalogue sheweth because the Protestāts are able to shew no other Pastors His whole discourse affirmes two things the first that the bodie of Christian
dayes Thirdly that diuerse particular points of our doctrine are acknowledged by learned Protestants to haue bene taught by the ancient Fathers namely Vowes Reall presence c. For all which the said Protestant Apology citeth the names and bookes and oftentimes the very words of the learned Protestants as may be seene and I wish the Reader for his more satisfaction to see Lastly that our Church holdeth the very same and no other faith in substance then that which was held by the ancient Church may appeare by the very nature as I may say of our Church whose property and condition is not to inuent of new or to alter any doctrine in any matter of faith but to receiue humbly and obediently at the hands of our present Pastours what they in like manner learned of their predecessors and still to hate and resist all innouation in any matter of faith no lesse then a deadly poison as knowing that the least infection of any new inuented heresie or alteration in matter of faith doth corrupt and adulterate the whole faith and taketh away infallible authoritie and credite from the Church Wherefore our Pastors haue bene like men appointed to watch very vigilant in noting reprehending resisting and condemning all innouation in faith and sometimes casting incorrigible members out of the Church euen for a word or two profanely innouated contrary to the custome and faith of the Church The which course being duly obserued as chiefely by Gods prouidence and partly by humane diligence it hath bene and shall be still obserued it is not possible that there should be such alteration in religion or difference betwixt the faith and doctrine of the ancient and present Pastours of the Church as our aduersaries ignorantly or maliciously obiect For as Vincencius Lyrinensis saith Vincent Lyr. l. aduersus haereses Vincentius Lyr. contra haereses c. 32. the Church of Christ is a carefull keeper of religion committed to her charge she neuer changeth or altereth in any thing she diminisheth nothing nothing she addeth to wit as a doctrine of faith True it is that by reason of heresies arising the Pastors and doctors of the Church in latter ages haue had occasion to write more largely and expressely about diuerse points then was done in former times when no such heresies were and that for confutatiō of those heresies and more explication of the formerly receiued faith these Pastours and Doctors haue vsed some kinde of more significant words then formerly were vsed in which sort the terme of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was brought in against those who denied Christ our Sauiour to be true God and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 against those who denied our blessed Lady to be the mother of God and transubstantiation against those who denied the conuersion of the substance of bread into the substance of the body of our Lord. The which tearmes although they may seeme to smell of noueltie yet indeed are not of that prophane sort of nouelty of voices or wordes which the Apostle wisheth to be auoided because the sence of these wordes is not different from the faith and phrase vsed formerly by the Church but do onely explicate more plainely or signifie more fully and clearely that which was formerly beleeued and taught by the Church which kinde of explication of the ancient faith to be lawfull and allowable Vincent Lyrin cont haer c. 2. we may learne out of Vincentius Lyrinensis who although a most true louer of antiquitie alloweth such new explicatiō of the faith as we may see in his goldē Treatise where hauing declared excellently by that saying of the Apostle Cap. 28.29 30. O Timothy keepe the Depositum c. that nothing is to be innouated in faith he sheweth how this notwithstanding Cap. 32. the ancient faith may in processe of time be more explained and that for more easie vnderstanding of it to an old article of faith we may giue a new name 1 HEre are foure reasons to proue that the ancient Fathers held the same doctrine of faith that is now professed in the Church of Rome and one obiection answered that he thinkes will be made against him His first reason is the testimony of Coccius a Cum ab ineunte aetate incidisset in praeceptores Lutheranos adhuc inuenis in eiusmodi haereticorum Academijs versatus c. Posseuin ap v. Iod. Cocc an apostata who in his Thesaurus settes downe the Fathers point by point with vnanime consent testifying against the Protestants Wherein he much forgets himselfe for if Coccius set downe the Fathers point by point what needed the Repliar haue graunted b Ch. 44. a little before that there be diuers points held by his side now adaies whereof there is no mention in the writings of the Fathers yet they held them because either explicitely or implicitely they held many points that they haue not expressely mentioned let these two be reconciled They held some things onely implicitely by an infolded faith not mentioning them expressely and yet Coccius sets them downe point by point testifying against the Protestants For those points which they held onely infoldedly Coccius cannot set downe in their owne wordes point by point I answer therefore that Coccius with his * Spatio 24. annorū Posseu twenty foure yeares studie hath not done this that my Repliar reports he hath collected together the wordes of the Fathers and such places as his side vses for the confirmation of their hereticall opinions but the vnanime and certaine consent in the now current Romane faith he hath not shewen and the Reader shall know it by this that in the controuersies betweene vs they many times deny the authority of the Fathers and c Ind. expurg Belg pag. 12. professe so to do yea to excuse and extenuate their errors by deuising shifts and to fainesome fit sense for their owne purpose vnto them when they are opposed against them by vs in our disputations And why haue they thus purged and corrupted their writings and why do they allow nothing to be the sense of their wordes but what the Pope and his Clergy allowes to be the sense Is it not palpable hypocrisie to do all this and yet to bragge of their vnanime consent against vs Coccius therefore out of the Fathers whom they haue CORRVPTED PVRGED COVNTERFETTED and COINED may bring places which being fraudulently expounded and shuffled may giue colour to Papistrie but by the true writings of the true Fathers truely expounded as themselues meant the present faith of Rome in the articles which they hold against vs and as they expound them cannot be confirmed no not in one point and let no man hope the contrarie as may appeare by these examples following Of the sufficiency of the Scripture without traditions Saint Basil d De Fid. p. 394. graec Basil sayes It is a manifest falling from the faith and an argument of arrogancy either to abrogate any of