do grant it Hart. They grant that the Pope may be an Heretick perhaps by a supposal as many things may be which never were nor are nor shall be For you cannot prove that any Pope ever was an Heretick actually though possibly they may be whereof I will not strive This point of the fallibility of the Pope and his subjection to a Council is so notorious with every man that is acquainted with the more ancient and modern Writers so known to any one that hath either read the determinations of Bishop Davenant qu. 5. or the defense of the Dissuasive of Bishop Taylour pag. 40. or the Review of the Council of Trent written by a French Catholick from whom the Disswader borrowed his allegations or that hath so much as read over the History of the Council of Trent that I need not insist on it any longer Notwithstanding the earnestnesse of the Iesuits under Laynez in the Council of Trent yet neither was the Pope's superiority over a Council nor the Infallibility of the Bishops of Rome defined there directly as appears out of the Review of that Council lib. 4. c. 1. and out of the English History pag. 721 722. Neither is there to this day amongst the Papists any thing enacted or determined in that Church which obligeth a man under pain of Excommunication to hold any such thing as the personal Infallibility of the Bishops of Rome the contrary being daily maintained there by more than the Iansenists much lesse is there any Sovereignty in matters of Faith ascribed unto them at this day All books of the Papists are subjected to the judgment of the Church not to the Arbitrement of the Pope The fides Carbonaria or Colliers faith so famed amongst the Papists was not established upon the infallibility or sovereignty of the Bishops of Rome no he told the Devil that He believed as the Church believed and the Church as He. And how necessary soever they make the communion with the particular Church of Rome how great influence soever they ascribe to the Pope over Councils yet the Decrees of the Council of Trent run in the name of the Holy Synod not Pope and there it is determined sess 4. that none dare interpret Holy Scripturs against the sense which our Holy Mother the Church hath held or does hold If you enquire in-the doctrines of M r White D r Holden Serenus Cressy and such others as endeavour at present and that with great shew of wit and artifices to seduce the English to that Apostaticall Church there is not one of them that I knowe of who attributes any infallibility to the Pope or submitteth his faith to the Sovereigne decisions of the Bishop of Rome As for Serenus Cressy he very judiciously deserts the School-terme of Infallibility for that of the Churches Authority and saith that the exceptions and advantages which the Protestants have against the Roman Church proceed only from their mis-understanding of her necessary doctrines or at most that all the efficacy they have is onely against particular opinions inferences made by particular Catholique writers He shews that D r Stapleton asserts that the infallible voyce and determination of the Church is included in the decree of the Church speaking in a Generall Council representatively In which the Church is infallible with this restriction viz in delivering the substance of faith in publique doctrines and things necessary to salvation Other Catholiques and namely Panormitan teach that the decrees of Generall Council are not absolutely and necessarily to be acknowledged infallible till they be received by all particular Catholique Churches because till then they cannot properly be called the faith of the universall Church or of the body of all faithfull Christians to which body the promise of infallibility is made And this was the Doctrine of Thomas Waldensis and some other Scholmen c. An opinion this is which though not commonly received yet I do not saith S. C. find it deeply censured by any yea the Gallican Churches reckoned this among their chiefest priviledges and liberties that they were not obliged to the decisions of a Generall Council till the whole body of the Gallican Clergy had by a speciall agreement consented to them and so proposed them to the severall Churches there And to this last opinion doth S. C. incline and his book was approved at Paris as consonant to the Catholique faith He guides himselfe by the Authority of received Councils he acknowledges that to be onely necessarily accounted an Article of Catholique faith which is actually acknowledged and received by Catholiques and since contradictions cannot be actually assented unto it will follow that whatsoever decisions of Councils may seem to oppose such articles are not necessarily to be accounted Catholique doctrines and by consequence not obligatory He denies that Generall Councils can make new articles of faith they are witnesses of what hath been delivered not Sovereigns to determine of new truths either by way of addition to the former or in opposition thereunto Their Infallibility is limited to Tradition and spiritually assisted in the faithfull reporting of