controuerted or doubtfull But personall succession may bee found in a false Church as appeareth by the Iewish Church in the time of the Pharisees and by the Churches of the East in the dayes of the Arrians and our Aduersaries affirme the Greeke Church to be vnsound notwithstanding it is apparently descended from the Apostles by a lineall succession of Bishops Cardinall Bellarmine perceiuing the weight of the former Argument departeth from the common opinion of other Papists saying That although personall succession alone or by it selfe is not a proper note of a true Church yet the absence thereof prooueth a nullitie of the Church in them which want it But if this be so then personall and locall succession must bee expuged out of the Calendar of Churches notes for all proper notes argue and demonstrate their subiect both 〈◊〉 and negatiuely also they demonstrate the same of themselues without the assistance of other things If therefore externall succession prooueth not a true Church except right Faith bee concurring and if as Bellarmine teacheth it rather serueth to prooue there is not the true Church where it wanteth than to argue a true Church where it is then the same is not proper and conuertible and consequently it is no essentiall marke because to bee proper and conuertible are of the being of notes according to the Cardinals owne description It is likewise remarkeable that the ancient Fathers doe not onely or principally vnderstand personall succession when they mention succession in their writings because they argue affirmatiuely from succession and not negatiuely onely Therefore Romists in this disputation shall doe well to begin with the questions which concerne Doctrine and prooue that they haue succession of Doctrine in all those Articles wherein they oppose other Churches before they mention locall and personall succession but the manner of these men is to obserue a contrarie proceeding and from the latter to conclude the former which is against good reason and against the Custome and manner of the ancient Fathers IESVIT For how can the Tradition of Christian doctrine be eminently and notoriously Apostolicall if the Church deliuering the same hath not a manifest and conspicuous pedigree or deriuation from the Apostles which is a conuincing argument vsed by Saint Augustine how can we thinke that we 〈◊〉 receiued manifestly Christ if wee 〈◊〉 not also 〈◊〉 manifestly his Church It is a Principle of Phylosophie Propter quod vnumquodque tale illud magis But the name of Christ his glory his vertue and miracles are to the world famously knowne from age to age by reason of the Church and her preaching that in her first Pastours saw them with their eyes Ergo This Church must needes be more famous more illustrious as able to giue fame vnto the being and Doctrine and actions of Christ. ANSVVER I haue shewed in the former Section that the visible Church is principally called Apostolicall because it imbraceth the doctrine of the holy Apostles And euerie Church is Apostolicall so farre foorth onely as it consenteth with the Apostles in Doctrine Sacraments Inuocation and in that which is substantiall in Ecclesiasticall policie And in a precedent Section I haue declared That the visible Church may at some times bee more or lesse Apostolicall holy c. But it is not at any time simply or principally Apostolicall because it hath externall personall succession Occham a famous Schooleman and some others with him affirme That a true and Apostolicall Church may consist of a few lay people and if all the Prelates and Clerkes throughout the world should become hereticall God may raise vp Pastours either extraordinarily or else hereticall Bishops 〈◊〉 Pastours the Church may be reformed by them But to the Argument I answere as followeth First if the same were wholly granted nothing could bee concluded against the Church of England from it because the Bishops and Pastours of this Church are able to exhibite a Pedigree or deriuation both of their Ministerie and Doctrine from the Apostles 1. Of Ministerie in that they haue for substance the same descent of externall Ordination which the Romane Church hath 2. Of Doctrine because they maintaine the Primitiue Faith and accord in the same with the soundest part of the Catholicke Church in all ages And where we may seeme to discent from the Antient the same is either in things humane and adiaphorous or in matters which were not fully discussed or in points which were not deliuered by an vnanimous consent or in things which are reprooued by plaine demonstration of holy Scripture and wherein the Fathers permit libertie of dissenting and the Papists themselues take the like libertie Secondly the Iesuits Interrogation How can the Tradition of Christian Doctrine be eminently and notoriously Apostolicall if the Church deliuering the same hath not a manifest and perspicuous pedigree or deriuation from the Apostles is answered this may be performed two waies 1. By the historie and monuments of the Primatiue Church whose descent and pedigree from the Apostles was perspicuous 2. The same may be made manifest by the Scriptures of the Apostles which are diuine and authenticall Records of all Apostolicall Doctrine and contain in themselues many liuely and effectuall Arguments proouing to such as read and examine them with diligence and vnderstanding that they are the Doctrine of the holy Ghost and consequently the worke of the Apostles And the maiestie and lustre of heauenly Doctrine is such that if it be propounded by meane and obscure persons it will appeare illustrious euen as a rich Iewell if the same be deliuered by a poore Artificer doth manifest his owne worth and therefore the sequell of the Iesuits Argument is denied for it followeth not because the Doctrine of Christ must be illustrious that the Church which deliuereth the same must be alwaies so Thirdly S. Augustine in the place obiected Epist. 48. confuteth the Donatists which confined the Church vniuersall to one countrie only excluding the rest of the world from the communion thereof against this error he saith How can wee thinke that we haue receiued Christ made manifest if we haue not also receiued his Church made manifest From hence nothing can be inferred but that we receiue the true Church not only at one time or in one place but at all times and in all places where it is manifest and that Christ is reuealed and made manifest by the Doctrine of the Apostles and that this Doctrine must be preached although not at one time yet successiuely throughout the whole world But all this which S. Augustine speaketh being granted prooueth not that the true Church shall be notoriously eminent and visible at all times neither doth this Father say that Christ cannot bee manifest but by such a Church only as can lineally deriue her pedigree by Records and Tables from the Apostles And howsoeuer Papists boast of their owne pedigree yet when their
compassed about with ignorance and infirmitie and at some times better or worse qualified than at other Also the true Church in firmissimis suis in her firmest members is 〈◊〉 holy for life because the Holy of Holiest sanctifieth and purgeth the same by his Word Sacraments and Grace Eph. 5.26 Tit. 3.5 6. But it is not absolute in holinesse Iam. 3.2 1. Ioh. 1.8 nor yet in euery age so remarkeably holy that it is thereby able to conuert Infidels And the true Church hath not in all ages the gift of Miracles and the pretext of Miracles is common to deceiuers Math. 24.24 25. 2. Thessal 2.9 Apoc. 13.13 And Suares the Iesuit saith Haec adulterari possunt ita exterius fingi vt non sint necessaria signa verae Fidei Miracles may so be adulterated and externally feigned that they may not be necessarie signes of Faith And Canus speaking of Popish miracles and legends saith Nostri pleriquè de industria ita multa 〈◊〉 vt eorum me pudeat taedeat sundrie of our men do so wilfully coine many things in their report of Miracles that I am ashamed and irked of them IESVIT That the Roman is the One Holy Catholicke Apostolicall Church from and by which we are to receiue the Tradition of Christian Doctrine These grounds being laid it is apparant that the Roman Church that is the multitude of Christians spread ouer the world cleauing to the Doctrine and Tradition of the Church of Rome is the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church ANSVVER The former grounds according to your deliuerie and exposition of them are partly false and partly ambiguous and captious and therefore it cannot be made apparant from them That the moderne Roman Church is the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church from which we are absolutely to receiue the whole Tradition of Christian Doctrine IESVITS 1. Argument There mnst be alwaies in the world One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church that is a Church deliuering Doctrine vniformely therby making them credible Vniuersally thereby making them famously knowne to mankind Holily so making them certain and such as on them we may securely rely Apostolically so making them perpetually flow without change vnto the present Christianitie in the Channell of neuer interrupted succession of Bishops from the Apostles And this Church must either be the Roman or the Protestants or some other opposit to both Protestants cannot say a Church opposite to both for then they should be condemned in their owne judgement and bound to conforme themselues to that Church which can be no other but the Graecian a Church holding as many or more Doctrines which Protestants dislike than doth the Church of Rome as J can demonstrate if need be ANSVVER There must be alwaies in the world a Church One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicall that is A number of Christians beleeuing and 〈◊〉 professing Christianitie to the sounder part wherof the properties of One Holy Catholicke Apostolicall belong But there is not alwaies in the world an Hierarchiall visible Church consisting of Prelates and people vnited in one externall forme of Policie and profession of Religion vnder an vniuersall Pope to which alone these foure titles are proper or principally belonging And there may bee an Orthodoxall Apostolicall Church consisting of a small number of inferiour Pastors and right beleeuing Christians opposed and persecuted by the Hierarchiall part of the visible Church euen as in the raigne of king Manasses and other idolatrous kings of Iuda when Idolatrie preuailed among the Priests and generall multitude there was a remnant of holy people worshipping God according to his word and not defiled with the impietie of those times Now concerning the disiunctiue part of the Iesuits Argument which is This Church must either be the Roman or the Protestants or some other opposite to both It is answered The Protestant Church is that true and Orthodoxall Church which is One Holy Apostolicke and a sound part of the Catholicke For although the same may be supposed to haue had beginning in Luthers age yet this is vntrue concerning the essence and kind and is true onely touching the name and some things accidentall For in all ages and before Luther some persons held the substantiall articles of our Religion both in the Roman and Graecian Church And by name the Graecians maintained these articles in common with vs That the Roman Church hath not primacie of Iurisdiction Authoritie and Grace aboue or ouer all other Churches neither is the same infallible in her definitions of Faith They denie Purgatorie priuate Masses Sacrifice for the dead and they propugne the mariage of Priests In this Westerne part of the world the Waldenses Taborites of Bohemia the Scholers of Wiclife called in England Lollards maintained the same doctrine in substance with the moderne Protestants as appeareth by the confession of their Faith and by the testimonie of some learned Pontificians And concerning certaine differences obiected to haue beene betweene them and vs we shall afterward shew that the same are no greater than such as haue beene antiently among the Fathers and there are as great differences betweene the Elder and moderne Romists in many passages of their doctrine But now on the contrarie if it were so that we could not for certaine ages past nominate or assigne out of historie any other visible Church besides the Roman or Grecian yet because right Faith may be preserued in persons liuing in a corrupt visible Church as Wheat among Tares 1. King 19. 11. and because God hath promised there shall be alwaies in the world a true Church hauing either a larger or smaller number of professors if Protestants be able to demonstrate that they maintaine the same Faith and Religion which the holy Apostles taught this alone is sufficient to prooue they are the true Church IESVIT It is also most manifest and vndeniable that Protestants are not such a Church nor part of such a Church since their reuoult and separation from the Roman seeing confessedly they changed their Doctrines they once held forsooke the bodie whereof they were members broke off from the stocke of that tree whereof they were branches Neither did they departing from the Roman ioine themselues with any other Church professing their particular doctrines dissonant from it Ergo The Romane is the one holy Catholicke and Apostolicall Church c. ANSVVER Bold words It is most manifest and vndenyable miserable proofes they changed their Doctrine they once held c. If the Pharisees had argued in this manner against Saint Paul or the Manichees and Pelagians against Saint Augustine the one would haue told them That it was no fault to forsake the leauen of Traditions to imbrace the Doctrine of the Gospell confirmed by the Prophets and the other would haue pleaded most iustly That it is a vertue and honour to forsake errour and to imbrace veritie Gods people are commanded vpon a
will not demonstrate that it is the Church vniuersall For both the Iewes and also sundrie Christians which are no Romists are largely diffused ouer the World and exercise their Religion in places where they make their abode and there is nothing more presumptuous than to make externall Fame and Amplitude which are things common and separable proper notes of a true Church and vpon this ground to reiect and censure smaller Churches which haue lesse fame in the World but more Veritie IESVIT Most manifestly Holy in all kind of high extraordinarie Sanctitie giuing notorious signes and tokens thereof striking admiration into carnall men that are not altogether prophane and diffusing abroad among Infidels the sweete Odour of Christ and the Christian Name ANSWER Passing by your boasting of Manifestly Holy in all kind of high and extraordinarie Holinesse notorious striking admiration c. And putting you in mind of Solomons Prouerbe There is a man that boasteth himselfe to be rich and yet hath nothing Prou. 13. 7. I answere the matter first You must be aduertised that Gregory Moral l. 33. c. 26. saith Praedicatores Antichristi sanctitatis sibi speciem arrogant sed tamen opera iniquitatis exercent Antichrists Preachers arrogate vnto themselues a shew of holinesse and practise the workes of iniquitie This will be verified in such as you are if your forme of externall holinesse bee not conioyned with holy and Orthodoxall Doctrine You must therefore first of all prooue your doctrine to be Orthodoxall in the Articles in question betweene the reformed Churches and you before your miracles and specious holinesse can stand you in any stead And there is no kind of externall holinesse which heretickes haue not pretended and practised in shew before men Secondly your owne friends and followers testifie That your Church hath beene for many ages notoriously defiled with the enormitie of vices Some of them say in generall tearmes that from the crowne of the head to the sole of the foot the vlcerous matter of enormous sinne hath defiled and deformed the whole body and state of Christianitie liuing vnder your profession Others affirme that all Ecclesiasticall and Christian discipline was in a manner extinguished in euery place Others say that oppression rapine adulterie incest and all pestilent vice did confound all sacred and prophane things and that the same beat S. Peters ship so impetuously that it began to hull or wallow vpon the to-side Others that vices were so exalted and multiplied that they hardly left any space to Gods mercie Others say there is no place wherein is found so little pietie and Religion as in those people which dwell neerest to Rome Others say that you haue not onely imitated and matched but surpassed all the auarice ambition lubricitie and tyrannie that was euer heard of amongst the heathen Sundrie of your owne part haue written volumes containing Narrations of the outragious wickednesse which raigned among 〈◊〉 They haue stiled your grand fathers Monsters of mankind The dregs of vice Incarnate deuils c One saith Nothing was more luxurious couetous and proud than Priests they spent the Churches patrimonie in gluttonie ryot vpon dogs and queanes and all their preaching was to Matthew Paris saith The 〈◊〉 of Rome seeke not to make people deuout but to fill their coffers with treasure they studie not to win soules but to 〈◊〉 vpon other mens reuenues they oppresse the godly and impudently vsurpe other mens right they haue no care of honestie or right King Iohn of England from whom Pope Innocent extorted fortie thousand markes at once and twelue thousand annually to absolue his kingdome being interdicted said That he had learned by wofull experience that the Pope was ambitious beyond all men liuing an insatiable gulfe and thirster after monie and readie for hope of gaine like waxe to be 〈◊〉 to any kind or degree of 〈◊〉 Aluares hath these words The mysticall Sion the Church which in her primitiue state was adorned of her spouse with such and so many royall graces is now clouded and eclipsed with the blacke mist of ignorance iniquitie and errour and we behold her cast downe from heauen and as a desart vnhabited of vertue and if any godly people remaine they are esteemed as Arabians and Saracens And in the same place The Prelates of the Church are an armie of deuils Potius depraedandis spoliandis scandalizandis hominibus quam lucris animarum operam dantes They rather labour to rob spoile and scandalise men than to win soules Honorius Angustodonensis who liued in the yeere 1120. hath these words Turne thee to the citisens of Babylon and obserue what manner of people they be and by what streetes they walke come hither to the top of the mountaine that thou mayest behold all the habitations of the damned citie Looke vpon her Princes and Iudges Popes Cardinals Prelates the verie seate of the beast is placed in them All dayes they are intent to euill 〈◊〉 occupied without satietie in the works of iniquitie they not onely themselues act but instruct others to flagitious wickednesse they make port-sale of things sacred they purchase that which is wicked and labour with all their might that they may not descend alone to hell Turne thy selfe to the Clergie and thou shalt see in them the tent of the beast they neglect Gods seruice they are slaues to worldly lucre they defile their Priesthood through vncleannesse they seduce the people by hypocrisie they deny God by euill workes they abandon all the Scriptures appointed for mans saluation they lay snares all manner of wayes to ruine the people and are blind guides going before the blinde to perdition Contemplate also the societies of Monkes and thou shalt discerne in them the tabernacles of the Beast by faigned profession they mocke God and prouoke his wrath they betrample their rule with vile manners they deceiue the world by their habit c. Many of them are deuoted to gluttonie and sensuall appetite they putrifie in the filth of vncleannesse Behold the habitation of Nunnes and thou shalt obserue in them a Bride-chamber prepared for the Beast These from their tender yeeres learne leaudnesse they associate many to them to accumulate their damnation They make haste to bee vailed that they may more freely let loose the reines of luxurie they are prostituted worse than any Harlots like an insatiable gulfe they are neuer satisfied with the dung of vncleannesse These insnare the soules of yong men and shee among them which transcendeth her fellowes in leaudnesse beares away the bell Thirdly the Roman Church hath many passages in the verie course of Doctrine to destroy or corrupt holinesse for to omit their grosse superstitions Pharisaicall Traditions and other impieties against God First They depriue people of the reading and hearing of the holy Scripture which is a principall meanes to destroy Vice and kindle
must be Doctrines vnchanged comming from the Apostles ANSVVER This Proposition may hold in prime and essentiall Articles of Doctrine but not generally in all Doctrines and some learned Papists hold that it is possible for the visible Church of one age to erre or be deceiued by a blamelesse and inuincible ignorance in points of Doctrine the expresse knowledge whereof is not necessarie to Saluation IESVIT But it is most cleere and confessed by the Protestants whose testimonie plentifull in this behalfe if need require shall be brought First that the Doctrines of the Roman Church which Protestants refuse haue beene vniuersally receiued for many ages a thousand yeares agoe at least euer since Boniface the third ANSWER It is neither cleere in it selfe nor yet confessed by Protestants that the Doctrines of the Roman Church which Protestants refuse haue been vniuersally receiued for 1000 yeres at least c. The article of the Popes Supremacie and of Purgatorie Adoration of Images forbidding married Priests to liue with their wiues were euer opposed and reiected by the Greek Church The Doctrine of the Trident Councell concerning the Canon of the holy Scriptures and the preheminence of the vulgar Translation before the Hebrew and Greeke Text was not vniuersally 〈◊〉 for a thousand yeeres The temporal authoritie of the Pope the merit of Condignitie publicke seruice in an vnknowne language Iubilees and Popes pardons Communion in one kind Transubstantiation Blessing or baptising of Bells c. were not generally receiued in the Church vniuersall for a thousand yeeres at least And a great number of Beleeuers which in this West part of the world haue alwayes denied and resisted these Articles and among other opponents there were a people called Waldenses Leonistae pauperes de Lugduno c. many in number and largely diffused through diuers Countries who denied the foresaid Popish Articles and whose Doctrine in the most points was consonant to that which reformed Churches doe now professe Reinerius an Inquisitour of the Church of Rome liuing about the yeere one thousand two hundred fiftie foure in a Booke Printed at Ingolstade writeth in this manner of the Waldenses which hee calleth Leonists Among all Sects which are or haue formerly beene none is more pernicious to the Church than that of the Leonists First because it continued longer than any other for some say it hath lasted euer since Pope Siluester others say euer since the Apostles Secondly because no Sect is more generall than this for there is scarce any countrey in which it is not found Thirdly whereas other Sects deterre men with their horrible blasphemies this Sect of the Leonists maketh a great shew of godlinesse because they liue righteously before men and beleeue all things rightly touching God and concerning all other Articles of the Ceed onely they blaspheme the Romane Church and Clergie in which thing the Laitie is forward to giue credit vnto them IESVIT Secondly That Protestants cannot tell the time when the Church of Rome began to change and deuiate from the Apostolicall Doctrine deliuered by succession Ergo the Roman Church neuer changed her Faith ANSWER If the Antecedent were true yet it followeth not Ergo the same Roman Church neuer changed her Faith For although we cannot tell the time when the progenitors of Abraham first began to change and deuiate from the Doctrine of Noah and Sem yet it is certaine that they had changed their Religion Iosh. 24. 2. And were not the Sodomites transgressors of the Law of Nature because the first beginning of their transgression cannot be knowne How many wicked Customes haue beene common in the World whose authors and first beginners were vnknowne to Posteritie The time is not knowne when the late Iewish Church did first change and corrupt the sense of the Morall Law and brought in the Traditions condemned by our Sauiour and yet they had corrupted and changed the same Matth. 5. 6. 7. 15. 19. 23. If a Tenant haue by himselfe and his predecessors long held an House which is now in decay and readie to drop downe the Landlord by this Law of the Iesuits Ergo shall neuer compell the Tenant to make reparation vnlesse he be able to demonstrate to the Tenant in what yeere and moneth euerie Wall and Rafter began to decay A Physician shall not purge a malignant humor out of a diseased bodie vnlesse hee or his Patient be able to name the time and manner of that misdiet which bred the first seed of this distemper IESVIT So that her Doctrines are to be receiued as Apostolicall supposing the Maior of this Argument be true That Doctrines vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not knowne are to be beleeued as Apostolicall which is a Principle set downe by Saint Augustine allowed by Doctor Whitgift late Archbishop of Canturburie who in his Bookes written by publike authoritie against Puritans citing diuerse Protestants as concurring in opinion with him saith Whatsoeuer Opinions are not knowne to haue begun since the Apostles times the same are not new or secundarie but receiued their originall from the Apostles But because this Principle of Christian Diuinitie brings in as M. Cartwright speaketh all Poperie in the iudgement of all men I will further demonstrate the same though of it selfe cleare enough ANSWER If the Maior of this Argument were graunted to wit Doctrines vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not knowne are to be 〈◊〉 as Apostolicall yet the inference is false because the Romane Doctrines opposed by vs were neuer vniuersally receiued but by many eyther not heard of or reiected and contradicted Neyther is the former Principle sufficiently prooued out of S. Augustine First because hee speaketh in all the places obiected of Customes and matters of Fact and Practise the right and Doctrine whereof is found in holy Scripture Secondly the Iesuit conueyeth into his Proposition certaine words to wit Doctrines vniuersally receiued c. which are not found in S. Augustine And this Father did neuer allow that the vniuersall Church should beleeue any thing as Doctrine of Faith which was not contained expressely or deriuatiuely in holy Scripture And in the same bookes out of which these Obiections are collected he confuteth rebaptising by Scripture and confirmeth the lawfulnesse of Infants Baptisme by Scripture So that his meaning is when matters being in common vse and practise are questioned the right and lawfulnesse hath warrant from the Scripture although no especiall example be found in the written Bookes of the Apostles of such practise yet the generall custome and vse of the vniuersall Church in all Ages argueth that such practise receiued it beginning from the Apostles For example That the Apostles baptised Infants is not particularly reported in their Writings but sufficient grounds are found in them to prooue the necessitie and to warrant the practise thereof In this and in all other the like cases Quod vniuersa tenet Ecclesia nec
rewarder of them that seeke him F. I asked How then it happened as Mr Rogers saith that the English Church is not yet resolued what is the right sense of the Article of Christ's descending into Hell B. The English Church neuer made doubt that I know what was the sense of that Article The words are so plaine they beare their meaning before them Shee was content to put that Article among those to which she requires subscription not as doubting of the sense but to preuent the Cauills of some who had beene too busie in crucifying that Article and in making it all one with the Article of the Crosse or but an Exposition of it And sure the B. thinkes and so doe I That the Church of England is better resolued of the right sense of this Article than the Church of Rome especially if she must be tryed by her Writers as you trie the Church of England by Mr Rogers For you cannot agree whether this Article be a meere Tradition or whether it hath any place of Scripture to warrant it Scotus and Stapleton allow it no footing in Scripture but Bellarmine is resolute that this Article is euerie where in Scripture and Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed The Church of England neuer doubted it and S. Augustine prooues it And yet againe you are different for the sense For you agree not whether the Soule of Christ in triduo mortis in the time of his death did goe downe into Hell really and was present there or virtually and by effects onely For Thomas holds the first and Durand holds the latter Then you agree not whether the Soule of Christ did descend really and in essence into the lowest Pit of Hell and place of the Damned as Bellarmine once held probable and prooued it or really only into that place or Region of Hell which you call Limbum Patrum and then but virtually from thence into the Lower Hell to which Bellarmine reduces himselfe and giues his reason because it is the common opinion of the Schoole Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in the Creed and beleeues them without further dispute and in that sense which the antient Primitiue Fathers of the Church agreed in And yet if any in the Church of England should not be throughly resolued in the sense of this Article Is it not as lawfull for them to say I conceiue thus or thus of it yet if any other way of his Descent be found truer than this I denie it not but as yet I know no other as it was for Durand to say it and yet not impeach the Foundation of the Faith F. The B. said That Mr Rogers was but a priuate man But said I if Mr Rogers writing as he did by publike Authoritie be accounted onely a priuate man c. B. The B. said truth when he said Mr Rogers was a priuate man And I take it you will not allow euerie speech of euerie man though allowed by Authoritie to be printed to be the Doctrine of the Church of Rome This hath beene oft complained of on both sides The imposing particular mens Assertions vpon the Church yet I see you meane not to leaue it And surely as Controuersies are now handled by some of your partie at this day I may not say it is the sense of the Article in hand but I haue long thought it a kind of descent into Hell to be conuersant in them I would the Authors would take heed in time and not seeke to blind the people or cast a mist before euident Truth least it cause a finall descent to that place of Torment But since you hold this course Stapleton was of greater note with you than Rogers is with vs and as he so his Relection And is it the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which he affirmes The Scripture is silent that Christ descended into Hell and that there is a Catholike and an Apostolike Church If it be then what will become of the Pope's Supremacie ouer the whole Church Shall hee haue his power ouer the Catholike Church giuen him expressely in Scripture in the Keyes to enter and in Pasce to feed when he is in and when he hath fed to confirme and in all these not to erre and faile in his ministration And is the Catholike Church in and ouer which he is to doe all these great things quite left out Belike the Holy Ghost was carefull to giue him his power Yes in any case but left the assigning of his great Cure the Catholike Church to Tradition And it were well for him if hee could so prescribe for what he now claymes But what if after all this Mr Rogers there sayes no such thing as in truth he doth not His words are All Christians acknowledge he descended but in the interpretation of the Article there is not that consent that were to be wished What is this to the Church of England more than others And againe Till wee know the natiue and vndoubted sense of this Article is Mr Rogers Wee the Church of England or rather his and some others Iudgement of the Church of England F. But if Mr Rogers be onely a priuate man In what Booke may wee find the Protestants publike Doctrine The B. answered That to the Booke of Articles they were all sworne B. What was the B. so ignorant to say The Articles of the Church of England were the publike Doctrine of all the Protestants or That all Protestants were sworne to the Articles of England as this speech seemes to implie Sure he was not Was not the immediate speech before of the Church of England And how comes the subiect of the speech to be varyed in the next Lines Nor yet speake I this as if other Protestants did not agree with the Church of England in the chiefest Doctrines against which they ioyntly take exceptions against the Romane Church as appeares by their seuerall Confessions Nor did the B. say That the Booke of Articles onely was the Continent of the Church of Englands publike Doctrine Shee is not so narrow nor hath shee purpose to exclude any thing which shee acknowledges hers nor doth shee wittingly permit any crossing of her publike declarations Yet shee is not such a Shrew to her Children as to denie her Blessing or denounce an Anathema against them if some peaceably dissent in some particulars remoter from the Foundation as your owne Schoolemen differ And if the Church of Rome since shee grew to her greatnesse had not beene so fierce in this course Christendome I persuade my selfe had beene in happier peace at this day F. And that the Scriptures onely not any vnwritten Tradition was the Foundation of their Faith B. The Church of England grounded her Positiue Articles vpon Scripture and her Negatiue Refute where the thing affirmed by you is not affirmed in Scripture nor directly
Doctrine by Principles of Diuine Reuelation because Humane Testimonie is not sufficient to myse Articles of Faith And I rest assured that each intelligent person will obserue by reading this Worke that the Aduerfarie notwithstanding he is well verst in Controuersie and hath in substance said as much as his Cause will permit yet he is deficient of Diuine proofe in euery Article and farre more specious in eluding our Arguments than happie in confirming his owne But if it be certaine that Popish Faith wanteth the Suffrage of Diuine Testimonie then we haue sufficient cause to reiect their Doctrine And if wee could not demonstrate that the Articles which they maintaine against vs were contra verbum Dei contradictorie to the Word of God yet if by deficiencie of proofe on their side it appeare they be extra praeter without or besides the Word of God they cannot be the obiect of Diuine Faith Lastly I entreat all of our part to prayse God for the benefit of true Religion maintayned in our Church to auoid Contention among themselues for in all Ages the same hath proued pernicious and scandalous Also to be as deuout in the way of Pietie as Aduersaries seeme to be in the way of Superstition And because it hath euer beene an Honor to our Profession to be loyall and obedient to higher Powers let this be still an indelible Caracter of euery true Brittish Protestant to reioyce in the peaceable and happy Gouernment of his most sacred Maiestie let vs all so far as it is possible by our feruent votes and prayers striue to adde encrease to his dayes and happines Far be it from any of our part in their secret thoughts to misconster his actions or to entertaine the least iealousie of any abatement of his wonted loue to true Religion planted among vs for assuredly he vnderstands the Mysterie of Poperie too well to thinke any otherwise of it than formerly he hath done and no subiect can lay the Cause of Religion more neere their heart than his most Religious Maiestie doth And we haue all great cause to glorifie God who hath blessed our Church with such a wise and constant Defender of the Faith Now my Conscience vrgeth me to deliuer thus much concerning his Maiestie because the Aduersarie in some passages of his ensuing Treatise as by reading you shall obserue rhetoriseth suspitiously intending no doubt to raise some iealousie in credulous minds contrarie to this which I haue spoken My selfe therefore through the gracious Clemencie of his Maiestie being admitted to approach so neere as to be an eare-witnesse of his admirable Iudgement and constant Resolution in point of Religion and hereby certainely knowing that the Jesuit departing from the King added no improuement to his Popish Cause but vanished with foile and disgrace J trust J shall incurre no Censure from men iudicious and louers of Truth for certifying that which J obserued by mine owne experience And thus commending my Labors to the blessing of the Almightie to the examination of my Superiors in the Church and to the perusall of those which desire to read them I addresse my selfe to the ensuing Disputation April 10. 1624. THE CATALOGVE OF QVESTIONS DISPVTED in this Worke. 1. WHether of all other it be the most important Controuersie to vnderstand the Qualitie of the Romane Church Fol. 1. 2. Whether Diuine Faith be resolued finally into vnwritten Tradition or into Scripture 12 3. Touching the Visibilitie and Notes of the Church in generall 49 4. Whether the Romane Church is the Onely Holy Catholike and Apostolike Church 103 5. Whether Protestants erre fundamentally in the Faith 146 6. Whether Protestants erre fundamentally about Tradition 149 7. Whether they doe the like in their Doctrine about Generall Councels 152 8. Whether they erre by denying Papall Supremacie 157 9. Whether they erre in point of Iustification 161 10. Whether they erre in point of Merit of Good Works 169 11. Whether they doe the like concerning the Sacrament of Baptisme 175 12. Whether they erre in the Doctrine of Reall presence 178 13. Whether they doe the like about Penance and Absolution 185 14. Whether they erre about the Article of the Catholique Church 193 15. Touching Worship of Images 209 16. Concerning Inuocation of Saints departed 287 17. Touching prayer of the ignorant in an vnknowne Tongue 365 18. Concerning repetitions of Pater-Nosters Aues and Creeds with reference to Merit 384 19. Concerning Transubstantiation 390 20. Of Communion in one kind 459 21. Of workes of Supererogation and Popes Pardons 510 22. Of deposing Kings and giuing away of their Kingdomes by Papall power directly or indirectly 569 IESVIT TO THE KINGS MOST EXCELLENT MAIESTIE Most Gratious and dread Soueraigne A Conference about Religion betweene Doctour White and me was occasion that your Maiestie called mee to your Gratious presence not disdaining to dispute with one so meane and vnworthie as my selfe imitating his benignitie whose Vicegerent you are and according to the phrase of holy Scripture his Angell And as it is the propertie of the good Angell first to strike feare and terrour into them to whom hee appeares but in the end to leaue them full of comfort In like sort your Maiestie For though the first salutation carried a shew of seueritie yet your dismissing me was benigne and gratious not onely pardoning my earnestnesse in defending the part of the Catholike Church but also saying You liked me the better ANSVVER MIrum est si in facie hominis tantum interuallum inter frontem linguam vt frons non comprimat linguam It is strange saith St. Augustine that there should be such a great distance betweene the front of a man and his mouth that the shame of his forehead should not represse the impudencie of his tongue It is vntrue that his Royall Maiestie at the Cloase of the Conference whereof you speake gaue you any applause or the least occasion to coniecture That hee was taken with any passage of your Disputation For you propounded nothing to demonstrate your owne Tenet or to confute ours worthie of the great Presence to which you were admitted But you kept your selfe within your Trenches and sometimes you were driuen to dissemble your owne Tenet other-while according to the Romish manner by wyre-drawne distinctions and euasions to elude the waight of his Maiesties Arguments making good the saying of Maxentius Mens contentioni Indulgens non sanari sed vincere cupiens auersa ab eis quae rectè dicuntur tantum intenta est in hoc vt inueniat quod pro partibus suis loquatur A contentious mind desirous of victorie and not willing to be reformed but auerse from right sayings only deuiseth how to elude Truth and to speake for his owne part And as for those words of his royal Maiestie I like you the better they were vttered vpon this occasion When the Iesuit being pressed about the point of Temporall authoritie c. did at the first
we should doe them ô but if the Iesuits were admitted into our bosome wee should haue as that King had presents sent of some Singularities c. Rare trinckets no doubt for which wee could not pay too deare though wee sold our Religion and Libertie for them But in the Example cited that which surpasseth is The Armie of learned Pennes which by thousands will march vpon the Plaine of Paper Monuments for extolling those which nurse vp that brood But would to God these men did not write sometimes with blood How they requited that Kings loue and what securitie hee enioyed by them the dolefull Catastrophe shewed Male ominatis Parcite verbis IESVIT No labours would wee spare nor any indeauours omit nor sticke to venter the losse of any thing deare vnto vs except the grace of God and our eternall saluation to purchase a small portion of that fauour your Maiesties meanest Subiects enioy that wee might in some sort cooperate to the felicitie of the Christian world which as wee are persuaded doth on your Maiesties person singularly depend For God rich in Mercie and Goodnesse as hee hath made your Maiestie partaker of his Power and Authoritis in gouerning this inferiour world so likewise hee hath adorned you with many excellent gifts as Wisedome Learning Authoritie with forraigne Princes and Common-wealths made you beloued of your Subiects that on you are cast the eyes of all Christian Countreys as on the Person whom the Prince of Peace hath beyond the rest inabled to ioyne together againe the parts of Christendome distracted one from another through Contiouersies of Religion ANSWER It is sufficient that you haue libertie to deprecate his Gratious Maiestie to forget things past against himselfe and the State and to thanke his Princely clemencie for the benefit of his mercifull Gouernment whereof you and others haue tasted beyond expectation But in stead heereof you discouer in your selues a restlesse minde neuer to be satisfied vntill that like the Serpent hauing once got in your head you winde in all your bodie Surely some euill Genius guideth you otherwise you could not be so impudent as to sollicite a most iuditious and resolute Prince to be an Apostata from his Faith and to expose his naturall and loyall Subiects to the grosse errours and sharking rapine of Romish Harpies And wherefore must his Maiestie condescend to these heauie conditions forsooth to ioyne together againe the parts of Christendome distracted that is in plaine English vnder pretext of Religion to establish lewd Superstition and Roman Tyrannie Libanius the Sophister in antient time vpon the like ground sollicited Iulian the Emperour to Apostasie but wee say with Saint Hilarie Speciosum nomen est pacis pulchra est opinio vnitatis c. The name of Peace is specious and the opinion of Vnitie carries a faire shew but there is no Euangelicall Peace without Christ that is without true Faith and Charitie in Christ. Saint Augustine saith Habet superbia appetitum quendam vnitatis c. Euen pride it selfe hath a certaine desire of vnitie that it might bee Omnipotent If Peace bee iust and honest saith Polybius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 It is a worthie possession and most profitable but if it bee dishonourable and base 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is of all things most shamefull and pernitious IESVIT If the requests of the pretended Reformers were such as the Roman Church might yeeld vnto them without ouerthrowing the very foundations of the vnitie of Faith If in stead of Catholicke Principles mis-liked by them they did propose such other of their owne as she might see some probabilitie or almost possibilitie of assured continued peace likely to follow vpon her yeelding in some Points feeling compassion in regard of the wound of discord bleeding in the heart of Christendome would mooue her to the vttermost approach towards Protestants that the Law of God can permit though with some disparagement to her honour ANSWER You should rather say If the request of Protestants among whom the King of Great Britaine is most emment were such as that the Romane Prelates might yeeld vnto without hazard of their vsurped Monarchie If Protestants would consent to sond the holy Scriptures packing and not reckon the same among Diuine Principles if they would purchase remission of sinnes by paying tribute into his Holinesse his Checker and not seeke to obtaine the same by the merits of the Lambe of God in a word if they would permit the Romane Nahash to plucke out their right eye that their deuotion might be framed according to the rule of implicite Faith and blinde Obedience sensible feeling of her owne reuiuing greatnesse and lucre would mooue the Romane Mother being tender-hearted to them which present her with Red and White to approach towards Protestants and to hugge them in her armes as Apes doe their Whelpes vntill with ouer-much kindnesse shee crush out their breath IESVIT But so it is that those that defre her Reformation bee so many for number and for Opinions so diuided amongst themselues that it is impossible shee should satis fie all Their Conditions of peace are That she reforme her selfe by forsaking definitions of generall Councells Customes Doctrines vniuersally receiued for many ages time out of minde confessedly without any knowne beginning since the Apostles In stead of these means so potent to stay staggering consciences and to keepe the Christian world in peace they present her with the Scriptures vnderstood by priuate illumination the source of discord from which an Ocean of strife must needes flow These things considered your most Iuditious Maiestie cannot but see that her yeelding would not compose debates alreadie begun but rather open a wide gap to innumerable new brawles and bring them into Kingdomes bitherto with such dissention vntoucht ANSWER Whosoeuer abideth in errour ought to reforme The Roman Church abideth in errour Ergo The Roman Church ought to reforme The Assumption is manifest by the repugnancie of Roman Doctrine against the Faith of the holy Scriptures and against the Doctrine of the Primatiue Church which shall hereafter be prooued in euery point of Difference betweene Romists and vs. But as the Synagogue of the Iewes hated reformation and persisteth in hardnesse of heart to this day so likewise Babylon will not be healed Ierem. 51.9 The Iesuit deliuereth three reasons why the Romane Church cannot yeeld to reformation The first is taken from the manifold diuisions of Protestants among themselues c. But this Argument to say nothing of the leading part thereof is inconsequent for if Romists erre then they ought to reforme whosoeuer they are that admonish them and conuince them of errour And when the antient Church abounded with Schismes and ruptures a meanes was vsed to restore vnitie to wit a common submission to free and lawfull Councells congregated not by Romane Popes but by Christian and religious Emperours and these
1. Tim. 2 4. But without vnderstanding the qualitie of the Romane Church people may be baptised beleeue and repent and haue all the ordinarie meanes of saluation as appeareth by the Iewes Asts 2 41. and the Eunuch Acts 8 37. and Lydia Acts 16 14. and many Gentiles Acts 13 48. and the elect Ladie and her children 2. Iohn v. 1 2 4. and the Corinthians Galatians Ephesians and the seuen Churches of Asia Apoc. 2 3. c. Occham saieth that after Christs ascension many people were saued before the Roman Church had anie being and AEneas Siluius affirmeth That the first 300 yeares before the Nicene Counsell small regard was had of the Roman Church Iohannes Maior saieth It were ouer hard to affirme that the Indians and other Christans which liue in remote countries should be in the state of damnation because they were ignorant That the Bishop of Rome is head of the Church if they beleeue other necessarie Articles of Saluation And Alchasar saieth Before such time as the publique nuptials betweene the Roman and other Churches were celebrated by a common receiued custome a lesse frequent communion with that Church was sufficient Seconly It is no Article of the Apostles Creed or of any other ancient Creed neither is it delinered in any plaine text or sentence of holy Scripture That all Christian people must receiue their beleefe from the Roman Church or that the same intirely shall in all ages continue in the doctrine and faith receiued from the Apostles yea the contrarie is taught in holie Scripture Rom. 11 22. But if the doctrine aforesaid were fundamentall and of greatest importance the same must haue beene plainely deliuered either in holy Scripture or in all or some of the auncient Creedes IESVIT The Church is the pillar and foundation of Truth 2. Tim. 3 15. The eminent Rocke and Mountaine filling the whole world on the top whereof standeth the Tradition of sauing Doctrine conspicuous and immooueable Ergo Jt is the most important Controuersie of all other to know whether the Roman Church be the true Church ANSVVER Foure texts of Scripture are produced to proue that it is the most important controuersie of all other to know whether the Roman Church be the true Church but neither are the places of Scripture expounded rightly neither is the Iesuits islation from them consequent or firme 1 Although it were granted that the totall certaintie of Christiantie dependeth vpon the Church yet because the Roman Church is not the whole Church but onely a part and member thereof Rom. 1 6. and such a member as may erre and proue vnsound Rom. 11 22. The knowledge of the state and qualitie of that Church cannot be simply necessarie and consequently not a matter of greatest importance to be vnderstood 2 The places of Scripture 1. Tim. 3 15. Math. 16 18. Esay 2 1. Dan. 2 35. proue not the question The first place to wit Math. 16 18. is expounded by manie interpreters of Christ himselfe and by the most of the faith which S. Peter confessed touching Christ. And our Sauiour affirmeth not in this Text that the Roman Church of euerie age is a Rocke but that the Church of right beleeuers is builded vpon a Rocke and so the Church is one thing and the Rocke another because nothing is builded vpon it selfe The second place 1. Tim. 3 15. 〈◊〉 that the Church which is the house of the liuing God is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the pillar and ground of Truth 1. If by the Church we vnderstand the Catholicke Church as it containeth the holie Apostles then this commendation agreeth fully and perfectly to it in respect of the Apostles who were led into all Truth Iohn 16 13. and which taught whilest they 〈◊〉 all Truth and they do at this present day in the Scripture teach the fulnesse of Truth 2. If by the Church we vnderstand the Church of Christ liuing after the Apostles the same is by office and calling the pillar and ground of Truth in all ages And some part or other thereof Truth of God 〈◊〉 to saluation But the present Church is not 〈◊〉 and simply in all things the pillar and ground of Truth but so farre onely as it teacheth the doctrine reuealed by the holie Ghost and groundeth her faith vpon the word of God and this is proued because the Church Apostolicall was free from all errour but succeeding Pastors and Doctors may erre in Ecclesiasticall censures in degrees legislatiue in sermons disputations and other tractats as our Aduersaries themselues confesse and they which propugne the infallible authoritie of the present Church restraine the same to the Pope and Councell of which S. Paul is silent 1. Tim. 3 15. And from hence I inferre That the Church wherein the Apostles taught and gouerned was the ground and pillar of Truth fully intirely and in all things But the present Church is so with limitation conditionally and so farre forth onely as it deliuereth the Apostles doctrine Lastly the Roman Church can challenge no greater priuiledge of Infallibilitie from this Scripture than the church of Ephesus of which the Apostle speaketh litterally in the said Text. But although the Church of Ephesus was by office the pillar and ground of Truth yet the same did afterwards degenerate and depart from the right Faith which argueth that particular Churches such as were the Roman Ephesine Corinthian c. are not in such sort the pillar and ground of Truth as that they are in no danger of errour The other two places Esay 2 1. Dan. 2 35. are principally vnderstood of Christ and his Apostles and they proue not the Iesuits position which is It is the most important controuersie of all other to know whether the Roman Church is the true Church for the present Church of Rome is a Molehill and not the Mountaine prophesied of Esay 2. the same filleth not the whole world but onely a small part of the world neither did the same antiently for 500 yeares at the least fill the whole world for many people both in the East and West were Christians without depending vpon it neither is the same alwaies illustrious for Vertue and Truth but sometimes notorious for Superstition and Vice If our Adnersaries will contend That there is in all ages avisible Church like vnto a great Mountaine filling the whole world vpon the top whereof standeth the Tradition of all true doctrine conspicuous and illustrious 1. The places of Esay and Daniell affirme not this concerning all times and ages of the Church 2. The Scriptures foretell a large reuolt and apostasie from heauenly trueth 3. Our Aduersaries themselues acknowledge that the outward face of the visible Church at some times hath beene and againe may be miserably polluted with foule and enormious scandals and abominations IESVIT If this Church bee ouerthrowne the totall
certainetie of Christianitie cannot but with it fall to the ground ANSVVER The totall certainetie of Christianitie dependeth not vpon a Church illustrious and conspicuous to the eie of the whole world and hauing such externall pompe and Visibilitie as Papals imagine Therefore if such a Church be ouerthrowne that is be proued in sundrie Articles to be corrupt and vnfound which is our Tenet concerning the present Roman Church the certaintie of Christianitie may still subsist The Tenet which wee maintaine touching the qualitie of the present Roman Church 〈◊〉 to the reformation of errours and abuses in the same and not to the ouerthrowing of the lawfull authoritie of the Visible Church The certainetie of Religion in the time of the Iewes did depend as much vpon the authoritie of the Visible Church of Iuda as it can in our daies depend vpon the authoritie of the Roman Church or of any other for that Church was by office the keeper of the Canonicall Scripture Rom. 3 2. the teacher of heauenly trueth Ezek. 44 23 Mal. 2 7. a ministeriall Iudge of controuersies Deut. 17 9. Ezek. 44 24. and yet notwithstanding the said Church was reprooued by the holie Prophets Mal. 2 8. 2. Chron. 29.6 7. Esay 56 10. Ezek. 34. and the religious kings of Iuda reformed the same 2. Chron. 14.3 4. and cap. 17.7 8 9. and cap. 29.3 c. and cap. 34.3 4. and cap. 33.15 Now like as when a Physition discouereth the diseases of the bodie and prescribeth remedies and medecines he doth thereby heale and not destroy the state of the bodie so likewise they which out of the Oracles of God haue reuealed the errours and corruptions of the Roman Church and sought reformation thereof doe not ouerthrow the certainetie of Christianitie nor impaire the lawfull authoritie of the Church but repaire and establish the same IESVIT If it be hidden and made inuisible men must needs wander in the search of the first deliuered Christian Doctrine without end or hope of euer ariuing at any certaine Issue And if this Controuersie be not examined and determined in the first place disputation by Scripture will proue fruitlesse by the sole euidence whereof no victorie can be gotten against proteruious error or at least not victorie that is verie apparant neither will answers about particular Doctrines satisfie a mind preoccupated with a long continued dislike of them ANSVVER In this Section two things are deliuered First If the Church be hidden c. Secondly Controuersies cannot be decided by sole Scripture c. To the first I answer The Church that is the societie of Christian people professing sauing Faith is at no time totally bidden and inuisible but in Persecution the same may be hidden and vnknowne to them which 〈◊〉 no will to know it 2. Cor. 4 3. or which defire to know it that they may persecute and oppresse it Reuelat. 12 14. And the same may sometimes cease to be largely and in a 〈◊〉 and pompous manner visible Math. 10 23. and 23 34. Heb. 11 38. And in the state of Persecution when the same is hidden and vnknowne to enemies the friends of this Church to whom it is knowne may by the Ministerie thereof exercised in priuate receiue the certaintie of beleefe and if it be vnknowne or hidden to any of them these may by priuat reading or meditation of that which they haue formerly learned supplie the defect of publique Ministerie euen as some Christians at this day being slaues in Turkie or Barbarie may be saued without externall Ministerie And it is also possible for such to be Instruments of conuerting and sauing others Ruffin Hist. Eccles. li. 1. c. 9 10. Besides we do also acknowledge that the Popish Church although it were corrupt and vnsound in many things yet it preserued the Bookes of holie Scripture and taught the Apostles Creed and sundrie parts of Diuine veritie collected from the same and by these Principles of Christianitie preserued in that Church iuditious and pious men might with studie and diligence find out what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine in such things as are necessarie to Saluation as in the Iewish Church when the same was corrupt in manners and doctrine Mal. 2 8. Esay 56 10. 2. Kings 16 11 16. Marc. 6 34. the Bookes of holie Scripture and many remnants of Diuine truth which were able to saue Gods elect remained and were sufficient Principles from whence all sauing truth might be deriued and pernitious errours and abuses discouered and reformed And thus although the true Church be granted at sometimes to be hidden and inuisible in manner before expressed well affected people shall not want all meanes to vnderstand what was the first deliuered Christian faith The Iesuit in the next passage laboureth to make it appeare impossible to end and determine Controuersies of Religion without the authoritie of a perpetuall visible Church whose iudgement is alwaies infallible and free from all error But if his speech be resolued from a Rhethoricall flourish into forme of Argument the loosenesse of it will appeare For he proceedeth in this or the like manner IESVIT By all such meanes as is of it selfe sufficient to declare what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine apparant victorie may be gotten against proteruious errour and minds preoccupated with long dislike of particular Doctrines may be satisfied By sole Scripture no apparant victorie can be gotten against proteruious errour neither can long dislike of particular Doctrines be satisfied Ergo sole Scripture is not a sufficient meanes to declare what was the first deliuered Christian Doctrine ANSVVER First If by apparant Victorie be meant such Victorie as proteruious errants will confesse or persuade themselues to bee a Victorie against them then the Maior Proposition is false For when our Sauiour himselfe confuted the Pharisees by such demonstration as none could be greater yet they resisted the Truth and in like sort they resisted St. Stephen Acts 7 53. and S. Paul Acts 28 23. and in the best Councels of Nice Ephesus c. no such apparant Victorie was gotten of proteruious Heretiques Secondly If by apparant Victorie be meant a true and sufficient confutation and conuiction of Errants then the Minor is false for that is a sufficient means to obtaine Victorie by which our Sauiour himselfe subdued Sathan Math. 4.4 7. and the Heretiques of his time Math. 12 3. 22 29 43. and by which St. Paul confuted the Pharisees and other Aduersaries Acts 17 2. and 28 23. And whereby the Fathers of the Nicene Councell conuicted the Arrians Socrat. Hist. l. 1. c. 6. and which are giuen by inspiration to be an effectuall meanes to reprooue and confute error 2. Tim. 3 16. Chrys. d. fid leg nat But the Iesuit may cauil saying that euen as a sword in the hand of a Giant is sufficient to 〈◊〉 an enemie but not in the hand of a child who
cannot vse it so the Scriptures are a meanes to conuict proteruious 〈◊〉 as they were vsed by Christ and his Apostles and by the 〈◊〉 Councels or Papall Councels and the Bishops and Doctors of the Roman Church c. Answ. First Our Sauiour and his Apostles did both vse the Scriptures themselues and commanded others euen simple men to vse them Iohn 5 39. Ephes. 6 17. and they are commended who examined Doctrine by them Acts 17 11. Secondly they which vnderstand and applie the Scriptures truely vse them as Christ and his Apostles did and so the Scripture in their vse is a word of power and not as a sword in a childs hand Thirdly Scriptures were meanes to conuict Hereticks as they were vsed by the Fathers of the Church and other holie Persons before any generall Councells were gathered to wit the first three hundred yeares and before the Papall Supremacie was aduanced in the Church Fourthly it is ridiculous to imagine that the present Roman Church and the sole Adheres thereof according to the Trident Creed are the only true expositors of holy Scriptures or that 〈◊〉 exposition of Scripture repugnant and diuers from the present Roman Creed is false or Haereticall for neither hath the holie Ghost by expresse testimonie or euident demonstration appropriated the key of knowledge to this Church and few Heretickes haue more fouly corrupted and abused the Scriptures And the pillars of this Church 〈◊〉 sundrie times been vnskilfull Ideots vnlettered Gulls Monsters of mankind with whom the holie Spirit vseth not to haue commerce Wisdom 1. 2. Cor. 6. 15. Fiftly the place of Tertul. d. Praescript c. 19. doth not 〈◊〉 the imperfection of holie Scripture to conuict proteruious error according to the latter part of my former distinction for then he could not haue said Scripturae plenitudinem adoramus We adore the plenitude of the 〈◊〉 and Let Hermogenes teach that it is written and if it be not written let him feare the Wo denounced against them which add or detract any thing from the word of God but be 〈◊〉 of the Scriptures according to the first part of my distinction to wit That Heretickes blinded with malice and either denying or corrupting the text of the Scriptures cannot be so conuicted by them but they will still vse cauils and by Sophisticall slights borrowed from Philosophers elude the euidence of the plaine Texts of Scriptures But if this argue the Scriptures of imperfection it will also prooue the Authoritie of the Church and of Tradition to be insufficient as appeares in the Arrians and Donatists And Heretickes may with no lesse pretext take exception against Tradition and Ecclesiasticall Authoritie than against the Scripture Ireneus li. 3. ca. 2. When they are confuted by Scriptures they accuse them as being not well written and destitute of Authoritie or else so ambiguous that one cannot find the Truth by them c. And in like manner when we prouoke them to stand to triall by Tradition which came from the Apostles c. they oppose the same c. And thus they will consent neither to Scripture nor Tradition And Gregorie Valence himselfe saith The infallible teaching and proposition of the Church is no lesse obscure vnto vs than any other Article which we are to beleeue Sixtly we acknowledge the lawfull Power and Authoritie of the Church about expounding holy Scriptures and for maintaining Vnitie in right Faith and appeasing contention repressing proteruious Errants Heb. 13.17 Math. 18.17.1 Timoth. 3.15 2. Thessal 5.12 And in particular first wee beleeue the authority of Councels General and Nationall lawfully assembled and accordingly proceeding to be sacred And all Councels of this nature we reuerence with the same honour the ancient Church did affirming that priuate Christians and particular Churches are to submit their iudgement to the authority of the same except it bee manifest that they depart from Truth Secondly wee highly and reuerently esteeme exposition of Scripture deliuered by the vnanimous consent of the Primatiue Fathers and although wee yeeld eminent and supreme Authoritie to the holy Scriptures because the same is absolutely diuine yet when any question ariseth concerning Expositions we allow not priuate persons vpon vncertaine or probable reasons to reiect the sence which hath bin antiently and commonly receiued and against which no strong or solid exception can be produced Now this being obserued and other helps of expounding Scripture vsed there followeth nothing from our Tenet whereby Christianitie should be made vncertaine and Disputation from sole Scripture prooue fruitles or which may hinder apparent Victorie by the same against proteruious Error IESVIT The Preface ended our Aduersarie descendeth to his disputation and herein first he setteth downe a maine proposition which hee intendeth to prooue to wit The Roman Church is the onely true Church Secondly He deliuereth fiue Principles manifest in themselues and presupposed and confessed by Papists and Protestants Principle 1. No man can be saued without firme and sure apprehension of supernaturall Truth concerning his last end and the meanes to attaine thereunto Secondly Assurance of this kind is not had by cleere sight Demonstration humane Discourse or humane Authoritie but by Faith grounded vpon Gods Word reuealing things vnknowne by other meanes Thirdly God reuealed all Supernaturall Truth to Christ and Christ reuealed the same to the holy Apostles partly by vocall Preaching but principally by the immediate teaching of his holy Spirit to this end that they should deliuer them to mankind to bee receiued and beleeued euerie where ouer the World euen to the consummation thereof Fourthly the Apostles fulfilled this preaching to all Nations and deliuering partly by writing and partly by word of mouth the whole entire Doctrine of Saluation planted an vniuersall Christian companie and to deliuer vnto 〈◊〉 all they had 〈◊〉 from them Fiftly though the Apostles and their Primatiue Hearers be deceased yet there still remaines in the World a meanes by which men may assuredly know what the Apostles preached andthe Primatiue Church receiued of them because the Church euen to the endof the World must be founded on the Apostles and beleeue nothing as matter of Faith but that which was deliuered by them The former grounds being confessed a question remaineth to be examined What is the principall infallible meanes whereby a Christian may know what was and is the Doctrine of Faith originally preached by the Apostles Whether holy Scripture of the Apostles and Euangelists bee that meanes or perpetuall Tradition vnwritten deriued by Succession from the Apostles ANSVVER The Iesuit affirmeth the latter and produceth foure Arguments to prooue his Tenet and then supposing that he hath prooued the Question inferreth that the Roman Church is the only true Church because it is the only faithfull keeper and teacher of this Tradition IESVITS 1. Argument If the maine and substantiall points of our Faith are
meanes to know their Authours the one Ecclesiasticall to wit the perpetuall History of the Church since the Apostles departure whereby is produced a morall persuasion and credibilitie than which none can bee greater in that kinde by reason of the antiquity number consent and sanctitie of the witnesses which testifie this the other totally diuine to wit the matter and forme of Doctrine contained in the the said bookes to be 〈◊〉 and if they be can speake in them And that within those bookes is affirmed by the 〈◊〉 Among which 〈◊〉 are taken from the internall matter and maiesty of the bookes and Gregory Valence contained in the same Scripture c. And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that the 〈◊〉 of God is seene by faith in the holy faith The Scripture is a faire 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 You haue before 2. Pet. 1. 19. And 〈◊〉 August And therefore as a 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 others by the same light or 〈◊〉 manifests it selfe so the holy Scripture inlightning the Church demonstrates his owne 〈◊〉 and vertue And thus 〈◊〉 we be first directed and holpen by vnwritten Tradition to know the Scriptures yet the Tradition of the present Church is 〈◊〉 the onely last and principall ground whereunto we resolue 〈◊〉 If the Iesuits Argument be retorted vpon himselfe it will demonstrate that our Faith is finally resolued into holy Scripture and not into vnwritten Tradition for inuerting 〈◊〉 order of the 〈◊〉 and retaining the matter I argue as followeth If the maine and 〈◊〉 points of Faith are 〈◊〉 to be 〈◊〉 because of the 〈◊〉 of perpetuall Tradition vnwritten and 〈◊〉 Tradition vnwritten is beleeued to be Apostolicall because of the authoritie of the Scripture then our resolution that our Faith is Apostolicall resteth finally vpon the Scripture But the Antecedent is true Ergo c. The Assumption is confirmed two waies First by the practise of Papals which confirme their doctrine of Tradition by testimonies of Scripture alledging 2. Thess. 2. 15. 1. Tim. 6. 20. 2. Tim. 1. 16. Secondly because the credit of Tradition in respect of vs dependeth vpon the authoritie of the Church and the authoritie of the Church vpon the Scriptures Both these assertions are maintained by the Papals First They say that the authoritie of Tradition in respect of vs dependeth vpon the Church Gretsar def Bellarm. d. verbo Dei lib. 4. cap. 9. Vitus miletus cont 〈◊〉 loc 27. Error 615. Secondly They confirme the Churches authoritie by the Scriptures 1. Tim. 3.15 Math. 18.17 Eph. 4. 11 12 13 14. Gregorie Valence tom 3. disput 1. punct 1. pa. 40. ibid. punct 7. pa. 327. Driedo d. Eccles. dogm li 2. c. 3. pa. 59. Stapleton triplic c. 15. pa. 179. And thus will they nill they they are compelled to make holie Scripture the last and finall resolution of Faith for if we beleeue Tradition vpon the authoritie of the Church and the Churches authoritie for the Scripture then we must of 〈◊〉 make the Scripture our last and finall resolution of 〈◊〉 which is the Tenet of the Fathers S. Chris. sup Psal. 95. When any thing is deliuered without the warrant of Scripture the hearers thought staggereth sometimes consenting and then againe 〈◊〉 and another while reiecting the same as 〈◊〉 c. but when the testimonie of Diuine Voice is deliuered out of the Scripture it both confirmeth the saying of the Speaker and mind of the Hearer IESVIT So it is that the Scripture of the New Testament 〈◊〉 not be prooued to haue beene deliuered vnto the Church by the Apostles but by perpetuall Tradition vnderwritten conserued in the Church succeeding the Apostles for what other proofe can be imagined except one would prooue it by the titles of the Bookes which were absurd seeing doubt may be made Whether those titles were set on the Bookes by the Apostles themselues of which doubt Tradition only can resolue vs. Besides the Gospell of S. Marke and S. Luke and also the Acts of the Apostles were not written by any Apostles but were by their liuely voice and suffrages recommended vnto Christians as sacred otherwise as also Mr. Bilson noteth they should neuer haue obtained such eminent authoritie in the Church neither should they be now so esteemed but vpon the supposall of Apostolicall approbation but how shall we know the Apostles saw these writings and recommended the same vnto Christian Chnrches but by Tradition ANSVVER The point which the Aduersarie endeauors to prooue is That the Scriptures of the New Testament are beleeued by diuine Faith to come from the Apostles only and principally by the testimonie of perpetuall Tradition vnwritten he endeauoreth to performe this by disproouing other meanes to wit the titles of the Bookes c. The summe of his argument is Either perpetuall Tradition vnwritten is the only ground of this beleefe or else the Titles of the Bookes But the Titles of the Bookes are not the only ground because doubt may be made of their credit c. And some of the Bookes of the New Testament were not penned by the Apostles but by their Suffrages recommended to Christians and so became Authenticall in the Church And this approbation is not expressed in the Titles of the Bookes but is only made knowne by Tradition I answere It followeth not that Tradition vnwritten is the only or principall ground whereupon we beleeue the Scriptures of the New Testament to be Apostolicall although the titles of the Bookes alone are not so for besides the externall Titles there be three other grounds arguing the said Books to be Apostolicall First the inward Subscription 1. Corinth 16.21 and Inscription 1. Rom. 1. 1. of many of these Bookes and namely of all Saint Pauls Epistles except to the Hebrews together with the Reuelations of Saint Iohn and the other Canonicall Epistles Secondly In diuers Bookes there is found apparant testimonie within the same that the Apostles were the Authors Iohn 21. 24. 1. Cor. 15. 10. 1. Tim. 1. 13. Renel 1. 4. Thirdly In those Bookes which want such inward inscription or testimonie the matter and forme of the Bookes their harmonie with the Scriptures of the Old Testament and with those other of the New Testament which haue inscription and the voice of the holy Ghost speaking in them will prooue them to be diuine and if they be diuine then it followeth that they are Apostolicall either by the Apostles owne writing or approbation because the Church of the New Testament is builded vpon the foundation of the Apostles Eph. 2. 20. and our Sauiour himselfe did appoint their Doctrine and Ministerie to be the prime rule of Faith Math. 28. 20. Luc. 10. 16. c. 24. 48 49. And whosoeuer in their daies by preaching or writing instructed the Church must receiue approbation from them Gallath 2. 2. 9. The titles prefixed before the Bookes of the New Testament being ioined with these three grounds formerly
expressed are sufficient to prooue that the holy Apostles were the Authors or Approuers of all the Scriptures of the New Testament and if these with other humane motiues of credibilitie be not the same doubt which is made concerning them may with greater probabilitie be made concerning vnwritten Traditions And secluding the authoritie of the Scripture it selfe no other diuine testimonie can be produced to satisfie them which are doubtfull touching the veritie of vnwritten Tradition and the authoritie of the present Church If one will not beleeue the Scriptures because of the authoritie of God speaking in them neither will he beleeue the present Church consisting of persons in whom is possibilitie of error IESVIT For we may distinguish three properties of the Doctrine of Faith to wit to be true to be reuealed of God to be preached and deliuered by the Apostles The highest ground by which I am persuaded and resolued that my Faith is true is the authoritie of God reuealing it the highest ground on which I am resolued that my Faith is reuealed is the credit and authoritie of Christ Iesus and his Apostles who deliuered the same as diuine and sacred but the highest ground that mooueth me to beleeue that my Faith was preached by the Apostles is the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles that so teacheth me ANSVVER The last part of the former distinction is denied The highest ground meaning diuine which mooueth vs to beleeue that the doctrine of Faith was preached by the Apostles is not the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles but the holy Scripture of the New Testament for the perpetuall Tradition of the Church succeeding the Apostles is beleeued because of the authoritie of the said Church and whosoeuer beleeueth that Tradition or Testimonie must first of all know the Church to be an infallible witnesse But the word of God only the greater and most worthie part whereof by our Aduersaries confession is contained in the Scriptures giueth authoritie to the Church for the Church is founded vpon the word of God Eph. 2.20 and the word of God is the immortall seed which produceth and giueth being to the Church Luc. 8.11 Ia. 1.18 it selfe vpon the Apostles 〈◊〉 word and Doctrine which is principally contained in the Scripture 〈◊〉 Into this principle St. Augustine resolued his faith against the 〈◊〉 who pretended the Scriptures were corrupted confuting them by Tradition of the Church affirming that he would not beleeue the Gospell did not the authority of the Catholike Church induce him assigning this as the last stay of his resolution in this point for though he beleeued the Gospel to 〈◊〉 souer aignely certaine and true vpon the authority of God 〈◊〉 it and that it was reuealed of God vpon the authority of the Apostles who as sacred preached it yet that this Gospel as we haue it came incorrupt from the Apostles he could haue no stronger or more excellent 〈◊〉 than the testimony of the present Church descended by continued succession of Bishops from the Apostles neither can we imagine any higher except we flye to particular and to priuate reuelation which is absurd ANSWER St. Augustines words C. Epist. Manichei c. 4. doe not proue that after he was fully conuerted he resolued his faith finally and principally into the authority of the Church succeeding the Apostles First St. Augustine resolued his faith finally and principally into that which he knew to be infallible and totally diuine But he was not so persuaded of the Church succeeding the Apostles because he thought it possible for the principall members of that Church to 〈◊〉 and be deceiued and he prefers the authority of the Scriptures before the iudgement of Councels and Fathers in which some of our aduersaries place the 〈◊〉 of Ecclesiasticall infallibility Moreouer it appeareth by Saint Augustine in the second chapter of this Booke that he did not make the authority of the Church the highest ground of resolution of his faith for he saith that manifest verity is to be preferred before all other tbings whereby he was held in the Catholike Church but that whose authority must be preferred before all other things is the highest ground of faiths resolution Secondly because St. Augustines meaning in this place is obscure and dubious our aduersaries cannot conclude certainely from hence 1. Some Schoolemen hold that he speaketh of acquisite or Historicall Faith which is an introductiō to infused faith and then it is inconsequent to argue that because Saint Augustine at his first conuersion and being a Nouice in Faith did ground his Historicall faith vpon the authority of the Church therefore the authority of the Church is vniuersally and after men are conuerted the highest ground of resolution Most men are at first induced by externall motiues to giue credit to the Scriptures as the people of Samaria were by the testimony of the woman to beleeue that Christ was a Prophet Ioh. 4.42 Altisiodor summa in prolog li. 3. tr 3.9.4 But as these people afterwards beleeued because of Christs owne words so they which by the Churches authority are first persuaded to heare and reade the doctrine of the Scriptures afterwards by the light of grace doe perceiue the diuine Maiestie wisedome efficacie and verity of the said doctrine and resolue their faith into the diuine authority of the holy Ghost manifesting himselfe in the Scripture or doctrine of the Scripture Secondly other learned Papists hold that St. Augustine in the place obiected by the authority of the Church vnderstood the Church wherein the Apostles themselues gouerned and of which they were parts and then no meruaile if he resolued his faith into the authority of the Church because in this notion the Church comprehends the Colledge of the Apostles whose testimony concerning the Scripture was altogether Diuine And although St. Augustine conioyneth the authority of the latter Church with the former wherein were the Apostles yet he did not equally and with the same manner of beleeuing ground his faith vpon both for when a Preacher deliuereth Apostolicall doctrine we beleeue both the Preacher and the Doctrine and we could not haue knowne the doctrine but by the Preacher yet we resolue not our faith finally and principally into the authority of the Preacher but into the diuine verity it selfe preached by him Euery thing by which we are mooued to beleeue and without whose authority we should not haue beleeued is not the principall obiect whereunto diuine faith is finally resolued as appeareth by miracles preaching instruction of Parents c. IESVIT Vpon the former place of Saint Augustine the Iesuit inferreth That because we haue no stronger or more excellent proofe than the testimonie of the present Churcb descended by continuall succession of Bishops from the Apostles to confirme that the Gospell as wee haue it came incorrupt from the Apostles therefore Saint Augustine resolued his faith that
it was Apostolicall finally and principally into the authority of the present Church ANSWER Saint Augustine deliuers not the former and therfore the Iesuit cannot inferre the latter we haue indeed no stronger or more excellent morall proofe than the perpetual testimony of the Church succeeding the Apostles but we haue a stronger and more excellent diuine proofe to wit the Prophesie of Christ and his Apostles concerning the perpetuall preseruation of the Gospell vnto the end of the world also that the Aposcolical Scriptures were once incorrupt is manifest because they were giuen by diuine inspiration And it is apparant that they were not afterwards corrupted because no authority or sufficient Argument can be produced to procue them in whole or in part to haue been corrupted Now that which being once knowne by diuine testimony to haue beene incorrupt cannot be prooued afterwards to haue been corrupted doth by diuine testimony appeare to be incorrupt because the first diuine testimony standeth still in force The Text of the Gospell was once knowne by diuine testimonie to haue beene incorrupt and it cannot be prooued to haue beene afterwards corrupted Ergo It doth still appeare by diuine testimonie that the Text of the Gospell is incorrupt and the resolution of Faith finally and principally resteth vpon that diuine testimonie and not vpon the 〈◊〉 of the present Church Lastly the harmony coherence of the Gospel both with the Scriptures of the old Testament Lu. 24.27 Act. 28.23 and of the seuerall parts of the Gospel among themselues do manifest that the text of the new Testament is incorrupt For if the same were corrupted in any part corruption of words would produce alteration and difference of matter but we find at this day a perfect harmonie of all the parts of the Gospell among themselues and a perfect agreement of the same with the Scriptures of the old Testament And from the same being an inward Argument we may collect that the text of the Gospell is at this day incorrupt Now hauing so many Arguments besides the authoritie of the present Church to prooue the integritie of the text of the Gospell we do not flie neither is it necessarie to flie to priuat Spirit or particular Reuelation for assurance and that which our Aduersaries obiect against vs saying that we resolue our Faith and Religion into the priuat Spirit is a foolish calumniation for we resolue our Faith into the authoritie of Gods outward word expounded vnto vs by such helpes and meanes as both the Scripture it selfe and the antient Church require as into the diuine motiue and obiect of beleefe and we affirme that his grace and holy Spirit working by the outward meanes inableth draweth and persuadeth the conscience to assent Iohn 6.45 12.37 38.1 Cor. 2.12 c. 12.3 2. Cor. 3.5 Act. 16.14 1. Iohn 2.20.27 Esay 50.5 And herein we flie to no priuat Spirit or Reuelation but maintaine the ordinarie assistance of diuine grace according to the doctrine of the holy Scripture and of S. Augustine and the common Tenet of the Scholemen themselues IESVITS 2. Argument Secondly J 〈◊〉 that common vnlearned people the greatest part of Christianitie are persuaded about all substantiall points of Faith by Tradition not by Scripture Common vnlearned people haue true Christian Faith in all points necessarie and snfficient vnto Saluation but they haue not Faith of all these maine and substantiall points grounded on Scripture for they can neither vnderstand nor read any Scripture but translated into vulgar languages and so if they beleeue vpon Scripture they beleeue vpon Scripture translated into their mother tongue but before that they can know that the Scriptures are truely translated euen in all substantiall points that so they may build of it they must first know what are the maine and substantiall points and firmely beleeue them so that they would not beleeue the Scripture translated against them for if they knew them not before how can they know that Scriptures in places that concerne them are truely translated if they do not before hand firmely beleeue them why should they bee readie to allow translations that agree with them and to reiect the translations which differ from them Ergo Originally and before they know any Scripture they haue Faith grounded on the Tradition of their ancestors by the light whereof they are able to judge of the truth of Translations about such substantiall points as they firmely beleeue by Tradition ANSVVER The question which the Iesuit vndertaketh to prooue in his foure Arguments is that our resolution of Faith stayeth finally vpon the perpetuall Tradition of the Church and not vpon the Scripture His second argument to prooue this is taken from the manner of vulgar and illiterate people in resoluing their Faith For if these being the greater part of Christianitie do ground their Creed touching all points of doctrine necessarie to Saluation vpon Tradition of their ancestors andif they haue true Faith before they know and vnderstand the Scripture then Christian Faith at least-wise among the greater part of Christians is resolued finally into the Tradition of ancestors and not of the Scriptures And he prooueth that these vulgar people haue Faith touching all points necessarie to Saluation before they know the Scriptures because it is impossible for them to read or vnderstand Scripture vntill it be translated into their mother tongue and they are not able to iudge of translations or know them to be true vnlesse they first beleeue the principall points of Christian Faith and by comparing translations of Scripture with the said doctrines of Faith formerly by them beleeued be inabled to iudge of the Truth of Translations This Paralogisme hath certaine ambiguous or equiuocall termes which must be distinguished and then I will applie my answer First the terme of Scripture may be taken for the letter and text of the Scripture together with the names of the seueral Bookes Authors and Sections and secondly it may signifie the doctrine of the Scripture without mention of the particular Bookes Iohn 7.38 Rom. 1 2 3 4. Secondly Resolution of Faith is either distinct and explicite wherein beleeuers are able to declare the seueral reasons of their Faith and to proceed from one reason of beleeuing to another vntill they ascend by degrees to the principall ground or else Implicit and Vertuall wherein beleeuers cannot proceed distinct ly and with explication of the seuerall reasons and grounds of Faith but resting themselues vpon one prime and radicall ground are readie for the authoritie of the same to beleeue all other particular reasons and verities of Faith when they are declared vnto them Thirdly Tradition may signifie either doctrine of Faith and good manners not contained or written in holy Scripture expressely or inuoluedly or else the same doctrine which is found in holy Scripture deliuered by Ancestors or Teachers by word of mouth These distinctions premised I answer the obiection 1.
Granting that some vulgar people and nouices in Faith may attaine beleefe concerning such verities of Christian Doctrine as are absolutely necessarie to Saluation by the Tradition of their Ancestors and Teachers without distinct and explicit resoluing their Faith into the Text of holy Scripture or the particular Bookes or Sections thereof But withall I deny that they can haue sauing Faith without resoluing the same into the doctrine of the Scriptures For example It is an Article of Faith necessarie to be beleeued by all Christians of riper yeres that Iesus Christ is the 〈◊〉 of the World and the same Article is reuealed and taught in many Texts of holy Scripture If a simple rurall person beleeue this Article taught him by his parents and other teachers he beleeueth the Doctrine of the Scripture and vertually grounds his Faith vpon the Scripture although hee know not the Bookes of the Scripture or the particular sentences contained in the same A man which drinketh water flowing from a fountaine or seeth day light although he haue no distinct knowledge of the fountaine or sight of the Sunne which is the cause of light yet hee receiueth water mediatly from the fountaine it selfe and his light principally from the Sunne so likewise rude and illiterate Christians reape the benefit and fruit of the Scriptures and vertually ground their Faith vpon them although they be not able distinctly to looke into them or to resolue their Faith into the seuerall parts and testimonies contained in them OBIECTION Vulgar andilliterate persons do not know or vnderstand the Scriptures neither can they be certaine by their owne knowledge that the same are truely translated in such points as the y are bound to beleeue therefore they cannot ground their Faith finally and lastly vpon the Scriptures ANSVVER 1. If this Obiection were good vulgar people could not ground their diuine Faith vpon Tradition because they haue not distinct knowledge of Tradition or of the qualitie or deriuation thereof Therefore I distinguish of Knowledge out of Bonauenture that the same is two fold to wit either confused and generall or distinct and speciall and a thing may be knowne two waies either in it selfe or in another If vulgar and illiterate people could know and vnderstand the Scriptures neither confusedly nor distinctly neither in themselues nor in any other thing then it were impossible that they should resolue their Faith into them but if they may know them by teaching of others and vnderstand the Doctrine of the Scriptures to be diuine by the light of heauenly veritie resplendent in the same and by the inward testimonie of the holy Spirit co-working with that Doctrine then it is possible for them to resolue their Faith into the Scripture because they which actually resolue their Faith into the Doctrine of the Scripture doe virtually and mediatly resolue the same into the verie Scripture euen as he that actually beleeueth the kings proclamation doth virtually beleeue the kings authoritie although he know the king or his authoritie confusedly and in generall only The Text of holy Scripture and the distinct sayings and sentences thereof are the principall and finall externall ground whereupon the whole bodie of the Church must ground their Faith But as there is a diuersitie of the members of the Church 1. Cor. 12.20 so likewise there is a difference betweene them in the manner of resoluing Faith for the stronger and firmer members are able to resolue their Faith distinctly into Scripture but the weaker members whose Faith as Bonauenture speaketh is diminuta seeble and imperfect in respect of the distinct apprehension of the obiect of Faith are guided by the stronger as children by a nurse And these little ones are taught the truth of heauenly Doctrine 1. By their parents or ecclesiasticall teachers and they know the Scriptures to be truely translated not by their owne skill but by crediting others which are able to iudge But being thus farre directed and persuaded by humane meanes then the light of Gods word it selfe by the power of Grace persuadeth them as a diuine cause to yeeld full assent to all such verities as are necessarie to be beleeued by them to saluation IESVIT And this is that which Protestants must meane if they haue any true meaning when they say that the common people knew Scriptures to be truely translated by the light of the Doctrine shining in true Translations to wit by the light of Doctrine receiued by Tradition of Ancestors and thereupon so firmely beleeue as they will acknowledge Scriptures to be truely translated so farre and no farther than they perceiue them consonant with the Faith deliuered vnto them so that their last and finall resolution for substantiall points is not into Scripture truly translated into their vulgar tongue but into Tradition by the light whereof they discerne that their Translations are true more or lesse according to the measure of knowledge they haue by Tradition ANSVVER The summe of the former obiection is Vnlearned people are not able without the helpe and instruction of others to resolue their Faith into the Scriptures Therefore the Scripture is not the finall and greatest stay and ground of Faith The Argument is denied for as in Arts and Sciences an vnskilfull person cannot resolue his knowledge into the first principles vntill he be taught the meaning of words and the sence of rules and precepts but when he is taught and vnderstandeth these then he maketh resolution into the very first principles themselues So likewise in beleeuing the Obiect of Faith must be taught the sence of the words and matter declared the grounds and reasons of credibilitie deliuered and then the beleeuer principally and immediately settles the resolution of his Faith not vpon these helps and instruments which are only dispofitiue and adiuuant causes but vpon the first principles themselues expressely or deriuatiuely contained in holy Scripture And whereas Dr. Ioh. Wh. is produced affirming in the behalfe of all Protestants that common people know Scriptures to be truely translated by the light of the Doctrine shining in true Translations First Dr. Wh. in the place assigned speaketh not in particular of common people but of the true Church in which are found many persons skilfull and learned Secondly he deliuereth other meanes besides the light of Doctrine whereby the Church may know that Translations are true to wit knowledge of Tongues rules of Art ministerie of the Word to which I adde analogie of Faith the testimonie of the 〈◊〉 Church and best learned in all ages All these are helpes and instruments of right Translations and when the Scriptures are translated they manifest their Author and sacred authoritie to such as in a right manner are conuersant in hearing or reading them And this is not only the Tenet of Protestants but besides the antient Fathers of moderate Papists themselues There is saieth one of them
onely Rule because it is not said to be sufficient for all men but for the man of God and it is not sufficient alone and by it selfe but being ioyned with Tradition I answere first That which is Sufficient in genere regulae as a Rule for the man of God either Minister 1. Tim. 6. 12. or other spirituall man 1. Cor. 2.15 is sufficient for all men because there is but one common Obiect and Rule of Faith for the whole Church and all the members thereof contayning strong Meat for the Learned and Milke or plaine Doctrine for Babes And therefore if the Scripture be a Rule and a sufficient Rule it is such in common and in respect of all people although the manner of applying and vsing the same may differ Secondly That which is Profitable to make the man of God perfect and throughly furnished to euerie good worke is both a sufficient Rule and an onely Rule First it is sufficient because it makes people which receiuc it by Faith and Obedience meet for the kingdome of God Secondly it is alone sufficient otherwise this effect of making the man of God perfect and throughly instructed could not be ascribed to it alone as it is manifestly done in the Apostles speech When two persons equally co-worke we cannot ascribe the whole worke to one of them alone but to both Bread alone being one part of Food is not sufficient to all kind of Nutriment The Apostle in the Text alledged affirming first That the Scripture is able to make wise vnto saluation secondly affirming That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the whole Scripture as Dionysius Carthusian expoundeth it giuen by inspiration is profitable to teach confute instruct reproue and then declaring the greatnesse of the vtilitic which is to make the man of God perfect and throughly instructed to euerie good worke This effect cannot be ascribed to a partiall cause neither can the Apostle meane that the whole Scripture is profitable or sufficient onely as one part of Diuine Reuelation but because it containeth the whole Rule of Faith If any shall pretend That the Scripture is not sufficient of it selfe to these effects because Diuine Grace Ecclesiasticall Ministerie Docilitie in the Hearer or Reader are necessarie together with the Scripture to make the man of God perfect they must vnderstand that our question is Whether holy Scripture alone be a sufficient rule of Faith Not whether other adiuuant causes be necessarie for the receiuing and applying thereof that it may produce Faith The Earth is sufficient to bring forth food for man Gen. 1. 29. although Husbandmen and Grasiers be necessarie Manna Quailes and the water flowing from the Rocke were sufficient to feed the children of Israel in the Desart yet Bakers and Cookes were necessarie to prepare and dresse this food Exod. 16.6.24 Sap. 16.21 Euen so the holy Scripture is sufficient as a Rule to teach all Doctrine necessarie for our spirituall nourishment although the Ministerie of man and Diuine Grace be needfull also that wee rightly vse the same If the Obiection were good to wit Holy Scripture is not the onely Rule because by it alone without Diuine Grace and Ecclesiasticall Ministerie c. wee cannot beleeue then Tradition and holy Scripture being conioyned to make vp the Rule of Faith the same will yet be insufficient because without Diuine Grace Ecclesiasticall Ministerie and Docilitie in the people neither Scripture nor Tradition can produce Faith IESVIT Hence also we may conclude that the many allegations of Fathers which Protestants bring to prooue the Scripture to be cleere in all substantiall points are impertinent because the Fathers speake of men aforehand instructed in all substantiall points who may by the light of Tradition easily discouer in Scripture as they that heard Aristotle explicate himselfe by word of mouth may vnderstand his Booke of Nature most difficill to bee vnderstood of them that neuer heard his explication either out of his owne mouth or by Tradition of his schollers ANSWER Out of your owne fancies you may conclude what you please but from the Fathers nothing can be concluded repugnant to that which Protestants hold concerning the perspicuity of sacred Scripture euen in it selfe Ireneus saith All the Scriptures both Propheticall and Euangelicall are cleere without ambiguity and may indifferently bee heard of all men S. Hierom It is the manner of the Scripture to ioine that which is manifest to such things as are obscure S. Cyril That they may be knowne of all people both small and great they are profitably commended vnto vs in a familiar kind of speaking that they may exceed the capacitie of none S. Augustine Plaine places are found in them to expound and open the darke and hard S. Gregorie The Scripture hath so much in open 〈◊〉 as may feed little ones S. Chrysoft Scriptures are 〈◊〉 like mettals which haue need of workemen to digge them out but they deliuer a treasure readie at hand for them which seeke hidden riches in them It is sufficient to looke into them that you may depart replenished with all fruit it is sufficient onely to open them that you may presently behold the splendor of their pearles And although the antient Fathers do many times referre people to Tradition especially in three cases First For the testifying of the number and integritie of the Bookes of Canonical Scripture Secondly For the cleering of some hard or ambiguous Texts of Scripture from the new and forged expositions of Heretickes Thirdly For externall rites and ceremonies yet neither the Fathers nor the more learned Papists themselues do hold that there is a large and general Commentarie of all the Scriptures or of all the difficill places thereof receiued from the Apostles and preserued vntill our daies neither doe the Fathers hold that people cannot read the holy Scripture with profit or collect the true meaning of them in points substantiall and necessarie without such a Commentarie First If such a Commentarie were extant it must be found in the elder Fathers Tertullian Ireneus Origen c. But the Papists themselues will not alwaies be tied to their Expositions as appeareth by their forsaking of Tertullian in the Exposition of the wordes of the Gospell Hoc est corpus meum This is my bodie and by their forsaking of Origen in many of his Expositions and againe of Tertullian in his Exposition of Math. 16. 17. Secondly The Exposition of Scripture giuen by the Fathers is many times repugnant and different each of them from other as Sixtus Senensis in his Bibliotheca and Cardinall 〈◊〉 in his Commentaries and other Pontificians doe shew but if there had beene a large and generall Commentarie of Scripture or of all or most of the harder places of Scripture the antient Fathers 〈◊〉 nearest vpon the Apostles must haue knowne and followed that and so could neither haue
are baptised and externally professe Christianitie And according to this notion it comprehendeth both the good and the bad the cleane and the vncleane of that profession 2. Tim. 2. 20. Math. 13.25.47 Math. 3.12 c. 22.10 〈◊〉 it is taken for Particular Societies and congregations of Christians Apoc. 1.4 2.1 and sometimes it is taken for the Pastors of particular Churches Math. 18.17 sometimes for the People Acts 20.28 sometimes for the whole Flocke consisting of Pastors and People Apoc. 3.6 But it is neuer taken in holy Scripture for the Pope and Councell If the Iesuit in his Proposition There is a visible Church alwaies in the world c. understand the 〈◊〉 Church in the first Notion then it is denied that we are absolutely to adhere to the Traditions of this Church or that the same is alwaies and intirely One Vniuersal Apostolicall Holy according to the meaning of the Apostles and Nicene Creed Secondly according to the second Notion the Church is not visible for a principall part thereof is in heauen and the other moetie militant vpon earth being considered as elect and holy is knowne intuitiuely to God only 2. Tim. 2.19 and morally coniecturally and according to the iudgement of Charitie to men in this world 2. Thess. 2.13 Thirdly according to the third Notion the Church is visible in all ages and some part thereof teacheth and professeth right Faith in all substantiall and fundamentall articles And we are to cleaue to the Traditions of the same so farre as in the deliuerie thereof it exceedeth and transgresseth not the bounds of lawfull authoritie and teacheth according to the rule of Gods word S. Chrysostome saith Because Seducers are often found even in true Churches we are not to beleeue vnlesse they speake and do that which is consonant to the Scriptures And in another place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If the Priest teach any peruerse Doctrine giue no credit yea though he were an Angell Nay I will presume to say more than this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one ought not beleeue Paul if he should preach any thing humane or of himselfe but as he is an Apostle and hath Christ speaking in him Lastly according to the fourth Acceptation there are euer in the world particular Churches and societies of Christians and euery one of these Churches professe some portion of diuine veritie But we must enquire by the rule of Gods word which of these are pure and orthodoxall and on the contrarie which of them are infected with errors and imbrace the Doctrine of the one and auoid the Corruptions of the other Remarkable Obseruations concerning the Church OBSERVATION I. THe externall visible Church is an intermixed or compounded societie bodie and state of Christian people professing the faith and worship of Christ in which are found sheepe and goats wheat and tares gold and drosse good fishes and bad and vessels of honour and dishonour This common and generall societie and bodie consisteth of diuers particular Churches consenting and agreeing in the professing of some part of diuine veritie and of these Churches some are orthodoxall some are impure in faith and religion and also these being compared are respectiuely purer or impurer And within the compasse of each particular Church the members are better or worse more or lesse holy or corrupt OBSERVAT. II. Whereas the Church hath many Titles and Properties belonging to it and Christ Iesus the Head thereof hath made sundrie Promises and conferred diuerse Graces vpon it wee must consider which part of the Church is the proper subiect of these Qualities Promises and Graces For it is apparant That as Sheepe and Goats Chaffe and Wheat Gold and Drosse are of a contrarie kind although they are intermixed so likewise the Affections and Attributes of the same although they are spoken in generall of the whole Subiect as an Heape which hath Wheat and Chaffe a Field which hath Wheat and Tares are called an Heape of Graine a Field of Wheat yet many of them appertaine formally and indeed onely to the better part of the common Subiect OBSERVAT. III. In the visible societie of Christian people there are found according to S. Augustine Citizens of the heauenly Hierusalem and also Inhabitants of Babylon And as the same Father teacheth Notum est ciues malae Ciuitatis administrare quosdam actus 〈◊〉 Ciuitatis It is manifest that in the visible Church Burgers of the wicked Citie Babylon doe administer some Functions of the holy Citie Hierusalem Ioh. 12.6 2. Timoth 4.10 Apoc. 3.14 15. Phil. 〈◊〉 Ioh. 3.9 The Promises of Christ made to the Church concerning his presence and assistance to his Word and Sacraments preached and administred according to his commandement are fulfilled when wicked persons execute the office and performe the worke of outward 〈◊〉 For although wicked persons like the Carpenters of Noahs Arke reape no benefit to themselues yet God Almightie concurreth with their Ministerie being his owne Ordinance for the saluation of all deuout and worthie Communicants OBSERVAT. IIII. Some things are spoken of the Church in common or generall tearmes to shew what the whole is in respect of Gods outward vocation or what the office and dutie of the whole Church is but the same promises properties and priuiledges are really fulfilled or found in the better and sounder part thereof onely When our Sauiour promiseth that the gates of Hell shall not preuaile against the Church Matth. 16.18 he vnderstandeth such a Church as heareth and obeyeth his word and not a visible companie or Hierarchie of Prelates which forsake his word and doe what they list August d. Vnit. Ecclesiae cap. 18. Ecclesia in his est qui adificant supra Petram id est qui credunt verbum Christi faciunt d. Baptismo Lib. 6. cap. 24. Nonne illi sunt in Ecclefia qui sunt in Petra Qui autem in Petra non sunt nec in Ecclesia sunt iam ergò videamus vtrum super Petram aedificium suum constituant qui audiunt Christi verba non faciant Saint Augustine in these words deliuereth three things first The Church is in them which build vpon the Rocke secondly They are not in the Church which are not in the Rocke thirdly They onely build vpon the Rocke and are in the Rocke which beleeue and obey the word of Christ And this Doctrine of S. Augustine is taken out of the holy Scripture Matth. 7.24 1. Cor. 3.11 10.4 Also when S. Paul saith The Church is the ground and pillar of Truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. by the Church hee vnderstandeth the House of the liuing God as the precedent part of his speech sheweth to wit If I tarrie long that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behaue thy selfe in the House of God c. But they alone are verily and indeed the House of God which beleeue and loue the Truth
S. August Enchirid. c. 5.6 c. Donatist Lib. 7. cap. 50. Wicked people may be called Gods House because of externall calling and visible profession 2. Tim. 2. 20. Sed non sunt de compage domus They are not of the frame of the House Heb. 3. 6. August d. Bapt. Lib. 7. cap. 50. All they which couet earthly things preferring worldly felicitie before God they which seeke their owne and not those things which are Iesus Christs ad vnam Ciuitatem illam pertinent quae dicitur Babylonia mystice habet Regem Diabolum belong onely to that Citie which in a mysterie is called Babylon and hath the Deuill the Head Aug. sup Psal. 61. Wicked persons saith S. Augustine Epist. 50. figuram membri tenent retaine the figure or outward shape of a member sed reuera corpus Domini non sunt but they are not in truth the bodie of Christ August d. Doct. Christ. Lib. 3. cap. 32. In corpore Christi non sunt quod est Ecclesia They are not in the bodie of Christ which is the Church August c. Crescon Lib. 2. cap. 21. But they which are not of the Body of Christ nor of the house of God really and in truth doe not constantly preserue or faithfully deliuer Apostolicall Traditions neither are they one or holy nor yet such as the Spirit of God infallibly and alwayes directeth in their publicke Doctrine OBSERVAT. V. The qualities of vnitie holinesse veritie Apostolicall succession and other the like are not alwayes found in the true Church equally or in the same degree and measure of perfection but according to a latitude and inequalitie of intension and remission and more or lesse so that although the sounder part of the Church hath alwayes the substance of truth sanctitie and vnitie yet this veritie of Doctrine vnitie of Charitie sanctitie of Manners is greater larger and more sincere and perfect in some persons and ages of the Church than in others These qualities were in their greatest perfection when the Apostles themselues liued they were in great measure in the ages immediately abutting vpon the Apostles But the holy Fathers complaine of the decrease and decay of them in after times And Papists deplore the extreme diminution of them in their dayes OBSERVAT. VI. It falleth out sometimes in the outward state of the visible Church that wicked persons which are not sound parts of Gods house nor liuing members of Christs mysticall bodie being more in number and greater in power doe possesse the chiefe places of publicke Iudicature and Ecclesiasticall gouernment and being thus exalted and withall abetted by worldly power and swarmes of time-feruers whom they aduance and honour to accomplish their owne ends it may heereby fall out that the outward state of the visible Church shall be ordered and swayed according to the lust and will of wicked rulers And then good men may be disgraced depressed and persecuted the simple and they which are negligent vnlearned and secure may be deluded and errour and superstition craftily and couertly be brought in and that is fulfilled which Gregory saith Dum mali praepositi suam contra veritatem honorem exigunt ab omni rectitudine corda sequentium abducunt When wicked rulers seeke their owne glory more than truth they misleade their followers from all course of righteousnesse This happened in the Iewish Church when the Scribes and Pharises and other hypocrites and errants were 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 master-builders Math. 21.41 And the euill seruant beareth rule in the houshold and oppresseth his fellow-seruants Matth. 24. 49. Diotrophes excommunicates and vsurpes according to his owne will 3. Ep. Ioh. 9. 10. The Arrians in the dayes of Constantius and Valence did all the former in the greater part of the Christian world The same happened in the Church of Rome especially after the thousand yeere one man vsurped ouer the Christian world making himselfe on earth chiefe and sole commander ouer things diuine and humane his power was so exorbitant and boundlesse that he trode vpon the necke of kings throning and dethroning crowning and decrowning them as himselfe listed his dominion was so absolute and vast as that no man might reprooue or withstand him All men were reputed heretickes or schismatickes which would not say and sweare as he commanded in Synods and Councels causes were transacted according to his will and remission of sinnes and right to life eternall were intailed to his chaire IESVIT This principle is consequent vpon the former and out of it sixe things may be clearely prooued First that there is alwayes a true Church of Christ in the world for if there be no meanes for men to know that Scriptures and other substantiall Articles came from Christ and his Apostles and so consequently from God but the Tradition of the Church then there must needs be in all ages a Church receiuing and deliuering these Traditions else men in some ages since Christ should haue beene destitute of the ordinarie meanes of saluation because they had not meanes to know assuredly the substantiall Articles of Christianitie without assured faith whereof no man is saued ANSVVER By true Church we may vnderstand either an vniuersall maltitude of Beleeuers totally in respect of all persons or distributiuely in regard of them which principally rule and command free from errour in publicke doctrine Or else a choise and select number of Beleeuers liuing either in the common fellowship of the generall visible Church or vnited in particular Congregations by themselues teaching and professing right Faith in all capitall points and readie to imbrace all diuine Truth when the same is manifested vnto them If the name of true Church be taken in the first sense or for an Hierarchicall Church wherein the principall commanders teach and maintaine truth intirely and sincerely then the Proposition to wit There is alwayes a true Church of Christ in the world is denied for it is possible that the greater Prelates to wit Popes Cardinals mitred Bishops and Abbots of which the Hierarchicall Church principally consisteth shall bee reprobates blinde guides a generation of vipers wolues in sheepes cloathing and such as being armed with the title of the Church persecute the true Church And that this is possible it appeareth First by the example of the arch-rulers of the Iewish Church which in some ages corrupted true Religion and persecuted the seruants of God 2. Chron. 36. 14. Moreouer all the chiefe of the Priests and the people transgressed very much after all the abominations of the heathen and polluted the house of the Lord c. v. 16. They mocked the messengers of God and dospised his word and misused his Prophets c. Reade 2. Kings 16. 11 16. Ierem. 2.8 Esay 56.10 Malach. 2.8 Ierem. 20.1 23.1 2. Machab. 4.10 Ezek. 34.4 Mark 6.35 Math. 3.7 Matth. 23. 13. Luk. 12. 1. Matth.