what hath been delivered what ever reports or decrees they make of another nature they are to be received with a different assent from what is Catholique faith There is a double obligation from decisions of Generall Councils the first an obligation of Christian beliefe in respect of doctrines delivered by Generall Councils as of universall Tradition the second onely of Canonicall obedience to orders and constitutions for practice by which men are not bound to believe those are inforced as from Divine authority but onely to submit unto them as acts of a lawfull Ecclesiasticall power however not to censure them as unjust much lesse to oppose and contradict them Much more doth the same Author adde which give little countenance to that state of the controversie which our Author forms unto us No Soveraigne dominion over our faith is by him ascribed to the Bishop of Rome or Nationall or Generall Counâ—ills and as to Infailibility which Mr Chillingworth had impugned he thus acquits himselfe I may in generall say of all his Objections that since they proceed only against the word Infallibility and that word extended to the utmost heighth and latitude that it possibly can beare Catholiques as such are not at all concerned in them seeing neither is that expression to be found in any received Council nor did ever the Church enlarge her authority to so vast a widenesse as Mr Chillingworth either conceived or at least for his particular advantage against his adversary thought good to make show as if he conceived so As to the subject wherein Infallibility or Authority is to be placed since Catholiques vary as to that point he sayes 't is evident thereby that they are not obliged to any one part of the Question only they are to agree in this Tridentine decision Ecclesiae est judicare de vero sensu Sacrae
Council of Chalcedon was held Rex Ecclesia Anglicana quatuor prima Concilia Oecumenica quam ad mittant eo ipso satis declarant verae as legitimae Ecclesiae tempus non includere se uno aut altero demum seculo verùm multò longiùs producere Marciani Imperatoris sub quo Chalcedonense Concilium est celebratum tempus complecti If our Historian can shew that the present Church of Rome and the Tridentine model is so ancient as to come within this period I shall admire him and the Congregatio de propaganda fide multiply their acknowledgments unto him beyond what his present performances deserve yet really He merits very much from the Romanists in charging all the Schisme upon the Protestants who made a causlesse separation and whilst he condemnes the Pope onely for usurping an infallibility and sovereign dominion over our Faith without so much as imputing unto him any abuse of that pretended power and infallibility without fixing on him any error superstition Idolatry or other temporal retrenchments upon our Monarchy which alone would have justified a separation from the Papal Church But to resume my former Discourse I shall adde this passage out of K. Iames thereby to manifest how much more knowing our Virtuoso must be than all the Prelates of the Church of England were then if he can assert this Fame and Antiquity of the Romish Church Fatetur Rex Ecclesiam suam à capitibus non paucis ejus fidei disciplinae quam hodie Romanus Pontifex probat omnibus tuetur viribus discessionem secisse verùm eam Rex Ecclesia Anglicana non defectionem à fide veteris Catholicae interpretantur sed potiùs ad fidem Catholicam pristinam quae in Romana novis inventis fuerat multipliciter mirè deformata reversionem ad Christum unicum Ecclesiae suae magistrum conversionem Quare siquis doctrinâ hujus observationis fretus inferre ex illa velit Anglicanam Ecclesiam quia Romanae placita nonnulla rejicit à veteri Catholicâ discessisse non hoc illi prius Rex largietur quam solidis rationibus probaverit omnia quae à Romanis docentur illa praecipuè quae volunt ipsi ut necessaria ad salutem credi ab omnibus antiquae Catholicae à principio probata fuisse sancita hoc verò neminem posse facere aut unquam facturum neminem certè hactenus fecisse tam liquidò Regi constat Ecclesiae Anglicanae Antistitibus quà m Solem meridie lucere But to gratifie our Historian to yeild up the utmost of Antiquity to the Church of Rome to ascribe all that renown which so charmes our Virtuoso and which is not to be found in the Narrative of that Papacy which contains nothing almost but what is ignominious base and detestable to do all this signifies nothing to Communion unless I also grant that the Romanists are a true Church and that there is not any thing in the constitution of that Church which may give a pious Christian just occasion to avoid or rescind Ecclesiastical Communion therewith Imagine them as ancient as the Manichees Gnosticks and Simon Magus or even the old Serpent as flourishing and renowned as ever were the Arrians or Saracens all this concernes not the little flock them whose portion and kingdom is not of this world whose calling is of another nature There was a time when Christianity it self must have been slighted justly and the