16. 12. Iohn 10. 8. Ezek. 22. 26. Secondly the same apeareth to be true both by the example of the greater Prelates of the Asian Churches which corrupted true Doctrine and worship and prouoked the Almightie so much that he remooued their Candlesticke out of his place and also by the example of the West Church it selfe wherein Popes and greater Prelates haue been illiterate Monsters Diuels incarnate Apostataes men defiled with all wickednesse and abominable sinnes as Papists themselues report And concerning Doctrine it is euident by comparing their decrees with the Scriptures and the ancient Fathers and Councels that they are in many things departed from the truth And Occham saith Omnis congregatio quae potest errare contra bonos more 's potest errare contra fidem quia mali mores excacant intellectum Because euill manners blinde the iudgement therefore euery assembly which may erre notoriously in manners may erre against the Faith But if by true Church we vnderstand a number of Beleeuers smaller or greater teaching and professing right Faith in all substantiall and capitall points and willing to imbrace and teach all other diuine veritie when the same is made knowne vnto them then it is granted that there is a true Church of Christ alwayes in the world And this kind of Beleeuers doe either teach and professe their Faith and Religion in congregations apart or in the externall fellowship and common societie of corrupt Beleeuers as appeareth by the example of the Iewes in the dayes of their wicked Kings and Priests and in the time of the Pharisees The open and publicke ministerie of Priests was corrupt in those dayes yet God had a remnant of people and small Church in the middest of this blindnesse Esay 1.9 In the other part of this Section the Iesuite produceth an Argument to prooue That there is alwayes a true Church of Christ in the world The summe of his Argument is Christ neuer leaueth the world destitute of the ordinarie meanes of saluation and people cannot haue the meanes of saluation but from the true Church and by the Tradition thereof by which they receiue the Scriptures and the rule of Faith to guide them in the exposition of the Scriptures ANSVVER It is lost labour to spend time in proouing against vs that there is alwayes in the world a true Church for wee haue euer acknowledged this The thing that we denie is that although there bee alwaies in the world a Church the 〈◊〉 members whereof are free from damnable and 〈◊〉 errour yet there is not alwaies a true Church in the world whose commanding Prelates are free from all error or 〈◊〉 part of it from malicious error Secondly It is granted that Christ doth not according to his antecedent will leaue the world destitute of the meanes of Saluation Math. 23.37 1. Timoth. 2.4 2. Pet. 3.9 But notwithstanding this will of Christ many people may be actually destitute of the meanes of Saluation by the negligence of Preachers and through their owne negligence or malice contemning or repelling the said meanes when they are offered vnto them Acts 13.46 Thirdly A corrupt visible Church may truely deliuer some parts of sacred Truth and among other verities it may deliuer the Apostles Tradition touching the Canon of the Scripture and also the rule of Faith contained in the Apostles Creed This appeareth by the Churches of the Nestorians at this day and also of old by the Iewish Church which at such times as it was Idolatrous and vnsound preserued the Canon of the Scriptures of the Old Testament and by transcribing and reading deliuered the whole Text thereof truely Rom. 3.2 and Acts 15.21 Fourthly If we should grant which is false as appeareth by the Greeke Church that there was in some ages past no other Church but the Roman and the adheres thereof and affirme withall that the chiefe Prelats thereof and their faction maintained sundrie erronious and superstitious doctrines yet because all Doctors and people liuing within the externall communion of that Church were not equally poysoned and surprised with error but many among them firmely beleeuing all fundamentall 〈◊〉 were 〈◊〉 by adeu out and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in some other points It followeth not that the world should be destitutes of all meanes of saluation for these founder members lining in the visible Roman Church might deliuer the maine and capitall Articles of Christianitie and their ignorance and error in other matters was in those daies pardonable because they offended in simplicitie and were 〈◊〉 unawares IESVIT Secondly this Church must be alwaies visible and conspicious for the Traditions of the Church must euer bee famous glorious and notoriously knowne in the world that a Christian may say with S. Augustine I beleeue nothing but the consent of Nations and Countries and most celebrious fame Now if the Church were hidden in secret invisible in any age then her Traditions could not bee Doctrines euer illustriously known but rather obscure hidden Apochriphall Ergo the Church the mistris pillar and foundation of Truth must bee alwaies visible and conspicuous which if need bee may be further prooued most euidently ANSVVER The Church according to the Popish Tenet is said to be Visible because it alwaies hath such an outward forme and appearance in the eyes of the world as that people are able by sence or common reason to know the same materially and to distinguish it from other societies of infidels and Hereticks And by the Church in this question they vnderstand a companie of beleeuers professing Christian Faith without error submitting themselues to the Bishop of Rome as to their vniuersall Visible head And they affirme concerning the said Church that it may at all times be sensibly knowne and discerned and that the place of aboad and the principall members thereof are openly knowne and the externall actions of the same to wit Preaching Praying administration of 〈◊〉 may bee alwaies heard and seene and that the same is perpetually sensible and 〈◊〉 like vnto earthly kingdomes and common weales Some few of them acknowledge that it is possible for the same for some short season to loose part of the externall amplitude and glorie and to be ouershadowed with clouds and stormes of Heresies Scismes and Persecutions but yet they all 〈◊〉 that euen in those tempestuous seasons it is conspicuous to the world in regard of the principall members and that the common and ordinarie condition of the true Church is to be amply famously and in a glorious manner visible But our Tenet is First That the true Church abideth oftentimes in persecution either of 〈◊〉 and externall enemies or of domesticall foes And in time of persecution by either of 〈◊〉 enemies it may be reputed a false Church or impious Sect by the multitude and consequently be vnknown to the wicked world vnder the Notion of holy and true and in such
persecutions the loue of many may waxe cold Math. 24.12 and iniquitie and infidelitie so abound Luc. 17.26 cap. 18.8 that the number of right beleeuers shall be few and the same may bee compelled to exercise their religion in 〈◊〉 Secondly We deny that a naturall man is able infallibly to iudge and discerne by sence and common reason or human prudence only which is the true Church of Christ whereunto euery one that wil be saued must vnite and ioine himselfe 1. Cor. 2.11.14 Now the reasons for which we reiect or limit the Popish Doctrine concerning the Churches visibilitie are these and not what the same must be perpetually Some teach what the same is by outward calling and consequently what in right by precept and dutie it ought to be Some Texts of holy Scripture describe the inward and spirituall beautie of the sounder part of the Church by Allegories and similitudes taken from externall and worldly pompe and glorie Some places shew what 〈◊〉 ought to performe when the publike and common Ministerie of the Church is incorrupt and ordinarie Pastors in Doctrine and Discipline proceed according to the Ordinance of Christ. Lastly some of the Fathers liuing in Ages wherein the outward face of the Church was externally glorious not foreseeing what was imminent and future might probably suppose that the same should alwayes retaine the like beautie And yet S. Augustine who because of the Donatists speaketh most largely in this kind vseth words of limitation and exception and affirmeth that the splendor of the Church in time of Persecution may be eclipsed and the glorie thereof ouershadowed Secondly The Arguments against the glorious and perpetuall Visibilitie of the true Church according to our aduersaries Tenet are weightie First The best and worthiest members of the said Church may be persecuted disgraced and condemned as Heretikes and impious persons as appeareth by the example of Athanasius Hilarius Ambrosius c. And this may be done by great multitudes and by learned persons and by such as are potent in worldly and Ecclesiasticall power and in such times the true Church vnder the notion of a true Church cannot be generally and gloriously visible Secondly The prime Rulers and Commanders in the visible Church doe at some times by Ambition and other enormious Vices become enemies vnto Truth as our aduersaries themselues acknowledge concerning all other Bishops but onely the Roman and his adheres and that the Roman Popes and Prelates haue departed from right Faith and exceeded others in monstrous ambition and wickednesse is reported by many amongst themselues Now when these Master-builders fall innumerable multitudes of inferiour ranke for hope fauour feare and other humane and carnall respects concurre with them and then the number of Infidels which remaine without the Church being added to the Church malignant the totall summe of both amounteth to a great number and in comparison of them right beleeuers may be few and their reputation in the world so meane as that they shall not be generally knowne the true Church And if they be not knowne and esteemed a true Church by the greatest part of the world then they are not famously visible at all times as our aduersarie maintaines Thirdly The Scriptures foretell a comming and reigne of Antichrist a large Apostasie and reuolt from the right Faith a raritie of true beleeuers and decay of Charitie a flying of the true Church into the Wildernesse and grieuous persecutions of Gods Elect before the finall consummation of the World 2. Thess. 2.3 c. 1. Tim. 4.1 2. Tim. 3.1 c. Luc. 18.8 Matth. 24. 12 24. Reuel 12.6 But such a perpetuall visibilitie of the Church as Romists imagine is not compatible with the precedent Predictions But the Iesuit saith IESVIT Because the Tradition of the Church must be at all times famous glorious and notoriously knowne in the World therefore the true Church which is the Teacher Pillar and Foundation of Tradition must be at all times famously visible to the eye of the World ANSWER Neither the Antecedent nor Consequent of this Argument are firme It is not alwayes true that those things are visible which make other things famous glorious and notoriously knowne for that which is innisible to the eye of the World may cause other things to be famous as wee see in God himselfe in Christ in the holy Apostles c. Also persons liuing in disgrace and persecution may by writing from Exile Prison or vnknowne Habitations make Diuine Truth notoriously knowne to the making of the enemies thereof inexcusable and the conuersion of others as appeareth in Athanasius Secondly The Antecedent is false If the Iesuit by the word Must vnderstand that which by an immutable prouidence of the Almightie shall infallibly in all ages be fulfilled it is not decreed by the Almightie that the Doctrine and Tradition of Diuine Veritie shall in all Ages be generally famous and notoriously knowne to the World the same must alwayes in matters substantiall and necessarie be sufficiently knowne to some part of the World But many people for sundrie Ages haue beene ignorant of Christ and of the whole Tradition and Doctrine of the Apostles and a large tract of the World remaineth at this present day in Heathenish and damnable ignorance and consequently to a large part of the World Tradition is not in a famous and glorious manner notoriously knowne IESVIT Thirdly The Church is Apostolicall and that apparantly descending from the Apostolicall Sea by succession of Bishops vsque ad confessionem generis humani euen to the acknowledgement of humane kind as S. Augustine speaketh ANSWER The true visible Church is named Apostolicall not because of locall and personall succession of Bishops onely or principally but because it retaineth the Faith and Doctrine of the holy Apostles Eph. 2. 20. Reuel 21.14 Tertullian d. Prascript cap. 32. affirmeth That Churches which are able to produce none of the Apostles or other Apostolicall men for their first planters are notwithstanding Apostolicall for consent of Faith and consanguinitie of Doctrine And many learned Papists antient and moderne say The Church is called Apostolicall because it is grounded vpon the Doctrine of the Apostles in respect of Faith Lawes and Sacraments But personall or locall succession onely and in it selfe maketh not the Church Apostolicall because hirelings and wolues may lineally succeed lawfull and orthodoxe Pastours Act. 20.29 30. Euen as sicknesse succeedeth health and darkenesse light and a tempest faire weather as Gregorie Nazianzen affirmeth Orat. d. laud. Athanasij That which is common and separable cannot of it selfe demonstrate the true Church And the notes of the Church must be proper and inseparable agreeing to all times to euery true Church as Bellarmine affirmeth Also the same must be so conspicuous as that they cannot easily bee pretended by Aduersaries or be at all
Catalogue of descent is duely examined all the passages are not so currant in it as they pretend Fourthly the principle of Aristotle vpon which the last Argument is grounded admitteth many exceptions That because of which another thing is such is it selfe much more such when both things are of the same order and pertake the same affection as Christ which sanctifieth is more holy than they which are sanctified Fire is hotter than water and other things warmed by it c. But it holdeth not in causes equiuocall or partiall or in causes by accident or of diuers order The Sunne causeth life in plants and yet the Sunne is without life A whetstone sharpeneth tooles and yet is dull it selfe Euill manners cause good lawes and yet euill manners are not good Daniels wisdome is reuealed to Baltasar by the queene Dan. 5. 10 11. yet Daniell is not made a 〈◊〉 man nor onely knowne to be such by that report so likewise the name of Christ his glorie his vertue and miracles are famously knowne of belecuers from age to age by reason of the Church and her preaching c. But all this concerning Christ is neither principally nor only made knowne to the world by the present Church nor by the Roman Church more effectually than by other Churches and the Church is a caufe of one kind and order and the Scripture of another The Church is veluti Preco Nuntius like a Cryer and Messenger but the holy Scripture is the Word Handwriting and Epistle of Christ into whose voice and authoritie all the faithfull resolue their beleese concerning Christ and all his actions and according to S. Agustine In sanctis libris manifestatur Dominus ibi eius Ecclesia declaratur In the holy bookes of Scripture the Lord is made manifest and in the same also his Church is declared and in another place In Scripturis diuinis Christum in Scripturis didicimus Ecclesiam In the Scriptures we haue learned Christ and in the Scriptures we haue learned the Church Now if the Scriptures manifest Christ and demonstrate his Church they are of greater authoritie and consequently more credible famous and illustrious than the Church according to the Iesuits Theorem out of Aristotle Propter quod vnum quodquè tale est illud magis IESVIT Fourthly the Church is one that is all the Pastors and Preachers thereof deliuer and consequently all her professors and children beleeue one and the same Faith ANSWER The visible Church in regard of the sound and liuing part thereof is one both in Faith and Charitie Ephes. 4.3.4 c. But this vnitie is more or lesse perfect at some times and in some persons than in other Vnitie in all Veritie and in all sanctitie of Vertue and Charitie is necessarie to Saluation in praeparatione animi in the purpose and intention of heart Rom. 12. 18. and actuall Vnitie in fundamentall points of Faith and in the maine offices of Charitie is simply necessarie to Saluation Heb. 12.14 but perfect cōcord excluding all discord is not perpetually found amongst the best members of the visible Church There was contention among the Disciples Luc. 22.24 and the Affrican and European Churches were diuided concerning rebaptising and the Eastrne and Westerne Churches about the day of Easter S. Augustine saith That good men being but proficients may be at strife Aquinas affirmeth That discord is not a sinne vnlesse it ouerthrow Charity or be corrupted with error concerning matters of Faith which are necessarie to bee knowne to Saluation or in smaller points with 〈◊〉 Also discord may happen in the visible 〈◊〉 by the pride ambition and faction of the in which case 〈◊〉 persons although they 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 all lawfull peace and 〈◊〉 yet through the 〈◊〉 of those which are enemies to peace they cannot 〈◊〉 it 〈◊〉 120.5 6 7. IESVIT For if the Preachers and Pastors of the Church disagree about matters which they preach as necessarie points of Faith how can their Tradition and Testimonie be of Credit therein or haue any Authoritie to persuade who will or canfirmely 〈◊〉 disagreeing witnesses vpon their words ANSWER First They which disagree in part and accord in the maine may haue substantiall 〈◊〉 although they want the prefection of vnitie and these are of credit and may persuade in those things wherein they consent as appeareth by S. Cyprian and his Colleagues disagreeing with the Romans touching Appeales and 〈◊〉 and yet conuerting many people to godlinesse Secondly When there is discord betweene 〈◊〉 in 〈◊〉 matters the Orthodox partie 〈◊〉 many 〈◊〉 all those whose hearts the Lord 〈◊〉 and mooueth to discerne and obey the truth Otherwise in the great Dissentions of the antient Church reported by Eusebius Lib. 2. cap. 60. 61. d. vita Constantini no people should haue beene conuerted to God Thirdly If 〈◊〉 take away all possibilitie of persuading from the Pastors of the Church then the Romans which 〈◊〉 with 〈◊〉 Ancestors in many points of Doctrine and haue had so many Schismes whereof some haue beene most bloudie and pernicious to the Christian World must want power to persuade The efficacie of persuasion dependeth vpon absolute concord onely as vpon a greater motiue of credibilitie and not as vpon a proper efficient and although Preachers should be contentious and factious yet the Word of Christ truly deliuered by any of them is in it selfe mightie in operation and able to persuade and conuert soules and God Almightie many times shewes his power in the Ministerie of infirme and imperfect Instruments Phil. 1. 16 17. IESVIT And this consent must be conspicuous and euident For if in outward appearance and shew Preachers dissent one from another in maine and materiall Doctrines their Authoritie is crazed and their Testimonie of no esteeme Howsoeuer perchance their Dissentions may by some distinctions so be coloured that one cannot conuince him that would boldly vndertake to defend as D. Field vndertakes for Protestants that their Dissentions are but verball But what is this to the purpose Doe the accused Dissentioners allow this Doctors Reconciliation 〈◊〉 they giue ouer Contention hereupon No but confesse that such Reconcilers misse of their meaning and that they disagree substantially about the very prime Articles of Faith How can these men be witnesses of Credit for substantiall Articles concerning which there is open confessed and professed Dissention among them ANSVVER The consent of Pastors according to one sence to wit expounding Must for 〈◊〉 Ought as 1. Tim. 3.2 is to be conspicuous and euident both in Faith and in Charitie and when this is fulfilled the testimonie of Pastors is of greater weight and credit among men But this perfection of Visitie is 〈◊〉 and therefore although the same be 〈◊〉 in part the Pastors of the Church are not despoyled of all Authoritie and credit in deliuering Christs Word if the better
Church then it is not necessarie that because God will haue all men to be saued by his antecedent will therefore the true Church must in all ages be visibly vniuersall A contingent cause vndetermined doth not produce or argue a constant certaine and necessarie effect The antecedent will of God is a contingent cause in respect of the perpetuall visible vniuersalitie of the Church Ergo The antecedent will of God doth not produce or argue a perpetuall visible vniuersalitie of the Church For if notwithstanding the antecedent will of God many singular persons and whole nations may be for some space of time destitute of outward calling by the ministerie of the Church and of all morall possibilitie for that space of time of the hauing thereof and are not guiltie of the sinne of infidelitie because without any speciall demerit of their owne they are destitute of the word of Faith as it is maintained by Aquinas and his followers then the antecedent will of God is only a contingent cause in respect of producing arguing outward calling by the ministerie of the Church and consequently of the perpetuall visible vniuersalitie of the true Church But the first is true as appeareth by the Indies before Columbus arriuing in their coasts and by many barbarous people and nations liuing in remote regions and hauing no preachers of the Gospell sent vnto them before the two hundred fiue hundred or six hundred yeare after Christ Ergo The latter is also true IESVIT Sixtly this Church is holy both in life and doctrine holy for life shining in all excellent and wonderfull sanctitie such as the Apostles gaue example of as Pouertie Chastitie Obedience Virginitie Charitie in vndergoing labours for the helpe of Soules Fortitude in suffering heroicall Martyredomes Zeale and Patience in the rigorous treatie of their bodies by miraculous Fasting and other austerities ANSVVER Sanctitie is a propertie and inseperable qualitie of the true Church in respect of all the liuing members thereof Cant. 4. 7. Eph. 5.26 27. 1. Cor. 14.33 Rom. 1.7 Eph. 1.18 c. 4.12 Phil. 4.21 Coll. 1.12 1. Cor. 6.11 1. Iohn 3.18 And the same is called holy First Because it is clensed and washed from the guiltinesse of sinne by the immaculate blood of Christ Apoc. 1.5 Heb. 10.10 c. 13.12 Secondly Because it is pertaker of the holinesse of Christ the head thereof by Grace 1. Cor. 1.30 Ephes. 5.30 Iohn 17.19 Heb. 12.10 and because of the speciall inhabitation and operation of the holy Ghost Ephes. 1.13 1. Cor. 3.17 1. Thessal 4.8 2. Tim. 1. 14. Thirdly Because it is called and consecrated vnto holinesse 2. Tim. 1.9 1. Pet. 2.9 1. Thessal 4.7 Apoc. 1.6 Fourthly Because the Faith Doctrine Lawes Sacraments and Religion thereof are holy Iud. v. 20. 2. Pet. 2.20 Tit. 3.5 Fiftly Because the vertues and actions thereof are truely and indeed holy whereas the vertues of Infidels which liue out of the Church are prophane and vnholy as bearing the image of vertue but wanting the true forme and fruit thereof But our Aduersarie passeth by these causes and reasons of the sanctitie of the Church being proper and essentiall which are deliuered in the holy Scripture and will haue the same to be reputed holy because of monasticall vowes of Pouertie Obedience and Chastitie and for externall Fastings Whippings wearing of Haire-cloth and other bodily exercises which some Heremites and Cloysterers performe in the Roman Church Touching this Assertion we are to obserue First that the Iesuit doth onely affirme these things but bringeth no proofe and therefore it were sufficient for me to say with S. Hierom Quod de Scripturis non habet authoritatem eadem facilitate contemnitur qua probatur That which wanteth authoritie from the Scriptures may as well bee despised as receiued Secondly when the principall Doctors of the Romish Church deliuer the causes why the true Church is stiled Holy they either omit these externall exercises or else onely mention them as accessarie Turrccrem sum d. Eccles. l. 1. c. 9. Cordub Arma. fid q. 1. propos 2. Bannes 22. q. 1. ar 10. Bellarm. d. Eccles l. 4. c. 11. Greg. Val. to 3. Disp. 1. punct 7. Thirdly these exercises are common to hypocrites and heretickes and they make not people holy and good which vse them and the Church may bee holy without them and therefore they are no constitutiue parts or essentiall properties of the sanctitie of the Church That the same are common appeareth by the example of the Pharisees and of many Heretickes which vsed these exercises with great austeritie and yet they were no sound parts of the holy Catholicke Church And that the Church may be holy without these exercises is manifest by reason and example The Church which wanteth these things may haue all the causes of sanctitie to wit Faith Hope Charitie Regeneration remission of sinnes c. Therefore it may bee holy without them And the Church of the Hebrews to which Saint Paul wrote his Epistle was an holy Church yet Saint Chrysostome saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. There was not so much as any footstep of a Monke c. Fourthly these monasticall vowes haue many times distained and corrupted the Church and therefore they are no mayne or proper actions of holinesse Aluares Pelagius saith of the Monkes and Cloysterers of his age that they were Paupertatis professores sed haereditatum successores Professours of pouertie and heires apparant to euerie mans land Mathew Paris saith That the Mendicants in England raised stately buildings equall to Princes palaces and they hoorded vp inualuable treasure c. And Papirius Masson saith Pouertie which religious Orders seeme to professe is more hatefull to them than to any other sort of men The vow of Chastitie made the most of them more impure than dogs and to stinke before God and men That many of them were Sodomites is affirmed by no meaner man than Saint Bernard who saith Besides fornication adulterie and incest the deedes of ignominie and turpitude for which the cities of Sodome and Gomorrha were predamned are not wanting c. Rodericus a famous Bishop saith That Votaries and Regulars were not satisfied with one woman but kept Concubines and young Damosells sans number Alphonsus Castro saith The incontinencie of Priests is in these dayes so frequent that if but one of them be knowne to liue chastly although many other necessarie 〈◊〉 lities be wanting in him he is esteemed a holy man by the people for this one qualitie Aluares Pelagius saith That the Cells of Anchorites were dayly visited by women And in another place Priests for many yeeres together doe arise euerie day from their Concubines sides and without going to Confession say Masse And in another place Quis Clericorum intra sanctam Ecclesiam Castitatem seruat What Clerke is there within the holy Church which obserueth
Chastitie And againe There be few Priests in these dayes in Spaine and Apulia which doe not openly foster Concubines Dionysius Carthusian saith Paucissimi eorum proh dolor continenter viuunt Few of them out alas liue continently And S. Bridget the Nunne in her Reuelation saith Not one among a hundred And the same Bridget speaking of Nunnes saith Talia loca similiora sunt Lupanaribus quam sanctis Cellis Such places are more like Brothelhouses and common Stewes than holy Cells The Vow of Pouertie brought forth perpetuall Theft and Rapine and that from the Widow and fatherlesse The Vow of Chastitie filled all the Earth with the steame of Brothelsome impuritie and the Vow of blind Obedience caused hatefull and direfull Murthers euen of Kings and Gods annointed Concerning whom the holy Prophet saith Touch not mine annointed and the sacred Historie reports to all posteritie That Dauids heart smote him because he cut off a piece of the Kings Garment These voluntarie Exercises and Deuotions carrie a great shew of perfection and merit among worldly people euen as the Pharisaicall will-worship in ancient time did But yet experience taught them which beheld these things in the height of their pride that the more these Vowes and religious Orders encreased the more Ignorance Infidelitie Iniquitie and all manner of Plagues multiplyed in the World Antonin sum Histor. p. 3. tit 23. c. 9. § 5 IESVIT This sanctitie shineth not in all the Children of the Church but in the more eminent Preachers and Professors which kind of sanctitie together with Miracles if the Church did want she could not be a sufficient Witnesse of Truth vnto Infidels who commonly neuer begin to affect and admire Christianitie but vpon the fight 〈◊〉 sucb wonders of sanctitie and other extraordinarie workes ANSWER Sanctitie of Grace which is a perpetuall propertie of the true Church shineth in all the sound and liuing members of the Church Phil. 2. 15. And whereas the measure and degrees thereof are 〈◊〉 the most eminent degree of sanctitie is not alwayes found in Preachers or in Popes and greater Prelates or in persons professing Monasticall life but the same may be equall or greater in Lay persons or in people of meane esteeme as appeareth by the state of the Iewish Church in the dayes of Esay cap. 1.9 and of the Pharisees at such time as our Sauiour was incarnate Dominicus Bannes a famous Schoole-man treating of the sanctitie of the Church saith That the supreame Bishop the Pope is said to be most holy because of his State and Office although indeed hee is not so Rodericus speaking of the Clergie of his times saith Rectores moderni non Pastores sed raptores ouium tonsores non ad viridia pascua ductores non piscatores sed negotiatores non dispensatores bonorum crucifixi sed voratores c. Our moderne Church-men are not Pastors but Raueners they fleece their Sheepe and lead them not to the greene Pastures they are not stewards but deuourers of the goods of Christ crucified c. And Laurent Iustinianus saith The greatest part of Priests and Clerkes in our dayes liue voluptuously and after the manner of Beasts Paucissimi reperiuntur qui honestè viuunt rariores autem qui pabulum salutis gregibus valeant praebere fidelium Verie few are found which lead an honest life and a farre smaller number of such as are able to minister the food of saluation to their flockes In the next words our Iesuit affirmeth That if the Church wanted the sanctitie aforesaid together with Miracles shee could not be a sufficient witnesse of Truth to Infidels c. This Assertion concerning the perpetuitie and absolute necessitie of Miracles in all Ages is repugnant to the Fathers and to many learned Papists and it is voluntarily affirmed by our Aduersarie First If the gift and power of Miracles were perpetuall and inseparable from the true 〈◊〉 in all Ages this would appeare by some reuelation or promise of holy Scripture as well as other gifts and priuiledges of the same But there is no reuelation or promise concerning perpetuitie of the gift of Miracles more than of the gift of Tongues or of Prophesie or the giuing of the Holy Ghost by imposition of Hands c. And these gifts were neuer promised in the Scripture to be perpetuall and are long since ceased August Retrac Lib. 1. cap. 13. Secondly The Fathers which liued since the foure hundreth yeere affirme That outward Miracles such as the Apostles wrought were 〈◊〉 in their dayes and not absolutely necessarie for after times Gregor Moral 27. cap. 11. Lib. 34. cap. 2. super Euang. Hom. 29. August d. vera Relig. cap. 25. d. Ciuit. Dei Lib. 22. cap. 8. sup Psal. 130. Chrysost. in Matth. Hom. 4. Imperfect in Matth. Hom. 49. sup 1. Timoth. Hom. 10. Thirdly Many learned Papists hold That the gift of Miracles is rare and vnnecessarie in these later times Abulensis Leuit cap. 9. q. 14 Trithemias Abbas Lib. 8. Q. ad Imperat. Max. q. 3. Roffensis c. Luther a. Captiu Babylon c. 10. n. 4. pag. 81. Acosta d. Procur Indorum Salut Lib. 2. cap. 8. pag. 218 Stella in Luc. cap. 11. Cornel. Muss Conc. Dominic Pentecost pag. 412. And some of them censure the reporters of Miracles as Impostors and grosse Fabulers and Lyars Gerson Lib. c. Sect. Flagellantium Canus Loc. Lib. 11. cap. 6 Ludouicus Viues Erasmus Occham Espenceus Fourthly If Infidels cannot be assured that the Wonders which they outwardly behold are the workes of the true God and if the same may be the illusions of the Deuill then the operations of such Miracles can be no infallible argument of Veritie and consequently no meanes of conuerting Infidels But Bellarmine affirmeth That before the approbation of the Church which Infidels know not it is not euident and certaine by Faith concerning any Miracle that the same is true and Diuine and it is possible for the same to be an illusion of Sathan IESVIT Holy for doctrine in regard her Traditions be diuine and holy without any mixture of errour ANSVVER The Church which buildeth it selfe vpon the foundation of the Prophets and Apostles Eph. 2.20 And which heareth the voyce of Christ Iohn 10.27 is holy both for life and doctrine But as holinesse of life is compatible with some kind of sinne 1. Iohn 1.8 Euen so sanctitie of doctrine excludeth not all errour St. Augustine a man as holy as any since the Apostles saith I must not deny but that as in my manners euen so in my workes and writings many things may iustly and without any temeritie be reprehended IESVIT For if the Church could deliuer by consent of Ancestors together with truth some errours her Traditions euen about truth were questionable and could not bee beleeued vpon the warrant of her Tradition ANSWER If Ancestors may erre
and be deceiued then the later Church may vpon their reports deliuer some errours together with truth and yet the Tradition thereof concerning matters which are grounded vpon diuine Testimonie is infallible The Church may speake of it selfe and vpon report of them whose Testimonie is humane and fallible And it speaketh also vpon the authoritie of Gods word In the first it may erre and bee deceiued and consequently the Testimonie thereof absolutely bindeth not people to beleeue But when it confirmeth her doctrine and Tradition by diuine Testimonie the Tradition thereof is the Tradition and voyce of God himselfe worthy of all acceptation Neither is her Testimonie fallible and doubtfull in this latter kinde because of errour in the first any more than the Prophesie of Nathan was fallible when he spake by inspiration to Dauid 2. Sam. 7.5 Although when he formerly answered by a humane spirit he was deceiued Balaam is a credible witnesse in all those verities which God put into his mouth Numb 23.5 18. 24. 1. And yet in other matters which proceeded from himselfe he was fallible And Iosephus a Iew is credited in the Testimonie which hee gaue of Christ Antiq. lib. 18. c. 4 although in many other reports he was deceiued The antient Fathers Iustin Martyr Ireneus Origen St. Cyprian erred in some things and yet their authoritie in other matters which they deliuered consonantly to holy Scripture is credible Our Aduersaries confesse that their Popes may erre personally and that their Popes and Councels may erre in the Premises and Arguments from which they deduce conclusions of Faith and yet they will haue their definitiue sentences to be of infallible authoritie Cardinall Iacobatius speaking in the Popes defence saith That it followeth not because one hath erred that therefore his testimonie is altogether inualid and to be refused And hee confirmeth this assertion by diuers Texts of the Canon Law IESVIT And whereas some Protestants affirme that the Church cannot erre in fundamentall points but onely in things of lesse moment The truth is that in her perpetuall Traditions she cannot erre at all If the Tradition of the Church deliuering a small thing as receiued from the Apostles may be false one may call into question her Traditions of moment especially if he please to thinke them not to be of moment for like as if we admit in the Scriptures errours in small matters wee cannot be sure of its infallibitie in substantiall matters So likewise if we grant Tradition perpetuall to be false in things of lesse importance we haue no solid ground to defend her Traditions as assured in other of moment wherefore as he that should say That Gods written word is false in some lesser matters as when it sayes That S. Paul left his cloake at Troas erreth fundamentally by reason of the consequence which giueth occasion to doubt of the truth of euery thing in Scripture Euen so hee that granteth that some part of Traditions or of the word of God vnwritten may bee false erreth substantially because he giueth cause to doubt of any Tradition which yet as I haue shewed is the prime originall ground of Faith more fundamentall than the verie Scripture which is not knowne to be Apostolicall but by Tradition whereas a perpetuall Tradition is knowne to come from the Apostles by its owne light For what more euident than that that is from the Apostles which is deliuered as Apostolicall by perpetuall succession of Bishops consenting therein ANSWER The true Church in her sounder members erreth not in points fundamentall nor yet in matters of lesse moment maliciously or with pertinacie But the same may be ignorant and also erre in secondarie Articles The reason of the first is because the same should then cease to bee the true Church by corrupting the substance of right faith expresly or vertually and consequently there should remaine no true Church vpon earth which is impossible The reason of the second is because the Church since the Apostles is not guided by immediate inspiration or by Propheticall reuelation but by an ordinarie assistance of grace accompanying the vse of right meanes which remooueth not possibilitie of errour but leaueth space for humane iudgement being regenerate onely in part Heb. 5.2 Gal. 5.17 Aug. Enchir. c. 63. to worke by his proper force and power Secondly the Church hath no perpetuall Traditions but such as are either contained in holy Scripture or which are subseruient to maintaine the faith veritie and authoritie of the holy Scriptures and the doctrine thereof Thirdly whereas the Iesuit saith That euen as no vntruth can be admitted in the holy Scripture in regard of such things as are of the least moment without ouerthrowing the totall authoritie thereof so likewise no errour great or small can bee admitted in the doctrine and Tradition of the present Church because vpon the same will follow the subuersion of all her Tradition euen in matters essentiall I answere That there is not the same reason of the Scripture and the Church for the Scripture is totally and perfectly diuine and must alwayes bee so esteemed and to admit any errour or possibilitie thereof in Scripture were to make God a lyar and consequently to ouerthrow all faith But the present Church is onely the seruant of God and of his word Iohn 10.27 and hath no credit or authoritie but from it and although the same may erre in some things yet there remaineth alwaies a higher and more soueraigne Iudge to wit the holy Ghost speaking in and by the Scriptures to whom Christians desirous of truth may appeale and by whose sentence the Doctrine and Traditions of the present Church are to bee iudged Whosoeuer admitteth any errour or vntruth in the holy Scripture taketh away all authoritie from that which is the prime foundation of supernaturall veritie But he that admitteth error or fallibilitie of iudgement in some Traditions and Doctrines of the Pastours of the present Church doth onely make the credit of a secondarie and inferior witnesse subiect to triall and examination of an higher Iudge And euen as in building the rule and measure of proportion must alwaies be euen and right in it selfe but the workemans hand may possibly leane or shake and applie his rule amisse so likewise the holy Scriptures which are the principles of Theologie and the most exact ballance and measure of diuine Veritie as S. Chrysostome speaketh must be free from all obliquitie of error and to admit the least error in the Scripture ouerthroweth the foundation of Faith But the Ministerie and Tradition of the Church is like an Artificers hand which may sometimes leane and goe awrie and yet the foundation of Veritie abideth firme in the prime authenticall rule and by the same the errour of mens Tradition and Doctrine may be corrected Fourthly the Iesuit affirmeth That Tradition to wit of the
Church since the Apostles is the prime originall ground of Faith more fundamentall than the Scripture This assertion is Antichristian and impudent for can any thing be more fundamentall than the foundation or of greater authoritie than the word of God S. Peter speaking of the Propheticall Scriptures equalleth the same to the sensible voice of God which was vttered in the Apostles audience from heauen Math. 3.17 c. 17.5 saying 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We haue the most sure word of Prophesie c. vpon these words S. Augustine d. verb. Apostoli serm 29. commenteth as followeth Et cum dixisset hanc vocem audiuimus de Coelo delatam subiunxit atque ait habemus certiorem propheticum sermonem sonuit illa vox de Coelo certior est propheticus sermo when the Apostle had said We heard this voice from heauen he addeth further and saith We haue a more sure word of prophesie That voice sounded from heauen and yet the propheticall word is more sure he said more sure not better or truer because that word from heauen was as good and as profitable as the word of prophesie Why therefore more sure Because the hearer was more confirmed by it Our Sauiour himselfe in the Gospell examineth the Traditions of the Pharises and of the Iewish Church then being by the Scriptures Math. 5.6 and 7. Ch. 12.5 c. 15.4 19.4 And the holy Ghost in the new Testament both in the doctrine of Christ and his Apostles confirmeth the Truth which was taught by the authoritie of the Scriptures and Christ Iesus perpetually submitteth himselfe and his doctrine to the triall of the Scriptures and the Apostles after him did the like Acts 26.22 The antient Fathers affirme that the Scriptures are of most eminent authoritie and that wee are aboue all things to giue credit to them and that they are the mouth of God and the verie hand of God and Paul and Peter and Iohn and the whole companie of the Prophets do speake with vs by them and that Faith it selfe by which a iust man liueth is conceiued by them and the Church it selfe is demonstrated to wit tanquam à priori by them But on the contrarie Traditions receiue their authoritie from the Scriptures and may not be admitted vnlesse they agree with the Scriptures And in our Aduersaries Tenet men must first beleeue the authoritie of the Church before they can receiue or beleeue Tradition from all which it followeth that Tradition of the present Church is neither the prime originall ground of Faith nor yet more fundamentall concerning Faith than the Scripture The Trident Councell held it sufficient to equall Tradition with the Scriptures This new master with Baronius Pighius preferreth them before the Scriptures These men perceiue that the Roman Faith cannot subsist vnlesse they depresse the written word of God and exalt the prophane bastardly and Apocriphall Traditions of the Pope They say the Scripture is a breathlesse lumpe a nose of wax a leaden rule Andradius writeth That in the Books of the Scriptures themselues there is no diuinitie or any thing else binding vs to beleeue Stapleton saith That being considered as written it can no way be called the Temple or Tabernacle of the holy Ghost Bosius saith The holy Ghost resideth in the Church more effectually and nobly than in the Bookes of the Scripture And Majoranus hath these words The consent of the Church alone which neuer wanted the spirit of God ought to be of greater esteeme with vs than all mute and tonguelesse Bookes and than all the written volumes which are or euer were and which haue in all ages ministred fuell of contention to the wits of men And Gretsar the Iesuit There would haue beene fewer contentions in the world as I supose if there had beene no Scripture at all Iacob Brower a Reader of Doway saith I would not beleeue the Gospell did not the authoritie of Pope Paul the fift mooue me And lastly it is one of the dictates of Pope Hildebrand canonised by Baronius That no Chapter or Booke of Scripture must bee esteemed canonicall without his authoritie I doubt not but that Romists are able with faire glosses and distinctions to salue these blasphemies and to reconcile dark nesse with light but he that diggeth a pit for people to fall into althought he couer the same with some superficiall tecture is accused by the antient sentence of diuine Law Exod. 21.33 Towards the end of this Section the Iesuit addeth First That the Scripture is not knowne to bee Apostolicall but by Tradition This is false for the Scripture is knowne to come from the Apostles by inward grounds and testimonies contained in it selfe and by the vertue and effects of it as well as by the Tradition of the Church Secondly it is most vntrue that Tradition is knowne to come from the Apostles by it owne light but not Scripture for what internall light hath Tradition more than or aboue the Scripture If it haue then the articles of Popish Tradition Purgatorie adoration of Images c. are more manifest than the articles which Scripture teacheth concerning the incarnation and resurrection of Christ than Heauen and Hell c. Also sacred Scripture is receiued as diuine by all Christians Popish Tradition onely by some The Catalogue of Romish Tradition could neuer to this day be specified and distinctly assigned but the Canon of holy Scripture may Moreouer holie Scripture hath the perpetuall and vnanimous consent of the Primitiue Church Popish Tradition hath not Againe Bellarmine confesseth that nothing is better knowne and more certaine than holy Scripture but if nothing be better known then nothing hath clearer light Thirdly the confirmation of the former to wit What more euident c. is insufficient because that which is known to come from the Apostles by their owne immediat testimonie in writing is more euidently knowne to come from them than that which is affirmed to come from them onely by the report of men which are deceiueable Diuine testimonie maketh things more certaine and infallible than humane The testimonie of the Apostles extant in writing is totally diuine the report of Bishops is in part humane IESVIT And this may bee clearely prooued to omit other pregnant testimonies by the words of our Sauiour in the last of Matthew Going into the whole world teaching all nations baptizing them In the Name of the Father and of the Sonne and of the holy Ghost teaching them to keepe all that I haue commanded you all dayes euen to the consummation of the world A promise of wonderfull comfort vnto them that pawne their soules and saluation vpon Gods word deliuered by perpetuall Tradition For in this sentence appeare these fixe things First That there is still a Christian Church all dayes not wanting in the world so
much as one day till the consummation of the world ANSWER The place of Saint Matthew chapter 28. 19 20. prooueth First that the holy Apostles receiued a Commission and Mandate from Christ to preach the Gospell to all nations both Iewes and Gentiles and to baptise them In the name of the Father Sonne and holy Ghost Marke 16. 15 16. Luke 24.27 Acts 1.8 Rom. 1.14 Secondly that our Sauiour promised his Apostles a perpetuall presence and assistance of his diuine power and grace both in regard of the gifts of edification Acts 2. 4. And in respect of the grace of inward sanctification Iohn 17.17 Thirdly because the Apostles were mortall and not to remaine alwayes personally vpon earth and other Pastors must succeed in the office of Ministerie the promise of Christ touching his spirituall presence and assistance of grace is extended to these successours and when they teach and baptise in such manner as Christ commanded diuine grace is present to their Ministeriall actions and the holy Ghost co-worketh with them Fourthly But yet succeeding Pastors receiued not the same measure of diuine Grace with the Apostles neyther had they immediate and Propheticall reuelation but onely a measure of Grace ordinarie mediate and in some sort conditionall Also the said Promise Matth. 28. 20. was common and equall to all the Apostles and to the successors of one Apostle as well as of another to the successors of Saint Iames and Saint Iohn c. as well as to the successors of Saint Peter Fifthly Notwithstanding the said promise Bishops and Pastors succeeding the Apostles were in respect of themselues subiect to errors and their iudgement in matters of Faith was not absolutely infallible like the Apostles but so farre forth onely as they walked in the footsteps and followed the Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles Our Sauiour promised that he would be alwayes with the Apostles euen to the consummation of the World partly in their personall Teaching whiles they themselues liued in the World and partly in their permanent Doctrine contained in the Scriptures of the New Testament when the same was truly deliuered by their successors And he will be also with succeeding Pastors all Ages according to such a measure of Grace and assistance as is sufficient for the edifying of the Church if they for their owne part be studious to learne diuine Truth from the holy Apostles and carefull to preach the same to others But his promise concerning immunitie from error and mortall offences is not so absolute to successors as it was to the Apostles themselues Sixtly Many antient Expositors affirme That the Promise of Christ Matth. 28.20 is especially made to the iust and faithfull and some of them say to the Elect onely And Occham affirmeth That if there should be found in the whole World but one Orthodox Bishop or but one such Priest and a small number of Lay people professing right Faith in Articles essentiall and willing to embrace all other Diuine Vertie when the same should be manifested vnto them this were sufficient to make good Christ his Promise Matth. 28.20 In the next passage our Aduersarie inferreth and deriueth certaine Propositions from the former Text of Matth. 28. 20. First hee saith There is still a Christian Church all dayes not wanting so much as one day in the World till the consummation thereof I answer That there is still in the World a common Christian Church wherein some beleeuers hold the substance of right Faith But there is not perpetually in the World a Church the more potent and maior part whereof beleeueth and professeth right Faith without error in all points and so infallible in all her Doctrine as was the Primitiue Church which enioyed the immediate and actuall preaching of the Apostles IESVIT Secondly This Church is euer visible and conspicuous For the Church which alwayes teacheth and christeneth all Nations to which Christ saith I am alwayes with you not with you sitting in corners or hidden vnder ground but with you exercising the Office enioyned you in the words precedent Docete omnes gentes baptizantes eos c. ANSWER The Church is euer visible according to some degree of visibilitie but this Scripture teacheth not that the true Church is alwayes largely and gloriously visible The same doth not actually in euerie Age teach and christen all Nations and the Roman Church for sundrie Ages past teacheth and christeneth few or none within Natolia and other large Prouinces liuing in subiection to the Grand Seignior or Emperour of Constantinople And as Christ doth not say verbally in this Text I am alwayes with you sitting in corners so he doth not say I am alwayes with you when you are carryed vpon mens shoulders and tread vpon Emperours neckes and diuide and share the Kingdomes of the World and gather endlesse Riches by selling Pardons and preaching Purgatorie But yet of the two it is farre more agreeable to the Diuine Goodnesse who is a Father of the poore and oppressed to be present to his little flocke in persecution and when it flyeth as a Lambe from the Wolfe and hideth it selfe from the Oppressor Apoc. 12. 14 than that hee hath entayled his perpetuall presence vpon ambitious and oppressing Tyrants which stiled themselues Pastors and were rauening Wolues Scribes and Pharisees imposing insupportable burthens vpon others and not moouing them with one of their owne fingers And there is no cause why the good God which was present with Daniel in the Lyons Denne and with Ionas in the Whales Belly and with Ioseph in the Dungeon and with Iob vpon the Dunghill should in the dayes of the oppressing Antichrist withdraw his presence and assistance from his poore flocke yea although it were sitting in corners and hidden vnder ground IESVIT Thirdly This Church is euer Apostolicall for to his Apostles Christ said I am alwayes with you vntill the consummation of the World not with you in your owne persons but with you in your successors in whom you shall continue to the Worlds end Ergo a lawfull companie of Bishops Pastors and Doctors succeeding the Apostles must be perpetually in the World ANSVVER First The Church may be called Apostolicall because of Faith Plantation and Externall Ordination of Pastors According to Faith and Doctrine in all the maine and substantiall Articles the true Church is euer Apostolicall In regard of Plantation the Primitiue Church was Apostolicall because it was immediately planted and watered by the holy Apostles But Tertullian affirmeth That many particular Churches were not thus planted by Apostles or Apostolicall persons and yet they were truly Apostolicall by reason of consanguinitie of Doctrine with the holy Apostles According to the third manner to wit in respect of Externall Ordination and Imposition of Hands receiued from Bishops lineally succeeding the Apostles a false and corrupt Church may be Apostolicall as I haue formerly prooued And it is
not impossible for a true Church to succeed or come out of a false or for a corrupt Church to reforme it selfe And if this happen there is required no new Ordination of Pastors 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 any Miracles to confirme their Vocation but they which 〈◊〉 ordained in a corrupt Church returning to the right Faith and worship of God make their former Ordination more legitimate holy and effectuall The Iesuit in the words ensuing collecteth from our Sauiours promise I will be with you c. that there must euer bee a companie of Bishops and Pastours succeeding the Apostles because Christ said to them and their successours I will bee with you c. But if this collection be good then euerie one of the Apostles must haue Bishops Pastours and Doctours succeeding them in right faith to the end of the world for Christ spake to them all in generall and also distributiuely to euerie of them c. But the Papals themselues at this day exclude all the successours of other Apostles excepting Saint Peter Neither yet doth our Sauiour limit his presence and assistance to generall Councels or definitiue sentences of Popes but hee speaketh of Preaching and Baptising and therefore if his presence with Pastours and Bishops doe free them from all errour it must free them in Preaching and writing Bookes as well as sitting in Councell Also they to whom Christ is alwayes present are not of infallible iudgement or free from errour in all matters but onely from damnable and malicious errour as appeareth by Saint Cyprian Saint Augustine and all the elect of God Wherefore this promise in regard of the perfection thereof did appertaine to the Apostles themselues and in regard of the veritie of it and for such a measure of assistance as is necessarie to constitute a number of faithfull people more or lesse in euery age to serue Christ truely in the substance of faith and pietie it is fulfilled alwayes euen to the end of the world But because our Aduersaries insist so much vpon this Text to raise their visible and personall succession I will reduce the Argument which they draw out of it into forme and then accommodate mine Answere If Christ will be with his Apostles all dayes to the end of the world then the Apostles not continuing aliue themselues they must remaine in Bishops Pastours and Doctours locally and personally succeeding them to the end of the world But the first is true Ergo c. First if the consequence of this Argument were good then all and euerie one of the Apostles must continue allwayes to the consummation of the world in Bishops Pastours and Doctours lineally succeeding them which Papals themselues denie Secondly lineall and personall succession is not the sole meanes by which the Apostles after their decease remaine in the world but they remaine also in the world by their Scriptures and also by the faith of Beleeuers receiuing and obeying their doctrine Thirdly that which is promised vpon condition is not absolute vntill the condition be fulfilled The presence of Christ is promised to the Apostles successours conditionally and as they were one with the Apostles by imitation and subordination that is so farre as they walked in their steps and conformed their Doctrine and Ministerie to the patterne receiued from them But successours did not alwayes performe this condition neither did the promise inable them to doe it without their owne care and indeuour which was contingent and separable and therefore many times deficient Fourthly Christs presence alwayes to the consummation of the world with some Bishops Pastours and Doctours lineally succeeding the Apostles prooueth not that these Bishops and Pastours cannot erre in any part of their Doctrine for then no particular Bishops hauing Apostolicall ordination could fall into any errour but it sheweth onely that Christ co-operates with them in such Ministeriall duties and actions as they performe according to his Ordinance And when they preach his Doctrine and administer his Sacraments hee himselfe will adde vertue and grace to their actions being duly performed IESVIT Fourthly this Church is vniuersall 〈◊〉 in mundum vniuersum Marc. 16. 15. where I will be alwayes with you ANSWER The true Church is vniuersall according to the manner formerly declared But the Argument taken out of Saint Marke 16.15 prooueth not that it is euer actually vniuersall in respect of place and multitude of professours For as it followeth not that because Christ said he would be with Saint Paul when he preached at Corinth Act. 18.10 therefore he will be euer at Corinth So likewise it is inconsequent to inferre Christ said he would be present in all places of the world with the Apostles when they baptised and preached as he commanded them Ergo he will alwayes be present in those places although their successours neglect his commandement Is God euer in the dungeon in Egypt because he was euer there whilst Ioseph a iust person continued in prison The promise of spirituall presence is annexed to the worke of Preaching and Baptising wheresoeuer it is performed according to the Diuine Ordinance but that which in some ages hath beene done in many places may at other times be performed in few IESVIT Fiftly the Church is one not diuided into parts because it teacheth and beleeueth vniformely all that Christ deliuered and commanded without factions Sects or parts about matters of faith ANSWER It is not affirmed neither can it be concluded out of Mat. 28. that the visible Church in all ages of the world teacheth and beleeueth either vniformely or expresly and distinctly all that Christ deliuered or commanded and in the same Churches which were planted by the Apostles there was discord among infirme Christians 1. Cor. 1.11 IESVIT Sixtly this Church is alwayes holy for doctrine neuer deliuering or teaching any falshood I who am the truth am alwayes with you teaching all nations Holy also for life Christ the Holy of Holies assisting and making her able to conuert Infidels which it could not well doe without signes and tokens of wonderfull sanctitie at the least in her more eminent Preachers ANSVVER Although the true Church is alwaies holy for Doctrine yet it is not perfectly and in the highest degree euer so And it is most inconsequent to argue Christ which is the Truth is euer with the Church Ergo the Church cannot erre or teach any falshood for Christ is alwaies with the faithfull Ephes. 3. 17. yet iust and faithfull people may erre Because Christ was with the Apostles by miraculous inspiration therefore they could not erre or deliuer any falshood great or small but he is present with the sounder part of the Church militant since the Apostles by ordinarie grace and assistance which freeth the same from damnable and malicious errour but not from all errour And this assistance of Grace is greater or lesse according to the good pleasure of Christ and the disposition of his people which are
grieuous penaltie to depart out of Babylon and spirituall Sodome Apoc. 18.4 and Chap. 11.8 Saint Paul speaking of such as teach diuerse doctrine from the Apostles saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Depart from such from their assembly and Church Reade Acts 19. 8. 1. Corinth 10. 14. 2. Cor. 6. 14 15 17. Hos. 10. 17. The Roman Church in those things wherein wee departed from it was shamefully corrupted it did not onely forsake bur depraue and persecute the truth of God the leprosie thereof was incurable for it would not iudge it selfe nor bee reprooued by others nor reforme the least errour but desperately followed the Canon Si Papa c And none might inioy life and breath within her Precincts which would not obey her Traditions These Romuleans vnlesse they were blinded like Elymas could not be ignorant at least of some of their errours and corruptions but they chose rather in their Tridentine Synode to proclaime and propugne apertly or couertly all their antient forgeries than to compassionate the distressed and 〈◊〉 Christian world by mittigating or condescending according to truth in the smallest matters It had beene most facile for them without any preiudice or dammage to themselues to haue permitted the Communion of the holy Eucharist in both kindes the publicke 〈◊〉 of God in a knowne and vnderstood Language to haue abolished the adoration of Images c. But their Luciferian pride and mallice was so transcendent that they rather presumed to obtrude new Scandalls vpon the Christian World than to vse the least Moderation for the peace of the Church And euer since that Synod they haue proceeded from euill to worse obscuring and out-facing the Truth with Forgerie and Sophistrie They haue conspired against Kingdomes and States they haue surpassed professed Infidels in perfidious Stratagemes and immane Crueltie Lastly whereas they expelled vs by Excommunication and chased vs away from them by Persecution yet this Romane Aduocate taxeth vs of Schisme and Apostasie neuer remembring what S. Augustine long since deliuered The Sacriledge of Schisme is then committed when there is no iust cause of separation Or what some of his owne part haue said The Sheepe are not bound to be subiect to any Shepheard which is become a Wolfe or is aduerse to the saluation of the Flocke IESVIT Which also plainely will appeare to any man of vnderstanding that casts vpon her an impartiall eye For is she not conspicuously one the professors thereof agreeing in all points of Faith howsoeuer they differ about small vndefined Questions ANSVVER Externall Vnitie is found amongst Infidels and the Turkes being more in number than Papists neuer disagree amongst themselues touching matters of their Religion Shall wee then say as the Iesuit doth It will plainely appeare to any man of vnderstanding that casts his eye vpon Turkie that the same hath Veritie because it is conspicuously one Saint Augustine saith That Iewes Heretikes and Infidels obserue Vnitie against Vnitie S. Bernard Alia est vnitas Sanctorum alia facinorosorum The Vnitie of Saints is one thing and the Vnitie of wicked men Deceiuers another S. Hilarie Vnitas fidei vnitas perfidiae There is Vnitie of Faith and there is likewise perfidious and faithlesse Vnitie S. Gregorie saith That the ministers of Antichrist shall cleaue together like the skales of Leuiathan Therefore because externall Vnitie is in it selfe a thing common and Iewes and Mahometists enioy the same more apparently than many Christians our Aduersarie must prooue that his Church hath Veritie before his argument taken from externall Vnitie can be of any force Neither is Papisticall Vnitie so entire and absolute as this man gloryeth for Papalls disagree both in Doctrine and Manners They differ concerning the supreame Authoritie of the Church Whether it be in the Pope or in the Generall Councell They differ in the matter of Free-will and Grace They differ concerning the manner of the Conception of the Virgin Marie There are three Opinions among them concerning the Temporall dominion of Popes Some say he hath direct Temporall power some say indirect some say hee hath none but by the free Donation of Princes and that Princes were euill aduised in yeelding him so much And moderne Popes disagree with the antient concerning the Dignitie of vniuerfall Bishop adoration of Images Transubstantiation Communion in both kinds and the merit of Good workes Also they themselues complaine of grieuous hatred and discord reigning generally among them and some of them say There is greater Concord among Gentiles And when they colour these palpable Dissentions pretending that they are readie to submit themselues to the iudgement of the Pope First this Iudge and Vmpire is many times a Peace-breaker and no Peace-maker an Ismael in the Christian World whose hand is against euerie man and euerie mans hand is against him Secondly Vnitie which is founded on blind Obedience is onely an Vnitie of Pollicie and not of true Faith Thirdly this submission maketh not actuall Concord and miserable Dissention both intestine and forraine at home and abroad rageth betweene Popes and Princes and betweene one Popish Faction and another The Guelphes and Gibellines the Papalls and Imperialls are as famous in Histories for their Discord as the sonnes of Cadmus and when Papistrie was most potent the Christian World was most distracted IESVIT Apparently vniuersall so spread ouer the World with Credit and Authoritie that whole Mankind may take sufficient notice of her and her Doctrine for the embracing thereof ANSWER The Roman is a particular Church and not vniuersall it is onely an vnsound member of the whole and not the whole Rom. 1. 6. S. Paul saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Among whom are yee also But a Church which is but one amongst the rest cannot be the whole and vniuersall Church It is as absurd to say that the Romane Church is the vniuersall Church as to affirme that England is the vniuersall World If the vniuersall Church be taken properly or absolutely it comprehendeth both the Triumphant and Militant Church Augustine Enchir. cap. 56. and 61. Couaruuias Resol Lib. 4. cap. 14. If it be taken restrictiuely it is the whole Church Militant of each Age. If Catholike be taken for that which is Orthodoxall in Faith and which holdeth no diuision with the common Bodie of Christianitie according to which notion the Fathers tearme particular Churches Catholike then neyther is this Title proper to the Romane Church alone neyther can Papists iustly assume the name of Catholike vntill they haue proued their Faith to be Orthodoxall and iustified themselues from being the Authors of Discord in the Christian World And to answere that which followeth although the Romane Church is spread ouer sundrie parts of the World because some people professing the Romane Faith trauaile or reside in many Countreyes and exercise their Religion where they trauaile or liue yet this
Vertue Deut. 31. 21. Secondly Their doctrine of Pardons ministred daily occasion of intollerable wickednesse For although their Scholemen plastered the same with subtle distinctions yet the people entertained them according to the outward letter and practised accordingly Thirdly By some part of their doctrine they 〈◊〉 people to commit sinne Equiuocation is a doctrine of Periurie To affirme that it is lawfull to depose Princes and take away their 〈◊〉 in case of Heresie is a plaine doctrine of 〈◊〉 worse than murder and if the Pope may command murder why may he not also command adulterie theft and blasphemie The doctrine of the Popes authoritie to dispence with oathes is perilous and pernitio us to the safetie of mankind making way to all kind of fraud and iniustice If the Roman Church be so apparantly and infinitly holy why doth it openly maintaine Stewes and receiue yearely tribute and part stake with Harlots and wherefore are Sanctuaries the harbours and dennes of Assisines and other enormous delinquents tollerated and supported by this Church It is a monstrous doctrine which was hatched by Pope Vrban and approoued by Baronius That they are not to be iudged murtherers which slay excommunicate persons The exemption of 〈◊〉 from being tried in Causes Criminall before Christian Magistrates is a doctrine which maketh way to most outragious offences Gulielmus Nubrigensis lib. 2. cap. 16. The Iudges complained that there were many robberies and rapes and murthers to the number of an hundred then presently committed within the realme by Ecclesiasticall persons vpon presumption of exemption from the censure of the lawes We cannot be persuaded that the Roman Church is holy in such high and extrordinarie manner as our Aduersarie boasteth because the greatest Clerkes of that societie vndertake the defence of such impieties as are detestable in Nature and condemned by the light of common Reason Garnets Powder-plot hath many Patrons Cardinall Baronius commendeth to the skies yong Henrie the Emperors sonne for rebelling against his naturall father for deposing imprisoning and bringing him with sorrow to the graue what Turke or Sauage would be the encomiast of such vnnaturall and enormous villanie IESVIT Most 〈◊〉 Apostolicall 〈◊〉 a most glorious succession of Bishops and Pastors from the Apostles famous in all monuments of Historie and Antiquitie who were neuer noted as deliuering 〈◊〉 doctrines the one to the other In which proofe that these properties agree to the Roman and be wanting in the Protestant Church J will not inlarge my selfe as I otherwise might as well not to wearie your Maiestie as also not to seeme to diffide the matter being most cleere of your Maiesties judgement wherefore it is more than cleere That the Roman Church is the One Holy Catholicke Apostolicke Church by whose Tradition Christian Religion hath beene is and shall be euer continued from the Apostles to the worlds end ANSVVER First If the present Roman Church do want the life and soule of Apostolicall Succession to wit Apostolicall Doctrine locall and titular Succession is only a Pharisaicall cloake or a painted wall Acts 23.3 and common to Caiaphas Paul Samosaten Nestorius and to many other notorious Heretickes Secondly The visible Succession of the Bishops and Pastors of the said Church from the Apostles is not most glorious and famous by the report of all monuments of Historie and Antiquitie but the same hath beene notoriously distained in latter times by Simoniacall entrance of Popes and Prelats by Schysmaticall intrusions and by commutation of the forme of election of Pastors appointed by the Apostles and exercised in the Primatiue Church And whereas the Aduersarie contendeth that Roman Bishops and Pastours hane Succession of doctrine because Ecclesiasticall Historie is silent in noting latter Popes for deliuering contrarie doctrines the one to the other both the Illation it selfe and the antecedent or ground of the Illation are false First it is inconsequent to inserre negatiuely from humane Historie and to say Histories are silent and therefore no such matter was Our Sauiour prooueth the Pharisees and Sadduces to be errants because their present doctrine was repugnant to the Scripture and had the Pharisees or Sadduces replied That their doctrine was the same which Moses the Prophets taught because they had Snccession and Histories were silent when they changed the antient Faith they had iustified themselues vpon as good grounds as Papals do Secondly it is false which this disputer venteth so confidently That Histories and antient Monuments are altogether silent of the Innouations which were made by latter Popes and we are able as in due place it shall appeare to produce testimonies of Historie to the contrarie IESVITS 2. Argument Protestants haue the holy Scriptures deliuered vnto them by and from the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolical Church but they receiued them from no other Church than the Roman Ergo the Roman is the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church ANSVVER This Sillogisme is peccant in forme and both the propositions are affirmatiue in the second figure which I note the rather because the Aduersarie at the end of his Argument cryeth Victoria saying An Argument conuicting and vnanswerable I must therefore reduce the same to a lawfull forme and then answer That Church by and from which the Protestants receiue the Scriptures is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church The Protestants receiue the Scriptures from the Roman Church Ergo The Roman Church to the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church First If this Argument be conuicting and vnanswerable as the Iesuit boasteth then these which follow are such That from which the Russians receiued the Scriptures is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church The Russians receiued the Scriptures from the Greeke Church Ergo The Greeke Church is the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church Also that Church from which the Apostles receiued the Scriptures was the true Church The Apostles receiued the Scriptures from the Sinagogue of the Iewes gouerned by the Pharisees Ergo The Synagogue of the Iewes gouerned by the Pharisees was the true Church The deliuerie of the Text of the holy Scriptures is common to the true and corrupt Church and not proper to the Only Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church as appeareth by the Synagogue which being a corrupt Church at the time of our Sauiours Aduent yet by the speciall prouidence of God preserued and deliuered the Text of the old Testament Rom. 3.2 And S. Agustine testifieth of the Iewes That they were Librarie keepers to Christians of the Bookes of the Law and Prophets And S. Hierom saith That the Hebrews did not corrupt the Text of the old Testament Also the Donatists and Nouatians deliuered the incorrupt Text of holy Scripture to their followers Secondly the proposition of the former Argument hath another defect The Text of holy Scriptures may be deliuered by a particular Church which is but a member of the vniuersall and therefore it is
inconsequent to conclude That because the Protestants receiued the Scriptures from the Roman Church therefore they receiued them to wit immediatly from the vniuersall Church The Minor proposition to wit the Protestants receiued the Scriptures from no other Church than from the Romane may be taken in a double sence For either it may be vnderstood originally and by way of authoritie that is The Protestants receiued the Scriptures both originally and deriuatiuely from and by the authoritie of the Romane Church onely or else it may bee vnderstood indicatiuely The Protestants receiued the Scriptures by the hand of the Romane Church and were first of all instructed and told by that Church that the same were diuine Bookes yet they receiued them not onely or principally from that church but also from the Primitiue Church which led them originally to the Apostles themselues And besides the former Tradition by reading and studying the holy Scriptures they learned sufficient matter out of those heauenly bookes to confirme them that they were diuine and of God Philemon receiued S. Pauls Epistle by the hand of Onesimus he did not esteeme Onesimus a seruant who had beene a fugitiue an infallible witnesse in himselfe but the argument and contents of S. Pauls Epistle persuaded him that S. Paul was the Author A man may receiue the Kings Proclamation from off a pillar or his great Seale by the hand of a meane clarke So likewise the bookes of holy Scriptures are first conueyed vnto vs by Ecclesiasticall testimonie and Tradition but they containe heauenly veritie and doctrine within themselues which persuade the diligent readers and learners of them that they are diuine IESVIT The Maior I prooue If Protestants haue not the Text of Scripture by and from the one holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church they cannot be certaine they haue the true incorrupt Text the Apostles deliuered and recommended as Diuine to the first 〈◊〉 seeing the Tradition of any other Church is fallible and may deceiue And if it may deceiue how can they be certaine that they are not deceiued seeing they themselues liued not in the Apostles dayes to see with their owne eyes what Copies the Apostles deliuered But Protestants as they pretend be certaine that they haue the true incorrupt Apostolicall Text of Scripture Ergo they haue it vpon the Authoritie of the holy Catholike Apostolike Church ANSWER The Argument whereby the Aduersarie confirmeth his Maior is this If the Protestants receiue the Scriptures from any other but the Holy Catholique Church they cannot be certaine that the same are incorrupt because a fallible Witnesse may deceiue Answ. They which receiue the Scriptures from the hands of a corrupt Church may be deceiued if there be not some other infallible meanes besides the Testimonie of that Church to assure them But if that Church be onely a Messenger to deliuer and there be found in the thing deliuered that which is certaine and infallible in it selfe to wit the Testimonie of the Apostles and of the Spirit of God speaking in and by those Scriptures Acts 24. 25. then they which immediately receiue the Text of the Scripture from a fallible Church may be certaine that they are not deceiued It is not necessarie that the Messenger by and from whose hands wee receiue immediately the Text of the Scriptures should be infallible in all things for then wee must receiue them from the hands of no particular Church or particular Councell vnconfirmed by the Pope or from any particular Pastour of the Church because these are fallible And according to our Aduersaries Tenet infallibilitie of Iudgement is found onely in the Pope and Councell confirmed by him And from hence it will in like sort follow that for the first two or three hundred yeeres beginning from the death of the Apostles in which time there was no generall Councell yea for certaine Ages after generall Councels began vntill the Canon of the Scripture was expressely assigned by some generall or particular Councell confirmed by the Pope Christians should haue remained vncertaine touching the sacred Authoritie of Diuine Scripture because the meanes by which they receiued them immediately were fallible The Authoritie of the holy Scripture dependeth vpon the immediate Messenger which deliuereth the Bookes vnto vs no more than the Authoritie of the Kings Proclamation dependeth vpon the Sergeant who proclaymes it or sets it vpon a Pillar to be read of all men but vpon the first Diuine Witnesses which wee know to be the Authors of the Scripture not because Pope Paul the fifth or Clement the eight say so but because the Witnesses themselues affirme it in their Scripture or deliuer that in their Scripture by which it is prooued to such as are eleuated by Grace and taught of God IESVIT Now the Minor That they haue the Scripture from the Romane is apparent For what other Church did deliuer vnto Luther the Text of the Bible assuring him that they had it by Tradition of Ancestors time out of mind as giuen originally by the Apostles which is accordingly acknowledged by M. Whitaker and others but particularly by Luther himselfe Ergo the Romane Church is the one holy Catholike Apostolike Church whose Tradition doth deliuer infallibly vnto vs the Text of Scripture ANSVVER The Protestants receiuing the Bookes of holy Scripture by the hand of the Roman Church proueth not the said Church to be the onely holy Catholike and Apostolike Church any more than the receiuing of Baptisme by Heretikes or the Old Testament by the Synagogue of which the Pharisees were a part proue the same to be the true infallible Church IESVIT And if the true Apostolicall Text then also the true Apostolicall Sense ANSWER The sequele is denyed For it is not necessarie that they which truly deliuer the Text shall also truly deliuer the Apostolicall sense and on the contrarie a lying sence may be deliuered by them which retaine the true and incorrupt Letter of the Text as appeareth by the Pharisees Arrians Donatists and many other Heretikes IESVIT This I proue If the Apostles did not deliuer the bare Text but together with the Text the true sense of Scripture to be deliuered perpetually vnto posteritie then they who by Tradition receiue from the Apostles the true Text must together receiue the true sense But all principall Protestants affirme No man doubteth but the Primitiue Church receiued from the Apostles and Apostolicall men not onely the Text of Scripture but also the right and natiue sense which is agreeable to the Doctrine of the Fathers that from the Apostles together with the Text descends the Line of Apostolicall interpretation squared according to the Ecclesiasticall and Catholike sense ANSVVER The Assumption of the former Argument to wit The Apostles together with the Text deliuered the true sense of all their Scriptures to those people to whom they wrote is vncertaine They deliuered no doubt the sense of the Scriptures
an vniforme Tradition of all ages that the place of Saint Paul 1. Cor. 3. 12. is vnderstood of Popish Purgatorie or Math. 16. 19. Iohn 20.23 of Iubilees and Indulgences or the place of Acts 10. 13. Rise Peter and kill of murthering Princes or of the temporall dominion of the Pope If the Papists would impose no other sence vpon the Scripture than such as is confirmed by vniforme Tradition the difference betweene them and vs would easily bee composed but these men euerie day hatch nouell expositions and when they are hunted out of one they flie to another They glorie of antiquitie succession vniforme Tradition and cry Victoria Inuincible Vnanswerable before the combate is finished but they are compelled to forge Authours to impose false expositions vpon the Texts of Fathers sometimes to abridge sometimes to inlarge the Tomes of Councells and to purge and corrade Ecclesiasticall writers old and new and yet being vnable to preuaile by all the former they are forced in many cases to presse the bare authoritie of the Pope and his adheres to warrant their Tradition IESVITS 3d. Argument My third proofe I ground vpon a principle most certaine and set downe by your most gratious Maiestie That the Roman Church was once the Mother Church and consequently the One Holy Catholicke and Apostolicke Church all other Churches being her daughters and that she is not to be forsaken further than it can be prooued that she departed from her selfe that is from the Mother and originall Doctrine deliuered by the Apostles ANSWER This principle whereupon you ground your third Argument is neither true in it selfe nor yet confessed by his excellent Maiestie in the place whereunto you referre vs His Maiestie affirmeth That wee ought not to depart from the Church of Rome in Doctrine or Ceremonie further than she had departed from her selfe in her best estate and from Christ her head This sentence of our most religious King is consequent vpon S. Pauls doctrine Rom. 12. 18. Rom. 14. 13. and the same is consonant to Charitie and Reason and argueth a mind desirous of Concord and Peace and averse from vnnecessarie Innouations And as this moderation is commendable in all men so it is most agreeable to him that is a Father of peace whose word is Beati Pacifici But whereas you incroach vpon his Maiesties speech adding a glosse which is not warranted by the Text and infer a conclusion which the premises affoord not you are herein iniurious both to the Author you alleage and to the Truth The Roman was neuer by diuine institution the Mother Church in regard of all Christians neither Vniuersall in respect of an absolute command and iurisdiction ouer all particular Churches as is challenged by the Canon Dist. 12. c. 1. Non decet c. But it was once a Mother Church as the Seas of Patriarches are stiled Mother-Churches or a Mother-Church respectiuely to such people and nations as were conuerted by her preaching and other Churches were stiled with that title as well as the Roman Theoderet speaking of the Church of Hierusalem saith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 We make knowne vnto you that the most reuerend and godly Cyrill is made Bishop of Hierusalem which is the Mother of all Churches The Roman Church once a Metropolitan or patriarchall Mother Church since the daies of Hildebrand is suspected to be the Mother spoken of Apoc. 17. 5. and some of your owne part haue said that in these latter times Nontam se matrem exhibet quam Noueream she behaueth her selfe more like a stepdame than a naturall mother her brests haue beene verie drie for sundrie ages past and she depriued her children of a principall portion of the food of life and in steed of milke deliuered them water mixt with chaulke Her publicke readings and seruice were in an vnknowne tongue the holy Scriptures were closed vp that people might not cast their eies vpon them fabulous legends were read and preached in steed of Gods word and hereby it came to passe as some of their owne Authors say That the greater number of people vnderstood no more concerning God and things diuine than Infidels or Heathen people IESVIT But she cannot be prooued to haue changed her Doctrine since the Apostles by any monuments of Historie or Antiquitie yea the contrarie in my iudgement may be most euidently prooued in this sort ANSVVER If by monuments of Historie and Antiquitie be vnderstood Human or Ecclesiasticall Monuments it is inconsequent to inferre that the present Roman Church hath not changed her doctrine since the Apostles although this could not be demonstrated by monuments of Historie c. for there remaineth a more firme and demonstratiue Argument to prooue this to wit the holy Scripture and if the present doctrine of the Roman Church disagree with the Scripture then it is changed from that which it was antiently The rule by which we must trie doctrines is the word of God and not humane Historie and the word of God is true and abideth for euer whereas humane Historie is fallible contingent and corruptible 1. It is not absolutely necessarie that humane Histories of all matters should be composed and the world continued many ages without any written Historie Secondly When the same are written they cause onely humane Faith Thirdly they may totally perish and be suppressed or corrupted by the enemies of Truth Fourthly Historie may be repugnant to Historie and that which is affirmed by some may be contradicted or contrauerted by others and the largenesse and difficultie of the Monuments of Antiquitie may be such as that few people can be able to read and examine them and if they which read and compare them be opposite in iudgement each to other the greater part of people shall be perplexed and cannot know how to resolue themselues Our Aduersaries teach vs That the principall Monuments of Antiquitie to wit the ancient Councels haue not beene faithfully preserued Many things supposititious haue beene added to the workes of the Antient and bastardly Bookes and Sentences passe vnder the titles of Fathers Our Aduersaries being a party whose doctrine is to be examined according to their owne challenge by Monuments of Antiquitie haue presumed to correct purge and alter such Records Lastly when the testimonie of Historians repugnant to their present Tenet is produced against Papals they despise and reiect them to wit Eusebius Socrates Sozomene c. Baronius a new vpstart censureth all Historians Pighius after one thousand yeares controls the testimonie of generall Councels and it is a rule among them that the antient Fathers then much lesse Histories are not to be 〈◊〉 any 〈◊〉 than they 〈◊〉 the keyes and 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 Church IESVIT The Doctrines that were for diuers ages vniuersally receiued in the Christian Church and no time of their beginning is assigneable
〈◊〉 institutum sed semper retentum est non nisi Authoritate Apostolica traditum rectissimè creditur That which the vniuersall Church holdeth and which was not appointed by Councels but alwayes obserued is most rightly beleeued to be none other than a Tradition of the Apostles Lastly that which is produced out of BB. Whitgift and M. Cartwright belongeth to the Titles or Names of Ecclesiasticall Rulers and to the matter of Ceremonies Cartwright had a sowre opinion against these being neuer so antient and inculpable The most reuerend BB. his Aduersarie answereth out of S. Augustine Epist. 118. Those things that be not expressed in the Scriptures and yet by Tradition obserued of the whole Church come either from Apostles or from generall Councels as the obseruing of Easter the celebration of the day of Ascension c. The Bishop disputeth of adiaphorous Ceremonies and Titles of Ecclesiasticall persons no wayes blameable but because they are not expressely found in Scripture and concerning such things he saith That because their originall cannot be found out it is to be supposed it is probable they haue their beginning from the Apostles But hee speaketh not in this manner touching dogmaticall points and Articles of Faith Therefore our Aduersarie peruerteth his words and meaning IESVIT The Spirit of Christ or Christ by his Spirit being still with the Church cannot permit Errors in Faith so to creepe into the Church as they grow irreformable euen by the Principles of Christianitie But if Errors could so creepe into the Church as their beginning could not be knowne since the Apostles and neuer be espyed till they be vniuersally receiued Errors could so creepe into the Church and preuaile that by the Principles of Christianitie they are irreformable This I prooue because Errors are irreformable by the Principles of Christianitie when whosoeuer vndertakes to reforme them by the Principles of Christianitie is to be condemned as an Heretike But he that will vndertake to reforme Doctrines vniuersally receiued by the Church opposeth against the whole Church and therefore is by the most receiued Principle of Christianitie by Christs owne direct Precept to be accounted as an Heathen and Publican And as S. Augustine saith to dispute against the whole Church is most insolent madnesse specially when the Doctrine is antient without any knowne beginning as are the supposed erronious Customes and Doctrines of the Romane Church for then the vndertaking Reformer must striue against not onely the whole present Church but also the whole streame of the visible Church time out of mind since the Apostles Et quis ad haec Idoneus Who is able to begin a new course of Christianitie and to ouerthrow that Doctrine which is vniuersally receiued and cannot be prooued by any Tradition of Ancestors to be otherwise planted in the World but by the Apostles themselues through the efficacie of innumerable Miracles Wherefore these Doctrines if they be Errors which by the Principles of Christianitie no man ought to goe about to reforme and seeing it is impossible that there should be any such Errors we must acknowledge that Principle of S. Augustine as most certaine That Doctrines receiued vniuersally in the Church without any knowne beginning are truly and verily Apostolicall And of this kind are the Roman from which Protestants are gone ANSWER The Point which you labour to prooue is That Doctrines vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not reported by Monuments of Historie and Antiquitie are Apostolicall You haue taken that as granted and presupposed which we denie to wit That your Popish Doctrine was for a thousand yeeres at least vniuersally receiued But this is a begging of the Question and a false supposition Wherefore I might according to the rules of Disputation passe by the other part of your Argument But to cleare all things more exactly I will ex abundanti answer that which followeth Your disputation about this part of the question being resolued into the seuerall Arguments and parts may bee thus conceiued No errours irreformable can be in the Church All errours vniuersally receiued without a knowne beginning are irreformeable Ergo No errours vniuersally receiued without a knowne beginning can be in the Church The Maior is confirmed by an Argument taken from the continuall presence of Christ by his Spirit to the vniuersall Church for wheresoeuer Christ is perpetually present and assistant by his holy Spirit there it is impossible that irreformeable errours should preuaile I answere No errours great or lesse absolutely irreformeable can bee in the Church as it signifieth the sounder and better part thereof but errours irreformeable Ex Hypothesi that is presupposing the ignorance and malice of some ouerruling Prelates may preuaile in the Hierarchicall Church which is vulgarly reputed the vniuersall Church for such a Church may be the seate of Antichrist and whiles he reigneth errours may be incureable Ierem. 51. 9. Apoc. 17. 5. Neither doth the presence of Christ and of his Spirit deliuer the malignant part of the Church from irreformeable errours but onely the liuing members of his mysticall Bodie which are actuated and mooued by influence of sauing Grace Iohn 8. 31 32. Rom. 1. 28. 2. Thes. 2. 11. Iohn 12. 40. The Assumption to wit All errours vniuersally receiued without a knowne beginning are irreformeable is denied For although the errours of the Pharisees were vniuersally receiued according to the vniuersalitie of the state of the Church in those dayes without such a knowne beginning as Papists require vs to exhibite concerning their errours yet the same were reformeable by the word of Christ and by the doctrine of the Prophets in all such as receiued the loue of the Truth that they might be saued But the Iesuite prooueth his Assumption by this reason All errours are irreformeable when they which seeke to reforme them are Heretickes by the Principles of Christianitie But all that seeke to reforme errours vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not knowne are heretickes by the principles of Christianitie Ergo All errours vniuersally receiued without a knowne beginning are irreformeable The Minor of this Paralogisme is denyed and it is false That all they which seeke to reforme errours vniuersally receiued are iustly condemned as heretickes by the principles of Christianitie And the Argument produced to prooue this Proposition is of no force Whosoeuer opposeth against the whole Church is by the most receiued Principle of Christianitie deliuered Matth. 18. 7. to be accounted as an Heathen or a Publicane and Saint Augustine saith That to dispute against the whole Church is insolent madnesse But whosoeuer seeketh to reforme errours vniuersally receiued whose beginning is not knowne opposeth against the whole Church Ergo All they which seeke to reforme errours c. are Heretickes by the Principles of Christiantie ANSVVER Whosoeuer opposeth against the whole Church taken as before for the Church Hierarchicall or representatiue is not by the doctrine of our Sauiour and Saint Augustine to be accounted an
Heathen or Publicane but euery one which opposeth against the true Church inordinately and without iust cause is onely so to be accounted First there is opposition by way of counsell and aduice and this maketh no man an Hereticke as appeareth by Paphnutius opposing the Councell of Nice Secondly there is opposition by way of reprehension and true confutation of errour by authoritie of the holy Scriptures And this also maketh no man an Hereticke because he that in a lawfull manner propugneth the faith of the Scriptures maintaineth the Law and veritie of God and fulfilleth the Diuine Precept requiring man to contend for the truth 1. Tim. 6. 11. 2. Tim. 4. 7. And also performeth a worke of charitie in labouring to conuert people from errour Iam. 5. 19 20. Saint Augustines place Epist. 118. c. 5. ad Ianuar. is vnderstood of outward ceremonies and adiaphorous rites in respect of their vse vnblameable and not of matters of faith and therefore it appertaineth not to the question in hand IESVITS 4th Argument That doctrine which Tradition hath deliuered as the doctrine of all Ancestours without deliuering any Orthodox opposition against it that is opposition made by any confessed Catholicke Doctours or Fathers is doctrine deriued from the Apostles without change ANSWER This Proposition is denied for new Doctrine may bee brought in after the decease of the antient Fathers and because the same was vnheard of in their dayes they could make no such plaine and direct opposition against it as that either Historians might take notice thereof or the maintainers of such Doctrine haue no euasion by distinctions and sophisticall slights to elude their Testimonies IESVIT But such is the Doctrine of the Roman Church which Consent and Tradition of Ancestors doth deliuer and doth not together deliuer that any confessed Orthodox Father opposed against it ANSVVER Some Doctrines of the later Roman Church were opposed by the antient Roman Bishops themselues to wit Adoration of Images by Gregorie the Great Communion in one kind by Leo the first Transubstantiation by Gelasius the first The temporall dominion of Popes and Bishops ouer Princes by S. Chrysostome Optatus Mileuitanus and Gregorie the first The dignitie and title of vniuersall Bishop by the same Gregorie And the Doctrine of Papals preferring the old Translation before the originall Text making Apocriphall bookes Canonicall prohibiting lay people to read the Scriptures and exalting the authoritie of the present Church aboue the Scriptures are condemned by many antient Fathers IESVIT We know indeed by Tradition that some in former times stood against many points of the Roman Doctrine as Arrius Pelagius Waldo the Albigenses Wiclife Husse and some others but they are not confessed 〈◊〉 Fathers but were noted for nouelty and singularity and for such by Tradition described vnto vs which kind of opposition doth not discredit the Doctrine of the Church but rather makes the same to appeare more cleerely and famously Apostolicall ANSVVER 〈◊〉 opposed the Doctrine of the holy 〈◊〉 and of the 〈◊〉 Church and was 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by 〈◊〉 and the Fathers of the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that by the Scriptures and the Pelagians were 〈◊〉 conuicted by S. Augustine and his Scholers out of the holy Scripture And although Pope Celestine approoued S. Augustines Faith and condemned these Hereticks yet that was not the principall reason whereupon they were reputed Heretickes by the Christian world but the falshood of their Doctrine prooued such by repugnancie with the Scriptures made them to be so esteemed And how many Heretickes were discouered and confuted by the Fathers of the first three hundred yeares out of the Scriptures before the Roman Church ascended to the height of authoritie The Waldenses were no Hereticks as I haue formerly prooued but were only branded with that aspersion by Papals whose pride and tyrrannie they did oppose and had S. Paul himselfe beene aliue and reprooued the errour and wickednesse of the Babilonian Harlot he must not haue escaped her censure and malice Wicliffe and Husse were blessed instruments of Christ vindicating and defending Gods Truth withheld in Iniquitie neither did they hold such blasphemies as the Romists cast vpon them They might haue some opinions in points lesse materiall wherein perhaps they concurre not with our Doctrine as likewise the Waldenses but as for those vile reports which Romists make of their Doctrine no indifferent person will regard it for euen at this day when things are in present view and action you calumniate the persons and falsifie the Doctrine of all your Opposites as grosly as euer Pagans traduced the Primitiue Christians And many of the Bookes and Writings of Wicliffe and Husse are extant wherein are found no such Doctrines as Papists haue charged them with IESVIT Seeing as euen Doctor Field doth confesse when a Doctrine is in any age constantly deliuered as a matter of Faith and as receiued from Ancestors in such sort as the Contradictors thereof were in the beginning noted for Noueltie and if they persisted in contradiction in the end charged with 〈◊〉 it is not possible but such a Doctrine should come by Succession from the Apostles What more euident signe of a perpetuall Apostolicall Tradition than this ANSWER You mistake the Doctors meaning for he speaketh of the most famous and eminent of euery age in sensu composito that is of the most famous and eminent of euery age which consent and agree the latter with the former But he affirmeth not in sensu 〈◊〉 that whatsoeuer the most famous in any one particular age constantly deliuered c. is descended from the Apostles Whiles this reuerend Diuine was liuing such passages of his booke were obiected against him by Papists which caused him to explane himselfe and among other things he saith I neuer make the judgement and opinion of present Bishops of Apostolicall Churches to be the rule to know Traditions by but denie it c. And make onely the Pastors of Apostolicall Churches successiuely from the beginning witnessing the same things to be a rule in this kind IESVIT Protestants answer that it is sufficient that the Roman Doctrine was contradicted by Orthodox Fathers and that this may be prooued by their writings which they haue left vnto posteritie though their opposition was not noted by Antiquitie nor by fame of Tradition deliuered vnto posteritie But this answere leaues no meanes whereby common people may know certainely the perpetuall Tradition of Gods Church without exact examining and looking into their workes which common people cannot do J prooue it if against euery Tradition of the Church difficill and obscure passages of the Fathers may be brought and this doth suffice to make the same questionable then no Tradition can be certainely knowne without exact reading and examining and looking into the holy Fathers But no Tradition or Doctrine is so constantly and cleerely deliuered
by the Fathers but diuers obscure and difficill places out of their workes may be brought against them with such a shew that common people shall not know what to say For what Tradition more constantly deliuered by the Christian Doctours than our Sauiours consubstantialitie with his Father according to his diuine nature And yet the new reformed Arrians bring very many testimonies of antient Fathers to prooue that in this point they did contradict themselues and were contrarie one to another which places whosoeuer shall read will cleerely see that to common people they are vnanswerable yea that common people are not capable of the answeres that learned men yeeld vnto such obscure passages What then shall they doe They must answere that Antiquitie did neuer acknowledge such dissention among the Fathers in the point of our Sauiours consubstantiality which they would not haue omitted to doe had there beene any such reall dissention seeing they noted the Fathers opposition in lesser matters ANSWER That which was brought in after the daies of the Fathers could not be confuted by them particularly and in expresse tearmes neither could Antiquitie or fame of Tradition make report to Posteritie of those things which happened afterwards But yet many things vttered vpon other occasion are found in the writings of the Fathers which prooue that our present Romists are degenerated and entertaine a beleefe repugnant to the Primitiue Church But it is obiected that common people cannot know certainely the perpetuall Tradition of Gods Church by such places of the Fathers partly because the exact examining of the workes and sayings of the Fathers requires great labour and skill and so it exceedeth the abilitie of these people partly because many obscure and difficile passages are found in the writings of the Fathers which will rather perplex common people than resolue them whereunto I answere That the rule whereby common people must examine Doctrine is the plaine sentence of holy Scripture and further triall and examination of Controuersies by the Fathers and Ecclesiasticall Writers belongeth to the learned and principally to the Pastors and Doctors of the Church who are to vse their gifts to the instructing of the common people If the Aduersarie shall obiect that Heretickes and deceiuers may impose a false sence vpon the Scripture I answere That notwithstanding this sufficient matter is found in the Scripture to confute hereticall exposition and God alwayes stirreth vp some Pastours or other learned persons to assist common people which haue receiued the loue of truth in true vnderstanding of diuine veritie necessarie to their saluation Secondly If the Scripture may bee abused and prophaned by heretickes Tradition may with greater colour be pretended or abused by them as appeareth by the Pharisees Thirdly Tradition is founded vpon the authoritie of a present Hierarchicall Church which may erre by the confession of many learned Papists But the Scripture is founded onely vpon the authoritie of Christ and his Apostles and is acknowledged to bee sacred and diuine by all Christian Churches IESVIT In the same manner Catholickes doe sufficiently answere Protestants that bring places of Fathers against the receiued Traditions of the Church as the reall Presence Inuocation of Saints and other the like to wit that Tradition deliuered these Doctrines as the vniforme consent of the Fathers and neuer noted such oppositions as Protestants frame out of their writings which is a cleare signe that Protestants either mis-alleadge their words or mistake their meaning For were that contradiction reall Why did not Antiquitie famously note it as it noted and conueyed by fame to posteritie their differences about disputable matters This Answere is full and a certaine ground of persuasion else as I said common people could neuer know the assured Tradition of their Ancestours vpon which they as I prooued build their Christian beleefe seeing as Doctour Field also noteth there bee few and verie few that haue leasure and strength of iudgement to examine particular controuersies by Scriptures or Fathers but needs must rest in that doctrine which the Church deliuers as a Tradition neuer contradicted To discredit therefore a constant receiued Tradition it is necessarie to bring an Orthodox contradiction thereof not newly found out by reading the Fathers but a contradiction by the fame of Antiquitie deliuered vnto Posteritie which kind of contradiction they cannot find against any point of Catholike Doctrine For let them name but one Father whom Antiquitie doth acknowledge as a contradictor of Inuocation of Saints Adoration of the Sacrament Reall presence Prayer for the Dead they cannot certainely though they bring diuerse places to prooue a thing which Antiquitie neuer noted or knew of before that the Fathers be various and wauering about these Points ANSWER The Doctrine of Reall Presence by way of Transubstantiation and the Doctrine of Inuocation of Saints imposed as an Article of the Creed c. were neuer deliuered by any vniforme consent of the antient Fathers neither hath antient Tradition affirmed That the Fathers vniformely taught and beleeued these points And as for later Tradition the authoritie thereof is doubtfull deseruing no credit further than it confirmeth that which it deliuereth by the testimonie of Witnesses more infallible than it selfe They which haue liued in succeeding Ages haue no certaine meanes to assure them what the antient Fathers taught but either their owne Bookes and Monuments or the testimonie of their Coaeualls And later Traditioners may both corrupt the Writings of the Fathers and also by report impose a false Tenet vpon them Our Aduersarie therefore beats the ayre when he laboureth to gayne the Fathers vnto his part vpon the sole Testimonie of latter Tradition and vpon a Negatiue Argument taken from the silence of the Romane Church omitting in partialitie towards it selfe the Narration of such Collections and Oppositions as were made against the Doctrine thereof out of the Fathers But when wee charge the Papalls with Noueltie wee proceed vpon more euident grounds First wee prooue that the Romish Faith opposed by vs hath no foundation or warrant in sacred Scripture Secondly the same is an addition to the antient Rule of Faith Thirdly the said Doctrine is not deriued by perpetuall and vniforme Tradition from the Apostles Fourthly the primitiue Fathers vertually opposed this Doctrine For although these Popish Articles as they are now explicitely maintained were not in perfect being in the dayes of the antient Fathers and therefore they could not so punctually or literally oppose them as wee doe yet in their Disputations Tractats and exposition of Scripture they vtter many things from which wee may collect that they beleeued not these Articles and that the same were no part of the Catholike Faith in their dayes and that if such Opinions had beene thrust vpon the Church for Articles of Faith in their dayes as now they are they would haue opposed them But our Aduersarie pleaseth himselfe immoderately with his Negatiue
Argument concluding That because no Historicall and expresse opposition was made against these Doctrines by the antient Fathers therefore the Tradition of the present Romane Church concerning these Doctrines is Apostolicall As if a man should conclude That because no expresse opposition was made against the Pharisees by the antient Iewish Church therefore their Traditions were diuine But if the sequele of this Argument be good then the Proposition following is necessarie to wit Euerie Doctrine against which the antient Fathers haue not made expresse and literall opposition is Apostolicall But this is false because some Heresies sprang vp in the Church after the decease of the antient Fathers and against those they could make no such opposition vnlesse they had beene endued with Propheticall inspiration But if as our Aduersarie obiecteth euerie Doctrine is Apostolicall against which the antient Fathers made no expresse and Historicall opposition then the Articles following which Protestants maintaine are Apostolicall to wit The Romane Bishop and Councell may erre The substance of Bread and Wine remaine in the holy Eucharist after consecration The common Prayer and Seruice of the Church which the vnlearned frequent ought to be vttered in a knowne Language These I say and the like Articles according to the Iesuits Argument must be Apostolicall because no expresse Historicall or literall opposition was made against them by the antient Fathers But the Iesuit will peraduenture except That euerie Doctrine deliuered by the Tradition of the Romane Church against which the Fathers haue made no expresse opposition is Apostolicall and not euerie other Doctrine This verily or any thing else as wilde and absurd may be pretended but it must be prooued before it can merit any credit And if the Romane Church may erre and change her Doctrine after the decease of the antient Fathers then the Doctrine deliuered by the Tradition of the Romane Church is of the same qualitie with the Doctrine deliuered by the Tradition of other Churches But the first is true Rom. 11. 22. and there is nothing promised in Diuine Writ to the Romane Church to free the same from Error more than to the Churches of 〈◊〉 Antioch Ephesus c. For Hierusalem was the prime Mother Church Esa. 2. 3. Luc. 24. 47. and the first Seat of all the Apostles Ephesus was the Episcopall Sea of S. Iohn and it was once a Ground and Pillar of Truth 1. Tim. 3. 15. and Antioch was the Episcopall Sea of S. Peter Baron Annal. to 1. anno 39. nu 20. And yet euerie one of these Apostolicall Churches are departed from their antient integritie Wherefore except Romists can demonstrate by diuine testimonie that their Prelates and Pontifes haue singular and ample promises beyond other Apostolicall Churches they begge the question when they arrogate sole perfection infallibilitie and immutabilitie to themselues THE SECOND PART of the Iesuits Disputation concerning the supposed Errors of the PROTESTANTS IESVIT THe Conclusion of this Point shewing that Protestants erre fundamentally ANSVVER THis Conclusion is inferred vpon false Premises and therefore it is a Lying Conclusion And if Protestants erre not in all or any of the Articles obiected eyther materially or pertinaciously then they erre not fundamentally IESVIT Out of all this appeares that the Romane is the true Church and consequently that Protestants haue fundamentall Errors about Faith ANSWER If the Antecedent were graunted yet the Consequence is not necessarie for the Church of Africa in the dayes of Saint Cyprian was a true Church and yet they which beleeued otherwise touching rebaptising than that Church erred not eyther materially or fundamentally IESVIT Errours are fundamentall that is damnable either in regard of the matter because against some substantiall Article of Faith the knowledge whereof is necessarie for the performance of a required Christian dutie or in regard of the manner they are held to wit so obstinately as in defence of them one denies the Catholicke Church ANSVVER The distinction of errours into fundamentall and preterfundamentall is collected out of the Scriptures 1. Cor. 3. 12. Phil. 3. 15 16. 2. Tim. 2. 18. Col. 2. 19. Heb. 6. 1. And the same is found in the Fathers and in the Schoolemen in tearmes aequiualent As all verities according to St. Augustine are fundamentall without the knowledge and faith whereof people cannot attaine saluation so likewise all errours directly opposing and destroying right Faith concerning those necessarie and essentiall verities are fundamentall 1. Tim. 6. 3. 1. Cor. 15. 4 c. Gal. 5. 2. All necessarie and essentiall veritie either concerning Faith or good manners according to St. Augustine is deliuered in plaine places of holy Scriptures and therefore they which accuse others of fundamentall errour must produce plaine and manifest Scripture against them And if after such ostension Errants continue obstinate they are guiltie both before God and men of damnable Heresie and deserue the title and punishment of Heretickes These things being premised concerning the Subiect of the Iesuits Proposition I denie that errours in secondarie points defended against the common tenet of the Catholike Church are alwayes fundamentall for 〈◊〉 Cyprian with 80. Bishops of Affrica did stifly defend Rebaptising against the common iudgement of the Catholicke Church and yet S. August freeth them from the guiltinesse of damnable errour Secondly if all such errour be damnable yet the Protestants are innocent because they defend no errour great or small wilfully or obstinately neither doe they oppose but humbly submit themselues to the iudgement of the true Catholicke Church The Pharisees of Rome enroabe themselues with glorious titles but where doth the word of Christ endow them with priuiledges beyond other Churches shew vs out of the holy Euangelists or the Acts and Epistles of the Apostles that you are the onely Catholicke Church All fundamentall veritie is deliuered in the plaine Texts of Scripture Aug. d. Doct. Christ. l. 2. c. 9. And all fundamentall errour is condemned by manifest Scripture Et Catholica fides in Scripturis manifesta est The true Catholike faith is manifest in the Scriptures Aug. d. Agon Christ. c. 28. Ecclesia nonin parietibus consistit sed in dogmatum veritate Ecclesia ibi est vbi vera fides est The Church of Christ consisteth not of outward Titles and walles but of the veritie of Doctrine Wheresoeuer true Faith is there is the Church saith S. Hierom sup Psal. 133. Where Faith is there is the Church saith Saint Chrysostome Where right Faith is not there is not the true Church Et Ecclesia est Hierusalem cuius fundamenta posita sunt super montes Scripturarum And the Church is Hierusalem whose foundations are placed vpon the mountaines of the Scriptures Eruite igitur aliquid manifestum quo demonstretis Ecclesiam If therefore Papals will force vs to beleeue that they are the only Catholicke Church and that we must follow their Pope
though he lead vs to hell bring something euident and manifest out of the holy Scripture Si diuinarum Scripturarum earum scilicet quae canonicae in Ecclesia nominantur perspicua firmatur Authoritate sine vlla dubitatione credendum est 〈◊〉 vero testibus vel testimonijs quibus aliquid credendum esse suadetur tibi credere vel non credere liceat c. If saith S. Augustine it be confirmed by the perspicuous authoritie of those diuine Scriptures which are Canonicall it must without all question be beleeued but as for other witnesses and testimonies by which any thing is persuaded to be beleeued it is lawfull for thee to beleeue or not beleeue them as thou shalt perceiue them to deserue credit IESVIT Fundamentall errours of the first kinde Protestants haue 〈◊〉 particularly these Nine ANSWER Malice alwayes fighteth against Vertue and laboureth to impose and rub off her owne faults vpon it and all they whose brests and minds are inhabited by Satan testifie their venemous rage with furious words If this Traducer be able to conuince the Protestants of Nine or of any one fundamentall errour wee must acknowledge that we are in a perillous state but if hee onely depraue and falsifie our doctrine or affirme that to be fundamentall errour which is diuine veritie then he prooueth himselfe to be one of his Ministers of whom S. Gregory speaketh Perfidious dealing is in the Tabernacle of Antichrist whereby he gainesayeth the faith of the Redeemer IESVIT First their Doctrine against Traditions vnwritten whereby the foundation is ouerthrowne on which wee beleeue all other substantiall and fundamentall points as hath beene shewed ANSVVER Either you wilfully falsifie or ignorantly mistake the Protestants Doctrine concerning vnwrttten Tradition First we admit in generall all vnwritten Traditions agreeing with the holy Scripture which are deriued from the Apostles and deliuered vnto vs by the manifest and perpetuall testimonie of the Primitiue Church and by the vniforme consent of succeeding Churches in all ages Secondly we beleeue in particular the historicall Traditions of the Primatiue and succeeding Churches concerning the dignitie authoritie perfection authors number and integritie of the bookes of Canonicall Scripture and also the Historicall Tradition of the said Church concerning the perpetuall virginitie of the blessed Virgin Marie and concerning the baptisme of infants and all other genuine Traditions which maintaine the Faith and Doctrine contained expressely or by consequent in the Scripture Thirdly we embrace such exposition of holy Scripture as being consonant to the rule of Faith and to the text of Scripture is affirmed by antient Tradition to haue descended from the holy Apostles Fourthly we beleeue the rule of Faith contained in the Apostles Creed both vpon the authoritie of Christs written word and also vpon the voice and testimonie of vnwritten Tradition If it shall then be demanded Wherefore do the Romists and you so eagrely contend about the question of Traditions and wherein lies your difference we answer as followeth First we yeeld the highest and most soueraigne authoritie to the sacred Scripture and make the voice and sentence thereof a supreame rule and iudge of supernaturall Veritie and we make Tradition vnwritten subordinate and ministeriall to holy Scripture admitting the same so farre forth only as it is conformable to the Scripture and reiecting the contrarie Secondly we affirme that the Canonicall Scriprure containeth all supernaturall Veritie necessarie to saluation and being receiued and vnderstood is a sufficient and perfect rule of Faith and the sole doctrine thereof is sufficient to instruct the whole Church and euery member thereof to saluation And that Tradition vnwritten maketh no addition or increase of new Articles of Faith but is only an helpe and instrument to deliuer applie and interpret the doctrine expresly deliuered or intended by the holy Ghost in the Scripture Thirdly we receiue no Tradition as diuine or apostolicall but such as hath the plaine manifest and vniforme testimonie and approbation of the Primatiue Church But our Aduersaries either equall or preferre vnwritten Tradition before the Scripture and they make Tradition a diuers and larger part of the rule of Faith containing many Articles which are neither expressely nor inuoluedly reuealed in the Scripture and they make the present Roman Church an infallible witnesse of such Tradition affirming that we are bound to beleeue euerie Article which the said Church deliuereth as a Tradition with the same assurance of Faith wherewith we beleeue any written testimonie of S. Paul or the holy Euangelists And many of them teach That it is not necessarie to deriue Tradition by a perpetuall descent and current through all ages but the voice of the present Church is sufficient to make any Article ctedible and authenticall to vs Lastly many particularopinions of antient Fathers which they deliuered coniecturally or probably onely and concerning which they haue not affirmed that they were diuine or apostolicall Traditions are ranked by latter Pontificians in the number of diuine 〈◊〉 and made parts of the vndoubted word of God And thus the present Roman doctrine concerning Traditions vnwritten is a Seminarie of Errour and by pretext hereof Pontificians obtrude vpon the Church many prophane fabulous and superstitious 〈◊〉 fansies and nouelties repugnant to holy Scripture and the antient Catholicke Faith Let therefore impartiall Readers consider whether this Romish doctrine debasing the sacred Scripture and aduancing humane Traditions tendeth not to the corrupting of Christian Faith and consequently whether the same be not rather a fundamentall Errour than an Orthodoxall Veritie And on the contrarie whether the doctrine of the Protestants maintaining the supreame authoritie of the sacred Scripture which is Gods vndoubted word and withall yeelding to genuine Tradition the credit and honour which the antient Church gaue thereunto is not fundamentall Veritie and a soueraigne meanes to preserue right Faith IESVIT Secondly their questioning the infallibe authoritie of lawfull generall Councels thereby casting downe the foundation of Vnitie in Gods Church ANSWER They which will not permit generall Councels to assemble or to proceed lawfully and which oppose the decrees of antient Councels are the Romists and not the Protestants First The moderne Popes vsurpe the whole right and authoritieof calling and conuocating Councells contrarie to the antient custome and practise of the Church Secondly They receiue and admit no Assessors and Iudges in Councels but onely their fast friends to wit men aforehand oblieged by solemne oath to proceed according to the will and purpose of the Pope Thirdly The Pope alone is appointed the authenticall Iudge of all causes and matters which are concluded in Councels he approoueth or refuseth whatsoeuer himselfe pleaseth and all other Iudges and Assessors are onely his shadowes and creatures Fourthly Whereas in words and tearmes they seeme to aduance