Scribes and Pharisees were in the right if to make one Orthodox he must be fortunate and that Antiquity and outward splendor must be the Characteristical discoveries of Truth t is better to be Master of the treasures in the Castle of S. Angelo than to be endowed with the Holy Ghost if Peter must also say Gold and Silver have I none The Laws of the Iews were thought novell by Haman what S. Paul preached at Athens was not endeared with the most material circumstances of Antiquity and Fame Et Celsus cùm ex professo scriberet adversùs Christum ut ejus Evangelium novitatis nomine per contemptum eluderet An inquit post tot secula nunc tandem subiit Deum tam sera recordatio Eusebius etiam author est Christianam religionem ab inition contumeliae causâ dictam fuisse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hoc est peregrinam novam But I shall silence my self and pursue this controversie no longer it having a thousand times been handled succesfully in opposition to the Papists by Protestant writers of our Nation and others beyond the Seas who have treated de signis Ecclesiae It is evident that the Romanists are not ancient nor famous nor a true Church according to the doctrine of the Church of England Or if in any limited sense it may be called a Churâ—h Ancient and Famous none of these attributes can give it such a repute that any obedient and true Son of our Church can say that such respect is due thereunto as infers any Ecclesiastical exteriour Communion much lesse can I or any else assent to the subsequent Proposition 6. That such a respect or exteriour Communion may be entertain'd with Rome and yet we incur no danger of Superstition To censure this Proposition it is necessary that we consider it in a twofold sense either as it relates to that original mistake of our Historian about the Infallibility and Sovereign Dominion over our faith assumed by the Pope or as it relates unto the real condition and constitution of the Romish Church in its Offices and religious Doctrines Upon the first consideration ariseth this Question Whether a Protestant of the Church of England can entertain communion with the Church of Rome supposing no material Errours in the worship wherein the Communion is maintained the Bishop thereof assuming and the Church allowing of an infallibility in him and a sovereign dominion over our Faith and not onely over theirs and this without danger of Superstition Upon the second Consideration ariseth this Question Whether it be possible for any Protestant of the Church of England to hold Communion with the present Church of Rome in its Ecclesiastical Offices and Doctrines without danger of Superstiton The first Question is easily decided against our Virtuoso from that those Churches who have held communion with the Pope when those pretensions were on foot have been involved in superstitious and idolatrous practices which is notorious out of all Church history and the exorbitancies of the Pope in that kind when the Canonists and other abettours ascribed unto him a Sovereignty over the Christian faith have introduced all the Superstitions of the Gregorian Missal and Blasphemies and Idolatries nor doth it appear that any thing ever contributed so much to the advancement of all those superstitious and Idolatrous practices and Tenets as some unwary expressions and respects of Communion which have been indulged to the Pope by the Fathers and others of succeeding Ages which is notorious to any man
represented as such by our Historian The third Proposition therefore carries something of prevarication in it So those Advocates which would betray the causes of their Clients propose a wrong state of the Case the vanity whereof being once discovered renders the Plaintiff contemptible in the sight of all men and reduces him to a necessity of complying with the injured Defendant There is a great deal of ignorance and intricateness the Consequent thereof in the Proposition of our Author as it is by him worded for Infallibility and a sovereign Dominion over our Faith are not equipollent Termes nor termes indifferently used No Papist did ever ascribe unto the Bishop of Rome except some Parasitical Canonist whose Credit is little in that Church a sovereign dominion over our Faith He that is Sovereign knows not any Superior nor any coercive Law but his will the objects about which his power is conversant are liable to what alterations he pleaseth and he rules by the Lex Regia but what Divine did ever ascribe such a power to the Pope in matter of Faith Place the Chair where and how you will none of that Church ever assumed so much nor did that Church ever attribute so much to the Bishop of Rome There have been those that have taught that if by way of supposal it could be imagined that all the Pastors of the Church Catholick should erre in a Decree of Faith the Laiety were bound to submit thereunto but such a Sovereignty in matters of faith none except some Iesuits and Parasites ascribe unto the Pope's person his Briefs and Decretals have not that credit amongst the Romanists