rest of the Apostles with him Iohn 20. 23. Eph. 2.20 Apoc. 21.14 Matth. 28.19 Thirdly To be a Ministeriall Rocke and foundation of the Church is not to be the sole Monarch of the Church because St. Peter might bee such in regard of his Preaching and Doctrine as the other Apostles were and not in respect of Monarchicall dominion Heereupon Turrecremate in his Sum. d. Eccles. lib. 2. cap. 11. saith Non argumentati sumus Petrum primatum habuisse quia dictus fuit fundamentum aut Petra Ecclesiae sed quia singulariter c. Wee argue not Saint Peter had the Primacie because he was called the Foundation or Rocke of the Church but because he was in a singular manner so called But if the name of Rocke argueth not St. Peters supremacie the singular applying thereof in one Text of Scripture will not doe it both because the speaking to him in particular is onely a circumstance and relation of a matter granted by the words of Rocke and Keyes but no addition of any other essentiall gift and also because the same Title in tearmes equiualent is elsewhere made common to other Apostles The Iesuit addeth That we denie the primacie of Peters Successour and that this Successour is the foundation of the Church laid by Christ and necessarie for the perpetuall gouernment of the same I answere First St. Peter in one respect to wit in regard of his Apostolicall function had no successour for the Office of Apostles was extraordinarie appointed by Christ for the first planting of Faith and consequently it ceased with the Apostles Immediate calling Propheticall inspiration the gifts of Miracles and Languages authoritie ouer the whole Church and all the ordinarie Pastours thereof were proper to the holy Apostles and if none succeed them in these gifts and prerogatiues then it is manifest that in respect of their Apostleship they haue no Successours Secondly In respect of ordinarie Ministerie and in regard of the power and order of iurisdiction St. Peter hath successours in the same manner as the rest of the Apostles to wit all Bishops and Pastours teaching either where hee planted Churches or in any other part of the world the same Faith and Religion which himselfe and his fellow Apostles did Thirdly That St. Peter hath a speciall Successour differing in kinde from the Successours of the rest of the Apostles and which is to bee for euer a visible Head and Monarch ouer the vniuersall Church from whom all Ecclesiasticall power is deriued and to whose sentence in things diuine euery Chrstian must submit himselfe and that the Romane Bishop is the man is deliuered as a prime Article of Christian Faith by Papals but it is neither confirmed by the holy Scripture nor by any diuine Reuelation neither is the same deliuered in the holy Apostles Creed or by any antient generall Councell or by the vnanimous consent of the Primatiue Fathers And sundry Romists themselues haue made question of it and later Pontificians doe with so many subtill sleights and inuentions propugne it that all intelligent and impartiall men may plainely discerne That this Doctrine of Papall Supremacie is builded vpon the sand For if the Romane Bishop had beene appointed and established the perpetuall Successour of Saint Peter in manner before mentioned either our Sauiour himselfe would immediately expreslly and manifestly haue reuealed the same to his Church or the holy Apostles would haue taken notice thereof and declared the same to others Also Saint Peter must haue carried himselfe as a Monarch among the other Apostles and exercised the actions of Soueraigntie in the visible Church But we find in the holy Scripture no supereminent iurisdiction or Monarchicall actions exercised by him no vassallage and subiection yeelded him by the rest of the Apostles And if hee must haue had a Successour in his Monarchie the Apostles suruiuing him should rather haue beene his Successours than the ordinarie Pastours of one Diocesse The Spirit of God also together with so eminent authoritie would haue conferred vpon 〈◊〉 Successours extraordinarie graces of Learning Wisedome Holinesse c. necessarie for so high a calling Also it is not probable that Eusebius and other antient Ecclesiasticall Historians would altogether haue been silent of this Monarchicall authoritie of the Romane Bishop neither would any Orthodoxe Father or generall Councell haue confined the Romane Pontife to equall bounds with other Patriarkes But the antientest Ecclesiasticall Stories are absolutely silent of such a swelling preheminence as moderne Papals claime and the Fathers and Councells contest the same Pope Stephan was slighted by St. Cyprian and the Bishops of Affrica when he enterposed in their affaires and Pope Victor by the Bishops of the East The Oecumenicall Councell of Chalcedon equalleth the Patriarch of Constantinople to the Bishop of Rome Gregory the Great himselfe giueth the Papacie a deadly blow And a great part of Christianitie hath euer to this day opposed the Papall Primacie Therefore it is most improbable that this doctrine should be fundamentall veritie which hauing no 〈◊〉 or infallible grounds in diuine Reuelation wanteth also the suffrages of all antient Ecclesiasticall Testimonie IESVIT FOurthly Their denying the foundation of true 〈◊〉 which is one true Catholicke Christian faith about reuealed Mysteries bringing in a fantasticall faith pretending That euery man is iustified by beleeuing himselfe to be iust or one of Gods Elect. ANSVVER YOu ought first to haue weighed our Doctrine concerning the definition of Faith and haue compared the same with the Tenet of sundrie of your owne Doctours before you had accused vs of fundamentall Errour about the same First We maintaine that true Christian Catholicke Faith is a 〈◊〉 and foundation to wit on mans part of Iustification Heb. 11.6 Rom. 1.17 Iud. v. 20. Secondly We denie that euery man is iustified by only beleeuing himselfe to be iust for he must be truely iust before he can or ought to beleeue himselfe to be so The promise of remission of sinnes is conditionall Esa. 1.16 17 18. Ezec. 18. 21. Pro. 28. 13. Math. 6.14 15. Iohn 15. 10. 16 27. Heb. 5.9 and the same becommeth not absolute vntill the condition be fulfilled either actually or in desire and preparation of mind and the full assurance of remission of sinnes succeedeth Repentance Faith Obedience and Mortification 1. Iohn 3.19 20 21 22. Thirdly We denie that it is an action of Christian Faith praeuious or fundamentall to Iustification for a man to beleeue himselfe to be one of Gods elect and admitting that one do not attaine the certainetie of Faith but of Hope onely that he is elected if there be no other impediment found in him besides this we make no question but such a person may be 〈◊〉 Wherein then lyeth the fundamentall errour concerning Faith and Iustification wherewith we are reproched If it be answered That
we erre fundamentally by making sauing Faith not only an intellectuall but also a fiduciall assent to the promise of the Gospell the 〈◊〉 must remember that many of his owne Doctours affirme the same Vega. d. Iustiff lib. 14. Fides in Scripturis 〈◊〉 idem est quod fidueia 〈◊〉 idem quod considere Faith in the Scriptures is many times the same that Trust and to beleeue the same that to trust Iansenius Concord Euang. cap. 32. The name of Faith in the Gospell when Saluation is ascribed vnto it containeth both firme assent c. and also considence and trust conceiued vpon the apprehension of his 〈◊〉 and goodnesse Adam Sasboth sup Rom. 1. v. 17. The word Faith in S. Pauls desputation containeth not only Assent but also Trust in Christ the Mediatour Ferus sup Math. Non semper Fides est quod nos Fidem dicimus c. That which we call Faith to wit to assent to such things as are reported in diuine Histories and which the Church propoundeth to beleeue is not alwaies Faith c. for the Scripture speaketh of Faith in another manner for according to it Faith is a trust in the diuine mercie promised by Christ with these also concurre Guilliaudus Fredericus Nausea and Suares saith Multi Catholici putant saepe accipi in Scriptura Fidem pro fiducia Many Catholicks think that Faith is oftentimes taken in holy Scripture for Trust. The Iesuit therefore wanted matter to fraught his papers when he obiected this Article against vs as a fundamentall errour For if his owne Doctours and the holy Scripture it selfe take the word Faith in this notion wherein haue we merited so grieuous a sentence But I haue produced many famous Doctours of his owne part which say expresly the same that we doe concerning the signification of the word Faith when it is said to iustifie and in steed of many other Texts I referre him to the places of Scripture following Iam. 1.6 Math. 9. v. 2. 22. cap. 14.31 Rom. 9.33 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Euery one that beleeueth vpon him 1. Pet. 2.6 Now in regard of the matter of our Doctrine the assurance of remission of sinnes which we teach is no other than S. Bernard Iohn Bacon the Carmelite Caietan Catherinus Ferus and many other Pontificians haue formerly taught Caietan sup Rom. 8. We haue from the holy Ghost and our owne a most sufficient testimonie to make vs beleeue that we are the sonnes of God for by this testimonie we cleerely discerne that we ought to beleeue that we are the sonnes of God And S. Bernard If thou beleeuest that he only can blot out thine offences whom thou hast offended it is well but ioine this also to the former that by him thy sinnes are forgiuen thee This is the testimonie which the holy Spirit yeeldeth in our hearts saying Thy sinnes are remitted vnto thee and in this sort doth the holy Apostle thinke that a man is freely iustified by Faith Now from the precedent positions I argue thus First That Doctrine concerning the nature and actions of Faith which is taught in holy Scripture and which hath the consent of many antient Fathers and which was deliuered by many learned Doctors of the Roman Church is not fundamentall Errour But such is the Doctrine of Protestants concerning iustifying Faith c. Secondly No Church erreth fundamentally which teacheth such a kind of iustifying Faith as Abraham Iob S. Paul and other iust persons commended in holy Scriptures had But Abraham Iob S. Paul and other iust persons commended in holy Scriptures had such a iustifying Faith as was both an intellectuall and fiduciall assent to diuine Veritie and Promises Ergo The Church of the Protestants erreth not fundamentally teaching such a iustifying Faith as is both an intellectuall and fiduciall assent to diuine Promises and Verities The assumption is prooued by Rom. 4.18 19 20 21. Iob 19. 25. Rom. 8.38 Gal. 2.20 2. Tim. 4.7 And whereas Pontificians bequarrel vs in this argument two waies First saying That these holy men had a particular promise made vnto them Secondly That they knew by extraordinarie Reuelation that they were indued with Faith Hope and Charitie which wee know only by coniecturall or morall persuasion I answer First we haue particular promises contained in the generall and the generall promises are particularly applied by the word of Absolution and the Sacraments and by the testimonie of the holy Ghost speaking in the conscience of true beleeuers by effects of Grace Secondly they which want miraculous Reuelation may vnderstand by ordinarie Grace that they haue Faith Hope and Charitie because the holy Scripture commandeth all Christian beleeuers to trie and examine themselues concerning these Graces 1. Cor. 11 28. 2. Cor. 13.5 And godly persons which liued in former daies knew they had these vertues Psal. 119. 97. Esa. 38.3 Iob 27.5 6. 29.14 Luc. 9.24 Ioh. 21.15 And the Apostle speaking of other people as well as of himselfe saith We know the things which are freely giuen vs of God 1. Cor. 2. 12. And S. Iohn saith That he which receiueth the hidden Manna knowes it Apoc. 2. 17. The Fathers also and many Doctors of the Roman Church affirme the same S. Augustine I see that I beleeue if I beleeue and in another place These two things are not vncertaine to me the goodnesse of God and mine owne Faith and in another place Let euerie man enter into his owne heart and if he find there brotherly Charitie let him be secure for he is passed from death vnto life and in a fourth place 〈◊〉 man knoweth the Charitie wherewith he loueth his brother better than his brother But to the end the difference betweene our Aduersaries and vs concerning this question may the better appeare I will deliuer our Doctrine in certaine propositions First We maintaine that such persons only can haue true assurance and certaintie of their Iustification which beleeue and repent and are resolued to obey Gods commandements Secondly A Christian of a contrite spirit beleeuing only that his sinnes are remissible and which earnestly desireth remission of sinnes by the merits of Christ and ioineth with this desire the exercise of vertue receiueth forgiuenesse although he be vexed with scruples and temptations and want assurance and persuasion in himselfe that his sinnes are remitted Thirdly The particular certaintie of remission of sinnes which iust persons attaine vnto vpon their Repentance Obedience and Faith is not equall in the firmitie of assent to that assurance which they haue about the common obiect of Faith to wit concerning the articles of Creation Trinitie Incarnation Resurrection or the like because these articles are immediately and totally reuealed in the holy Scripture but that his sinnes in particular are remitted vnto a penitent person dependeth vpon an Argument whereof one
no Lye nor his Power any Inconstancie Because therefore Christ hath a true and perfect Bodie both in regard of substance and matter and also in respect of quantitie stature measure posture proportion c. and because euerie true humane bodie by the Ordinance of the Creator who hath formed and constituted the seuerall kinds and natures of things after a speciall manner is determined to one indiuiduall place at one instant and must also haue distinction and diuision of parts with a length latitude and thicknesse proportionall to the quantitie thereof Therefore except God himselfe had expressely reuealed and testified by his Word that the contrarie should be found in the humane bodie of Christ and that the same should haue one manner of corporall being in Heauen and another in the holy Eucharist at one and the same time a Christian cannot be compelled to beleeue this Doctrine as an Article of his Creed vpon the sole Voyce and Authoritie of the Laterane or Trident Councell Some learned Papists confesse ingeniously That secluding the Authoritie of the Church there is no written Word of God sufficient to enforce a Christian to receiue this Doctrine And moderne Pontificians are not able to confirme their present Tenet to wit That Christs humane bodie may be in many vbities or places at one time and that the whole bodie of Christ is circumscriptiuely in Heauen and according to the manner of a Spirit and of the Diuine nature it selfe without extension of parts in euerie crumme of the Sacramentall formes This Doctrine I say Papals are not able to confirme by the vnanimous Testimonie and Tradition of the antient Church Therefore because the same is grounded neither vpon Scripture nor Tradition they begge the question when they alleadge Gods omnipotent power for it must first of all and that vpon infallible Principles appeare That God will haue it thus before his omnipotencie be pleaded that he is able to make it thus But the Iesuites Sophisme whereby hee would intangle vs within the snares of fundamentall Errour when wee denie Christs bodily presence in many places at once proceedeth in this manner No bodie can be truely receiued in many places at once vnlesse the same be corporally present in many places at once The Bodie of Christ is truely receiued in many places at once to wit in euery place where the holy Eucharist is administred Ergo The Bodie of Christ is present in many places at once I answere The Maior Proposition is denyed for there is a twofold manner of true Presence and consequently of Receiuing one Naturall by the hand and mouth of the bodie Another Mysticall and Spirituall by the deliuerie of the holy Ghost and by the apprehension and action of the soule First The holy Ghost truely and verily reacheth and presenteth the Obiect which is Christs Bodie and Blood crucified and offered in Sacrifice for mans Redemption Secondly The reasonable soule being eleuated by a liuely and operatiue Faith apprehendeth and receiueth the former obiect as really verily and truely after a spirituall and supernaturall manner as the bodie receiueth any corporeall or sensible obiect after a naturall manner Iohn 1. 12. Ephes. 3. 17. Fulgentius saith Filium Dei vnicum per fidem recipiunt They receiue the onely Sonne of God by Faith Our Sauiour saith That holy Beleeuers receiue the Flesh and drinke the Blood of Christ Iohn 6. 50 53 54. Credendo by 〈◊〉 v. 35.47 Paschasius hath these words The flesh and blood of Christ c. are truely 〈◊〉 by Faith and vnderstanding It is not lawfull to eate Christ with teeth This Sacrament is truely his flesh and his blood which man eateth and drinketh spiritually 〈◊〉 saith Hold readie the mouth of thy Faith open the iawes of Hope stretchout the bowels of Loue and take the Bread of life which is the nourishment of the inward man Eusebius Emisenus When thou goest vp to the reuerend Altar to bee filled with spirituall meates by Faith behold honour and wonder at the sacred Bodie and Blood of thy God touch it with thy minde take it with the hand of thy heart and chiefly prouide that the inward man swallow the whole Saint Ambrose Comedat te cor meum panis Sancte panis viue panis munde veni in cor meum intra in animam meam Let mine heart eate thee oh holy Bread oh liuing Bread oh pure Bread come into my heart enter into my soule Saint Augustine There is another Bread which confirmeth the heart because it is the Bread of the heart And in another place Then is the Body and Blood of the Lord life to each man when that which is visibly taken in the Sacrament is in very truth spiritually eaten spiritually drunken Now from the former Testimonies it is manifest that the Bodie and Blood of Christ may truely and really bee eaten and receiued by operatiue Faith in the Sacrament And if it bee further obiected That spirituall eating and drinking of the Bodie and Blood of Christ may bee without the Sacrament I answere That the same is more effectually and perfectly accomplished in the Sacrament than out of the Sacrament because the holy Ghost directly and in speciall when the Sacrament is deliuered exhibiteth the Body and Blood of Christ as a pledge and testimonie of his particular loue towards euery worthie Receiuer and the liuely representation and commemoration of Christs death and Sacrifice by the mysticall signes and actions is an instrument of the Diuine Spirit to apply and communicate Christ crucified and to increase and confirme the Faith Charitie and pietie of Receiuers Lastly It is remarkeable that vntill the thousand yeeres and more after Christs Ascension Orthodoxall Christians beleeued that the Bodie and Blood of Christ were truely and really present and deliuered to worthie Receiuers in and by the holy Eucharist according to St. Pauls Doctrine 1. Cor. 10.16 And that the same must be spiritually receiued by Faith or else they profited nothing But the manner of Presence which some Modernes now obtrude by Consubstantiation or by Transubstantiation was not determined as an Article of Faith And to say nothing of Consubstantiation the defence whereof inuolueth them in many absurdities which vndertake for it it is apparant that Transubstantiation is a bastard plant and vpstart weed neuer planted by the heauenly Father but the same sprang vp in the declining state of the Church and it is perplexed and inuolued with so many absurdities and contradictions to Veritie formerly receiued that our Aduersarie was transported with partiall folly when he presumed to ranke the refusall of this new and prodigious Article among fundamentall Errours IESVIT EIghtly Their denying the Sacrament of Penance and Priestly Absolution the necessarie meanes for remission of finnes committed after Baptisme ANSVVER THe Obiector by Penance vnderstandeth not Repentance as it is a vertue for Protestants beleeue true
repentance to be a second Table after spirituall Ship-wrecke and a necessarie meanes of remission of sinnes committed after Baptisme but he speaketh of Auricular Confession according to the Tenet of the Trident Councell and priestly Absolution vpon the same affirming but without any proofe that this kind of penance is a Sacrament of the Gospell and a necessarie meanes to obtaine remission of sinnes committed after Baptisme The Protestants in their Doctrine acknowledge that priuat confession of sinnes made by penitent people to the Pastours of their soules and particular absolution or speciall application of the promises of the Gospell to such as be penitent are profitable helps of vertue godlinesse and spirituall comfort The Augustane confession speaketh in this manner We retaine confession especially because of absolution which is Gods word applied to euerie priuate person therefore it were an vngodly thing to remooue priuate absolution out of the Church neither do they duly consider what is remission of sinnes or the force of the keyes of the kingdome of heauen which contemne or repudiate priuate absolution A reuerend Bishop of our time deliuereth the Doctrine of our Church in this manner The power of absolution in generall and particular is professed in our Church where both in the publicke seruice is proclaimed pardon and absolution vpon all penitents and a priuate applying of absolution vnto particular penitents by the office of the Minister And concerning priuat confession Bishop Iuell saith Abuses and errors being remooued and the Priest being learned we mislike no manner of confession whether it be publicke or priuate His most excellent Maiestie our gratious and religious king Iames in his Meditation vpon the Lords Prayer hath these words For my part with Caluin Institut lib. 3. cap. 4. Sect. 12. I commend Confession euen priuately to a Church-man and I wish with all my heart it were more in custome among vs than it is as a thing of excellent vse especially of preparing men to receiue the Sacrament The difference then betweene Papals and vs in this question is not about the thing it selfe considered without abuses but concerning the manner and also the obligation and necessitie thereof First they require of all persons being of age a priuate and distinct confession of all and euery knowne mortall sinne open and secret of outward deed and inward consent together with the circumstances thereof though obscene and odious to Christian eares to be made at the least annually to some Roman Priest authorised And they affirme the same to be simply necessarie either in act or in desire by diuine precept for the obtaining remission of sinnes committed after Baptisme And they teach that this confession and absolution vpon it is one of the proper Sacraments of the New Testament hauing an operatiue vertue to conferre Grace and to change Attrition or imperfect sorrow for sinnes past into contrition Secondly our Tenet is that auricular confession is not absolutely necessarie to remission of sinnes after Baptisme neither is the same generally in respect of all persons commanded or imposed by diuine law and the rigorous vrging thereof according to the Popish Doctrine is not Orthodoxall or Catholicke Faith neither is penance a Sacrament of the new Testament like vnto Baptisme and the holy Eucharist The true ends of priuate confession are these which follow First to informe instruct and councell Christian people in their particular actions Secondly if they be delinquents to reprooue them and make them vnderstand the danger of their sinne Thirdly to comfort those that are afflicted and truely penitent and to assure them of remission of sinnes by the word of absolution Fourthly to prepare people to the worthie receiuing of the holy Communion And if priuate confession be referred and vsed to these ends it is a worke of godly discipline consonant to the holy Scripture and antiently practised by the Primitiue Church Bishops and Ministers of the Church are Sheepheards Stewards and Ouerseers of Gods people committed to their charge 1. Pet. 5. 1 2. Acts 20. 28. They haue receiued the keyes of the kingdome of Heauen and power to loose and bind sinners Math. 16. 19. Math. 18. 18. Iohn 20. 23. They haue power to direct and gouerne their whole flocke and euerie sheepe and member of the same in things concerning their Saluation The people are subiect to them in such offices and actions as concerne their spirituall state Heb. 13. 17. 1. Thess. 5. 12. And if Christian people must confesse and acknowledge their faults one to another Iames 5. 16. then also when there is cause why should they not do the same to the Pastors of their soules But the precise and strict Law of Confession imposed vpon all Christians as a necessarie meanes of remission of sinnes is neither commanded in the New Testament nor hath warrant from the Primitiue Church First It was not instituted or practised Matth. 3. 6 for that Confession was before Baptisme and not at the Sacrament of Penance and so great a multitude as is mentioned in that Text could not within so smal space of time make speciall enumeration of all their sinnes and no priuat absolution was vsed Secondly It cannot be prooued from Act. 19. 17. because this Confession was open and not secret the same was voluntarie and not commanded it was performed once onely and not annually or often euerie yeere and no Absolution was giuen after it And Cardinall Caietan graunteth that it was no Sacramentall Confession but onely an open profession of their former wicked life Thirdly It was not appointed Iam. 5. 16. For our Aduersaries acknowledge That it is not certaine that S. Iames speaketh of Sacramentall Confession Rhemists Iam. 5. Annot. 10. And the persons to whom S. Iames commands Confession to be made are not onely Priests 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Confesse or acknowledge your faults one to another but also any other person whom one hath wronged and offended or from whom he may receiue counsaile or comfort Fourthly Neither was Sacramentall Confession instituted Ioh. 20. 23. because no mention is made in that Text of auricular Confession And the power granted to Ministers of the Gospell to apply remission of sinnes by Preaching Sacraments and Absolution may be exercised and also be effectuall in contrite people vpon the inward confession of sinnes to God himselfe and their liuely faith in Christ Iesus and vpon their Baptisme Act 3.19 26.18 Matth. 11.28 without priuate disclosing and manifesting their secret offences to man If the Aduersaries shall obiect None can forgiue sinnes by a iudiciall Act vntill they know them and haue them reuealed But Priests by commission from Christ forgiue sinnes by a iudiciall Act and therefore sinnes must by confession bee reuealed and made knowne vnto them I answere That hee which properly and directly pardoneth sinnes by a iudiciall Act
ought to know them and thud God himselfe forgiuing sinnes knoweth them Psal. 69.6 But they which forgiue sinnes declaratiuely and by publishing Gods iudiciall Act like as a Cryer pronounceth the sentence of a Iudge and by applying the Word and Sacraments to penitent persons vpon the holy and worthie receiuing whereof the holy Ghost himselfe conferreth the grace of Remission may performe that which belongeth to their office without distinct knowledge of all the particular sinnes whereof the penitent person hath repented himselfe in the sight of God as appeareth in Baptisme and generall Confession ioyned with Contrition And when a Priest applyeth the word of Absolution hee knoweth not whether the person confessing his sinnes performeth the same truely and with contrition of heart or not Iohn Medina Cardinall Caietan and Iansenius acknowledge the weakenesse of this Argument to prooue Auricular Confession And Vasques saith That a man can hardly find among those which maintaine Auricular Confession out of the place of Ioh. 20. 23. which doe effectually conclude the same from thence Ioh. Medina treating of Auricular Confession saith The Romane Catholike Doctors haue laboured till they sweat againe to find proofe for this veritie He might well haue said They laboured to as good purpose as the man who sought to finde Nodum in Scirpo or A Needle in a Bottle of Hay Mich. Palacius saith Diuines are perplexed in finding places of Scripture or other conuincing arguments to prooue Auricular Confession to be of Diuine Institution and it is worthie admiration what contention is about this matter and how badly Authors agree concerning the same Our Aduersaries labour tooth and nayle to prooue from the former Text in S. Iohn That Priests exercise a Iudiciall Power when they absolue sinners But if this were graunted they gaine nothing for this Iudiciall power is exercised according to the word of Christ And if that word absolue contrite and penitent persons vpon internall Confession to God himselfe and vpon their generall Confession before men without secret Confession then it followeth not That because a Priest exerciseth a Iudiciall power when hee absolueth Ergo Penitents must confesse all their knowne sinnes A penitent person may haue mortall sinnes which he remembreth not Psal. 19.13 and when vpon profession of his repentance he is absolued those sinnes are pardoned Psal. 103.3 and the Priest in giuing Absolution exerciseth a Iudiciall Act according to the Popish Tenet and yet those finnes are not disclosed or manifested vnto him Secondly The present Romish Doctrine concerning the absolute necessitie of Auricular Confession is not Catholique The Greeke Church both of antient and later times reiected the same as appeared by Nectarius S. Chrysostome and by the testimonie of learned Papists which affirme the same concerning that Church The Glosse vpon Gratian saith Auricular Confession is not necessarie among the Grecians Greg. Val. Lib. 2. d. Miss cap. 4. saith That Panormitan and Gerson maintained that secret Confession was not necessarie Andreas Vega Very many learned Catholikes haue doubted of this necessitie of Confession by Diuine Law Maldenat sum q. 18. ar 4. There be also among Catholikes which thinke there is no Diuine Precept touching Auricular Confession to wit all the Interpreters of the Decrees and also Scotus B. Rhenanus and Petrus Oxomensis denyed the said Confession to be of Diuine Institution And Gratian himselfe hauing disputed the Question pro con concludeth in this manner I leaue it to the Readers choyse which opinion to follow because each opinion to wit the one holding Confession to be of Diuine Institution and the other Ecclesiasticall hath fautors both wise and religious Now if Auricular Confession is not certainely and infallibly of Diuine Institution then it is impossible for the same conioyned with Absolution to be a Sacrament because Sacraments of the New Testament were immediately instituted by Christ and haue their institution matter forme visible signes and promises expressely and manifestly deliuered and appointed in the Scripture of the New Testament From hence I argue If that which Romists tearme Sacramentall Penance haue no word of Institution no visible and corporeall Element no expresse forme or word of Consecration neither any Sacramentall effect appropriated vnto it by Christ and his Apostles then the same is no Sacrament of the New Testament But all and euerie of these Conditions are wanting in Popish Penance Ergo The same is no Sacrament of the New Testament If Penitencie be not affirmed by the Fathers of the Primitiue Church to be a Sacrament properly taken then that the same is such in our dayes is not Catholique Doctrine But learned Pontificians haue narrowly searched euerie Sentence of Antiquitie concerning Penitencie and cannot yet produce one place where the same is plainely and expressely affirmed to be one of the Sacraments of the New Testament properly taken to wit such as is Baptisme and the holy Eucharist Therefore the present Doctrine of Romists concerning Penitencie That the same is a Sacrament is neither grounded vpon the Scripture nor the perpetuall Tradition of the Church And our Romish Aduersarie is the eight time guided by a lying Spirit when he accuseth vs of fundamentall Error because wee denie Popish Penance to be a Sacrament IESVIT NInthly Their denying the Catholique Church expressely set downe in the Creed which of all the other Articles is with greatest danger denyed For the standing out against this makes men Heretikes and without erring against this no man is guiltie of Heresie whatsoeuer Doctor Field to the contrarie saith That an errant against a fundamentall point is an Heretike though hee erre without pertinacie whereof he brings not any syllable of proofe And yet his Doctrine is against the whole consent of Diuines and expressely against S. Augustine who saith That a man holding with Photinus whose errors were most fundamentall against the Trinitie and the Godhead of Christ thinking hee holds Catholique Doctrine is not yet an Heretike till warned that hee holds against the Catholique Church hee chuseth to perseuere in his error ANSWER WEe beleeue stedfastly the Article of the Apostles Creed concerning the Catholique Church and denie onely the false sense which Romists impose and the absurd inferences which they draw from this Article And whereas the Iesuit affirmeth That this Article is with greatest danger denyed because the standing out against it makes men Heretikes c. Both the Proposition it selfe thus rawly and confusedly deliuered and the Confirmation are false The Article of the Catholique Church is not the most fundamentall and prime Article of the Creed for many other Articles are about a more principall and excellent Obiect to wit immediately concerning God the Creator and Christ Iesus the Sauiour and Redeemer and God the Holy Ghost c. whereas the Obiect of the Article in question is concerning the Creature The
prime foundation of Christianitie is Christ himselfe 1. Cor. 3. 11. 1. Pet. 2.6 The Church is the seruant and Spouse of Christ the House of God whereof Christ himselfe is the grand Lord and Builder But wee haue learned in the Gospell That the seruant is not greater than his Lord Ioh. 13. 16. Hereupon S. Augustine Enchyrid cap. 56. Good order requireth that the Church be placed after the Trinitie as an House after the Inhabiter his Temple after God and the Citie after the Founder And if the Aduersarie replie That although it be a lesse Article in regard of the Obiect yet the denyall thereof is of greater consequence because it maketh men guiltie of Heresie c. I answere Granting that the denyall of the whole Article being rightly expounded maketh men Heretickes but I denie that a Christian which beleeueth this Article is no Hereticke if hee beleeue and maintaine any Errour against the plaine Doctrine of the holy Scripture which hee knoweth or which hee is bound Necessitate 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 to know beleeue and maintaine Saint Hierom vpon the Galathians saith Whosocuer to wit in waightie points vnderstandeth the Scriptures otherwise than the sence of the holy Ghost whereby they were written requireth may bee called an Hereticke although hee depart not out of the Church Tertullian saith Whatsoeuer in points Diuine and Sacred is repugnant to Veritie is Heresie Albertus saith Hee is an Hereticke which followeth his owne opinion and not the iudgement of the Scripture Occham Hee is an Hereticke which with a pertinacious minde imbraceth any Errour the contradictorie doctrine whereof is contained in holy Scripture Two things constitute an Hereticke First Errour and false Doctrine as the materiall Secondly Malicious and pertinacious adhearing to the same or defending the same as the formall A man may haue both these without any explicite denying the Article of the Catholicke Church For the Trueth which hee gainesayeth may be plainely deliuered in the holy Scripture and hee may reade the same and haue sufficient meanes to know it in the Scripture and maliciously or inordinately resist the holy Ghost speaking by the Scriptures Act. 7.51 Our Sauiour condemneth some for Heretickes calling them false Prophets Murtherers and Theeues Mat. 7.15 Ioh. 10.5 Not because they opposed the present Church for some of these were principall Rulers of the Iewish Church Mat. 23.1 but because they taught and beleeued contrarie to the Scriptures Mat. 22.29 Saint Augustine d. Bapt. c. Don. li. 4. c. 16. speaketh not altogether as the Iesuit 〈◊〉 him but saith onely That hee would not affirme of such a person who being baptised in the 〈◊〉 Church beleeued as Photinus the hereticke did supposing the same to be Catholicke Faith that he was an hereticke he absolutely affirmeth not that such a person was no Hereticke but that hee would not pronounce him an Hereticke before hee was conuicted And hee speaketh of Heretickes not as they were in foro coeli according to the iudgement of God but in foro Ecclesiae according to Ecclesiasticall Censure Neither doth hee speake of persons sufficiently conuicted by plaine euidence of holy Scripture and maliciously and inordinately resisting the Truth but of simple Errants misled and seduced through ignorance or infirmitie Doctor Field whose learned Treatise of the Church is nibbled at by Papists but yet remaines vnanswered by them is censured by this Obiectour for saying without any Proofe that an Errant against a fundamentall point is an Hereticke though he erre without pertinacie But the Iesuit reporteth amisse when hee saith Doctor Field deliuered this Assertion without Proofe for in the Margine of his Booke he confirmeth the same by the testimonies of Gerson and Occham two famous Doctors of the Roman Church And it is remarkeable that the Iesuit censuring the Doctour himselfe produceth no Argument out of diuine Authoritie to confirme his owne Position but resteth onely vpon the single testimonie of one Father which as I haue alreadie shewed speaketh not to his purpose IESVIT Hence Jinferre that Protestants erre fundamentally according to the second kind of erring to wit in the manner in all points they hold against the Romane Church which I haue prooued to be the true Catholicke Church For he that holds any priuate opinion so stiffely as rather than forsake them he denyes and abandons the Catholike Church a mayne Article of his Creed erreth fundamentally as is cleare But Protestants hold their priuate opinions so stifly as thereupon they haue denied and abandoned the Catholicke Church to wit the Romane ANSWER The mayne Proposition of this Section to wit Protestants 〈◊〉 fundamentally according to the second kinde of erring c. is denied and the Assumption of the Syllogisme whereby the Obiectour laboureth to prooue the same is palpably vntrue For Protestants maintaine no priuate opinion either stiffely or remissely whereby they haue denied and abandoned the true Catholicke Church First They maintaine no doctrine as matter of Faith but that which is deliuered in holy Scripture and which consenteth with the Primitiue Church either expresly or virtually But such doctrine is not priuate opinion because the holy Ghost which is the supreame gouernour and directour of the Church and the Prophets and Apostles which were inspired from heauen are the Authours thereof Secondly The Romane Church is not the Catholicke Church but an vnsound part of the generall visible Church as it is prooued by the Learned of our part whereunto the Aduersaries haue as yet made no replie IESVIT Neither doth it import that they retaine the word hauing reiected the sence seeing not the letter of the Creed pronounced but the matter beleeued makes men Christians Neither is it enough to say that they beleeue the Church of the Elect seeing the Church of the Creed is not the Church of the onely Elect a meere fancie but the visible and conspicuous Church continuing from the Apostles by sucsion of Bishops which thus I prooue ANSWER We retaine both the words and the sence of the Article and the Catholicke Church in the Apostles Creed in respect of the militant part thereof is a Church of right beleeuers and especially of iust and holie persons and principally and intentionally and as it comprehendeth both the militant and triumphant the congregation of all the elect for this Church is the mysticall and liuing bodie which Christ saueth Ephes. 5. 23. It is the Church of the first borne which are written in Heauen Heb. 12.23 It is the Church builded vpon the Rocke against which the gates of Hell shall not preuaile either by Haeresie Temptation or mortall Sinne Math. 16. 18. Math. 7.24 And if it be a meere fancie to hold this then Gregorie the Great with many other of the antiēt Fathers were fantasticks for teaching in this manner But the Church of the Creed is not alwaies the Church Hierarchicall for the Church in the
Apostles Creed is that societie of Beleeuers against which Hell gates preuaile not finally either by Heresie or mortall sinne But Hell gates preuaile against Popes and Popish Prelats by mortall sinne so farre as that they descend into the infernall lake Therefore the Roman Hierarchicall Church consisting principally of Popes and Popish Prelats is not the holy Catholicke Church in the Creed for that Church hath remission of sinnes and life eternall and passeth not into Hell Ioh. 10.28 August d. Doctr. Christ. li. 3. ca. 32. IESVIT The Church whereof Christ said Math. 28.20 I am alwaies with you to the consummation of the world is the Church of the Creed or the Church which to forsake is damnable For the Church wherewith Christ still abideth not according to corporall and visible presence but by his Spirit is the body of Christ whereof he is head into which he infuseth the life of Grace and consequently he that forsaketh this Church forsakes the body of Christ the head thereof and cannot liue by his Spirit but is in a dead and damnable estate as a member cut off and seperated from a liuing bodie as S. Augustine long ago noted The Catholicke Church is the bodie of Christ whereof he is head out of this bodie the holy Ghost quickeneth no man Now the Church whereof Christ said I am alwaies with you to the consummation of the world is not the Church inuisible of onely the Elect but a visible Church deriued by succession from the Apostles therefore hee that forsakes this Church deriued by succession from the Apostles forsakes the Church of the Creed the Catholicke Church the bodie of Christ and puts himselfe into a dead and damnable state and may haue all things besides Saluation and eternall Life as Fathers affirme whose testimonies in this behalfe are notable and famously knowne whereunto D. Field yeeldeth acknowledging One Holy Catholicke Church in which only the light of heauenly Truth is to be sought where only Grace Mercie remission of Sinnes and hope of eternall Happinesse are found ANSWER The Church whereof Christ said Math. 28.20 I am alwaies with you to the consummation of the world is the Church of the holy Apostles of Pastors and Beleeuers succeeding them in the same Faith and Religion and this is a principall part for the Catholicke Church in generall containes all Faithfull and iust persons from Abel c. of the Church in the Creed Secondly some part of the Catholicke Church of the Creed is alwaies visible in the world sometimes in an ampler sometimes in a smaller number of Professours Also the visibilitie thereof is at sometimes illustrious and notorious and at other times it is obscure according to the state of Persecution Thirdly to forsake the true Church in the maine and primarie Articles of Faith or by any wilfull infidelitie is damnable and all people which desire Saluation must actually if it be possible or Voto in case of necessitie conioine themselues to some part of the Orthodoxall Catholicke Church But our Sauiour promised to no one visible Sea or Church continuing after the Apostles by succession of Bishops absolute immunitie from all Errour and infallibilitie of Veritie but only presentiall assistance and protection of Grace sufficicient for the saluation of his people vpon condition to wit when the said Pastours taught and obserued that which he commanded and continued in the right vse of those meanes which he had deposed among them Ioh. 8.31 32. Rom. 11. 22. Read before in this Treatise pag. 94.99 The Testimonies of S. Augustine obiected by the Aduersarie which are That the Catholick Church is the body of Christ whereof he is head and that out of this bodie the holy Ghost quickeneth no man make altogether against himselfe for none are vitall members of Christs mysticall body but iust and holy persons And it is the same Fathers doctrine Impij non sunt reuera Corpus Christi wicked persons are not in deed and veritie Christs bodie And in another place In corpore Christi non sunt quod est Ecclesia quoniam non potest Christus habere membra damnata They are not in Christs bodie which is the Church because Christ cannot haue damnable members And Bernard saith Manifestum est non esse Caput Hypochritae Christum It is euident that Christ is not the head of an Hypochrite But the visible Rulers of the Popish Church haue many times bin as our Aduersaries themselues report not only Hypochrites but apparantly monstrous and damnable sinners therefore they are not the Catholicke Church out of which no Saluation can be had neither is perpetuall influence and assistance of Grace absolutely intailed vpon them Out of the former premises I argue thus Wolues Hipochrites and impious persons are not the holy Catholicke Church of the Creed out of which there is no Saluation Romish Prelats haue beene Wolues Hypocrites and impious men for they haue maintained false and superstitious Doctrine repugnant to the holy Scripture and aduerse to the Faith of the Primitiue Church which Protestants haue and are againe readie to demonstrate and they haue beene most notorious for all kind of abhominable vices as Romists themselues haue published to the World and they haue also most iniustly and tyranically persecuted and oppressed true beleeuers Ergo Romish Prelats are not the holy Catholicke Church of the Creed out of which there is no Saluation Argument 2. Out of the holy Catholicke Church of the Creed there is no Saluation Out of the fellowship of the Roman Church there hath beene and is Saluation Ergo The present Roman Church is not the holy Catholicke Church of the Creed And thus the Obiector hath gained nothing by accusing our Church of fundamentall error and his nine Accusations are prooued to be so many calumniations and we neither erre fundamentally in any maine Article nor yet pertinaciously or maliciously against any other Christian veritie For although whiles we liue in the world tenebras huius mortalitatis circumferimus as S. Augustine speaketh we carrie about vs in regard of our selues the darkenes of mortalitie tamen ad Scripturae lucernam ambulamus yet we studie carefully to walke according to the true light of holy Scripture and God hath hitherto so assisted vs that the euill eye of our Aduersaries is not able to discouer in our Doctrine any capitall Error neuerthelesse if vpon further inquisition they shall make it appeare by diuine testimonie or other sufficient proofe that we are deceiued in any matter of Faith small or great we will be as 〈◊〉 to reforme our selues as they are readie to accuse vs. And in all differences betweene them and vs we submit our selues to a free lawfull generall Councell to be tried by the rule of Gods word concerning which S. Augustine saith Extat authoritas diuinarum Scripturarum vndè mens nostra deuiare non debet nec relicto solidamento diuini
worshipped with that honour is vnlawfull and I suppose they will not denie that the forming of the Images of Angels and Saints with intent that they should be worshipped with 〈◊〉 honour either absolute or respectiue is vnlawfull and consequently prohibited by this Commandement For although the Adoration of created or artificiall things is prohibited in the first Commandement Thou shalt haue no other Gods but me yet the forming and erecting Images of any kind to be the outward meanes of such Idolatrous worship is prohibited in this Commandement Thou shalt not make vnto thy selfe any grauen Image c. Leuit. 26.1 And thus Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus and many other Fathers expound the Commandement IESVIT Wherefore the pictures of the Holy Ghost in forme of a Doue and of God the Father in forme of an old man be not direct and proper Images of the two diuine persons but onely of the Doue that descended on Christ and of the old man seene in a vision by Daniell in which the perfections of these persons are not liuely represented but a farre off and imperfectly shadowed nor doe Catholiques vse them as proper Images standing for their Prototypes and conueying our actions by imagination vnto them For no Catholike doth kisse the feet of the Doue or lye prostrate at them referring by imagination that outward subiection to the feet of the Holy Ghost who hath no feet but metaphoricall not imaginable nor such as can be represented by image ANSWER You slubber ouer the matter of Images of the persons of the Trinitie which are vsed in the Roman Church as experience witnesseth and your owne Doctours acknowledge and you conceale part of your Popish doctrine For although you affirme that these Images are not proper but metaphoricall representations of the diuine persons yet you hold that these represent not onely the effects and operations of the said persons but also God himselfe and you teach also that they are to be worshipped as sacred signes metaphorically shadowing and representing the persons whereunto they haue relation and the opinion of Durand and Abulensis holding the contrarie is condemned by the common sentence of later Pontificians among which Caietan saith Images of the Trinitie are painted in the Roman Church not onely that they may be shewed or looked on as the Cherubins of old time were in the temple but that they may be adored Therefore if Romish Catholikes doe not kisse them or lye prostrate before them as our Iesuit affirmeth they obserue not the ordinance of their Church as the same is related by the renowned Cardinall Caietan IESVIT Wherfore this Text being thus cleerely explicable and being not explicated at all doth make no lesse against Protestants than vs I see no reason why they should bee so much out of loue with the worship of the image of Christ Iesus their Lord to which Nature and Christianitie binds them ANSVVER The summe of this part of your disputation is That in the text of Exodus To fall downe and worship images is no more forbidden than to make but making of images is not simply and absolutely vnlawfull and consequently their worship is not simply and absolutely vnlawfull The first ground and proposition of this argument is false for worshipping of images is forbidden as the principall obiect of that negatiue precept and as a thing morally euill in his very kind but making them is forbidden onely when it is a meanes subseruient to worship and because it may be separated both in his owne nature and in mans intention from that end and vse therefore the one is simply forbidden and the other is onely prohibited when it becommeth a meanes or instrument to the other And this distinction and disparitie betweene making and worshipping hath beene confirmed by the example of the brasen Serpent for when the same was onely made and looked vpon it was a medicine when it was worshipped it became a poyson 2 Kings 18.4 Wherefore considering that the holy Scripture approoueth the difference which Protestants assigne betweene making and worshipping of images I see no reason why Papists should not rest vpon the sentence of holy Scripture alwayes condemning but neuer maintaining Image worship rather than to persist in a palpable superstition to the offence of God and scandall of his people IESVIT §. 4. Inconueniences which may come by occasion of Images easily preuented and their vtilities very great ANother Argument against Images Protestants much vrge That they be stumbling blocks for simple people who easily take an Image to be the very God euen as the Pagans did in former time to this purpose bringing some Testimonies out of S. Augustine ANSWER THis is not the Protestants Obiection but the Iesuits fiction We say that Image worship is a stumbling blocke both to the learned and the simple for it is in it selfe a superstition or vndue manner of Worship neuer approoued or ratified by any Precept Promise or blessing of God in the Old Testament or by Christ and his Apostles in the New Secondly The manner of worshipping Images according to the Popish tenet is so subtill and intricate euen to the learned themselues that it must of necessitie be difficile for the vnlearned to conceiue the same and consequently not to erre in the performance of it Thirdly When it is performed with greatest intelligence what fruit and reward can be reaped other than such as our Sauiour spake of the Pharisees saying In vaine doe you worship me teaching for Doctrines the Precepts of men And although Saint Augustine Epist. 49. and againe sup Psal. 113. speaketh literally of Pagan Images yet hee declareth in generall the perill which all Images being adored may bring vnto weaker mindes and condemneth the vse of them euen when they are not adored for themselues but made instruments to worship God saying in one place Thus haue they deserued to erre which sought Christ in painted Images and not in written Bookes IESVIT To this I answere First that this may seeme a great wrong not onely to the Christian Church but also to Christ himselfe to thinke that men indued with his knowledge and Faith and made partakers of the light whereby they beleeue the most high diuine and incomprehensible mysteries which he reuealed to the world should so easily be carried away into such blockish errors as to thinke a stocke or stone to be God a blindnesse scarce incident vnto men except they be wholly destitute of all heauenly conceits and nuzled vp in their Cradle in that persuasion as Panims were of whom onely Saint Augustine speakes for they did not onely want this light of Christian instruction but also were taught by their Ancestors that in their Jdoles a kind of diuine vertue or Godhead was lodged in and affiged vnto them Whereas Catholicke Doctrine teacheth the contrarie That our Images are bare resemblances of holy persons no diuinitie no vertue no dignitie no 〈◊〉
hath at any time among vs beene infected with the Humaniformian errour by hearing or reading the Bible I maruell also why you ranke not the Apostles Creed among prohibited Bookes as well as vulgar translations of the Bible for ignorant people rehearsing the article He sitteth at the right hand of God might more easily imagine God to be corporeall than by reading Scripture because herein that which in one Text is deliuered metaphorically is plainely and spiritually declared in other Texts and the like is not done in the briefe summarie of the Creed But on the contrarie many of your owne Doctors formerly cited complaine of the brutish superstition committed by sundrie of your people in worshipping Images It may be they thinke not the Images which they adore to be verie God for Heathen people were scarcely so rude yet they may beleeue they are the seat of God and that some diuine maiestie and power is inhabiting in them or that they are diuine instruments to conuey graces and benefits to people which adore them and that in worshipping them they merit saluation and the like Now as for the letter of sacred Scripture if any rude person should sucke errour from thence the offence is taken and not giuen for the reading thereof is lawfull and holy But when Roman Masters impose adoration of Images vpon simple people if these be ensnared by that action the scandall is actiue and it is extreme presumption in the Roman Clergie to prescribe a forme of worship neuer approoued or commended but alwaies censured by holy writ which being omitted can hurt none but being obserued endangereth many Lastly you censure Tertullian for holding the Deitie to be corporeall but S. Augustine to whom you referre vs expoundeth his Tenet more fauourably affirming that he was no Heriticke in this point because he may be expounded as speaking figuratiuely and by Corpus a bodie he might vnderstand a thing substantiall reall immutable quia non est nihil non est inanitas non est qualitas c. he is not nothing an inanitie a qualitie or accident but abideth firme and inuariable in his nature Neither yet affirmeth S. Augustine either of himselfe when he was a Manichee or of Tertullian that they were lead into their error by reading the Scripture And it is more probable that the Manichees sucked their false opinion from the Gentiles rather than from the letter of the Scriptures because they wholly reiected the old Testament in which principally is found the description of the Deitie by figures of things corporeal neither regarded they Apostolicall Scriptures but coined a Gospell according to their owne fancie IESVIT More our Children and ignorant people are in the Catholicke Church often and plentifully instructed against such errors as by our Catechismes may appeare and particularly by Jesuits who make a solemne vow to keepe their Institutes specially about teaching the rudiments of Faith vnto common and ignorant people Hence it is that in townes where they dwell and villages about on Sundaies and holy daies besides their Sermons for people more intelligent they teach without faile vnto children and men of ruder sort the forme of Christian Doctrine and vse all industry by giuing rewards vnto children and by bestowing almes on poore people to make them willing and diligent in this learning In the English Church what is done for the instruction of the ignorant in their rudiments of Faith by Ministers and Pastors as I know not much so will I say nothing but only that the time they spend in the praises of sole Faith and about the secrets of Predestination and in long bitter inuectiues against our Doctrines misvnderstood if not purposely misrelated might in my opinion more profitably bee spent in declaring the Creed and prime Principles of Christianitie in plaine and Catechisticall manner ANSVVER How plentifull your instruction of ignorant people at this present time is I will not examine but it is not long since some of the best learned of your part affirmed That throughout the whole Christian state there was so extreame sloath concerning these things that one should finde many in all places expresly knowing no more concerning God and things Diuine than Pagans And Espenceus vpon the 2. Tim. 3. n. 17. pag. 118. saith Are children well and religiously educated yea according to that Propheticall derision Esay 65. Children of an hundred yeeres that is aged and decrepite Christians trust as much and yeeld as much to Saints as to God and thinke that God is lesse mercifull and harder to bee intreated than Saints I knew saith this Authour an antient and noble Knight who being demanded What hee beleeued concerning the holy Ghost confessed freely like 〈◊〉 Ephesians Acts 19. That he 〈◊〉 not whether there was any holy Ghost Also the Catechismes of Ledesma Bellarmine c. are extant wherein few instructions are found sufficient to preuent the former errour whereinto ignorant people may easily fall You descend in the next place to depresse the English Church accusing the Pastors thereof of negligence in teaching the Principles of Christian Faith and spending their time in the praises of sole Faith and about the secrets of Predestination and making Inuectiues against your Doctrine misvnderstood But you looke vpon vs with an euill eye and your Aspersions are enuious First the Canons of our Church impose catechising no lesse than preaching and the negligence of delinquents in discharging this duty is punishable by Ecclesiasticall censures Secondly the faith which our Ministers are to preach according to the doctrine of the Church of England is a liuely and operatiue Faith and this Faith alone and no other can iustifie and saue the soule Thirdly it is not lawfull for Preachers to spend their time in confuting Papists vnlesse they vnderstand their Tenet and are able to prooue the same to be wicked and false And although our Tenet concerning Predestination be no other than what Saint Augustine and his schollers maintained against the Pelagians and which hath beene holden Orthodoxall by the best learned in the Church of Rome it selfe yet our Church is most cautelous in preuenting offences which may ariseby vndiscreet handling of this doctrine and a most prouident restraint is made among vs in this behalfe by superiour authoritie I might here retort vpon the Aduersarie the abuses of his owne Church in all or some of these kinds but this were to wander from the disputation and to giue occasion of further excursion to one Cui verbosa lingua est cor vero obtenebratum as S. Cyril anciently spake IESVIT Besides it is easie for the Romane Church to keepe her children from beleeuing that Images be Gods or true liuing things or that any diuinitie or diuine vertue resides in them as may be prooued conuincingly in my iudgement by experience had of her power in this kind about a point more difficile For what may seeme more euident than that a consecrated Host
is bread of which foure sences sight feeling smell tast giue in euidence as of bread no lesse verily than any other so farre as they can discerne and yet so potent is the Word and doctrine of the Church grounded on generall Councells declaring the word of God for Transubstantiation as Catholikes denying their sences beleeue assuredly that what seemeth bread is not bread but the true body of our Sauiour vnder the formes and accidents of bread Now can any man with any shew of the least probabilitie in the world thinke that it is difficile for this Church to persuade her children that the Image of Christ is not a liuing thing or bath any Godhead or liuing diuine power lodged in it as plaine Scriptures shew and generall Catholike Councells particularly the Tridentine and Nicene define which doctrine neither reason nor sence can dislike or shall the sole similitude of members correspondent vnto humane liuing members which Images haue so much preuaile in Catholike minds so to bow downe their thoughts to base Idolatrie as to thinke a stocke or stone to be God and that the Church shall not be able by teaching to erect them to a more high and diuine apprehension being able to make them firmely beleeue a consecrated Hoast is not really bread against the Iudgement that they would otherwise frame vpon most notorious euidencie of sence ANSVVER This passage is wasted in magnifying the power which the Roman Church hath in preseruing her adheres from the infection of superstition in worshipping Images The argument vsed by the Idolist to this purpose is The Roman Church performeth that which is more difficile to wit it persuadeth people contrarie to the experience of all their senses to beleeue that consecrate bread is not bread but the true body of Christ vnder the formes and accidents of bread Therefore it is able to persuade people that the Images which they adore are not very God or that any diuinitie or diuine vertue resides in them I answer that it is not more difficile to persuade some people to beleeue transubstantiation than to rectifie their iudgement in adoration of Images for mans nature being of it selfe through inbred corruption prone to beleeue lies and the members of Antichrist hauing a speciall curse of God vpon them 2. Thes. 2. 10 11. no maruell if they credit false doctrine although it be most absurd But they which beleeue and obey their Masters when they teach lyes doe not alwayes follow their directions if they instruct them in truth Neither are such people free from scandall iustly taken if they conceiue not images to be Gods or indued with diuine vertue residing in them for without such imagination they performe an vnlawfull worship neuer instituted but alwayes condemned by the Holy Ghost And this alone without further abuses is sufficient to condeme the doctrine and practise of the Romane Church IESVIT The Protestant Church on the other side may seeme to haue no great vigor by preachings to persuade common people against the errour of the Anthropomorphits seeing their principle is That a world of Preachers is not to bee beleeued against the euident Scripture Yea that a common ordinarie man by Scripture may oppose as great and a greater Church than is the whole Protestant Which principle being laid how will they conuince people that that God is a pure Spirit whom the Scripture doth so perpetually set forth as hauing humane members I may conclude therefore that their translating of Scripture into the vulgar languages breedes more danger vnto common people than our making of Images ANSWER The Iesuit is fallen vpon a Paradoxe affirming that there is more danger for Protestants to be mislead by reading Scriptures translated into the errour of the Humaniformians than the Papists to be seduced by images And his reason is because Protestant Ministers cannot by preaching the contrarie doctrine persuade people to desist from any errour which seemes to them agreeable to any literall text of holy Scripture for one of their owne principles is That a world of Preachers is not to be beleeued against euident Scripture c. and he citeth Mr. Iohn White in his Way pag. 59. I perceiue it is impossible for Papists to deale sincerely Mr. Iohn White affirmeth not that euery priuate person or that any companie of people whatsoeuer are to be credited vpon the sole allegation of a text of Scripture expounded as the outward letter soundeth for we know that sometimes the letter killeth and Saint Augustines rule concerning Scriptures exposition is neither strange nor vnpractised by vs but Mr. Iohn Whites doctrine is That if foure hundred Baalites or a whole Councell of Pharisees or Errants deliuer vntruths one Micajah one Stephen one Athanasius in whose mouth is fouud the word of Truth although the persons seeme neuer so priuate must be preferred before them which teach lyes or doctrine repugnant to holy Scripture truely expounded IESVIT But they will say the translation of Scripture into vulgar languages is commanded in the Scripture and the Apostles and Apostolicall Church practised it Whereas wee cannot prooue by Scripture that the Apostles did warrant or practise the setting vp of Images This they say with great confidence But what substantiall proofe is of this their saying I could neuer reade or heare The testimonies they bring in this behalfe Search the Scriptures Let his word dwell plentifully among you c. are insufficient to prooue a direct and expresse precept or practise of translating Scriptures into the vulgar tongue ANSWER Wee affirme with great confidence both that the reading of holy Scripture by Lay people which must needes imply Translation of them is a Diuine Ordinance and that Image worship was neither warranted by the Apostles nor practised by the Primatiue Church succeeding the Apostles Neither doe wee alledge onely those Sentences of holy Scripture Iohn 5. 39. Collos. 3. 16. which the Iesuit thinkes himselfe able to elude by subtile distinctions as the Arrians in times past eluded the Text of Saint Iohn Cap. 10.30 But we cite also the Precept of God giuen to the Church before Christ his comming and the perpetuall practise of the godly in the Old and New Testament and the vehement exhortations of the Primatiue Fathers exhorting Lay people to the reading and meditation of holy Scripture and magnifying the fruit and benefit arising from thence The Eunuch is commended for reading holy Scripture Acts 8. 28. The Baereans are called Noble by the holy Ghost for searching the holy Scriptures Acts 17. 11. Hee is called Blessed which readeth and heareth Apoc. 1. 3. The Galathians read the Scripture Gal. 4.21 The Ephesians Cap. 3.4 The Collossians Cap. 4. 16. The Thessalonians 1. Thes. 5.27 The Fathers are so plentifull in this Argument as I haue elsewhere shewed that it would astonish any man who hath read them to behold such impudencie in Papists as to denie this Practise to haue beene Primatiue and
of Saints and Angels IESVIT I Haue ioyned these two Controuersies together hoping I might doe it with your Maiesties good liking the maine difficultie of them both being the same to wit Worship and Inuocation of Angels and Saints For I am most fully persuaded that if your Maiestie did allow Inuocation of any Saint you would neuer denie that Deuotion vnto the Blessed Virgin Mother of God whom you honour and reuerence aboue the rest though perchance you may dislike some particular formes of our Prayers that seeme to giue her Titles aboue that which is due to a Creature about which I shall in the end of this Discourse endeuour to giue your Maiestie satisfaction ANSVVER ALthough it were granted that some kind or manner of Petition or Compellation made by the Church Militant to the blessed Saints and Angels were lawfull and that we might request them to be Comprecants and to make intercession to God in our behalfe yet the Inuocation of them according to the practise of the Romane Church wherein they pray first of all to Saints and in the last place to Christ and their excessiue worship by Vowes Oathes Offertures conioyning their satisfactions with Christs and confidence in their merits and adoring their Images cannot be iustified for this manner of Deuotion hath no foundation expresse or infolded in Diuine Reuelation and the Primitiue Church did not appoint or practise the same And it encroacheth so neerely vpon the Office of Christ our sole Redcemer Mediator and Aduocate that without expresse and manifest Precept or approbation of the Holy Ghost wee may not esteeme it lawfull The Doctrine of our Church concerning Inuocation and Adoration of the blessed Trinitie our accesse to God by Supplications and Prayers in the name of Iesus Christ our dependance vpon the sole Merits and Satisfactions of our all-sufficient Redeemer and Sauiour haue Precept Example Promise Reasons and Warrantie deliuered in the expresse manifest and indubitate Word of God Ioh. 14. 13 14. cap. 16.24 1. Ioh. 2.1 Heb. 4. 15 16. 1. Pet. 2.5 Heb. 13.15 Also wee haue certainetie of Faith That Christ Iesus our Intercessor and Aduocate hath distinct and perfect knowledge particular and generall of our qualitie state and actions Heb. 4.13 His office is to make intercession for vs Rom. 8.34 Heb. 7. 25. He inuiteth vs most louingly to come vnto him Math. 11.28 Our heauenly Father alwayes heareth him Iohn 11. 42. His compassion towards vs exceedeth the pietie of any creature Ioh. 10. 11. 15. 13. Heb. 4 15. Wee may more safely and with greater comfort speake to our Sauiour than to any Saint or Angell the holy Spirit helpeth our infirmities and teacheth vs to make intercession according to the will of God Rom. 8.26 27. Therefore our praying to God in the name of Christ onely our supplication to the Father to accept vs for the sole merits of our Sauiour is a most safe and faithfull deuotion and our assurance is grounded vpon the word of faith and hauing such promises we cannot be deceiued in our hope 2. Tim. 2.13 Tit. 1. 2. But on the contrarie Romish inuocation directed to Saints Angells and the blessed Virgin their oblation of the merits and satisfaction of creatures with many other branches of their holy seeming deuotion haue neither precept example or promise in the large booke of God notwithstanding the same booke is most abundant in teaching the dutie and forme of prayer And some of our best learned Aduersaries confesse that the doctrine of inuocation of Saints is neither expresly nor infoldedly taught in holy Scripture Therefore his most excellent Maiestie our Soueraigne Lord and King to whose sacred person the Iesuit directeth his former speech may with vnspeakeable ioy and comfort glorie that he is in this article a defender and propugner of that faith which is taught from heauen by the holy Ghost and Papisticall inuocation is no plant growing in the Paradise of holy Scripture by their owne confession neither haue they any meanes infallible to ascertaine themselues and others that the same is a plant which the heauenly Father hath planted or that their deuotion in this kind is necessarie profitable or acceptable to God IESVIT In which question I will suppose without large and particular proofe being able to prooue it by testimonies vndeniable if neede be That worship and inuocation of Saints hath beene generally receiued in the whole Christian Church at least euer since the dayes of Constantine A thing so cleere that Chemnitius doth write in this sort Most of the Fathers as Nazianzen Nissen Basill Theodoret Ambrose Hierome Austin c. did not dispute but auouch the soules of Martyrs and Saints to heare the petitions of those that prayed they went often to the monuments of Martyrs and inuocated Martyrs by name And seeing these Fathers praysed and practised this custome as receiued from Ancestours and as a matter of faith condemning the contradictors thereof as Nouelists and Heretikes to wit Aerius and Vigilantius as is confessed I may further conclude that that custome did not then begin but was come downe from the Apostles which is confirmed by testimonie of the Magdeburgians in acknowledging that in the Fathers next 〈◊〉 the Apostolicall times were found Non obscura vestigia Inuocationis Sanctorum as appeareth by the testimonie of Saint Ireneus tearming the 〈◊〉 Virgin the aduocate of Eue that is of her children ANSVVER You presuppose that which notwithstanding your facing you will neuer bee able to prooue to wit That innocation of Saints according to the doctrine and practise of the late Roman Church hath beene generally and vniuersally receiued as an article of faith or necessarie dutie euer since the dayes of Constantine neither hath Chemnitius whom you alleadge affirmed this but rather said the contrarie First he saith That in the Primitiue Church vntill two hundred years after Christ this doctrine and practise was vtterly vnknowne Secondly he affirmeth that about the yeare 240. some seedes of this doctrine began to be sowne in the Church by Origen Thirdly He saith expresly that for three hundred and fiftie yeeres and vpward the publike practise of Inuocation was vnknowne in the Church And then about the yeere 370 it began to be spoken of in publicke assemblies by Basil Nyssen and Nazianzen vpon occasion of their Panegyricall Orations Fourthly He addeth That notwithstanding these Orations it was not generally and vniuersally receiued in those times but both doubted of and also reprooued and condemned by some and about the 400. yeere Saint Chrysostome interposed and laboured to reduce people to the antient forme of Inuocation And proceeding in his Historicall Narration he sheweth out of Nicephorus lib. 15. cap. 28. that Petrus Gnapheus Anno 470 condemned by the first vniuersall Synode of Heresie was the first Author among the Grecians of mixing
intercessions to the Virgin Marie with diuine Prayers Hee affirmeth also that in Saint Augustines dayes Inuocation of Saints was not vsed in the common Seruice of the West Church And descending to the 600. yeeres he saith Inuocation of Saints among the Latines was not brought into the publicke Seruice and Letanies of the Church vntill the dayes of Pope Gregorie the first Lastly the forme and manner of Saintly Inuocation in the 600 yeere differed extreamely from that which was vsed by Papals in latter times and this is confirmed by Chemnitius setting downe verbatim many Collects and formes of deuotion vsed in latter dayes which were antiently vnheard of Secondly The Fathers which you cite in your Margine to prooue the Doctrine of Inuocation of Saints and Martyrs to haue beene a matter of faith from the dayes of Constantine are Gregorie Nyssen St. Basil Theodorit St. Ambrose St. Hierom and St. Augustine but hauing perused the places I finde not that these Fathers either deliuered this Doctrine as matter of Catholicke Faith or affirme the Practise thereof to haue beene necessarie and vniuersall or that they spake of such Worship and Inuocation of Saints as is practised in the seruice of your Church But as places may bee noted in some Fathers touching inuocation of Saints deceased or which argue that they requested Saints to assist them with their Prayers at least in generall and so farre foorth as they had knowledge of their necessities So likewise other Sentences are found in their writings maintaining the sole Inuocation of God by Christ and condemning Inuocation of Angels and Saints deceased according to the manner now vsed in the Romane Church Theoderit vpon the Colossians cap. 2. condemneth worshipping and Inuocation of Angels St. Ambrose saith Tu solus Dominus inuocandus es c. Thou Lord onely art to bee inuocated St. Hierom Nullum inuocare id est in nos orando vocare nisi Deum debemus We ought to inuocate that is by Prayer to call into vs none but God And in another place Whatsoeuer I shall vtter seemeth dumbe because hee Nepotian being defunct heareth me not St. Augustine Non sit nobis Religio cultus hominum mortuorum Let not the worship of persons defunct be our Religion Saint Athanasius Nunguam quispiam precaretur aliquid accipere a Patre Angelis vel ab vllis rebus creatis No man would euer pray to receiue any 〈◊〉 from the Father and from the Angels or from any other creature Thirdly That which the Iesuit affirmeth concerning Aerius and Vigilantius is false for neither of these is ranked among Heretickes by Philastrius Epiphanius St. Augustine or by any of the antient Fathers because they denied Inuocation of Saints departed and Popish Prateolus himselfe maketh not this doctrine any of Aerius his errours and treating of Vigilantius he produceth onely Lindanus and Hosius two most partiall Pontificians affirming him to haue beene condemned of heresie for this cause Wherefore our Aduersarie prooueth himselfe a weake Antiquarie when he affirmeth that Aerius and Vigilantius were condemned of heresie because they denyed Inuocation of Saints deceased Fourthly The Magdeburgians which in the third Centurie obserue Non obscura vestigia c some not very obscure traces or footsteps in the writings of the Doctors of this age concerning Inuocation of Saints speake of the least degree and kind of Inuocation to wit Compellation and besides they probably suspect that suppositious Sentences haue beene inserted into the Bookes of antient Fathers Lastly Ireneus stileth the Virgin Marie The Aduocate of Euah not in regard of her Intercession for Euah and her children after her decease and departure out of the world but because of that which she performed in beleeuing and obeying the heauenly message which the Angel Gabriel brought vnto her Luke 1.38 for hereby she became a blessed Instrument of conceiuing and bearing Christ Iesus and by this obedience the blessed seed was brought into the world by her whereby the fall of Euah and her children was repaired And thus shee was the Aduocate or Comforter of Euah and her children by bearing Christ and not because she was inuocated as a Mediator after her death by Euahs children IESVIT Neither can Protestants denie this to haue beene the Doctrine of the Fathers but seeke to discredit them as if they had been various vncertaine contradictorious in this point But seeing Antiquitie that hath perused their workes now more than 1300 yeeres neuer noted such contradictions in them Christian wisedome and charitie will neuer be so persuaded of the Fathers by Protestants specially their Allegations being such as may easily be explicated so as they make nothing at all against this Catholicke Custome ANSVVER Protestants maintaine that inuocation of Saints can be no Article of Faith although it were manifest that some Fathers liuing since or before the daies of Constantine had beleeued or practised the same for euery Article of Christian Faith must be grounded vpon diuine Reuelation But all opinions of the Fathers are not diuine Reuelation and the holy Fathers do not challenge to themselues infallibilitie of iudgement neither do our Aduersaries yeeld the same vnto them Therefore a surer foundation must be laid to proue Adoration and Inuocation of Saints to be a necessarie duetie than a few scattered opinatiue sentences of Ecclesiasticall writers Neuerthelesse Protestants are able to giue satisfaction concerning the iudgement of Antiquitie in this point And we haue prooued that the eldest Fathers for those ages in which Egesippus saith The Church continued a Virgin taught no such Doctrine Secondly no generall Councel nor yet any particular Councell confirmed by a generall did euer authorise or decree inuocation of Saints as it is now maintained by Papals to haue beene a necessarie duetie or practise Thirdly there be sundrie Principles and other passages in the Bookes of the Fathers by which this doctrine may be confuted IESVIT For all they say in this kind is reduced to these fiue heads First That Saints are not inuocated by Faith as authors of the benefits we craue ANSWER Our Aduersarie hath collected fiue Expositions to elude such testimonies as we produce out of antiquitie First whereas many Fathers treading in the steps of holy Scripture affirme that religious prayer is a proper worship belonging to the sacred Trinitie and by this argument they conclude against the Arians and Macedonians that Christ Iesus and the holy Ghost are verie God because Christians beleeue in them and pray vnto them The Iesuit telleth vs that the Fathers intend only that we may not inuocate creatures by faith as authors of the benefits we craue But if this glosse or solution be sufficient then the Argument of the Fathers concludeth not against the Arians that Christ is God because he is inuocated for the Arian vsing the Iesuits distinction may replie That Christ is inuocated as a Mediator and as
men indeed haue forged in their owne braines an axiome to serue their owne turne to wit That Christians must haue speciall ground out of Scripture for all circumstantiall actions and decencies vsed in diuine worship These we refute or better instruct to bring them into the middle way and wee teach as followeth First that nothing is to be receiued as a part of Catholike faith nor yet to be imposed in religion as a dutie immediately commanded by God which is expresly or deriuatiuely contained in holy Scripture Secondly outward ceremonies and things adiaphorous haue generall warrant in the Scripture in the doctrine of Christian libertie and in the doctrine of the authoritie of the Church And concerning things adiaphorous it is sufficient to make them lawfull that they are consonant vnto the generall rules and principles of Scripture But the Romish doctrine of inuocation of Saints and offering their merits vnto God c. are imposed by them as matters of faith and as a seruice immediately appointed by Christ and his Apostles and they which refuse this worship are condemned as Heretikes with a solemne Anathema Also the said worship is made meritorious and satisfactorie yea many times preferred before that which hath expresse warrant in Gods vndoubted word IESVIT This onely we require that ignorant people bee not Iudges of such inferences an office so farre aboue their capacities as I am persuaded no vnlearned man that hath in him any sparke of humilitie or any mediocritie of Iudgement will vndertake it for no man is competent to iudge assuredly of arguments by deduction from Scripture that hath not exact skill as well of Scripture to know the false sence from the true as of Logicke to distinguish Syllogismes from Paralogismes being able to giue sentence of the truth of Principles by the one and of the inferences by the other a thing so hard as euen learned Diuines doe much suspect their owne sufficiencie to iudge of Deductions and dare not absolutely pronounce their sentence but referre the same to definitions of authoritie which besides skill of Scripture and Logicke hath the promise of Gods perpetuall assistance in teaching the Christian Church ANSWER We are farre from appointing ignorant persons to be Iudges of that which exceedeth their modell and skill 1. Cor. 12. 29. and the tractation of matters obscure and difficile must be referred to the iuditious and learned But the promise of Christ to assist his Ministers in teaching and gouerning their flocke belongeth to other Pastours as well as to the Romane Bishop and his associates to whom we may say as S. Hierome doth in another case Are you alone the Church and is euery one excluded from Christ which offendeth you may you betrample the right of the Church and yet whatsoeuer you doe it must be a rule of Doctrine IESVIT Wherefore if Protestants will binde vs to bring expresse Scripture for the worship of Images adoration of the Sacrament inuocation of Saints they must themselues likewise be bound to bring expresse Scripture against Anabaptists for Christening of infants for their keeping of the Sunday in lieu of the antient Sabbaoth day for their dedicating of dayes in memorie of the Apostles with religious solemnitie for the crosse in Baptisme and other such things obserued in their Religion not expressed in Scripture And if deduction from Scripture or consonancie therewith be sufficient to warrant these customes Why should they mislike the worship and inuocation of Saints for which besides the iudgement of the most flourishing and learned antiquitie that euer was since the Apostles dayes to wit the Fathers of the fourth age confessedly consenting with vs we bring more cleare warrant from scripture than they can bring for the before mentioned obseruation of them religiously kept ANSWER If you will maintaine Inuocation of Saints as a matter of faith or necessarie dutie appointed immediately by God you must confirme the same either by expresse Scripture or by arguments out of the Scripture orby some other reuelation which is infallibly diuine besides the Scripture But if you vrge the same onely as a thing adiaphorous it is sufficient to make the practise lawfull if it be not repugnant to the Scripture But this latter imposeth no necessitie vpon other Churches which haue libertie to prescribe their owne adiaphorous rights The instances which you present vnto vs of infants Baptisme keeping Sunday in liew of the legall Sabboath and the figne of the Crosse in Baptisme arguing from them that some things are of necessarie obseruation and practised by our selues without expresse Scripture to warrant them are answered as before First baptinng of infants is deduced euidently from the Scriptures by the confession of your learned Cardinall Secondly there is expresse mention of the Lords day and of the religious obseruing thereof in the text of the new Testament Act. 20.7 1. Cor. 16.2 And the Primitiue Church immediately succeeding the Apostles testifieth expresly the obseruation of this day to haue beene grounded vpon Apostolicall institution But Romish inuocation of Saints wanteth the former of these totally and Papists can hardly name one authenticall Authour of the first 500 yeare which affirmeth that inuocation of Saints is a diuine or Apostolicall tradition Thirdly the signe of the Crosse in Baptisme is an antient ceremonie but yet adiaphorous and therefore expresse Scripture is not necessarie to warrant the vse of it But your inuocation of Saints and Image worship are made matters of faith and for the practise so inuiolable that the liuing Saints and Images of God must be destroyed and consumed in the topheth of your inquisition if they will not bend and bow the knee according to your tradition IESVIT § 2. Knowledge of Prayers made to them communicable and communicated vnto Saints THe second cause why Protestants dislike praying to Saints is for that they thinke by teaching that Saints heare our Petitions we attribute vnto them knowledge proper to God onely for Saints cannot know all Prayers made to them without seeing at once what is done in euery part of the world nor know the sincere deuotion wherewith they are done without seeing the secret affections of mens hearts but to know what is done in all parts of the world and the secrets of hearts is knowledge proper to God Therfore we cannot teach that they heare our Petitions without attributing to them knowledge proper to God To this exception answere is made That knowledge proper to God is of two kinds the one so proper as it is altogether incommnnicable with any creature and such is the comprehension of his diuine essence The second is proper so that naturally creatures are not capeable thereof yet the same may be imparted vnto them by supernaturall light eleuating them to a high and diuine state aboue the possibilitie of nature In this kinde is the vision of the diuine essence face to face which being granted vnto Saints
certaine it is that in God all creatures all actions done in the world and all the most secret thoughts of hearts so perspicuously and distinctly shine as they are in themselues so that the Saints hauing light to see the diuine Essence may in him cleerely discerne whatsoeuer is done in the world belonging to their state though neuer so secret according to the saying of S. Gregorie Nothing is done about any creature which they cannot see who see the claritie of the Creator And againe we must beleeue that they who see the claritie of the omnipotent God within themselues are not ignorant of any thing that is without which that Protestants may the lesse dislike I prooue to be grounded on the Scriptures ANSVVER The Popish speculation of the speculatiue glasse of the Trinitie is not Catholicke Doctrine in their owne Schole and therefore the Iesuit is ouerseene in obtruding the same vpon vs. Pius a Ponte a moderne Scholeman hath these words The diuine Essence cannot bee tearmed a Glasse properly neither by Metaphor doth the condition or likenesse of a Glasse properly agree vnto it and he citeth for his Tenet Thomas Caietan Capreolus Durand Ferrariensis and Bannes and the greater part of Pontificians hold that it doth not represent things according to the manner of a naturall Glasse but onely according to the good will and pleasure of God and thereupon they say that it is Speculatum voluntarium such a glasse as according to our manner of apprehension maketh reflection of such notices as God is pleased to manifest more or lesse when in what manner and to what persons himselfe pleaseth And therefore the Iesuits supposition if there were a glasse of diamond may conclude according to the reflection of a naturall glasse but it is inconsequent according to the reflection of a voluntarie glasse Gregorie in the places obiected according to Aquinas speaketh of the sufficiencie of the obiect in it selfe and not of the actuall demonstration which it maketh or else he speaketh of the knowledge of all things essential to blessednesse as Occham and Lombard take it And if his words be taken generally then it will follow that the blessed Saints are ignorant of nothing that is done without them and that they behold intuitiuely euery particular and speciall action and motion both of superiour and of inferiour creatures but our Aduersaries themselues denie this as it hath formerly beene shewed IESVIT First if Saints by reason of their blisfull estate do so participate of diuine nature and wisdome as they communicate with him in the power of gouerning the nations of the world then Saints haue knowledge of things that are done in this world else how could they be able to gouerne and rule it But Scriptures in plaine and expresse tearmes make Saints participate with Christ in the rule and gouernment of the world according to his promise To him that conquereth I will giue power ouer Nations and he shall rule them with a rod of Yron that is with power of inflexible equitie I will make him a pillar in the Temple of my God And the blessed Saints say of themselues That they were chosen out of Countries and Nations to be the Priests of God and that they should rule with him vpon the earth Therefore they know what is done vpon earth so farre forth at least as the affaires of earth do specially appertaine vnto them and such without doubt are our deutionos towards them ANSWER The places of Scripture which you produce to prooue your Assumption c. speake not in plaine and expresse tearmes of Saints deceased but of the Saints liuing in this present world And if they be expounded of Saints deceased the iudiciarie power mentioned in these Texts is that which shal be exercised by them at the last day when they shall be assessors with Christ Mat. 19 28.1 Cor. 6 2. And in this manner the antient Expositors Victorinus Arethas Beda Rupertus Ansbertus and also Hugo Carensis Albertus Lira Viegas Alchasar c expound the first place Reuel 2.26 The second place Reuel 3.12 is expounded of such as are Pillars in the Church militant by Gregorie Ticonius Primasius Haimo Beda Andreas Aretas Anselmus Richardus Ioachimus Albertus Lira Thomas Zegerus and Suares as Alchasar the Iesuit citeth them in his Commentarie vpon that Text who also confuteth Ribera expounding the same of the Church triumphant The third place Apocal. 5. 10. is expounded of the Church Militant by Rupertus Hugo Carensis Gagneus Albertus Alchasar c. And if it bee vnderstood of the blessed Saints they reigne vpon earth by their Doctrine and vertuous examples which they haue left behind them and they reigne vpon earth also not in their owne persons by actuall regiment but in the person of Christ their head Ambrosius Ansbertus who liued in the yeare 890 hath these words That power which the onely begotten Sonne of God being made man in time receiued of his Father he promiseth to giue to his Elect but in himselfe by whom the whole body is ruled and to whom the whole body of the Church is vnited for he as the Apostle saith is the head of all the Elect. If any member therefore shall bee worthy to continue with the head he is truely said to haue that which the head himselfe is prooued to possesse by right of inheritance The like is said by Haimo And from hence it appeareth that the Iesuites exposition of the places in the Reuelations is voluntarie nouell neuer heard off in the antient Church nor deliuered by elder Pontificians neither is the same followed at this day by the learned Expositours of the Church of Rome it selfe and therefore his argument being raysed vpon Scripture fondly expounded is of no force For when hee argueth in this manner Saints pertake with Christ in the rule and gouernment of the World Ergo they heare and vnderstand the prayers and deuotions of the liuing which are made vnto them Our answer is that the blessed Saints doe not partake with Christ as his Ministers Vicegerents or Coadiutors in the actuall rule and gouernment of the inferiour world but they onely partake with him in his gouernment as the friends of the Bridechamber partake with the Bridegroome by reioycing consenting and reaping increase of glorie and happinesse by his actuall rule and gouernment And this latter compartnership with Christ in gouernment prooueth not that the blessed Saints heare and vnderstand the prayers of the liuing but to make his sequele good the Iesuit must prooue both that blessed Saints partake with Christ according to the first branch of my distinction and also that they partake with him intirely and perfectly in euery action of his gouernment For it is possible for one to bee of Councell and to be assistant in gouernment to a King and yet not to bee partaker of all the Kings
succeeded them for certaine ages continued in their Doctrine and exercised the deuotion of Prayer according to the forme appointed by them And concerning latter times our exception is the same with our Sauiours in another case Math. 19.8 From the beginning it was not so and we say with Saint Cyprian to all latter examples If veritie be changed or leane a toside wee must looke backe and returne to Diuine Euangelicall and Apostolike Tradition and deriue the order of our Action from the originall ground where it first began And Tertullian saith If a custome proceeding from ignorance or simplicitie be confirmed by vse of succession and opposed against veritie we must obserue that neither space of time nor priuiledge of persons may prescribe against truth for Christ is eternall and before all and in like sort veritie is most antient IESVIT I answer That the Primmar or Office so tearmed of our Ladie is not an Office properly and principally directed vnto her but an Office containing praises of God taken out of holy Scripture wherein commemoration of her is made so as I dare say That the Prayers of the Office of our Ladie that are directed towards her make not the hundred part thereof And seeing it is most certaine that the Christian Church in her best times did frequently pray vnto Saints what reason haue wee to thinke that in her set forme of Prayers she did not vse to craue the intercessions of Saints If it be lawfull pious and profitable when we pray vnto God to pray also to Saints by their Mediation offering our Prayer to him why should any dislike the doing of this in a set forme that is allowed by the Church why should this displease rather than an extemporall forme But further wee can prooue That the Church in her best times did pray vnto Saints in set formes as Catholickes now doe euen with a kinde of Lettanies a forme of Prayer acknowledged and confessed by the Magdeburgians to haue beene in vse euen in the fourth age after Christ. Jn which age the foure first generall Councells were held ANSWER You denie that the Primar or Office of our Ladie is an office properly and principally directed to her c. But the reason whereupon you ground this denyall is slight for although there is a mixture of Prayers and Praises to God contained in this Office yet the Virgin Marie is as directly and properly inuocated therein as God himselfe or Iesus Christ besides you haue many Psalters and Primers of our Ladie and in some of them the Virgin Marie is the most speciall Obiect and matter of the seruice The Romane Breuiarie saith In this day of solemnitie and gladnesse wee call vpon the sweet name of Marie And to the Apostles O yee to whose command the health and infirmitie of all is subiect heale all those that bee sicke in manners restoring vs to vertues To Thomas Didimus O Thomas Didimus by Christ whom thou deseruedst to touch we beseech thee with our loud sounding Prayers to succour vs wretches that wee be not damned with the wicked in the comming of the Great Iudge To the blessed Virgin Wash away our offences that we being redeemed by thee may be able to obtaine the seate of euerlasting glorie Also All haile holy Virgin the medecine of all our sorrowes by whom death was expelled and life brought in The Romane Breuiarie teacheth vs to pray That the merits of the Saints Abdon and Senon interceding we may deserue to be deliuered from all our necessities And for Leo his merits interceding absolue vs from all sinnes Also By the sword of sorrow which went thorow the Virgins heart and the compassion of teares which she shed vnder the Crosse haue mercie on vs. Also Let the Host to be consecrate bee pleasing vnto thee by the celebritie of the Martirs Primus and Faelicianus that by their glorious merits and Prayers it may purge our sinnes and reconcile to thee the Prayers of thy seruants The like superlatiue boldnesse was in the enditing and publishing Bonauentures Psalter wherein God and Christ are sacrilegiously robbed yea blasphemously dishonoured to embelish the Virgin Marie yet all this the Church of Rome digesteth permitteth authoriseth c. In that Psalter these and the like formes of Prayer are extant Oh blessed Lady my Sauiour I will put my confidence in thee and I shall not need to feare Oh blessed Ladie our Saluation is placed in thy hands who thou pleasest shall be saued and they shall perish eternally from whom thou turnest away thy face Blessed art thou my Lady the mother of the God of Israell who by thee hath visited and sent redemption vnto his people and hath raised vp the horne of Saluation euen thy chastitie in the house of Dauid thy seruant c. Thou ô Marie shalt be called the Prophet of God by thee hath he giuen the knowledge of Saluation for the remission of sinnes by the bowels of the multitude of thy mercies Visit vs ô thou day starre arising from an high Thou art the gate of Paradise the ladder of Heauen the Arke of Pietie and Grace the spring of Mercie the Mediatrix of God and men And in the same Psalter these words are found Whosouer will be saued aboue all things he must haue stedfast Faith of the Virgin Marie and the right Faith is among other Articles God assumed her bodily into Heauen where she sits on the right hand of Christ c. Secondly the Iesuit prooueth that set formes of prayers to Saints are lawfull by this Argument If it be lawfull to make intercessions to Saints then it is lawfull to performe this in a set forme But the first is true for the Primitiue Church did this and the Magdeburgians confesse That a kind of Letanie to Saints was vsed in Primitiue times Ergo c. I answer That if by Primitiue Church be vnderstood the Church Primitiue comprehending the Apostles and their immediate successours then the proofe of the assumption is false for that Primitiue Church vsed no such deuotion And if by Primitiue Church be vnderstood extensiue exclusiue the Church after the three hundred yeares inuocation of Saints was not vsed by the whole Church for three hundred yeares more neither can the practise of any Church excluding the Apostles produce doctrine of Faith or of necessarie duetie The Magdeburgians rehearse out of a counterfeit worke fathered vpon Athanasius a set prayer vsed to the Virgin Marie but they adde apparet multa esse deprauata supposita in istorum doctorum scriptis It is apparant that many things depraued and supposititious are found among the writings of these Doctors IESVIT But they will perchance say that they do not so much dislike set formes of prayer vnto Saints as some phrases and speeches in our praying bookes that seeme to giue too much vnto creatures as our calling the blessed Virgin Mother of
Grace Mother of Mercie saying to her Ladie protect vs from the Diuell receiue vs in the houre of death giue light to the blind pardon the guiltie remooue from vs all euill c. A answer These speeches cannot iustly bee disliked because they are vnderstood in a pious sence knowne to a Catholicke a sence obuious and plaine according to the phrase of Scripture and which the words may well beare euen according to the common custome of speech The nature of things being various and the answerable conceits of men copious but words to expresse such conceits scant and in great paucitie Necessitie doth inforce to vse words applicable to diuers senses For example one man may deliuer another from death either by authoritie pardoning him as do Kings or by iustice defending him as do Aduocates by force taking him out of his enemies hands as do Souldiors or paying his ransome to them that keepe him captiue as Almoners finally by begging his life of them that haue power to take it away as Intercessors These be verie different wayes of reliefe yet haue we but one word to expresse them all to wit to saue a mans life which therefore is to be vnderstood according to the subiect it is applied and if men want vnderstanding or will to take our wordes according to the matter they are applied vnto there can neuer want cauills vnlesse we either speake not at all or when we speake euer vse long circumlocutions which were ridiculous and in verse impossible the meeter not permitting it And yet the aforesaid misliked phrases in the office of the blessed virgin are taken out of the hymnes and verses thereof If they that by begging obtaine of the King the life of one condemned to death may be and are commonly said to saue his life though they saued him by intercession not by their proper authoritie Why may not Saints bee said to giue vs the things which by their prayers they obtaine for vs Why may not the Church speake in hymnes and in verse as the learnedest Fathers speake euen in prose neuer imagining that any would mistake their meaning ANSVVER We condemne the verie substance of your prayers in this kind and not only some phrases c. For what Prophet or what Apostle or Euangelist did euer teach Gods people to pray in this manner And whereas some formes of your prayers to Saints being vnderstood according to the sound of words are blasphemous you labour to qualifie this by a fauourable exposition pretending that you say one thing and meane another and that herein you varie not from the Scripture You call the blessed Virgin Mother of Grace Mother of Mercie Queene of Heauen c. you say that all power is giuen her in heauen and in earth and because she outliued her sonne she was by naturall right heire of all the world Yea some of you go further teaching that as Christ redeemed man-kind by his flesh and bloud so she redeemed the same with her soule and that all grace and glorie comming from Christ the head passeth to the Church by the Virgin Marie as by the necke and she as his mother hath all right authoritie and dispensation of his mercie This lying doctrine is coloured with certaine distinctions and forced instances of holy Scripture which notwithstanding agree to the present question like Harpe and Harrow Men indeed which are instruments of preseruing life and sauing others may be said in largenesse of speech to giue life or to be sauiours Iud. 3. v. 9. 15. But the blessed Virgin and Saints deceased since their departure are not by any new actions instruments of spirituall life nor bestowers of grace and saluation vpon the liuing And when the Prophets and Apostles exercised their office and ministerie vpon earth Who euer stiled them Sauiours or prayed vnto them with such a conceit or by vsing such titles They themselues gaue all glorie to God and Christ and instructed the Church to do the like The Virgin Marie was neuer stiled a Redeemer Mediatour or Sauiour by the holy Ghost but she saith in her thankesgiuing My spirit reioiceth in God my Sauiour Some names are common and sometimes that which was common or typically giuen to certaine persons in the old Testament is appropriated in the new as we obserue in the names of Sauiour Iesus Redeemer Mediatour High Priest and the like Sometimes the effect of the principall cause is attributed to the instrumentall but in all these Regulam habemus praeter quam loqui fas non est We haue a rule beside which we may not speake And we are not so straighted for words that we must of necessitie applie or communicate the titles of Christ vnto the creatures Now to that which you adde by way of excuse for your improper or abusiue speaking saying in verse impossible the meeter not permitting I answer What an impudent and ridiculous plaster is this will not verse permit vs to implore benefits only at Gods hand by Christ or will not the measure and number of poeticall feet without pinching in the stockes be applied to direct and euident compellation of Saints to pray for vs without crauing the benefits we desire at their own hands Nay who so readeth the Papisticall poeticall Church hymnes shall in the most of them find versing laws most broken where the lawes of inuocation are most transgressed A reasonable Poet in lesse than a weekes worke would make so many hymns in exact verse and yet without ridiculous circumlocutions expres that which might better beseeme the triumphant Church to heare from the militant But that is verified in you which Arnobius said of the Gentiles Quod semel sinè ratione fecistis nè videamini aliquando nescisse defenditis meliusquè putatis non vinci quam confessae cedere atquè annuere veritati That which you haue once done vnreasonably you wil still persist in defending least you should seeme to haue beene ignorant and you rather desire to haue it appeare you are not ouercome than to submit your selues to euident truth IESVIT Saint Gregorie Nazianzen for his excellent learning tearmed by the Grecians The Diuine thus prayeth vnto Saint Cyprian Looke downe on vs from heauen with a propitious eye guide our words and wayes feed this holy flocke gouerne it with vs dispose some of them as farre as is possible to better state cast out importune and troublesome wolues that cauill aud catch at syllables vouchsafe vs the perfect and cleare splendor of the blessed Trinitie with whom thou art alreadie present ANSWER That Gregorie Nazianzen prayed vnto Saint Cyprian is more than you can prooue he vseth indeed an Oratoriall Apostrophe but your selues make a difference betweene a Prosopopeia or Apostrophe and Prayer you say you make an Apostrophe to the Crosse when you vse this Hymne All haile oh Crosse c. And I thinke you will not grant that the wodden Crosse heareth you So by
Mercie floweth into the admirable Vessell and Basin the Virgin Marie and the other part to wit of Iustice which was poured vpon the Altar he hath left vnto Christ. Thus writeth Benzonius a famous Romane both by birth and Religion in our dayes Blasius Viegas a moderne Iesuit applyeth also this absurd comparison of Assuerus and Esther to Christ and the Virgin Marie And these Authors with the rest whom they follow doe not intend onely to teach That the blessed Virgin is very gracious with Christ in respect of her intercession but that shee hath a right and authoritie as a Queene Regent to distribute mercie and benefits where shee pleaseth and to dispence with the Lawes of Iustice when there is cause as appeareth by the words of Ozorius the Iesuite citing out of Nunne Bridgets Reuelations Christs words following My mother in my Kingdome ruleth as a Queene c. and therefore shee may dispence with Lawes made by me when there is iust cause And by this speech Nunne Bridget intendeth to shew that Christ did vse the helpe of his mother Marie in ruling his Kingdome now this Osorius was a Iate Preacher in Portugall Our English Iesuits when they returne to vs dissemble and cloake this Superstition not because they dislike it for they and the rest are all Birds of a feather and feed their silly chicks with the same carraine but they prudently consider that such notorious blasphemies being published would appeare odious and hinder their successe in beguiling vnstable soules and minister greater aduantage to their Aduersaries therefore like the Steward in the Gospell commended for his craft but not for his honestie when their Tenet is an hundred they write downe fiftie and when their Doctrine is blasphemous they confesse a pettie ouersight or vnfitnesse in the phrase and manner of speaking But if in good earnest they disliked the former assertions why hath not the grand Senior of Rome siue cum Concilio siue sine Concilio condemned rased and purged out these sacrilegious blasphemies especially because in other Authours their expurgatorius Index hath Eagles eyes and a line or sentence cannot escape these Critickes if there appeare obloquitie or antipathie to their inueterate forgeries Now for a Conclusion of the former Question let it be obserued That the Aduersarie is deficient in the demonstration of his Popish Tenet concerning Inuocation of blessed Saints and Angels for he hath produced no Diuine Testimonie from sacred Scripture no Tradition from the Apostles no plaine and resolute definition of approoued Councels or Primatiue Fathers no sufficient argument of naturall reason yea the mayne Principles of his Doctrine are litigious and dubious amongst Pontificians themselues Hee hath strugled playing fast and loose with our Arguments and spent himselfe in soluing or rather in eluding of obiections but he confirmeth not his owne St. Augustine saith That in things diuine or which concerne saluation they offend grieuously Qui certis incerta preponunt which preferre vncertainties before that which is indubitate Nostra fides certa est ex Doctrina Apostolica nouo veteri Testamento confirmata Our faith concerning the direct inuocation of the deitie by Christ our Mediatour of intercession is right and a certaine Apostolicall Doctrine confirmed by the Old and New Testament The Popish Appendix concerning Inuocation of Saints wanteth all Scripture proofe and whatsoeuer else may be pretended for it is dubious and litigious therefore our Doctrine is of faith and the Popish Tenet of humane opinion or presumption THE FOVRTH POINT THE LITVRGIE AND PRIVATE PRAYERS FOR THE IGNORANT IN AN vnknowne Tongue IESVIT THe Custome of the Romane Church in this Point is agreeable to the Custome of the Churches in all ages and also of all Churches now in the world bearing the name of Christian though opposite vnto the Romane only those of the pretended reformation excepted which constāt concurrence is a great figne that the same is very conforme vnto reason and not any where forbidden in Gods Word which will easily appeare if we looke particularly vnto the same ANSVVER YOu lay your foundation of this Article vpon two apparant vntruths for the Doctrine and custome of the present Romane Church is not onely not agreeable but opposite both to the Doctrine and Practise of the antient Catholicke Church and also to the custome of other Churches which are not absolute Protestants First It is the common voyce of the Fathers That the Liturgie and Seruice of the Church was in their dayes and ought to be vsed in a knowne tongue Origen saith That in his dayes euery nation prayed to God in their owne Language the Grecians in Greeke the Romanes in Latine and all other people in their proper tongue Iustin Martyr Tertullian Clemens Alexandrinus affirme That the Priest and the people prayed ioyntly and in common in the publicke Seruice which argueth that the people vnderstood the Prayers And St. Cyprian requires That peoples hearts and words agree and that they heare and vnderstand themselues when they pray to God Saint Basil saith When the words of Prayer are not vnderstood by them which are present the minde of the Precant is vnfruitfull neither doth any man hereby reape any profit St. Chrysostome St. Ambrose affirme the like And St. Augustine requireth people to vnderstand what they pray and sing for if there be onely sound of voyce without sence they may bee compared to Parrats Owsells or Popiniayes And some of the best learned Papists to wit Thomas Aquinas Lyra Cassander acknowledge That in the Primatiue Church the common Seruice was vsed in the vulgar tongue Secondly it is false according to the Tenet of Bellarmine himselfe that all other Churches which differ from the Protestants haue their publique seruice in Hebrew Greeke or Latine Bellonius and Aluares affirme the contrarie of the Armenians and Abissines and Eckius of the Indians and Sigismundus Baro and Hosius of the Russians and Ledesma of the Egyptians and Armenians And AEneus Syluius reporteth That when Cyrillus and Methodius had conuerted the Saluons vnto Christ were suitors that they might administer the common Prayers and Seruice among them in their vulgar tongue The Pope in the Conclaue consulting about this matter a voice was heard as it were from Heauen saying Let euerie Spirit praise the Lord and let euerie tongue acknowledge him and hereupon they were permitted to vse their owne tongue And it appeareth by the Decretals that the Roman Church in former times did ordinarily appoint this for the words of the Canon are For as much as in many places within one Citie and one Diocesse there be nations mingled together speaking diuers tongues c. We therefore commaund that the Bishops of such Cities and Diocesses prouide meet men to minister the holy Seruice according to the diuersitie of their
manners and tongues Thirdly it is repugnant to the nature and end of vocall Prayer that the same should be exercised in a forme of words which people that pray together vnderstand not for prayer is an ascending of the mind to God and according to Aquinas and other Schole-men it is an action of the vnderstanding facultie and in the same people confesse their sinnes and request of God such things as they haue need of They giue thankes for benefits spirituall and temporall general and speciall conferred vpon them and the effect of prayer dependeth vpon their inward humiliation and sence of their wants 2. Chro. 34.27 Psal. 51.19 and vpon their speciall faith in the diuine promises Math. 9.28 Marc. 9.23 and Marc. 11.29 And Tertullian saith God is not so much an hearer of the voice as of the heart But these things cannot be performed where people vnderstand not what they confesse request or praise God for And words are appointed to instruct excite and edifie men and if they vnderstand them not to what vse serueth vocall prayer for we vse not words to teach God but to instruct and excite our selues And hereby the Popish euasion is answered wherein they affirme that euen as When a Supplication is preferred to a King or Iudge which the Suppliant vnderstandeth not it is all one in what language soeuer the same be preferred the Iudge vnderstand it So likewise because God vnderstandeth all languages it mattereth not though people pray to him in a strange tongue for our words in vocal prayer concern our selues mutually principally but God himselfe requireth the vnderstanding and affection of our heart Read S. Augustines words cited in the margent Also the Iewes vnder the Law and the Prophets prayed in a language which they vnderstood our Sauiour and his Apostles and the Primitiue Church did the like and the gift of languages was bestowed vpon Pastors and people in common Act. 2.3 Also the former Doctrine is so apparant that some of the best learned Romists teach that publicke seruice in a knowne language is most fruitfull and conuenient Caietan saith It appeareth by S. Pauls Doctrine that it is better for the edification of the Church that common Prayers which are made in the hearing of the people be said in a vulgar tongue vnderstood indifferently by Priest and people than in Latine Lira saith If the people vnderstand the prayer of the Priest they are better brought to God and they answere Amen with greater deuotion And the reason hereof is manifest for deuotion compunction desire and affection depend vpon vnderstanding and follow the same and the more distinct and particular the vnderstanding of the obiect of these is the more feruent and perfect the actions are IESVIT For we may imagine a triple state of Liturgie in an vnknowne tongue The first in a language altogether vnknowne in which no man in the Church speakes no man vnderstands besides the celebrant himselfe nor he neither but by Enthusiasme or inspiration of the holy Ghost Without question it is inconuenient that publique prayer should be said in a language in this sort vnknowne and this is prooued by the reasons the Apostle brings against an vnknowne tongue in the Church ANSWER This first imagination is a Chimera or 〈◊〉 for there was neuer in the world any such kind of common or ordinarie Seruice or Liturgie And S. Paul 1. Cor. 14. condemneth in generall the vse of vnknowne tongues in the congregation vnlesse they be interpreted and referred to mentall edification As for the vnlearned Ideot which is ready to ioine with the Priest in prayer what is it to him whether the Priest speake by Enthusiasme or by discipline an vnknown language his ignorance and impossibilitie of speciall concurrence in prayer is the same as well in the one as in the other IESVIT Secondly in a language vnknowne to most euen of the better sort of the Church yet some know it and other may with facilitie learne it To vse a language in the Church for publique prayer in this sort vnknowne cannot be prooued vnlawfull nor forbidden by the Apostle seeing the reasons brought by him against a language vnknowne make not against this For S. Paul reprehends in the publique Liturgie a language vnknowne as the Minister of the Church that supplies the place of the Ideot and ignorant cannot vpon his knowledge of the goodnesse of the prayer say thereunto Amen in the name of them all But when the language is knowne to some of the Church and may with facilitie be learned of others there is or may easily be found one able to supplie the place of Jdeot and ignorant and answere in their person Amen out of his intelligence of the prayer in that vnknowne tongue ANSVVER That is forbidden by the Apostle to bee vsed in prayer and consequently it is vnlawfull whereby all states and sorts of people being of ripe yeres may not be edified in their vnderstanding and to which being read pronounced or heard they are not able to say Amen hauing some distinct vnderstanding of the things which are spoken 1. Cor. 14.16 17. 19 20. but all states and sorts of people being of riper yeares cannot be edified in their vnderstanding neither are they able to say Amen c. to prayers which are heard by them being read or pronounced in a strange language Ergo Common prayer read and pronounced in the Church in a strange tongue is prohibited by the Apostle and consequently such forme of ordinarie prayer is vnlawfull The Iesuit restraineth the words of S. Paul either to the Minister supplying the place of the Idiot or to the Clerke of the congregation But the Apostle requireth that all those which ioyne in prayer and among these the Idiots and vulgar sort be edified in their minds and they must pray and giue thanks vnderstanding the sence of words spoken and vpon this vnderstanding say Amen And except saith he ye vtter by the tongue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 significant words or words carrying a perspicuous sence with them ye shall speake in the ayre and be as Barbarians to the hearers v. 9.11 and the Idiot mentioned by him v. 16. is not the Priest or the Clarke alone but the vulgar sort of people ignorant of the language and words which are vsed in preaching reading or praying as all the Fathers and sundry Pontificians deliuer which comment vpon this text As for the Latine the same is as vncouth to a great part of the congregation as to the Chineses they can onely gape at it and returne home from Masse and Mattens as wise as they went for ought they learne by the language The old rule was Barbarus hic ego sum quia non intelligor vlli and accordingly your Masse Priests are meere barbarians to the ordinarie sort of people IESVIT Notwithstanding the Roman Church doth not
dealing of their Mother than serue as lawfull witnesses of that which the Aduersarie intendeth to prooue by them The Vaile in the Greeke Church of which S. Chrysostome speakes Hom. 61. ad Pop. Antioch was not vsed to depriue the people of hearing but it was a ceremonie admonishing and signifying that prophane and vncleane persons were vnworthie to behold or pertake the sacred mysteries And as this Father sheweth Hom. 3. in Ephes. the drawing open of the curtaines signified the opening of Heauen and the descending of Angels at the celebration of the holy Eucharist Metrophanes a Monke of Greece in a certaine tractate testifyeth the forme or vse of the Vaile or Curtaine in the East Church to be That the Priest may within or vnder the same prepare aforehand the things requisit for the administration of the Sacrament and when this is done then the Canopie is drawne at the pronouncing of the holy Creed which is vttered with a loud voice euen as all other parts of the Liturgie are that all people may heare Now this action signifieth according to Dionisius that God reuealeth these mysteries to those only which are Orthodoxall in Faith and hee communicates his diuine grace to none but those which are sound in the diuine worship and to such all things are manifested whether men or women poore or rich c. The Iesuit therfore is ignorant of the reason wherefore the Greeke Church vseth a Canopie and shutteth and openeth the same at the holy Communion for the same was not done to take away audience of any part of the Seruice from lay people for the whole Liturgie from the beginning to the ending was pronounced with a loud voice but to admonish and signifie the due preparation which all persons were to vse when they pertake the sacred mysteries IESVIT Besides it is certaine that the Scripture was not read in any language but Greeke ouer all the Church of the East as S. Hierom witnesseth Also the Greeke Liturgie of S. Basil was vsed in all the Church of the East and yet the Grecian was not the vulgar language of all the Countries of the East as is apparant by manifest testimonies of the Cappadocians Mesopotamians Galatians Lycaonions Egyptians Syrians yea that all these countries and most of the Orient had their proper language distinct from the Greeke is manifest out of the Acts of the Apostles No lesse manifest is it that the Latine Liturgie was common antiently for all the Churches of the Westerne parts euen in Africke as appeareth by testimonies of Augustine but it is manifest that the Latine was not the vulgar language for all nations of the West And though the better sort vnderstood it yet some of the vulgar multitude onely knew their owne mother tongue as may be gathered out of the same S. Augustine who writes that he pleading in Latine against Cryspinus a Bishop of the Donats for possession of a village in Africke whereunto the consent of the villagers was required they did not vnderstand his speech till the same was interpreted to them in the vulgar African language So that the Christian Church did neuer iudge it requisit that the publique Liturgie should be commonly turned into the Mother language of euery nation nor necessarie that the same should be presently vnderstood word by word by euerie one of the vulgar Assistants neither doth the end of the publique diuine Seruice require it ANSWER Omitting things doubtfull this is apparant that common people both of the East and West had the vse of the Scriptures in such a language as they vnderstood for otherwise the Fathers would not haue exhorted them to read the holy Scripture but such exhortations are most frequent in S. Chrysostome S. Hierome and in other Fathers Read before pag. 279. And that the people of Asia vnderstood Greeke and the Africans Latine is prooued by the learned of our part out of many Authors and where this was wanting people had Translations and Seruice in their natiue tongue Also such people as were conuerted to Christianitie if they wanted Translations in their Mother tongue were careful to learne the ordinarie language in which diuine Seruice was vsed and wherein the holy Scriptures were commonly read But what proofe can the Aduersarie make that Christian people altogether ignorant of the language vsed in the publique Seruice came into those congregations and were pertakers of the holy Sacraments IESVIT As for the comfort that some few want in that they do not so perfectly vnderstand the particulars of diuine Seruice it may by other meanes bee aboundantly supplied without turning the publique Liturgies into innumerable vulgar languages which would bring a mightie confusion into the Christian Church First the whole Church should not be able to iudge of the Liturgie of euerie countrie when differences arise about the Translation thereof so diuers errours and heresies may creepe into particular countries and the whole Church neuer able to take notice of them Secondly particular countries could not be certaine that they haue the Scripture truely translated for thereof they can haue no other assured proofe but onely the Churches approbation nor can she approoue what she doth not vnderstand Thirdly were vulgar Translations so many as there be languages in the world it could not be otherwise but that some would be in many places ridiculous incongruous and full of mistakings to the great preiudice of soules specially in languages that haue no great extents nor many learned men that naturally speakethem Fourthly the Liturgies would be often changed together with the language which doth much alter in euerie age as experience sheweth Fiftly in the same countrie by reason of different dialects some prouinces vnderstand not one another And in the island of Iaponia as some write there is one language for noble men another for rustickes another for men another for women Into what language then should the Iaponian Liturgie be turned Finally by this vulgar vse of Liturgie the studie of the two learned languages would bee giuen ouer and in short time come to be extinct as we see that no antient language now remaines in humane knowledges but such as haue beene as it were incorporated in the publique Liturgies of the Church and the common vse of learned tongues being extinct there would follow want of meanes for Christians to meet in generall Councells to communicate one with another in matters of Faith Jn a word extreame Barbarisme would be brought vpon the world ANSVVER They cannot be some few onely in this case but the maior part yea an hundred to one which want the benefit and comfort of the holy Scriptures and publique Seruice of the Church And to supplie this want by preaching or priuate instruction it is morally speaking impossible it may be performed more compendiously and easily if Papists would chuse rather to follow S. Pauls doctrine 1. Cor. 14. than stifly to adhere to the late custome of