as to authenticate such Assertions nor is the belief thereof a necessary condition to communicate with that Church upon If we look upon the contests in Germany that introduced Protestancy at first we find the erroneous doctrine about Indulgences to be the primary occasion there In Switzerland and in France and Holland abuses and Idolatrous practises or false Doctrines are the first subjects of Disputes and occasion the Reformation there Transubstantiation Communion in one kind the propitiatory sacrifice of the Masse Image-worship praying to Saints and such like Controversies are the first and most fiercely debated In England under Henry the VIII the Pope's Supremacy in Ecclesiastical causes and appeals to Rome c. give the the first occasions of discontent and that change which was afterwards carried on to a total Reformation of the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England then came in question the power of the Bishop of Rome the nature of his Primacy the Authority and Fallibility of General Councels the power of National and provincial Churches to reforme themselves during the interval of Councels or without dependance thereon whether the Scripture were the sole rule of faith how obligatory were Traditions the interest and influence of the Civil Magistrate in ruling Ecclesiastical Affairs these came next into agitation The usurpation of Infallibility and a pretended Sovereignty in matters of faith to be lodged in the Pope was neither the occasion of the Protestant separation nor a material part of the first controversies though perhaps some Italianated persons and Canonists might assert some such thing and since the growth of the Iesuites tenets of that nature have been much advanced thereby to justifie their Vow of blind obedience to the Papal commands The memory of the Councils of Basil and Constance was fresh in the minds of men and the superiority of a Council above the Pope a common and authorized tenet in that Church The personal infallibility and the supremacy of the Bishops of Rome had of old received too great a check in the cases of Vigilius and Honorius and in the declared sentences of the Councils of Pisa Constance Basil and of the Universities of Paris Loven Colen Vienna and Cracovia not to mention particular Writers to be the occasion of that rupture The Sorbone to this day continues its former judgment and even the present King of France hath asserted the liberties of the Gallick Church in that point See Arrest de la Cour de Parliament portant que les propositions contenues en la declaration de la Faculte de Theologie de Paris c. Da. 30. May. 1663. And Declaration du Roy pour l' Enregistrement des six propositions de la Faculte de Sorbonne c. A Paris 4. d' Aoust 1663. What the Popish Church now holds and requires amounts not to any such Authority as our Author asserts if you will believe Cardinal Perron before our Virtuoso Scribis de Romano Pontifice nolle te verba facere quum vel mediocriter in Historiâ Ecclesiasticâ versatis compertum sit primorum seculorum Patres Concilia Imperatores Christianos primas illi semper detulisse praecellentis dignitatis praerogativam in omnibus negotiis ad religionem aut Ecclesiam spectantibus atque hoc solum exigere Ecclesiam vestram pro articulo fidei credendum ab iis qui communioni suae se adjungunt If this Cardinal understand any thing the Romish Church demands no more of her Members then that they own the Pope's primacy not Supremacy or Infallibility nor have the the books of such as derogate from the excessive greatnesse of the Papal power been ever called in or censured in that Church or communion denied to the Assertors of the infallibility of Oral Tradition or of General Councils in opposition to the personal Infallibility of the Bishop of Rome It was and is still a common opinion amongst the Papists that the Pope may be an Heretick I learn'd it from Franciscus Victoria in his Relections Haereticus potest esse non solum Presbiter sed Pontifex etiam summus ergo caput Ecclesiae And Bellarmine himself doth not assert the Infallibility of the Pope no not though He be assisted with a provincial Council In libr. 2. de concil c. 5. fatetur hanc propositionem scilicet Concilia particularia à summo Pontifice confirmata in fide moribus errare possunt non esse fide Catholicâ tenendam ejus tamen contradictoriam temerariam erroneam pronunciat Nay the same Writer in his solemn Lectures at Rome teacheth that it is true the Pope maybe an Heretick But it is probable and godly to be thought that he cannot be an Heretick In the conference betwixt Dr. Raynolds and Hart I find this passage Raynolds The Pope may not onely erre in doctrine but also be an Heretick which I hope you will not say that Peter might Hart. Neither by my good will that the Pope may Raynolds But you must no remedy It is a ruled case Your Schoolmen and Canonists Ockam Hostiensis Turrecremata Zabarella Cusanus Antoninus Alphonsus Canus Sanders Bellarmine and others yea the Canon Law it self yea a Council a Roman Council confirm'd by the Pope