of Bread which was once substantially Bread cannot become substantially the bodie of Christ except it bee substantially conuerted into his bodie or personally assumed by the same bodie And seeing this second manner of vnion betweene Bread and Christs Bodie is impossible and reiected by Protestants as well as by Catholickes Wee may conclude that the mysterie of Christs reall presence cannot be beleeued in truth by them that deny Transubstantiation specially seeing our Sauiour did not say here is my Bodie which speech may be verefyed by the presence of his Bodie locally within the Bread but This is my Bodie which imports that not onely his Bodie is truely and substantially present but also that it is the substance contained immediately vnder the accidents of Bread ANSWER First if a substance be either by nature humane Custome or diuine Ordination appointed to containe another substance then demonstrating the externall substance which containes we may signifie the hidden substance contained But according to that Tenet which maintaineth Consubstantiation the substance of bread is by diuine Ordination appointed to containe the substance of Christs bodie therefore demonstrating by words the substance of bread one may signifie the hidden substance which is Christs bodie Secondly Scotus Durand and Paludanus affirme that although the substance of Bread remaine yet because the substance of Christs bodie is also present it might truely and properly be said by our Sauiour This is my Bodie Now if such profound Scholemen haue weighed the Iesuits obiection do find the same light the propugnors of Consubstantiation haue smal reason to regard it Thirdly the former obiection is nothing to vs which maintaine a true mysticall presence of Christ in the holy Eucharist and refuse both Transubstantiation and Consubstantiation for we beleeue and are able to demonstrate that our Sauiours words are figuratiue in part and yet the true Bodie and Bloud of Christ are really and verely communicated according to the manner formerly declared pag. 405. IESVIT Jf any man say that by this Argument it appeares that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is not expressed in Scripture but from the words of the Jnstitution subtilly deduced and so may perchance bee numbred inter scita Scholae not inter dogmata Fidei I answer That the consequence of this Argument is not good as is euident in the example of the Incarnation The Doctrine that the vnion of natures in Christ is proper not Metaphoricall substantiall not accidentall personall not essentiall is no where expressely set downe by Scripture but by subtile deduction inferred from the mysterie which Scripture and Tradition deliuers Notwithstanding because these subtile deductions are proposed by the Church as pertinent vnto the substance of the foresaid mysterie they cannot be denied without preiudice of Faith In this sort the Doctrine of Transubstantiation though not in tearmes deliuered by the Scripture but deduced by subtile and speculatiue inference may not be denied by them that will be perfect beleeuers because the Church hath declared the same to pertaine to the proper sence of Christ his words and substance of the mysterie ANSVVER I know at whom you glance when you say inter scita Scholae but your solution from the Doctrine of Incarnation is not leuell to the scope for illations are of two sorts some are immediate formall necessarie euident and illustrious to wit Christ Iesus is a true and perfect man therefore he hath an humane will some are obscure contingent remote and sophisticall to wit Christ said This is my bodie Ergo the consecrate host is Christs substantiall bodie by Transubstantiation Christ said Do this in remembrance of me Ergo he made his Disciples sacrificing Priests That which is deriued from Scripture the first way is Doctrine of Faith that which is inferred the other way may be loose vncertaine infirme and many times ridiculous and apparantly false Now let me intreate you vntill you prooue your deduction necessarie to ranke your Popish Masse and Transubstantiation among this latter kind of deriuatiue Articles Neither can the swelling vsurpation of Romish Prelates which you stile the Church make euery subtile speculation of Schoolemen and nice figment of humane wisedome an Article of Christian Faith any more than a bragging 〈◊〉 can by outfacing conuert copper into gold for Articles of Faith come downe from heauen by the holy Ghost and are such onely from their forme and originall causes As for your Romane Synode of Pope Nicholas and your Laterane vnder Innocent the third These were your owne Idols the definitions that passed in them were the breath of the Popes nostrils and therefore why are you so fantasticall as to enammell them with the title and authoritie of the Catholicke Church And in one of these conuenticles your Pope hath so rudely and grossely determined the Question of Reall presence that Romists themselues are now ashamed and forced to Glosses and strained Expositions to metamorphise and new mould those vndigested crudities IESVIT §. 3. Transubstantiation was taught by the Fathers IT is certaine the Fathers acknowledge a Transmutation of bread into the Bodie of Christ and that they meant Transubstantiation that is not onely a mysticall and significatiue but also a reall and substantiall change appeares by these fiue Circumstances of their Doctrine in this point ANSWER THat we may rightly vnderstand the testimonies of Fathers alleadged in this question wee are in the first place to examine what transubstantiation is according to Papalls The Trident Councell saith It is a conuersion of the whole substance of Bread and Wine into the substance of Christs body and bloud wrought by the words of consecration First by the whole substance they vnderstand the whole substantiall matter and forme Secondly they affirme that the whole substance of Bread and Wine is destroyed or ceaseth to be Thirdly the substance of Christs body and bloud are placed vnder the accidentall shapes of Bread and Wine Fourthly by the force of the words of consecration the substance of Bread and Wine ceasing the body and blood of Christ acquire a new manner of being vnder the externall formes differing from his being in heauen Fiftly the shapes and accidents of Bread and Wine subsist without any materiall subiect of inherencie and affect the senses and nourish in like manner as formerly they did This doctrine of Popish Transubstantiation is new according to the iudgement of many learned Schoolemen and the Primitiue Fathers neuer taught the same for many of them maintaine expresly That the substance of Bread and Wine remaine and none of them affirme either that the substance of Christs body and bloud are placed vnder the naked formes and shapes of Bread and Wine or that the Accidents haue no materiall subiect of inherencie or that the body and bloud of Christ acquire a new being in the Sacrament differing from that which they had
the roome or seate of another is not substantiall conuersion but alteration of place IESVIT Saint Chrysostome When waxe is put into fire nothing of the substance thereof is left nothing remaines vnconsumed so likewise doe thou thinke that the Mysteries are consumed by the substance of the bodie of Christ. ANSWER This Father saith not That nothing of the substance of bread and wine is left but cleane contrarie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nothing of the substance goeth away And the words which follow 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are falsly translated for they are not Is consumed by the substance but Is coabsumed with the substance Also the substance of bread is not consumed by the bodie of Christ according to the Tenet of many Schoolemen The substance of the externall elements passeth into the bodie of the Receiuer and is consumed or vnited to the flesh of the Receiuer The bodie and blood of Christ represented by the same and receiued by Faith nourish the soule to life eternall Iohn 6. 54. And if our Aduersaries following their owne translation will expound Saint Chrysostome literally then Communicants receiue Christs bodie by the hands of the Seraphim and not by the Priests hands IESVIT S. Ambrose What arguments shall we bring to prooue That in the Sacrament is not the thing which nature hath framed but that thing which benediction hath consecrated and that greater is the force of benediction than of nature seeing by the benediction euen nature is changed ANSVVER The quantitie and accidents of the outward signes are framed by nature as well as the substance and the force of consecration and benediction passeth vpon the one as well as vpon the other and therefore the change of nature which Saint Ambrose intendeth is not the destruction of the elements and the conuersion thereof into another substance but the eleuating of these earthly creatures to be mysteries of grace and holy instruments to apply and communicate that which is represented by them It is inconsequent to argue They are changed in their nature Ergo Their naturall substance is destroyed for nature implieth qualities and properties as well as substance and it is taken Theologicè as well as Physicè for S. Peter speaking of regenerate persons 2. Pet. 1. v. 4. saith They are made partakers of the Diuine nature 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet his meaning is not that their former substance is abolished The nature of glorified bodies is changed and they are made spirituall 1. Cor. 15. 44. and yet they retaine the same substance Mans nature was changed after his fall Ephes. 2. 3. yet the substance of his nature remained Saint Ambrose himselfe saith That in Baptisme man is changed and made a new creature and treating farther of the Sacrament of Baptisme he saith Learne how the word of Christ is accustomed to change euery creature and when he will he altereth the course of nature IESVIT Secondly They require that the Authour that changeth bread into Christ his Bodie be omnipotent and consequently the change not meerely significatiue but substantiall S. Cyprian This Bread changed not in shape but in nature by the omnipotencie of the word is made flesh S. Cyrill Hee that in the marriage of Cana changed Water into Wine by his onely will is not hee worthie that we beleeue him that he hath changed Wine into his Bloud S. Gaudentius The Lord and Creator of Natures that of Earth made Bread againe because he can doe it and hath promised to doe it makes of Bread his owne Bodie and he that of Water made Wine now of Wine hath made his Bloud ANSWER S. Cyprian was not the author of the Booke de Coena Domini so Bellarmine confesseth and before him Iohannes Hessels but in some copies it passeth vnder the name of Arnoldus who liued manie ages after Cyprian And yet in one part of that worke d. vnctione Chrysmatis there is a manifest place against Transubstantiation Our Lord saith he in the table wherein he banqueted with his Disciples with his owne hands deliuered Bread and Wine c. declaring also how the thing signifying and the thing signified are called by the same name Secondly to a mysticall change the omnipotent power of God is necessarie as appeareth in the water of Baptisme and earthly creatures cannot be instruments of grace or meanes to communicate spirituall or miraculous benefits without the same as appeareth in the waters of Iordan 2. Reg. 5. and in the poole of Bethesda Ioh. 5. Therefore although some do require an omnipotent power to eleuate and change the creatures of Bread and Wine yet it followeth not that they maintained Transubstantiation Thirdly the author by the words Natura mutatus changed in nature vnderstood not a corporall change for in the same sentence he declareth himselfe by the example of Christs humanitie which being personally vnited to the deitie is changed but not so as that it looseth his naturall forme and substance And in the same Booke this Father faith That although the immortall food deliuered in the Eucharist differ from common meat yet it retaineth in the kind of corporal substance He saith not Species in the plurall number meaning according to the new Popish sence the externall shapes and accidents for let the Aduersarie prooue out of antiquitie that S. Cyprian or the Primatiue Church maintained the late Romish Doctrine concerning shapes of Bread and Wine without the materiall substance and we will freely grant that the Doctrine of Transubstantiation is antient but he saith Speciem the kind in the singular number that is the corporall substance and forme in the same sence in which S. Ambrose vseth the word saying Ante benedictionem verborum Coelestium alia species nominatur Before the benediction of wordes applied it is called another kind of thing S. Cyrills place maintaineth not Popish Transubstantiation for in this the shapes and accidents remaine and the materiall substance is corrupted but in our Sauiours miracle Ioh. 2. the shapes accidents and forme were changed and the materiall substance remained Gaudentius saith Satis declarat Sanguinem suum esse omne Vinum quod in figura passionis sua offertur Bonauent d. 11. q. 6. in 4. sent Omnia verba significantia innouationē circà corp ' Christi sunt falsè dicta Haec est simplicitèr impropria Corpus Christi fit Ne 〈◊〉 putes quod Coeleste effectum est per eū qui transit in 〈◊〉 Nam cum panem consecratum vinum Discipulis suis porrigerat c. The Lord makes Bread of his owne Bodie and he makes Wine of his Bloud and then he saith further of Bread he makes his owne Bodie and of Wine his owne Bloud but he saith not that this is done by Transubstantiation for Christs Bodie and Bloud are not transubstantiate but calling the same coelestiall food he declareth his meaning
Luc. 22.18.1 Cor. 10.16 11.26.27.28 Secondly the same affirmeth not that the substance of Bread and Wine is abolished Thirdly naturall reason sheweth that accidents must haue a subiect of inhaerencie and that bare formes and shadowes of things cannot nourish without corporall substance Fourthly the sences of Tast and Feeling discerne apparantly a corporietie in the elements receiued In this case there is no reason to imagine that our sences are deluded or that God almightie by miracle worketh in a contrarie manner to the course of nature and to that which he hath otherwise reuealed in his word It is not sufficient for Romists to affirme That God vseth a miraculous course in these things and to palliate absurdities repugnant to sence reason and scripture vnder pretext of Gods omnipotencie but they must prooue by diuine Reuelation that he will doe this for God effecteth not all things by his omnipotencie which men may imagine to be possible In the wordes of our Sauiour This is my Bodie This cuppe is the new Testament in my Bloud c. there is not a sillable concerning accidents without a subiect or concerning any miracle wrought in the Sacrament by omnipotencie neither is there any such doctrine elsewhere reuealed And if Christs words be expounded figuratiuely according to S. Augustine Tertullian Theoderit Origen Bertram c. they make nothing for corporall presence by indistance of place and if they be vnderstood literally they prooue not Transubstantiation for Bread may be called the bodie of Christ by an inusitate forme of speaking which according to the Tenet of some learned Diuines is no trope or figure And if neither of these expositions content our Aduersaries they might haue beleeued the words of the holy Text as they sound literally and a reall presence of Christs Bodie and Bloud wrought by the power of the holy Ghost without defining and determining the expresse manner how For if they beleeue that accidents subsist without a substance and nourish and are tasted and felt and passe into the stomach and yet are not able to expresse the distinct manner how and if they beleeue a substantiall presence of Christs indiuiduall humane bodie in many hosts and yet are vnable to declare the maner how Why might they not haue suspended other questions concerning the distinct manner of presence and maintained onely a true and mysticall presence the distinct manner whereof is incomprehensible in this life and not haue disturbed the peace of the Church by defining as an article of Faith such a doctrine as hath no foundation in diuine Reuelation to make it appeare certaine and infallible IESVITS 1. Consideration The first is grounded vpon the supposall of two things most certaine First that the Primitiue Church preaching vnto Pagans Iewes and other Infidels the rest of Christian mysteries as the Trinitie the Incarnation the Resurrection of the bodie did most carefully keepe as much as might be from their knowledge the mysteries of the Eucharist yea Catechumens and Nouices were not before Baptisme fully taught or instructed therein Secondly the reason moouing the Primitiue Church to be carefull in this point was least Catechumens and Infidels being fully acquainted with the whole mysterie the one should be scandalized and the other mocke thereat Hence it was accounted such a haynous offence that Christians should discouer this secret vnto Infidels or dispute about the difficulties thereof in their presence The Councell of Alexandria relating the crimes of Arians number this as one of the greatest They were not ashamed in publique and as it were vpon a scaffold to treat of the mysteries before Catechumens and which is worse before Pagans And a little after Jt is not lawfull to publish the Mysteries before them that are not initiated for feare least Pagans out of ignorance mocke and Catechumens entring into curiosities be scandalized And againe Before Catechumens and which is more before Iewes and Pagans blaspheming Christianitie they handled a question about the Bodie and Bloud of our Sauiour S. Ambrose saith To declare the mysteries vnto them that be Catechumens is not Tradition but Prodition seeing by such declarations danger is incurred least they be diuulged vnto Jnfidels that will scoffe at them This supposed I infer that the seeming absur dities of the Catholique reall presence should incourage a true Christian mind to beleeue it for a true Christian desires to beleeue and firmely cleaue vnto the reall presence that was beleeued by the Primitiue Church But this was a reall presence accompanied with many so seemingly grosse absurdities that the Church had no hope to satisfie Infidels therein or to keepe them from blaspheming but by concealing the mysterie from them and consequently they held the Catholique not the Protestant Doctrine in this point The Protestant Doctrine that makes Christs bodie present spiritually by Faith vnto the deuout Receiuer that communicating thinks sweetly of Christs passion and death containes no mysterie to be concealed in respect of the seeming absurdities ANSWER In the daies of the Fathers Heathens Iewes and Heretickes might enter into the Church and heare the publicke Sermons and preaching as appeareth by the fourth councell of Carthage and Infidels might read the bookes and tractates of the Fathers But the Fathers in their sermons to the people and also in their written bookes deliuered the Doctrine of the holy mysteries as appeareth by Ireneus Iustin Martyr S. Cyprian Gregorie Nissen Cyrill of Hierusalem S. Chrysostome S. Augustine S. Ambrose c. Neither is it apparant that the said Fathers taught any other secret Doctrine touching the holy mysteries than such as they preached in their Homilies and penned in their Bookes and therefore these Homilies and Bookes being publique it appeareth not that the Primitiue Church was more carefull to conceale the Doctrine of the Eucharist than of Baptisme or of the Trinitie The Obiections out of Athanasius and S. Ambrose shew that it was held vnlawfull in those ages to treat or dispute of the holy Eucharist intempestiuè that is before Heathens which were not at all instructed in the first Principles of Religion or to treat of this Doctrine in prophane places or auditories But what is this to Transubstantiation For it was held vnlawfull in the Primitiue Church in maner aforesaid that is in an vndue time order place to treat or dispute of the mysteries of Baptisme or of other profound mysteries belonging to Christian faith Also if it were granted that some antient Fathers beleeuing a reall Presence did therefore conceale the doctrine of the holy Eucharist Ratione scandali because of offence of Infidels arising vpon many difficulties and seeming contradictions to sence and common reason it followeth not from hence that those Fathers beleeued Popish Transubstantiation for many difficulties and repugnances to sence and common reason are found in Consubstantiation as well as in Transubstantiation and sundrie places of the Fathers may with more
probabilitie be alleadged in fauour of reall Presence by Consubstantiation than for Transubstantiation Lastly The mysticall vnion betweene Christ and his members is ineffable and the manner incomprehensible and the Protestant Doctrine teaching a reall donation of the bodie and blood of Christ and a mysticall coniunction by the operation of the holy Ghost with the soules of faithfull Receiuers and that dead and corruptible creatures can be a meanes and instrument heereof is a great mysterie of godlinesse incredible to prophane persons and therefore the Primitiue Church which beleeued this Doctrine might iustly require that this Mysterie should not be manifested before Infidels and other infirme Christians vntill they were first instructed in the rudiments of Christianitie IESVIT Yea the Fathers did not feare to declare vnto Catechumens this Sacrament so farre as it was commemoratiue of Christ and his Passion as appeareth by the Treatises of Saint Augustine vpon Saint Iohn made before Catechumens out of which Treatises Protestants for their meere commemoratiue presence alleadge many Sentences to little purpose For he there explicates spirituall manducation by Faith and he excludes the grosse imagination of eating Christs bodie in his proper shape tearing it in pieces with the tooth but denies not yea rather insinuates another kind of spirituall manducation not onely by Faith but by reall sumption though to conceale the Mysterie from Catechumens he speakes not so clearely thereof Wherefore as the Palme tree the heauier the waight is that is laid vpon it the more it riseth vpwards as it were ioying in difficulties so a true Catholicke Christian feeling in the doctrine of Transubstantiation many seeming absurdities that presse carnall imagination to the ground groweth thereby more strong to beleeue it imbracing these difficulties as manifest signes that this doctrine was beleeued by the Primitiue Apostolicall Church On the other side Protestants finding the Presence of Christs body by Faith to be deuoyd of such difficulties may by the very lightnesse thereof suspect it is not the doctrine which the Fathers concealed from Jnfidells as more absurd to humane Imagination than any other mystery of Christian Religion ANSWER You obiect that the Fathers declared to Catechumens that is to Nouices in Christianitie a commemoratiue presence in the holy Eucharist but not a corporall presence by Transubstantiation and from hence you would inferre that the Fathers held two kinds of Presences of Christs body and bloud in the Eucharist the one soly spirituall by intellectuall apprehension the other corporall by reall sumption of Christs body into the mouth and stomacke of the receiuer and you pretend that S. Augustine was of this iudgement But you must remember that you are not now to deale with Aduersaries which will credite your bare words and proofes you haue none Therefore I answer First that the Fathers taught no other kind of Presence to them which were baptised and receiued the holy Eucharist than to Catechumens or vnbaptised Christians although they instructed the one sort more fully than the other Secondly S. Augustine teacheth not that Christs body is receiued inuisibly insensibly and according to the nature of a spirit by the mouth and stomacke of each Communicant but he teacheth onely two kinds of manducation in the Sacrament one both corporall and spirituall wherein the body of man receiueth the externall elements of Bread and Wine and the soule receiueth the true body and bloud of Christ by faith the other corporeall onely wherein the receiuer partaketh the outward signe and not the thing signified Panem Domini non panem Dominum the visible Sacrament of Christs body but not his very body and he affirmeth not vpon the sixt chapter of S. Iohn That a malicious sinner continuing such receiueth the very body and blood of Christ. Thirdly Protestants beleeue not onely a commemoratiue but also an exhibitiue presence of the thing signified together with the outward signe according to the manner formerly declared pag. 405. and this Presence is mysticall and such as may seeme incredible to vnbelceuers because of sundry difficulties repugnant to common sence to wit That Christs flesh by the vnspeakeable power of the holy Ghost should be after a sort incorporated into the soule and that corruptible and dead creatures should be eleuated and made effectuall instruments to apply and communicate Iesus Christ and the vertue of his death to faithfull Communicants IESVITS 2. Consideration This consideration is drawne from the qualitie of the difficulties obiected against this Mysterie which be such as a Christian in honour should neglect them For if it be the part of a prudent and intelligent man not to permit Imagination to preuaile against his Reason What a disgrace is it for a Christian that his faith should be conquered by these kind of difficulties For that the seeming absurdities of this misterie be not in respect of naturall Reason but meerely of Jmagination may hence appeare that some naturall truths be in a manner as difficile and incredible which will be seene if we compare the foure aboue mentioned difficulties with the difficulties some truths euident in nature haue ANSWER When difficulties obiected arise from experience of sence and principles of nature and there is no expresse or manifest word of God sufficient to mooue vs to beleeue the contrarie it is the part of each intelligent and prudent man rather to credite that which is apparent to sence and common reason than to beleeue Paradoxes vpon no true ground and reason IESVIT First we cannot imagine that the whole body of Christ can be contained in the compasse of a small Hoast But it is not more incredible that in a thing of small quantititie for example the wing of a Flye there should be so many parts as vnfolded and laid together would couer the whole face of the world both of heauen and earth And yet it is demonstrable in Philosophy That euen in the wing of a Flye there are so many parts as broad and long as the wing though still thinner and thinner that Almightie God separating and vnfolding them may therewith couer the whole world For certaine it is that some finite number of such parts so separated each of them as long and as broad as a Flyes wing would couer the face of the whole world certaine also it is That the wing of the Flye is still diuisible into more and more such parts so that no finite number is assignable but God may still separate from that wing a greater number without any end therefore it is certaine that in the wing of a Flye there is so much quantity as is sufficient to couer the face of the whole world both of heauen and earth if God would but separate and vnfold the same Is not this Secret of Philosophy as incredible to carnall Imagination as the being of Christs body within a small Hoast Wee that cannot comprehend things we see with eyes and feele with hands certainely we shall haue much adoe
in it selfe Js it iniury to his charitie to thinke that loue vnto men makes him vnite himselfe really and substantially with them and to be as it were incarnate anew in euery particular faithfull man entering really into their bodies to signifie efficatiously his inward coniunction by spirit vnto their soules Finally is it an iniury to his Wisedome to beleeue that to satisfie on the one side the will of his Father that would haue him euer in heauen sitting at his right hand on the other side the Ardencie of his owne affection vnto men desiring to be perpetually with them he inuented a manner how still remaining glorious in heauen he might also be continually on earth with his Church secretly not to take from them the merit of faith yet to afford full satisfaction to his owne loue really by continuing personall presence and most intime coniunction with them On the other side it imports them that thinke Transubstantiation impossible or that God cannot put the same body in different places at once to consider if they erre easie it is for men to erre that with the compasse of their vnderstandings measure the power of God how dangerous and vnexcusable their errour will prooue when they shall be called to giue vnto their omnipotent Maker a finall account particularly of this Doctrine so much derogating from him Let them thinke how they will answer if God lay to their charge the neglect of the most prudent and reasonable aduise which S. Chrys. giues Let vs beleeue God saith he let vs not reiect his Word though the same seeme secret and absurd vnto our cogitation and sense for his speech doth surpasse our reason and sense his words cannot deceiue vs but our senses be deceiued easily and often How will they reply if they be pressed with the Intergatory which S. Cyril makes vnto such misbeleeuers If thou couldst not comprehend the diuine operation of God Why didst thou not accuse the imbecility of mans wit rather than the omnipotencie of God Or how disputing or proposing so many arguments against Gods power reiecting or questioning the same because they could not vnderstand it they neuer called to mind the saying of S. Augustine Ecce quibus argumentis diuinae omnipotentiae humana contradicit infirmitas ANSWER This third and last consideration is a meere declamation grounded vpon a vaine supposition for it presumeth as granted the opinion of Transubstantiation to be most probable and reasonable as being declared by many antient Fathers defined by generall Councells c. But this supposition is a begging of the question for not so much as one antient Father or generall Councell did euer declare or define the same as it will plainely appeare to all iudicious Persons which shall compare and apply the sentences of Fathers and antient Councells to the Popish definition of Transubstantiation And the said Doctrine is not grounded vpon our Sauiours words and the miracles which Romists venditate to authorise the same are eyther Fryars fables or reports misapplyed and wrested to a contrary end And that there should be merit or at leastwise lesse perill in adhering to this doctrine rather than to any other may bee proclaimed ouer and ouer againe by Romists but it deserueth credit when they demonstrate That an opinion which is not grounded vpon diuine Reuelation and which containeth so many difficulties as cannot be solued and the beleefe whereof is vnnecessarie can be imbraced with safetie and expectation of reward To the words following in the Iesuit That he might also bee continually with his Church secretly it is answered That excluding Transubstantiation Christ Iesus is continually with his Church secretly by his grace spirit and mysticall vnion and he dwelleth in the hearts of iustified persons by faith Epkes 3. v. 17. S. Chrysostome S. Cyril and S. Augustine in the places obiected affirme that we are not to beleeue our dull and carnall sence when it suggesteth vnto vs that which is repugnant to faith and when it acknowledgeth no other force and operation in the holy Sacraments but that which is sensible and naturall But embracing this doctrine of the holy Fathers we cannot from thence extract the fancie of Transubstantiation Learned Papists themselues acknowledge the intricacies and difficulties of this Article many of them affirme that secluding the authoritie of the Romish Church there is nothing in diuine Reuelation compelling to beleeue it The doctrine is not Catholike or Antient The Propugners of it vntill the late Trident Councell disagree in that which is maine and substantiall in it and for auoiding one figure they make many Therefore it standeth not with Christian Wisedome to imbrace or maintaine this doctrine and Romists are more confident than prudent in imposing the same as an Article of the Creed censuring the Noncredents as hainous Heretikes My finall conclusion about this Article is That doctrine which is not expresly taught or formally deduced from holy Soripture which no antient Councell or Church for the first 600 yeares plainely taught and vnto which many aduerse passages are extant in the monuments of antiquitie also which is repugnant to sence and common reason and hath no apparent vtilitie ought not to be imposed as an article of diuine faith But such is the doctrine of Romish Transubstantiation Therefore it ought not to be imposed as an article of diuine faith and the Roman Church should either cancell this part of their new Creed or be lesse censorious in obtruding of it THE SEVENTH POINT COMMVNION VNDER ONE KIND AND THE ABBETTING OF IT BY CONCOMITANCIE IESVIT YOur most Excellent Maiestie in the Proposition of this Controuersie shewes your deepe insight into Theologicall difficulties perceiuing a maine ground whereon the Catholicke opinion of the lawfulnesse of Communion vnder one kinde standeth to wit Concomitancie which being granted Communion vnder one kind is iustified ANSVVER IF his Sacred MAIESTIE should yeeld you Concomitancie yet vpon that ground Communion in one kinde could not be iustified Neuerthelesse we denie both 〈◊〉 and Communion vnder one kinde IESVIT § 1. The Doctrine of Concomitancie prooued THe Doctrine of Concomitancie is that vnder the forme of bread not onely the bodie of Christ but also his precious blood and blessed soule are truely and really contained the bodie directly and by vertue of the words of Consecration the blood and the soule consequently for being contained within the bodie of Christ they must needs Concomitate that is follow the bodie in what place soeuer the same bee neither can any that acknowledges the reall Presence denie this Concomitancie without falling into many absurdities as I prooue by three Arguments ANSWER THe bodie of Christ is considered two wayes First According to the nature of a perfect liuing bodie secondly As it is represented and exhibited in the Sacrament If we consider it the first way the blood of Christ cannot properly be said to be
spirituall manducation alone without Sacramentall If the former illation of Romists were good it will follow likewise from thence that receiuing of Bread in the Eucharist is not of the substance of Christs Institution for whole and intire Christ according to bodie and soule and infinite person is in the blood alone if the Popish Doctrine of Concomitancie be true and if this be granted as of necessitie it must then Romists may mangle and transforme the holy Sacrament at their pleasure Secondly The end and fruit of the Sacrament is either common to the holy Eucharist with other meanes of Grace or else proper to it onely To eate the flesh and drinke the blood of the Sonne of God by recognition of Christs Passion and by Faith in the same may be an effect of the Gospell preached Ioh. 6. 54. But to eate the same flesh and blood communicated more distinctly and effectually by visible seales of the couenant of the new Testament is an end and fruit peculiar and proper to the holy Eucharist 1. Cor. 10. 16. A man may haue the same inheritance bestowed on him by the word and writing of the Donor yet when the same is confirmed by the seale of the Donor the donation is of greater validitie and if by Law or custome two seales should be appointed the apposition of one is not of equall force and validitie to the apposition of both so likewise because the Sonne of God made choyce of two outward signes namely Bread and Wine to represent and apply his Passion and Oblation and withall commanded the common vse and reception of both saying Drinke ye all of this and also annexed a speciall promise and blessing to both these outward signes ioyntly vsed therefore the vse sumption of one of these without the other cannot haue so great force to apply the effect fruit of the Sacrament as the vse reception of both And as in concauses or partiall causes the action of the one cannot produce the effect without the other and as when two keyes are prouided to open a locke the same is not opened by one of them onely so likewise Christ Iesus hauing instituted and sanctified two signes for the more proportionable and effectuall application of his Bodie and Blood it is grosse presumption in man to mutilate and cut off a part of that bodie which the wisedome of Christ hath framed in due and beautifull proportion and to diuide that which God hath ioyned together and without warrant from Gods reuealed word to attribute a totall effect to a partiall meanes and cause IESVIT Hence it is apparent that without any iust cause some Protestants inueigh against the Councell of Constance as professing to contradict the Precept of Christ because it decreed That the Sacrament may bee lawfully giuen vnder one kind Non obstante quod Christus in vtraque specie illud instituerit Apostolis administrauerit Notwithstanding Christs Institution and Administration thereof in both kinds to his Disciples This their bitternesse proceeds from zeale without knowledge not distinguishing the Jnstitution of God from his Precept which are very distinct for the Precept of both kinds if Christ gaue any doth bind whether both kinds be necessarie for the maintenance of mans soule in grace or no but the Jnstitution in both kinds doth not binde further than the thing instituted to wit Communion vnder both kinds is necessarie for the maintaining of spirituall life for which one kind being sufficient as I haue shewed Christs Institution of both kinds doth not inforce the vse of both If God should haue commanded the vse both of meate and drinke euery man should be bound not onely to eate but also to drinke though he had no necessitie thereof but now seeing God hath not giuen such a Precept a man that can liue by meate without euer drinking is not bound to drinke non obstante that God did institute both eating and drinking for the preseruation of life in euerie man ANSWER The Councell of Constance is iustly censured for presuming to alter and disanull the ordinance of Christ for if it be flagitious amongst men to alter and contradict the lawfull Will of a Testator Galat. 3.15 shall it not be much more vnlawfall to alter the Testament of the Sonne of God who disposed to the common people his Bloud as well as his Bodie saying Drinke ye all of this Math. 26 27. and except yee eate the flesh and drinke the bloud of the man c. Ioh. 6.53 And the words of the said Synod are most presumptious for this they pronounce Although Christ after supper instituted and administred to his Disciples vnder both kindes c. And although in the Primitiue Chruch this Sacrament was receiued of Beleeuers in both kinds yet notwithstanding the contrarie custome for Laicks to receiue in one kind is with good reason brought in and they are Heretickes which hold this sacrilegious or vnlawfull But what are these men in comparison of Christ and his Apostles and of the Fathers of the Primitiue Church If men may thus twit Christ and his Apostles what shall become of all religion The sole and totall rule to guide the Church in the matter of the holy Eucharist is Christs Institution and practise recorded by the Euangelists and testified by the Apostles and the Primitiue Church in their doctrine and practise followed this rule as some of our learned Aduersaries ingeniously confesse If therefore Christ Iesus and his Apostles and after these the Primitiue Church administred the Communion to lay people in both kinds as this Synod confesseth and on the contraie nothing is extant in holy Writ or in the monuments of the Fathers to testifie that Christ and his Apostles retracted or altered this first practise What audacious sacriledge was it in the Prelates of Constance vpon their owne priuate and childish reasons to cancell Christs last Will and Testament and to violate the sacred precept and ordinance of the Sonne of God But our Aduersarie laboureth by a distinction of Institution and Precept to plaister the vlcerous Doctrine of the 〈◊〉 of Constance saying or implying That although Christ did institute the holy Eucharist in two kinds yet he gaue no precept for the vse of it in two kinds But this plaister of sig-leaues healeth not the wound for there is both an institution and a precept for both kinds and more expressely for the cup than for the bread for Christ said expressely and literally Drinke yee all of this whereas he said not so literally and expressely eat yee all of this Besides his institution is a vertuall and interpretatiue precept as appeareth by S. Paul 1. Cor. 11.23 And Christ did institute the Eucharist in two kinds that people might receiue and vfe it in two kinds Also if the manner of the institution prooueth not the manner of the vse then the Eucharist may be vsed in another manner I meane in things substantiall than
the one part from the other to wit because of the institution and signification Thus our Aduersarie is confuted touching Pope Leo and Gelasius by a most intelligent and learned Doctour of his owne societie IESVIT And as this is certaine and granted on our part so it is no lesse certaine that the Primitiue Church did neuer practise the vse of the Cup as pertaining to the essentiall integritie of the Sacrament or as commaunded by diuine precept but thought the recoiuing vnder one and both kinds a thing indifferent This may be prooued by the consideration of the time since Christs 〈◊〉 from our dayes vpward whence I gather fiue Arguments First is the confession of our Aduersaries amongst whom a Bohemian Protestant doth professe That hauing the feare of God before his eyes be dares not censure the Roman Church of Heresie in this point Hospinian writes that some Protestants confessed that whole christ was really present exhibited and receiued vnder euery kind and therefore vnder the onely forme of Bread and that they did not iudge those to do euill that communicated vnder one kind Melancthon As to eate or not to eate Swines flesh is placed in our power and athing indifferent so saith he J iudge of the Eucharist that they finne not who knowing and beleeuing this libertie doe vse either part of the figne And Luther They finne not against Christ who vse one kind seeing Christ doth not commaund to vse it but hath left it to the will of euerie one And Hospinian alledgeth Luther affirming Jt is not needfull to giue both kinds but the one alone sufficeth the Church hath power of ordaining onely one and the people ought to be content therewith if it be ordained by the Church But these testimonies though they may serue to stop the mouth of a clamorous Aduersarie yet are they not sufficient to satisfie any iuditious man in regard their Authors were men most vncertaine and various in their Doctrines about Religion now auerring as Orthodox and diuine Truth what soone after they fell to abhor as hereticall and impious ANSWER Concerning Luther Melancthon Iohannes Perzibram c. I answere that your benefactor Coccius to whom you are perpetually indebted for your readings alledgeth some such sayings out of these Authors but how truely it is vncertaine for in the ordinarie editions I find the contrarie deliuered by them made a Booke of Recognitions And it were more seemely for your selfe to reuoke your errours than to persist in a blind and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of Truth IESVIT I adde therefore secondly the definitions of the three generall Councels celebrated before the breach of Luther from the Romane Church The Councell of Florence wherein were present the Grecian and Armenian Bishops where 〈◊〉 is defined that Christ is whole vnder each 〈◊〉 The Councell of 〈◊〉 though they allowed the vse of the Cup 〈◊〉 the 〈◊〉 defined the lawfulnesse of Communion vnder one kind The Councell of Constance gaue example vnto both these former Councels being the first that defined this truth ANSVVER You adde nothing of any worth for the Councels of Constance and Basil were in your owne eyes vncanonical and he adlesse and are reiected by your selues in diuers articles and when you prooue which will be Ad Calendas Graecas that the three Synods named by you were generall Councells it shall be granted that Communion in one kind is not destitute of generall Synodicall late Testimonie IESVIT The third argument is the receiued and allowed generall custome of the Church which spontaneously euen before the Councell of Constance did abstaine from the Cup as the said Councell doth acknowledge which may be prooued by the testimonies of many that liued before the Councell of Constance Yea Alexander Halensis who liued two hundred yeares before the 〈◊〉 of Constance sayeth That almost euerie where Lay men receiued vnder the sole for me of Bread And venerable Bede doth signifie That in the Church of England euer since the first 〈◊〉 of her vnder S. Gregorie was vsed 〈◊〉 vnder one kind for the Laitie which could neuer haue entred into the Church without being 〈◊〉 and marked as an Heresie had not the Church euer held Communion vnder one or both kinds as a thing of indifferencie ANSWER The Greeke Church alwayes receiued in both kinds as your selues acknowledge therefore Communion in one kind was at no time an vniuersall Custome Also Vasques the Iesuit saith Wee cannot denie but that euen in the Latine Church Communion in both kinds was vsed and had continuance vntill the age of Thomas Aquinas Alexander de Hales affirmeth There is more Merit and power of Grace in Communion in both kinds than in one Lastly you were guided with that Spirit which is mentioned 3. Kings 22. v. 21. when you affirme That venerable Bede saith in the Church of England euer since her first Conuersion vnder S. Gregorie Communion vnder one kind was in vse for the Laitie First No such report is found in this Author Secondly In one of the Testimonies cited by your selfe the contrarie is affirmed For the two Apostles which are reported to haue spoken to a certaine young Lad say as followeth You must wait vntill the Masse or Communion be ended and hauing then receiued the holy Food of the Lords Bodie and Bloud you shall be deliuered from your infirmitie by Death and exalted to coelestiall ioyes IESVIT The fourth Argument is drawne from many signes and tokens that the Primitiue Church did sometimes vse Communion vnder one kind First the 〈◊〉 receiued vnder the onely forme of Bread as may appeare by the History of Serapion related by Eusebius and the Graecians at this day though they giue the Cup to the Communicants in the Church yet to the sicke they send the Sacrament vnder one kind Yea S. Ambrose as Paulinus relateth in his life at his death receiued the Sacrament vnder the sole forme of Bread and straight after the receiuing thereof gaue vp his soule ANSWER First touching Serapion related by Eusebius he receiued both Bread and Wine for the ladde which brought the Portion of the Eucharist was commanded by the Priest which sent him 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to sop the Bread into Wine and being moistened to put it into the old mans mouth and this was performed accordingly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the ladde wetted or moistened the Portion of Bread which he receiued of the Priest and infused the same into Serapion the old mans mouth and the Councell of Towers alleadged by Burchardus and Iuo reporteth the manner and reason of dipping the Bread in this sort We command That the Eucharist which is 〈◊〉 to be giuen sicke Persons shall be dipped into the bloud of our Lord that the Priest may say in truth The body and bloud of our Lord Iesus Christ profit thee to life eternall Which dipping sheweth that they thought it not sufficient to
giue the sicke only the Bread Secondly if Paulinus of whom Erasmus saith it is the same Craftsman which hath corrupted so many things in the writings of S. Hierome and S. Augustine report truely touching S. Ambrose this prooueth not That Communion in one kind was in ordinary vfe but that S. Ambrose being speechlesse and without vnderstanding and deceasing instantly after the Bread was put into his mouth and consequently being preuented by death receiued by reason of this accident one materiall part of the Sacrament onely IESVIT Secondly it was an antient custome in the Church to giue the Sacrament vnto Lay men especially vnto Eremites to be carryed in most pure linnen corporalls home to their houses to be taken in the morning before all other meates but there is no signe or token in Antiquity That the Faithfull together with the consecrated Bread did carry away with them consecrated Wine yea diuers Histories shew the onely forme of Bread was carryed away and consequently that the Church did not then esteeme of Communion 〈◊〉 one kind as of a Sacrilegious mayming of the Sacrament as Protestants now doe ANSVVER It was an antient custome to send the Communion to Persons absent in both kinds as appeareth by the Historie of Exuperius in S. Hierome And Gregorie Nazianzen saith of his sister Gorgonia if her hand had laid vp any Portion of the types or tokens of the pretious body and of the bloud c. And as touching sicke persons Why should we not iudge that the same order and proportion was kept in sending the Sacrament to them at their houses as was obserued when sicke persons came to the Communion Table or Altar in the Church IESVIT Thirdly it was an antient custome in the Graecian Church to consecrate the holy Eucharist on Saturdayes and Sundayes and on the other dayes of the weeke to communicate Ex praesanctificatis of the praesanctified forme st hat is consecrated on the Saturday or Sunday before Now it is not probable that they did consecrate Wine to indure fiue or sixe dayes long for feare specially in such hot Countreyes the same should grow sower Wherefore for the most part they did communicate vnder one kind ANSWER The Office of the Greeke Church making mention of the Sacramentall signes consecrated or sanctified before they were vsed nameth Bread and Wine For thus wee reade in the same That after the Priest hath sanctified the Bread hee powreth Wine and Water into the sacred Cup and rehearseth the accustomed words c. And the Liturgie Praesanctificatorum of the Presanctified signes according to Genebrards 〈◊〉 speaketh both of the body and of the bloud presented in the mysticall signes It appeareth also by Balsamon vpon the 52 Canon of the Synod in Trullo that both the Elements were consecrated at least vpon two seuerall dayes in the weeke and Baronius acknowledgeth That in antient times the Eucharist was reserued in both the kinds now if it was consecrated and reserued in both kinds Why should we imagine that it was not deliuered and receiued in both kinds IESVIT Fourthly the Manichees liued in Rome and other places shrouding themselues among Catholikes went to their Churches receiued the Sacrament publikely with them vnder the sole forme of Bread and yet they were not noted nor there discerned from Catholikes A manifest signe that Communion vnder one kind was publikely in the Church permitted at the least vpon some iust causes that might be pretended For how could the Manichees still refusing the Cup haue beene hidden among these antient Christians if they had beene persuaded as now Protestants that receiuing vnder one kind only is a Sacriledge If one in the Church of England should refuse the Cup but once in a publike Communion in the Church would he not be incontinently noted ANSWER The holy Eucharist in the dayes of Pope Leo the first was administred in both kinds and Romists could neuer as yet produce any one sufficient testimonie or example that so much as any one congregation of Christians in antient times receiued in the open Church vnder one kind And although the place obiected out of Leo doth in speciall concerne the Manichees yet it sheweth plainely that the present doctrine and practise of the Roman Church is not consonant to the antient practise of the same Church Neuerthelesse our peruerse Aduersary argueth against vs out of this place of Leo saying That if the Communion had not sometimes beene administred vnder one kind the Manichees practise in refusing the Cup could not haue passed vnmarked but must necessarily haue beene obserued I answer First The Manichees were espied and discouered otherwise how could the Pope reprooue their practise Secondly Vasques the Iesuit saith That these Heretikes receiued the Cup into their hand but dranke no Wine and among a multitude of Communicants some few might hold the Cup to their mouth and make shew of drinking and yet receiue no Wine IESVIT The last Argument is practise of the Apostles that is of the first Christians vnder them of whom wee reade in the Acts of the Apostles Erant perseuerantes in Doctrina Apostolorum communicatione fractionis Panis Orationibus speaking of sucred Eucharisticall Bread the taking whereof was ioyned with Prayer which vnto the newly baptised was straight giuen after Baptisme and yet there is no mention of Wine So that Protestants if they will haue these Christians to haue Wine they must out of their owne liberalitie by way of interpretation bestow it vpon them seeing the words of the Text doe not affoord it them To this Apostolicall practise wee may adde the example of Christ who gaue to his two Disciples in Emaus the Sacrament vnder the sole forme of Bread That the Bread Christ gaue was Eucharisticall and consecrated the words of the Text insinuate some learned Fathers affirme and the miraculous effect of opening their eyes to know Christ and their returne to Hierusalem and the Church of the Apostles in all hast confirmes it That they receiued at the hands of Christ the Sacrament vnder one onely kind of Bread is euident by the context of the Holy Narration which saith That vpon our Sauiours breaking and giuing them Bread they knew him and bee straight vanished out of their sight So that here also if Protestants will haue Wine giuen to these Disciples they must by the superabundance thereof in their Expositions supply 〈◊〉 want thereof in Scripture yea the Scripture in this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 capable of that Exposition the Apostles acknowledging of Christ in the verie fraction and giuing of Bread and our 〈◊〉 departing in the same moment leaues not-time for him to giue them Wine after the Bread ANSWER Your last Argument is poore and drowsie and perhaps you imagine that at this your Feast if yet we may be said to drinke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sine Calice we haue drunke well before and therefore in the
conclusion you giue vs that which is worst Iohn 2. 8. The Antecedent or leading part of your Argument is dubious and the Consequence also is infirme First you are not able to prooue out of the Texts Act. 2.42 or Luk. 24.30 that Christ and his Apostles in those places administred the holy Communion for there may be Prayer and breaking of Bread and yet no Sacrament 1. Tim. 4. v. 3.4.5 Also the place Act. 2. 42. may be vnderstood of dealing bread by Eleemosinarie dole to the poore And although some of the Fathers apply these Scriptures to the Eucharist according to the mysticall sence yet other Fathers are contrarie yea many Pontificians expound these Texts of common food or bread and not of the Eucharist But if the first Exposition were true yet Communion in one kinde cannot be hence inferred for either the words are proper or figuratiue If Romists will presse them according to the letter then no wine at all was then vsed by Christ Luc. 24. or by the Apostles Act. 2. and consequently it followeth 〈◊〉 If they will yeeld that there is a 〈◊〉 in the words then euen as when wee reade in sundrie places of Scripture That people meet together to 31.34 〈◊〉 2.10 wee vnderstand by a part of the 〈◊〉 the whole not 〈◊〉 wine or other in the 〈◊〉 Texts making literall mention of bread onely must be vnderstood as mentioning a part of the spirituall Feast for the whole Neither is there any force in the Argument ensuing which is Their eyes were opened to know Christ Ergo They 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bread for the eyes may be opened by Miracle Grace and by Donation of Faith Act. 10. 14. without receiuing Eucharisticall Bread The holy Eucharist is not a sole or 〈◊〉 cause of grace 〈◊〉 there are other caufes and meanes besides and therefore the Illation is inconsequent 〈◊〉 an effect which may proceed from diuers and fundrie 〈◊〉 to one speciall and determinate efficient cause But the Aduersarie proceedeth saying That after breaking of bread Christ straight way vanished out of their sight and they hastened to Hierusalem with all speed Therefore there was no space after receiuing the Bread for the sumption of Wine The Reader may perceiue by these and other such like writhings of the Text vpon what foundation Popish Faith is builded First The word Straight wayes is not in the Narration Luke 24. Secondly The receiuing a small quantitie of Wine could neither hinder our Sauiours expedition nor the Apostles iourney to Ierusalem Thirdly How appeareth it that receiuing Eucharisticall Bread made the Disciples more agile in bodie and prompter in minde to trauell to Hierusalem for two Disciples ranne to the Sepulchre with as much allacritie and expedition as was possible 〈◊〉 20. 4 and yet they had at that present time receiued no Eucharisticall Bread Yea on the contrarie the Apostles of Christ after the receiuing of the holy Eucharist doe all of them flie away and forsake their Master Math. 26.58 This collection therefore The Disciples hasted to Hierusalem Ergo They receiued the Eucharist is dissolute and not much vnlike that of Pope Boniface the eight God said Let vs make two great lights Ergo The Pope is greater than the Emperour IESVIT These bee the Warrants that Communion vnder one kinde hath being the greatest that may bee whereby appeares that the Roman Church is furnisht with all kinde of proofe in this point in which she doth seeme to her Aduersaries to be most forsaken of Antiquitie Now supposing Communion vnder one kinde to be good and lawfull That the Church could preseribe it and That shee had iust reasons to prescribe it J will let passe without proofe as a thing not doubted of by your Maiesties excellent wisedome ANSVVER All your warrants for halfe Communions are meere Impostures and audacious words and figments Commota semel excussa mens ei seruit à quo impellitur saith Seneca The mind which is disordered and put out of frame becomes a slaue to that which impells it This is verified in you you want all kinds of iust defence for your Sacriledge in mangling and dismembring the holy Communion yet hauing once ouershot your selues and become slaues to your owne conceit of not being subiect to errour Litigare magis quam sanari vultis you chuse rather to make warre with heauen than to retract your errour for they warre with heauen which oppose the Testament of the Sonne of God the Tradition of the holy Apostles and the practise of the Primitiue Church and this is your case although you list not to see it or rather seeing to acknowledge it THE EIGHT POINT WORKES OF SVPERERROGATION SPECIALLY WITH REFERENCE TO THE TREASVRE OF THE CHVRCH IESVIT IT is hard if not impossible to giue satisfaction in this point vnto any that is not aforehand persuaded of the Catholicke Doctrine of Merit ANSVVER THe word or name of merit is taken in two notions First properly strictly and vniuocally Ro. 4.4 Deu. 7.10 Secondly improperly largely and equiuocally Eccle. 16.15 The first is tearmed by Schoolemen Merit of Condignitie and the latter Merit of Impetration or of Congruitie If the Iesuit maintaine Merit according to the first acceptation then out of all question the Doctrine of Merit is not Catholicke If he maintaine Merit according to the second notion then Popes pardons and workes of Supererogation cannot be inferred or concluded from the doctrine of Merit for how can that action bee applied to other persons as satisfactorie which is rewarded by God of his free fauour and grace aboue the desert of the person himselfe which hath wrought it IESVITS §. 1. The Doctrine of Merit declared THis Doctrine is much misliked by Protestants as proud and arrogant yet not so much misliked as misunderstood their dislike growing from misconstruction thereof For Catholickes hold that no worke is meritorious with God of it owne nature but to make the same meritorious many graces are required and those most diuine and excellent particularly these seuen ANSVVER CAn any thing be more arrogant and foolish than for a miserable begger and sinner whose iustice is rather in remission of sinnes than in perfection of vertues to maintaine that God should be vniust if he rendred not heauen to mans good workes And yet this proud Doctrine is deliuered by the Rhemists and by some other Romists But our Aduersarie laboureth by distinction to salue this Pharisaisme saying Good workes are not meritorious by their nature but by many graces c. I answer If he should maintaine that Good workes merit iustification or perseuerance not by their Nature but by Grace this distinction would not free his Tenet from error so likewise it is erroneus to maintaine that Good works merit glorie by Grace for that which is of Merit is not of Grace but of debt And diuine grace doth not eleuate vertuous actions by adding vnto them a force of meriting but
God for then hee must free iust persons from all sinne but in respect of some particular Actions to wit whereas the Law of Charitie commandeth to distribute a portion of goods to the poore a man may bestow halfe his goods neuerthelesse he which performeth this may be deficient another way for he may fall short in the intension of his Charitie and also in the measure of his Hope Humilitie and other vertues The Iesuit concludeth the place of Saint Ambrose Lib. de viduis with an Exclamation saying What can bee more clearely spoken for Workes of Counsell and Supererogation But before his boasting he should haue aduised better touching these Fathers meaning First Ambrose teacheth that there is a difference betweene Precepts and Counsells Secondly That the obseruing of Counsells is not required of all but of some Thirdly They which besides Precepts obserue Counsells are more profitable seruants and shall receiue a greater reward Now the Argument for Workes of Supererogation from this Testimonie of St. Ambrose must be as followeth If they are more profitable seruants and receiue a greater reward which performe some vertuous and laudable Actions not inioyned by common Precept but by Councell then Workes of Supererogation must be granted But they are more profitable seruants and receiue a greater reward which performe some vertuous Actions not inioyned by common Precept but by Councell Ergo Workes of Supererogation must be granted I answere denying the Consequence for to the being and definition of Workes of Supererogation more is required than the performing of some vertuous and rewardable Actions inioyned by Councell and not by common Precept to wit First That the said vertuous and laudable Actions bee neither inioyned by strict and morall Precept nor yet by the Law of gratitude for when the Fathers oppose Precepts and Councels they vnderstand Precepts strictly and not the Law of Gratitude Secondly They which supererogate must doe the same vniuersally and transcend the common rule in euery Precept and vertuous Action and not in some alone Thirdly They must so transcend that they be guiltie of no Omission or Commission either against the substance or perfection of any morall Commandement IESVIT Neither is there any arrogancie as J said before in this Doctrine for neither the Fathers nor wee attribute more vnto man than Protestants doe but onely acknowledge one kinde of Diuine liberalitie towards man which Protestants bee somewhat backward to beleeue for Protestants will not denie supposing that God exacteth much lesse than man is able by his grace to performe but a man may offer vnto God some voluntarie seruices beyond commanded duties Catholickes also grant that had God vsed the vttermost seueritie in charging vs with debts as hee might hane done we could neuer by any measure of grace that now is ordinarily affoorded vnto men haue complied with vnrequired offices The difference therefore betweene them and vs is this They thinke that God seuerely exacteth of man that euer and in all 〈◊〉 hee worke according to the vttermost of his power yea commands him things impossible for him to performe Contrarywise wee 〈◊〉 that God to the end his Law may bee vnto men A sweet yoke A light loade and his Commandements not difficile doth not exact of man all that man is able to doe with his grace but much lesse and so much lesse as man is able through his remission to offer him liberalities What pride is it for man to acknowledge this sweet prouidence of this Creatour to praise his mercifull indulgence in not exacting so much as he might Especially beleeuing that this diuine indulgence not to exact of man and consequently mans abilitie to present vnto God more perfect and excellent seruice than he requires is giuen him through the merits of Christ Iesus ANSWER First You couple your selues with Fathers like as the Pharises did themselues with Abraham Sed quid Simiae prodest si videatur esse Leo saith Gregorie Nazianzen An Ape is but an Ape although he will seeme a Lyon Secondly A man may offer vnto God a free-will offering and yet herein he performeth no more than he is obliged vnto by the Law of gratitude Thirdly It is no part of our Creed that God in the Euangelicall Couenant seuerely exacteth of man any thing as necessarie to his saluation which is impossible for him to performe by the assistance of diuine grace and yet wee say againe That God by the rule of his Law commandeth a greater perfection of righteousnesse than man is able to performe in this life that all flesh may be humbled by the sight of infirmitie and consider the gracious indulgence of God in remitting sinne and his free bountie in conferring so great and so many vndeserued benefits Fourthly We praise God as much as any Romists can doe for his mercifull indulgence in remitting and not exacting so but with all we beleeue that God hath not 〈◊〉 his 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vs from being stil his debtors and we stand perpetually obliged vnto him touching the debt of Obedience yea more after Grace receined than before Rom. 6. 18. And although he imputeth not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 defects when we obey him in the maine yet this indulgence 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 power to man to merit his owne saluation much lesse to supererogate or to communicate his vertuous actions by way of satisfaction vnto others IESVIT §. 4. Workes with reference to the Treasure of the Church THe other part of this Controuersie proposed by your Maiestie about Workes referred vnto the Treasure of the Church concernes good Workes not as they are meritorious of reward but as they are satisfactorie for sinne for the workes of Saints as they are Merits be laied vp not in the Treasurie of the Church to bee applied vnto others but in the memorie of God to receiue their deserued guerdon in due time ANSWER TO the constitution of Popes Pardons three things are required by the Papals and reiected by vs. First Superfluous and redundant satisfactions of Saints Secondly A vast Treasurie in the Church militant to receiue and containe the same Thirdly An eminent authoritie and power in the Popes and Prelates of the Roman Church to communicate and applie the same to the liuing and defunct Protestants denie that any member of this Doctrine is Catholicke and Orthodoxall or that the holy Apostles or Primitiue Church maintained the same by teaching or practise We affirme also That the said Doctrine is nouell and deuised by Roman Prelates for filthie lucre The Aduersarie notwithstanding laboureth to vnderprop the tottering wall of Papall 〈◊〉 and Indulgences First by distinction of Merits and Satisfactions Secondly by explication of his Romish Tenet touching Satisfactions Thirdly by deliuering the maine grounds of the Doctrine of Satisfactions and Pardons His first Proposition is The merits of Saints are reserued and laid vp in the memorie of God and not in the Treasurie of the Church And on the
by a voluntatrie and prouisionall Mandate touching Recicide vnlesse you were otherwise proni ad rem bent to mischiefe Et luxato hoc freno and this Paper bridle being broken to broach and inculcate it If this your Masters hand shall cast Crosse in stead of Pile what shall we expect from such Gamesters Quibus ludus sunt capita diademata Regum IESVIT This onely I hope J may with your Maiesties good liking affirme That our Catholicke Doctrine in this Point is nothing so preiuditiall to Princes as are the Opinions of most Caluinists and Lutherans expressed in their Writings whereof we haue in this age but ouer-euident and lamentable examples to the world and your Maiestie not vnknowne And had the Authours of the Gunpowder Treason which from my soule I abhorre kept themselues within the bounds of Catholicke Doctrine they had neuer vndergone that most odious and abominable enterprise ANSWER By a draught of Sea water one may iudge of the brackishnesse of the whole His gratious Maiestie hath tasted alreadie of some fruits of Popish loyaltie and the Gunpowder Treason animalised by Iesuits but now disauowed for it succeeded not is a Watchword for prudent men not to confide in them whom the leuen of Superstition hath sowred But is the wit of a Iesuit growne so barren Haue you no other euasion but by recrimination and that impertinent For as concerning your Flim-flam of Caluinists and Lutherans I answere His Maiestie and the State of England hath felt no such disturbance but haue obserued by long experience that it cannot enter into any true Protestants heart vpon any occasion whatsoeuer to lift vp their heads against the Lords Annointed and if any vnsound or equiuocall member appeare among them diuerse from the true bodie let them receiue censure according to their demerits IESVIT As for the other Question which your Maiestie proposeth particularly to my selfe viz. What I thinke Subiects ought to doe in the case of Papall deposition of their Prince I can giue no better Councell vnto others than what J am resolued to take my selfe First to pray for peace and tranquilitie and true concord betweene both parties Secondly to exhort all to doe all other good offices tending thereunto and rather to suffer with patience than any way concurre to the preiudice of the Prince or disturbance of the Commonwealth Thirdly J doe protest before Almightie God that I would rather offer my selfe to die than any way to bee accessarie to your Maiesties death All which things most sincerely vttered by mee I humbly beg your Maiestie would vouchsafe to receiue as issuing from the conceits and hearts of all my Profession whose institutes particularly commandeth respect and obedience to all in authoritie as in the beginning of this Discourse I made plaine vnto your Maiestie vnto whom wee especially who are your borne subiects doe beare so vnfained affection that we should thinke our selues happie if your Maiestie would vouchsafe but to make tryall thereof not doubting but your Excellent Iudgement would soone discouer vs to be not onely as loyall as any other of your Subiects but more willing to imploy our wits pennes and labours euen with hazard of our liues in performing your Maiesties Commandements than many who inioying the fauour of the time make faire shewes of their owne affections and fidelitie and vncharitably traduce vs as capitall enemies to your Maiestes Person State and Dignitie ANSWER It is needlesse to make many words for if your heart and pen accord testifie the same by taking the Oath of Allegiance and by renouncing the pestilent opinion of Equiuocation therwise your Insinuations and Blandishments are but Maskes and Tectures of latent perfidiousnesse and they which are acquainted with Romish guile must still suspect that you play the Foxe Astutam vapido gestans sub pectore vulpem Ore aliud retinens aliud sub pectore Condens Now concerning this precedent passage let it bee obserued how the Iesuit hath not answered but declined his Maiesties Question And we must hold him to stand mute as one not daring to put himselfe to his Countrey lest he be found guiltie For the question is What ought the subiect to doe in case a Pope depose the King The Iesuits answere is I pray for peace I exhort others I would rather die c. Hansome complements but no securitie If his Holinesse send another wind you which haue vowed strict obedience to the Pope must turne your sailes your Votes and Prayers must bound another way you must exhort others to execute the Popes pleasure and if they and you perish in the Popes quarrell you die Martirs and goe to heauen in a string The IESVITS Conclusion HAuing performed your Maiesties will and pleasure in seeking to giue satisfaction about the Nine principall points that withhold your Royall assent from ioyning vnto the Roman Church my poore indeauours prostrate at your Maiesties feet to receiue their doome humbly beseech this fauor That your charitie and desire of the vnitie of the Church may ioyne together with your excellent Wisdome and Learning to pronounce the sentence Although I be confident that examining Religion by the meere rigour of only Scripture the Catholicke Doctrines would get the victorie more cleare and expresse Testimonies standing on our side than any that Protestants can bring for themselues as by the former Discourse may appeare although also I be much more confident in the Tradition perfect practise of the Church interpreting Scripture which by so full consent deliuers the Roman Doctrines that partialitie it selfe duely pondering can hardly in heart and in wardly iudge against them yet my chiefest hope is in those charitable thoughts and desires of Peace and Vnitie in the whole Christian world which the holy Ghost hath inspired into your Religious brest ANSVVER You deceiue your selfe touching his Maiestie for not onely these Nine points but many other detaine his royal assent from ioyning with the Romane Faith Secondly Your ostentation of proouing these Articles by the meere rigout of sole Scripture is Vanitas Vanitatum A vanitie beyond vanitie for the learned of your owne part acknowledge that many of your Romish Articles are neither expresly nor inuoluedly contained in holy Scripture Neither againe can your Faith subsist if it be tried by Genuine and Orthodoxall Tradition for your selfe in this Treatise wherein you performe as much in substance as your cause will beare haue made no demonstration of any one Article by the Testimonie of perpetuall Tradition and it seemeth to me that you are conscious hereof because in your Conclusion you fall vpon a new Disputation and seeke to inferre a necessitie of reducing all Controuersies to the meere and absolute determination of the Romane Church and Pope who will not faile to be fast friends to themselues IESVIT For suppose that praeconceit instilled into tender minds against them thinke comparing Catholickes with Protestants that Scriptures stand equally on both sides yea sifting
the matter by Scripture onely that Protestants may seeme to haue the vpper hand yet Charitie will mooue this Question Whether the Testimonies and Arguments they bring from Scripture are so vndeniably cleare and so vnauoidably strong that no answere or euasion may bee found but the Romane Church must bee refused notwithstanding so much discord and dissention so much inconstancie and incertainetie about Religion which as reason prooueth must and as experience sheweth doth thereupon ensue ANSWER First Protestants doe not onely bring Arguments and Testimonies of Scripture against the Roman faith but also the testimonie of Antiquitie and all other grounds of veritie Secondly their arguments from Scripture are such as cannot be auoided but onely by Sophistrie and in this manner the very arguments of Christ for the resurrection Matth. 22. 32. and the testimonies which Councells and Fathers vse 〈◊〉 Arrians Pelagians and sundry other Heretikes may receiue appearing and seeming solutions Thirdly if the Scripture it selfe and the doctrine of the Primitiue Church with other grounds of learning cannot as our Aduersarie obiecteth de facto or presupposing the malice of some persons 〈◊〉 all discord and inconstancie of Religion much lesse can the determination of the Roman Church effect this For if men will not regard Moses and the Prophets c. If an Angell come from heauen or if one rise from the dead they may still cauill and refuse to beleeue But for the externall repressing of petulant Spirits a free and lawfull Councell were to be desired and a disposition of heart in Christian Princes and in other worthy members of the Church to submit themselues to a Tryall by the holy Scripture and the doctrine of the Primitiue Church and vpon the same to conclude a common Peace in Christianitie and to represse by Discipline and Authoritie factious and turbulent Incendiaries either of the Romish or Protestant part IESVIT For if you cast away the Roman Church and her authoritie no Church is left in the World that can with reason or dares for shame challenge to be infallible in her definitions and if such a Church be wanting What meanes is left either to keepe the learned certainly in peace or to giue vnto the ignorant assurance what is the Doctrine of saluation the Apostles first preached ANSWER You doe well to name Daring and 〈◊〉 for if the Papall faction had not passed all shame they had not to their vsurpations of iurisdiction added the forgerie and vaunt of absolute intallibilitie a priuiledge which I make no doubt no Pope without or with his Papall Councells euer in his inward conscience thought himselfe to haue But as for Ecclesiasticke decisions and determinations we say that although the absolute authoritie of the Roman Church be refused and although no other Church in the world can truely challenge absolute infallibilitie of iudgement but conditionall onely or restrictiue so farre as it propoundeth and confirmeth doctrine out of the Sacred Scriptures yet the learned may be preserued in peace and the ignorant in assurance of veritie First The Holy Ghost hath already determined all questions of faith necessary for the Church to vnderstand by his owne immediate decisiue voice deliuered in Sacred Scripture expresly or deriuatiuely Secondly if any other question arise touching History matter of Fact naturall or morall Veritie Ceremonies and externall Policie c. the same may bee sufficiently decided by Christian prudence working vpon the principles of Reason humane Historie rules of Art and by the examples of former times and principally by the generall rules of holy Scripture and many questions are raysed by the curiositie and subtletie of men wherein if the Church be ignorant and vnresolued there ensueth no preiudice in respect of faith Thirdly if contentious persons lust to continue such the determination of the Roman Church or Councell cannot quell or stifle contention but onely as an humane Iudge and by the same authoritie with other Churches It is also remarkeable that the definitions of the Roman Church it selfe are vncertaine ambiguous mutable and such as Defacto leaue matter of strife among those persons which submit themselues to the resolution thereof The Dominicans and Iesuits contend egerly at this day concerning the sence and Exposition of the Trent Councell in the question of Grace and Free-will Suares and Vasques two prime Iesuits are diuided about the sence of that Councell in the matter of Merit and Satisfaction the like differences are found among many moderne Schoolemen touching the manner of worshipping Images and concerning the presence of Christs Body in the Eucharist whether the same be there by adduction or production wherein Bellarmine holdeth the first and Suares the latter opinion And if our Aduersarie eleuate these dissentions pretending them to be small surely they are as waightie as the differences amongst Protestants And lastly whatsoeuer Romists pretend to the contrarie the transcendent Authority of Popes is no sufficient or Soueraigne means to preserue vnitie either of faith or charitie in the Christian world for when the Papacie was most predominant the Christian world was distracted with contentions about Religion to wit between the Romans Graecians and other Churches and it was imbroyled with bloudy wars betweene Popes and other Princes and Emperours and the Roman See it selfe was rant into Factions by occasion of Antipopes Neither was the transcendent authority of the Roman Church any effectuall meanes to promote common vnitie but the Ambition and Oppression thereof was a perpetuall Seminarie and incentiue of mischiefe and discord therefore the meanes for his most excellent Maiestie to cause vnitie in the Christian world is not the aduancing of Papall Supremacie which is a firebrand of contention but the maintaining of the Supreame authoritie of the Scripture and the procuring if it might be of a free and lawfull Councell wherein the word of Christ may haue Preheminence and wherein the Pope may be a Subiect as well as other Pastours IESVIT A Church fallible in her teaching is by the learned to be trusted no further than they doe see her Doctrine consonant vnto Scripture and so they may neglect her Iudgement when they seeme to haue euidences of Scripture against her and if this libertie of Contradiction be granted What hope of vnitie remaines when a priuate man may wrangle eternally with the whole Church and neuer be conuinced apparently of teaching against the Scriptures whereof we haue too many examples ANSWER A Church fallible in Iudgement is to be trusted when it confirmeth her doctrine by the word of God which is an infallible witnesse And although a Church be subiect to possibilitie of Errour and although the doctrine thereof wanting Diuine proofe is not to be receiued of the learned as matter of Faith yet no libertie of contesting the lawfull authoritie of the same when it confirmeth her sayings by Gods word is hereby permitted to contentious Spirits and it is more probable That Pastors of the
Church assembled in Gods feare and not factiously for their owne ends shall iudge aright than Popes which referre all things to their owne worldly ends Also it is one thing to contradict a Church defining and speaking of it selfe and another when it deliuereth the doctrine of Christ. Now whensoeuer the preaching of the Church is according to the rule of holy Scripture the voice thereof is the voice of Christ and all people learned and vnlearned are bound to heare and obey the same IESVIT If wetake out of the world a Church infallible whence shall ignorant men learne which is the Doctrine of saluation the Apostles deliuered It is as euident as the Sunne shining at noone day and the euidence of the thing hath forced some Protestants to acknowledge That the Controuersies of Religion in our time are growne in number so many and in nature so intricate that few haue time and leasure fewer strength of vnderstanding to examine them so that nothing remaines for men desirous of satisfaction in things of such consequence but diligently to search out which amongst all the societies of men in the world is the Church of the liuing God the Pillar and ground of Truth that so they may imbrace her Communion follow her Directions rest in her Iudgement ANSWER If the rule be infallible and the Preaching of Pastours according to that rule ignorant persons by the assistance of Grace may learne the doctrine of saluation from their teaching without the least thought or reference more to the Romane Church than to any other Church for although Saint Augustine and Saint Cyprian were subiect to errour yet the vnlearned people of Hippo and Carthage receiued right Faith by their Ministerie with assurance that the same descended from the Apostles And it is as euident as the Sunne shining that the Word of Christ is the sole authenticall ground of Faith and the onely infallible rule to decide Controuersies and the Pastours of other Churches if they vse the meanes and haue sufficient knowledge and the assistance of ordinarie Grace may bee as infallible in their Doctrine as Romane Prelates And although vnlearned people depend vpon their Pastours like sicke men vpon their Physitions yet where they inioy the free vse of the holy Scripture as in antient times all people did and if they be carefull of their owne saluation and desire to know the truth God blesseth his owne ordinance and ordinarily assisteth them by his grace in such sort as that they shall not be seduced to damnation Math. 24.24 And if they be distracted in smaller points by the dissentions of Teachers their Errour in this case is excuseable But howsoeuer the Roman Church can be no greater stay to them than other Churches but onely by leading them to a blind obedience like as Pagans are led in another kind Dr. Fields testimonie concerning the necessitie of learning which is the true Church the ground and Pillar of Truth c. serueth not to prooue That the definition of any moderne Church is absolutely and vniuersally the rule of Faith and supreame Iudge of all Controuersies or free from all Errour for this learned Diuine speaketh of the Catholike Church in generall as it containes the holy Apostles and those which succeeded them in all ages in the teaching of the doctrine which they deliuered to the world And concerning the present Church he ascribeth no more vnto it but to be a manuduction and guider to sauing veritie confirmed and grounded vpon the holy Scripture neither maketh he the authoritie and definition thereof absolute but dependant vpon the word of God IESVIT Jf there be no Church besides the Roman in the world that can with any colour pretend infallibilitie of Iudgement Jf the most part of men cannot by their examining of Controuersie be resolued in faith and therefore must perish eternally except they find a Church that is an infallible Mistresse of truth in whose iudgement they may securely rest certainely those that haue bowells of charitie will accept of any probable answer vnto Protestants Obiections and accusations rather than discredit the authoritie of so necessarie a Church which being discredited no Church remaines in the world of credit sufficient to sustaine the waight of Christian that is infallible beleefe ANSWER Vnlearned people must relye vpon the Ministerie of some moderne Church not as a ground and rule of their faith but as an helper of their faith and although the Ministerie of the Church whereupon they depend is not absolutely infallible or free from Errour yet their saluation is not by this meanes impeached neither doe they perish eternally For it is not necessarie That a Church subiect to errour as Hippo Carthage Lions c. in the dayes of S. Augustine S. Cyprian S. Ireneus shall at all times actually erre or grieuously erre at any time and when it deliuereth the doctrine of holy Scripture it is herein free from errour and Christian people by comparing the doctrine thereof with the Scripture may certainely know that it erreth not Act. 17. 11. And touching the Roman Church Vpon what grounds are Christian people able to know by assurance of faith That the doctrine thereof is more infallible than the doctrine of other Churches But if Rome is Babylon described Reuelat. ca. 14. 8. 17 5. 18. 2. as weightie motiues induce some men to thinke then it is most safe for people to renounce the Communion of this Church as it now beleeueth and to liue in the fellowship of that Church which groundeth her faith on holy Scripture and not vpon the traditions of men Apoc. 18.4 IESVIT What amiserie will it be if it fall out as it is most likely it will fall out That at the day of Iudgement the most part of English Protestants be found to haue beleeued points of Doctrine necessarie to saluation not out of their owne certaine skill in Scripture as they should by the principles of their Religion but vpon the credit of the Church that teachech them which doth acknowledge her selfe to be no sufficient stay of assured beleefe for without question men cannot be saued who although they beleeued the truth yet beleeued it vpon a deceiueable ground and consequently by humane and fallible persuasion and not as need is by a diuine most certaine beleefe grouuded vpon aninfallible foundation which cannot be had without an infallible Church ANSWER What a miserie will it be if it fall out as it is certaine it will That at the day of Iudgement the greatest part of English Romists be found to haue renounced the expresse and manifest word of Christ and the sincere faith of the Primitiue Church and in stead thereof to haue imbraced lying vanities and the deceiueable Traditions of the man of finne the sonne of perdition who exalteth himselfe aboue all that is called God or that is worshipped 2. Thes. 2 3 4. For out of all doubt men cannot be saued
Whether you haue related the two former truly appeares by Dr Whites Relation or Exposition of them The B. was present at none but this third of which he is readie by me to giue the Church an account But of this third whether that were the cause which you alledge he cannot tell You say F. It was obserued That in the second Conference all the speech was about particular matters little or none about a continuall infallible visible Church which was the chiefe and onely Point in which the person doubting required satisfaction as hauing formerly settled their mind That it was not for them or any other vnlearned persons to take vpon them to iudge of particulars without depending vpon the Iudgement of the true Church B. The opinion of that person in this was neuer opened to the B. And it is very fit the people should looke to the Iudgement of the Church before they be too busie with particulars But yet neither Scripture nor any good Authoritie denyes them some moderate vse of their owne vnderstanding and iudgement especially in things familiar and euident which euen ordinarie Capacities may as easily vnderstand as reade And therefore some particulars a Christian may iudge without depending F. That person therefore hauing heard it granted in the first Conference That there must be a continuall visible Companie euer since Christ teaching vnchanged Doctrine in all fundamentall Points that is Points necessarie to Saluation desired to heare this confirmed and proofe brought which was that continuall infallible visible Church in which one may and out of which one cannot attaine Saluation And therefore hauing appointed a time of meeting betweene a B. and me and thereupon hauing sent for the B. and me before the B. came the doubting persons came first to the roome where I was and debated before me the aforesaid Question and not doubting of the first part to wit That there must be a continuall visible Church as they had heard graunted by Dr White and L. K. c. B. What Dr White and L. K. graunted neyther the B. nor I heard But I thinke both graunted a continuall and a visible Church neyther of them an infallible at least in your sense And your selfe in this Relation speake distractedly For in these few Lines from the beginning hither twice you adde infallible betweene continuall and visible and twice you leaue it out But this concerneth Dr W. and he hath answered it F. The Question was Which was that Church One would needs defend That not onely the Romane but also the Greeke Church was right B. When that Honourable Personage answered I was not by to heare But I presume hee was so farre from graunting that onely the Romane Church was right as that he did not graunt it right and that hee tooke on him no other defence of the poore Greeke Church than was according to Truth F. I told him That the Greeke Church had plainely changed and taught false in a Point of Doctrine concerning the Holy Ghost and that I had heard say that euen his Maiestie should say That the Greeke Church hauing erred against the Holy Ghost had lost the Holy Ghost B. You are very bold with his Maiestie to relate him vpon hearesay My intelligence serues me not to tell you what his Maiestie said but if hee said it not you haue beene too credulous to beleeue and too suddaine to report it Princes deserue and were wont to haue more respect than so If his Maiestie did say it there is truth in the speech the error is yours onely by mistaking what is meant by loosing the Holy Ghost For a particular Church may be said to loose the Holy Ghost two wayes or in two degrees The one when it looses such speciall assistance of that blessed Spirit as preserues it from all dangerous errors and finnes and the temporall punishment which is due vnto them And in this sense the Greeke Church lost the Holy Ghost for they erred against him they sinned against God and for this or other sinnes they were deliuered into another Babylonish Captiuitie vnder the Turke in which they yet are and from which God in his mercie deliuer them The other is when it looses not onely this assistance but all assistance ad hoc to this that they may remaine any longer a true Church And so Corinth and Ephesus and diuers others haue lost the Holy Ghost But in this sense the whole Greeke Church lost not the Holy Ghost for they continue a true Church in substance to and at this day though erroneous in the point which you mention F. The said person not knowing what to answer called in the B. who sitting downe first excused himselfe as one vnprouided and not much studied in Controuersies and desiring that in case he should faile yet the Protestant Cause might not be thought ill of B. The B. indeed excused himselfe and he had great reason so to doe But his Reason being grounded vpon his Modestie for the most part he is willing I should let you insult at your pleasure This onely by the way It may be fit others should know the B. had no information where the other Conferences brake off no instruction what should be the ground of this third Conference nor the full time of foure and twentie houres to bethinke himselfe whereas you make the sifting of these and the like Questions to the very Branne your dayly worke and came throughly furnished to the businesse Saint Augustine said once Scio me inualidum esse I know I am weake and yet he made good his Cause And the B. preferring the Cause before his Credit was modest and reasonable For there is no reason the weight of that whole Cause should rest vpon any one particular and great reason that the personall defects of any man should presse him but not the Cause F. It hauing a hundred better Schollers to maintaine it than he To which I said There were a thousand better Schollers than I to maintaine the Catholike Cause B. The B. in this had neuer so poore a conceit of the Protestants Cause as to thinke they had but a hundred better than he to maintaine it That which hath a hundred may haue as many more as it pleases God to giue and more than you And the B. shall euer be glad that the Church of England which at this time if his memorie reflect not amisse he named may haue farre more able defendants than himselfe he shall neuer enuie them but reioyce for her And hee makes no question but that if hee had named a thousand you would haue multiplyed yours into ten thousand for the Catholike Cause as you call it And this confidence of yours hath euer beene fuller of noyse than proofe But you admonish againe F. Then the Question about the Greeke Church being proposed I said as before that it had erred B. Then I thinke the Question about the Greeke Church was proposed But after you had with confidence
Deductions from the Article may require necessarie beleefe in them which are able and doe goe along with them from the Principle to the Conclusion but I doe not see either that the Learned doe make them necessarie to all or any reason why they should Therefore they cannot be Fundamentall Besides that which is Fundamentall in the Faith of Christ is a Rocke immooueable and can neuer bee varied Neuer Therefore if it be Fundamentall after the Church hath defined it it was Fundamentall before the definition else it is mooueable and then no Christian hath where to rest And if it be immooueable as indeed it is no Decree of a Councell be it neuer so generall can alter immooueable Verities no more than it can change immooueable Natures Therefore if the Church in a Councell define any thing the thing defined is not Fundamentall because the Church hath defined it nor can be made so by the definition of the Church if it be not so in it selfe For if the Church had this power shee might make a new Article of the Faith which the Learned among your selues denie For the Articles of the Faith cannot encrease in substance but onely in explication Nor is this hard to be prooued out of your owne Schoole for Scotus professeth it in this verie particular of the Greeke Church If there be saith he a true reall difference betweene the Greekes and the Latines about the Point of the Procession of the Holy Ghost then either they or we be vere Haeretici truly and indeed Heretikes And he speakes this of the old Greekes long before any decision of the Church in this Controuersie For his instance is in S. Basil and Greg. Nazianz. on the one side and S. Ierome Augustine and Ambrose on the other And who dares call any of these Heretikes is his challenge I denie not but that Scotus addes there That howsoeuer this was before yet ex quo from the time that the Catholike Church declared it it is to be held as of the substance of Faith But this cannot stand with his former Principle if hee intend by it That whatsoeuer the Church defines shall be ipso facto and for that determinations sake Fundamentall For if before the determination supposing the difference reall some of those Worthies were truly Heretikes as hee confesses then somewhat made them so and that could not be the Decree of the Church which then was not Therefore it must be somewhat really false that made them so and fundamentally false if it had made them Heretikes against the Foundation But Scotus was wiser than to intend this It may be hee saw the streame too strong for him to swim against therefore hee went on with the Doctrine of the time That the Churches Sentence is of the substance of Faith but meant not to betray the Truth for hee goes no further than Ecclesia declarauit since the Church hath declared it which is the word that is vsed by diuers Now the Master teaches and the Schollers too That euerie thing which belongs to the exposition or declaration of another intus est is not another contrarie thing but is contayned within the bowels and nature of that which is interpreted from which if the declaration depart it is faultie and erronious because in stead of declaring it giues another and a contrarie sense Therefore when the Church declares any thing in a Councell either that which she declares was Intus or Extra in the nature and veritie of the thing or out of it If it were Extra without the nature of the thing declared then the declaration of the thing is false and so farre from being fundamentall in the Faith If it were Intus within the compasse and nature of the thing though not expert and apparant to euerie Eye then the declaration is true but not otherwise fundamentall than the thing is which is declared For Intus cannot be larger or deeper than that in which it is if it were it could not be Intus Therefore nothing is simply fundamentall because the Church declares it but because it is so in the nature of the thing which the Church declares And it is a slight and poore euasion that is commonly vsed That the declaration of the Church makes it fundamentall quoad nos in respect of vs for it doth not that neither for no respect to vs can varie the Foundation The Churches declaration can bind vs to peace and externall obedience where there is not expresse letter of Scripture and sense agreed on but it cannot make any thing fundamentall to vs that is not so in the nature of it For if the Church can so adde that it can by a Declaration make a thing to be fundamentall in the Faith that was not then it can take a thing from the foundation and make it by declaring not to be fundamentall which all men graunt no power of the Church can doe For the power of adding any thing contrarie and of detracting any thing necessarie are alike forbidden Now nothing is more apparant than this to the eye of all men That the Church of Rome hath determined or declared or defined call it what you will very many things that are not in their owne nature fundamentall and therefore neither are not can be made so by her adiudging them 2. For the second That it is prooued by this place of S. Augustine That all Points defined by the Church are fundamentall You might haue giuen me that place cited in the Margin and eased my paines to seeke it but it may be there was somewhat in concealing it For you doe so extraordinarily right this place that you were loth I thinke any 〈◊〉 should see how you wrong it The place of S. Augustine is this against the Pelagians about Remission of Originall sinne in Infants This is a thing founded An erring Disputor is to be borne with in other Questions not diligently digested not yet made firme by 〈◊〉 Authoritie of the Church their Error is to be borne with but it ought not to goe so farre that it should labour to shake the Foundation it selfe of the Church This is the place but it can neuer follow out of this place I thinke That euerie thing defined by the Church is Fundamentall For first he speakes of a Foundation of Doctrine in Scripture not a Church definition This appeares for few Lines before he tells vs There was a Question mooued to S. Cyprian Whether Baptisme was concluded to the eight day as well as Circumcision And no doubt was made then of the beginning of Sinne and that out of this thing about which no Question was mooued that Question that was made was answered And againe That S. Cyprian tooke that which he gaue in answere from the Foundation of the Church to confirme a Stone that was shaking Now S. Cyprian in all the Answer that he giues hath not one
word of any definition of the Church therefore Ea Res That thing by which he answered was a Foundation of prime and settled Scripture Doctrine not any definition of the Church Therefore that which he tooke from the Foundation of the Church to fasten the Stone that shooke was not a definition of the Church but the Foundation of the Church it selfe the Scripture vpon which it builded as appeareth in the Mileuitan Councell where the Rule by which Pelagius was condemned is the Rule of Scripture Rom. 5.12 Therefore S. Augustine goes on in the same sense That the Disputor is not to be borne any longer that shall endeuour to shake the Foundation it selfe vpon which the whole Church is grounded Secondly If S. Augustine did meane by Founded and Foundation the definition of the Church because of these words This thing is founded This is made firme by full authoritie of the Church and the words following these To shake the foundation of the Church yet it can neuer follow out of any or all these Circumstances and these are all That all Points defined by the Church are Fundamentall in the Faith For first no man denyes but the Church is a Foundation That things defined by it are founded vpon it And yet hence it cannot follow That the thing that is so founded is Fundamentall in the Faith for things may be founded vpon humane Authoritie and be verie certaine yet not Fundamentall in the Faith Nor yet can it follow This thing is founded therefore euerie thing determined by the Church is founded Againe that which followes That those things are not to be opposed which are made firme by full Authoritie of the Church cannot conclude they are therefore fundamentall in the Faith For full Church Authoritie is but Church Authoritie and Church Authoritie when it is at full Sea the time that included the Apostles being past and not comprehended in it is not simply Diuine therefore the Sentence of it not fundamentall in the Faith And yet no erring Disputor may be endured to shake the Foundation which the Church in Councell layes But plaine Scripture with euident sense or a full demonstratiue argument must haue roome where a wrangling and erring Disputor may not be allowed it And there 's neither of these but may conuince the definition of the Councell if it be ill founded And the Articles of the Faith may easily prooue it is not fundamentall if in deed and veritie it be not so And the B. hath read some bodie that sayes Is it not you That things are fundamentall in the Faith two wayes One in their Matter such as are all things as be so in themselues the other in the Manner such as are all things that the Church hath defined and determined to be of Faith And that so some things that are de modo of the manner of being are of Faith But in plaine truth this is no more than if you should say Some things are fundamentall in the Faith and some are not For wrangle while you will you shall neuer be able to prooue That any thing which is but de modo a consideration of the manner of being onely can possibly be fundamentall in the Faith And since you make such a Foundation of this place I will a little view the Mortar with which it is laid by you it is a venture but I shall find it vntempered Your assertion is All Points defined by the Church are fundamentall your proofe this place Because that is not to be shaken which is setled by full authoritie of the Church Then it seemes your meaning is that this Point there spoken of The remission of 〈◊〉 sinne in Baptisme of Infants was defined when S. Augustine wrote this by a full Sentence of a Generall Councell First If you say it was Bellarmine will tell you it is false and that the Pelagian Heresie was neuer condemned in an Oecumenicall Councell but only in Nationalls But Bellarmine is deceiued for while they stood out impudently against Nationall Councels some of them defended Nestorius which gaue occasion to the first Ephesine Councell to excommunicate and depose them And yet this will not serue your turne for this place For S. Augustine was then dead and therefore could not meane the Sentence of that Councell in this place Secondly And if you say it was not then defined in an Oecumenicall Synod plena Authoritas Ecclesiae the full Authoritie of the Church there mentioned doth not stand properly for the Decree of an Oecumenicall Councell but for some Nationall as this was condemned in a Nationall Councell and then the full Authoritie of the Church here is no more than the full Authoritie of this Church of Africke And I hope that Authoritie doth not make all Points defined by it to be Fundamentall You will say Yes if that Councell be confirmed by the Pope And I must euer wonder why S. Augustine should say The full Authoritie of the Church and not bestow one word vpon the Pope by whose Authoritie onely that Councell as all other haue their fulnesse of Authoritie in your iudgement An inexpiable omission if this Doctrine concerning the Pope were true F. Secondly J required to know what Points the B. would account Fundamentall Hee said All the Points of the Creed were such B. Against this I hope you except not For since the Fathers make the Creed the Rule of Faith since the agreeing sense of Scripture with those Articles are the two Regular Precepts by which a Diuine is gouerned about the Faith since your owne Councell of Trent decrees That it is that Principle of Faith in which all that professe Christ doe necessarily agree Et Fundamentum firmum vnicum not the firme alone but the onely Foundation since it is Excommunication ipso iure for any man to contradict the Articles contained in that Creed since the whole body of the Faith is so contained in the Creed as that the substance of it was beleeued euen before the comming of Christ though not so expressely as since in the number of the Articles since Bellarmine confesses That all things simply necessarie for all mens saluation are in the Creed and the Decalogue What reason can you haue to except And yet for all this euerie thing Fundamentall is not of a like neerenesse to the Foundation nor of equall Primenesse in the Faith And the B. graunting the Creed to be Fundamentall doth not denie but that there are Quaedam prima Credibilia Certaine prime Principles of Faith in the bosome whereof all other Articles lay wrapped and folded vp One of which since Christ is that of S. Iohn Euery Spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ come in the flesh is of God And one both before the comming of Christ and since is that of S. Paul He that comes to God must beleeue that God is and that he is a
present Church to be the first inducing motiue to embrace this Principle onely wee cannot goe so farre in this way as you to make the present Tradition alwayes an infallible Word of God for this is to goe so farre in till you be out of the way For Tradition is but a Lane in the Church it hath an end not onely to receiue vs in but another after to let vs out into more open and richer ground And a better way than you Because after we are mooued and prepared and induced by Tradition wee resolue our Faith into that written Word and God deliuering it in which wee find the Tradition which led vs thither And so wee are sure by Diuine Authoritie that wee are in the way because at the end wee find the way prooued And doe what can be done you can neuer settle the Faith of man about this great Principle till you rise to greater assurance than the present Church alone can giue And therefore once againe to that knowne place of S. Augustine The words of the Father are Nisi commoueret Vnlesse the Authoritie of the Church mooued me but not alone but with other motiues else it were not commouere to mooue together And the other motiues are Resoluers though this be Leader Now since wee goe the same way with you so farre as you goe right and a better way than you where you goe wrong wee need not admit any other Word of God than wee doe And this ought to remaine as a presupposed Principle among all Christians and not so much as come into this Question about the sufficiencie of Scripture betweene you and vs. F. From this the Person doubting called vs and desiring to heare Whether the B. would graunt the Romane Church to be the Right Church The B. graunted that it was B. One occasion which mooued Tertullian to write his Booke de Praescrip aduersus Haereticos was That he saw little or no profit come by Disputations Sure the ground was the same then and now It was not to denie that Disputation is an opening of the Vnderstanding a sifting out of Truth it was not to affirme that any such Disquisition is in and of it selfe vnprofitable If it had S. Stephen would not haue disputed with the Cyrenians nor S. Paul with the Grecians first and then with the Iewes and all Commers No sure it was some abuse in the Disputants that frustrated the good of the Disputation And one abuse in the Disputants is a Resolution to hold their owne though it be by vnworthie meanes and disparagement of Truth The B. finds it here For as it is true that this Question was asked so it is altogether false that it was asked in this forme or so answered There is a great deale of difference especially as Romanists handle the Question of the Church betweene The Church and A Church and there is some betweene a True Church and a Right Church which is the word you vse but no man else that I know I am sure not the B. The Church may import in our Language The onely true Church and perhaps as some of you seeme to make it the Root and the Ground of the Catholike This the B. neuer did neuer meanes to graunt A Church can imply no more than that it is a member of the whole This the B. neuer did nor euer will denie if it fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a True Church he graunted also but not a Right as you impose vpon him For Ens and Verum Being and True are conuertible one with another and euerie thing which hath a Being is truly that Being which it is in truth of substance But this word Right is not so vsed but is referred more properly to perfection in Conditions And in this sense euerie thing that hath a true and reall being is not by and by right in the Conditions of it A man that is most dishonest and vnworthie the name a verie Theefe if you will is a True man in the veritie of his essence as he is a Creature endued with Reason for this none can steale from him nor hee from himselfe but Death but hee is not therefore a right or an vpright man And a Church that is exceeding corrupt both in Manners and Doctrine and so a dishonour to the name is yet a True Church in the veritie of essence as a Church is a companie of men which professe the Faith of Christ and are baptised into his Name but yet it is not therefore a Right Church eyther in Doctrine or Manners It may be by this word Right you meant cunningly to slip it in that the B. should graunt it Orthodoxe This hee neuer graunted you For Orthodoxe Christians are keepers of integritie and followers of right things so Saint Augustine of which the Church of Rome is neyther In this sence then no Right that is Orthodoxe Church at Rome And yet no newes that the B. graunted the Romane Church to be a True Church For so much verie learned Protestants haue acknowledged before him and the Truth cannot denie it For that Church which receiues the Scripture as a Rule of Faith though but as a partiall and imperfect Rule and both the Sacraments as instrumentall Causes and Seales of Grace though they adde more and misuse these yet cannot but be a True Church in essence How it is in Manners and Doctrine I would you would looke to it with a single eye For if Pietie and a peaceable minde be not ioyned to a good vnderstanding nothing can be knowne in these great things F. Further he confessed That Protestants had made a Rent and Diuision from it B. The B. I know from himselfe could here be heartily angrie but that he hath resolued in handling matters of Religion to leaue all gall out of his Inke and makes me straine it out of mine There is a miserable Rent in the Church and I make no question but the best men doe most bemoane it Nor is hee a Christian that would not haue vnitie might hee haue it with Truth But the B. neuer said nor thought that the Protestants made this Rent The cause of the Schisme is yours for you thrust vs from you because wee called for Truth and redresse of Abuses For a Schisme must needs be theirs whose the cause of it is The Woe runs full out of the mouth of Christ euer against him that giues the offence not against him that takes it euer But you haue giuen the B. iust cause neuer to treat with you or your like but before a Iudge or a Iurie F. Moreouer hee said hee would ingenuously acknowledge That the Corruption of Manners in the Romish Church was not a sufficient cause to iustifie their departing from it B. I would the B. could say you did as ingenuously repeat as hee did confesse Hee neuer said That Corruption of Manners was not a sufficient cause to
iustifie their departure How could he say this since he did not graunt that they did depart There is difference betweene departure and causelesse thrusting from you for out of the Church is not in your power to thrust vs Thinke on that And so much the B. said expressely then That which the B. did ingenuously confesse was this That Corruption in Manners onely is no sufficient cause to make a seperation in the Church Nor is it It is a truth agreed on by the Fathers and receiued by Diuines of all sorts saue by the Cathari to whom came the Donatist and the Anabaptist against which Caluin disputes it strongly And Saint Augustine is plaine There are bad Fish in the Net of the Lord from which there must be euer a seperation in heart and in manners but a corporall seperation must be expected at the Sea shore that is the end of the World And the best Fish that are must not teare and breake the Net because the bad are with them And this is as ingenuously confessed for you as by the B. For if Corruption in Manners were a iust cause of actuall seperation of one Church from another in that Catholike Bodie of Christ the Church of Rome hath giuen as great cause as any since as Stapleton graunts there is scarce any sinne that can be thought by man Heresie onely excepted with which that Sea hath not beene foulely stayned especially from eight hundred yeeres after Christ. And he need not except Heresie into which Biel grants it possible the Bishops of that Sea may fall And Stella and Almain grants it freely that some of them did fall and so ceased to be Heads of the Church and left Christ God be thanked at that time of his Vicars Defection to looke to his Cure himselfe F. But saith he beside Corruption of Manners there were also Errors in Doctrine B. This the B. spake indeed And can you prooue that he spake not true in this But the B. added though here againe you are pleased to omit That some of her Errors were dangerous to saluation For it is not euerie light Error in disputable Doctrine and Points of curious Speculation that can be a iust cause of seperation in that admirable Bodie of Christ which is his Church for which he gaue his Naturall Bodie to be rent and torne vpon the Crosse that this Mysticall Bodie of his might be One. And S. Augustine inferres vpon it That he is no way partaker of Diuine Charitie that is an enemie to this Vnitie Now what Errors in Doctrine may giue iust cause of seperation in this Bodie were it neuer so easie to determine as I thinke it is most difficult I would not venture to set it downe least in these times of Discord I might be thought to open a Doore for Schisme which I will neuer doe vnlesse it be to let it out But that there are Errors in Doctrine and some of them such as endanger saluation in the Church of Rome is euident to them that will not shut their eyes The proofe whereof runs through the particular Points that are betweene vs and so it is too long for this discourse which is growne too bigge alreadie F. Which when the generall Church would not reforme it was lawfull for particular Churches to reforme themselues I asked Quo Iudice Did this appeare to be so B. Is it then such a strange thing that a particular Church may reforme it selfe if the generall will not I had thought and doe so still That in point of Reformation of either Manners or Doctrine it is lawfull for the Church since Christ to doe as the Church before Christ did and might doe The Church before Christ consisted of Iewes and Proselytes this Church came to haue a seperation vpon a most vngodly Policie of 〈◊〉 so that it neuer pieced together againe To a Common Councell to reforme all they would not come Was it not lawfull for Iudah to reforme her selfe when Israel would not ioyne Sure it was or else the Prophet deceiues me that sayes exactly Though Israel transgresse yet letnot Iudah sinne And S. Hierome expresses it in this verie patticular sinne of Heresie and Error in Religion Nor can you say that Israel from the time of the seperation was not a Church for there were true Prophets in it Elias and Elizaeus and others and thousands that had not bowed knees to Baal And there was saluation for these which cannot be where there is no Church And God threatens to cast them away to wander among the Nations and be no Congregation no Church therefore he had not yet cast them away into Non Ecclesiam into no Church And they are expressely called the people of the Lord in Iehu's time and so continued long after Nor can you plead that Iudah is your part and the Ten Tribes ours as some of you doe for if that be true you must graunt that the Multitude and greater number is ours And where then is Multitude your numerous Note of the Church But you cannot plead it For certainely if any Calues be set vp they are in Dan and Bethel they are not ours Besides to reforme what is amisse in Doctrine or Manners is as lawfull for a particular Church as it is to publish and promulgate any thing that is Catholike in either And your Question Quo iudice lyes alike against both And yet I thinke it may be prooued that the Church of Rome and that as a particular Church did promulgate an Orthodoxe Truth which was not then Catholikely admitted in the Church namely The Procession of the Holy Ghost from the Sonne If shee erred in this Fact confesse her Error if shee erred not Why may not another Church doe as shee did A learned Schooleman of yours saith she may The Church of Rome needed not to call the Grecians to agree vpon this Truth since the Authoritie of publishing it was in the Church of Rome especially since it is lawfull for euerie particular Church to promulgate that which is Catholike Nor can you say he meanes Catholike as fore-determined by the Church in generall for so this Point when Rome added Filioque to the Creed of a Generall Councell was nor And how the Grecians were vsed in the after Councell such as it was of Florence is not to trouble this Dispute but Catholike stands there for that which is so in the 〈◊〉 of it and fundamentally Nor can you iustly say That the Church of Rome did or might doe this by the Popes Authoritie 〈◊〉 the Church For suppose he haue that and that his Sentence be infallible I say suppose both but I giue neither yet neither his Authoritie nor his 〈◊〉 can belong vnto him as the particular Bishop of that See but as the 〈◊〉 Head of the whole Church And you are all so lodged in this that Bellarmine professes he can neither tell the
Church of which a Councell be it neuer so generall is a verie little part Yea and this verie Assistance is not so absolute nor in that manner to the whole Church as it was to the Apostles neyther doth Christ in that place speake directly of a Councell but of his Apostles Preaching and Doctrine 2. As for Christs being with them vnto the end of the World the Fathers are so various that in the sense of the antient Church wee may vnderstand him present in Maiestie in Power in Aid and Assistance against the difficulties they should find for preaching Christ which is the natiue sense as I take it And this promise was made to support their weakenesse As for his presence in teaching by the Holy Ghost few mention it and no one of them which doth speakes of any infallible Assistance further than the succeeding Church keepes to the Word of the Apostles as the Apostles kept to the guidance of the Spirit Besides the Fathers referre their speech to the Church vniuersall not to anie Councell or Representatiue Bodie And Maldonate addes That this his presence by teaching is or may be a Collection from the place but is not the intention of Christ. 3. For the Rocke vpon which the Church is founded which is the next place wee dare not lay any other Foundation than Christ Christ layd his Apostles no question but vpon himselfe With these S. Peter was layd no man questions And in prime place of Order would his clayming Successors be content with that as appeares and diuerse Fathers witnesse by his particular designement Tu es Petrus But yet the Rocke euen there spoken of is not S. Peters person eyther onely or properly but the Faith which hee professed And to this beside the Euidence which is in Text and Truth the Fathers come in with very full consent And this That the Gates of Hell shall not preuaile against it is not spoken of the not 〈◊〉 of the Church principally but of the not falling away of it from the Foundation Now a Church may erre and daungerously too and yet not fall from the Foundation especially if that of Bellarmine be true That there are many things euen de Fide of the Faith which yet are not necessarie to saluation Besides euen here againe the promise of this stable edification is to the whole Church not to a Councell at the least no further than a Councell builds as a Church is built that is vpon Christ. 4. The last place is Christs Prayer for S. Peters Faith The 〈◊〉 sense of which place is That Christ prayed and obtained for S. Peter perseuerance in the grace of God against the strong temptation which was to winnow him aboue the rest But to conclude an infallibilitie from hence in the Pope or in his Chaire or in the Romane See or in a Generall Councell though the Pope be President I find no antient Fathers that dare aduenture it And Bellarmine himselfe besides some Popes in their owne Cause and that in Epistles counterfeit or falsely alledged hath not a Father to name for this sense of the place till he come downeto Chrysologus Theophylact and S. Bernard of which Chrysologus his speech is but a flash of Rhetorike and the other two are men of Yesterday compared with Antiquitie and liued when it was Gods great grace and our wonder the corruption of the time had not made them corrupter than they are And Thomas is resolute that what is meant here beyond S. Peters person is referred to the whole Church And the Glasse vpon the Canon Law is more peremptorie than he euen to the denyall that it is meant of the Pope And if this place warrant not the Popes Faith Where is the infallibilitie of the Councell that depends vpon it And for all the places together weigh them with indifferencie and either they speake of the Church including the Apostles as all of them doe and then all graunt the voyce of the Church is Gods voyce Diuine and Infallible or else they are generall vnlimitted and applyable to priuate Assemblies as well as Generall Councels which none graunt to be infallible but some mad Enthusiasts or else they are limitted not simply into All Truth but All necessarie to Saluation in which I shall easily graunt a Generall Councell cannot erre if it suffer it selfe to be led by this 〈◊〉 of Truth in the Scripture and take not vpon it to lead both the Scripture and the Spirit For suppose these places or any other did promise Assistance euen to Infallibilitie yet they graunted it not to euerie Generall Councell but to the Catholike Bodie of the Church it selfe And if it be in the whole Church principally then is it in a Generall Councell but by Consequent as the Councell represents the whole And that which belongs to a thing by consequent doth not otherwise nor longer belong vnto it than it consents and cleaues to that vpon which it is a Consequent And therefore a Generall Councell hath not this Assistance but as it keepes to the whole Church and Spouse of Christ whose it is to heare his Word and determine by it And therefore if a Generall Councell will goe out of the Churches Way it may easily goe without the Churches Truth 4. Fourthly I consider That All agree That the Church in generall can neuer erre from the Faith necessarie to saluation No Persecution no Temptation and no Gates of Hell whatsoeuer is meant by them can euer so preuaile against it For all the members of the Militant Church cannot erre either in the whole Faith or in any Article of it it is impossible For if all might so erre there could be no vnion betweene them as members and Christ the Head And no vnion betweene Head and members no Bodie and so no Church which cannot be But there is not the like consent That Generall Councels cannot erre And it seemes strange to me that the Fathers hauing to doe with so many Heretikes and so many of them opposing Church Authoritie in their condemnation this Proposition euen in tearmes A Generall Councell cannot erre should be found in none of them that I can yet see Suppose it were true That no Generall Councell had erred in any matter of moment to this day which will not be found true yet this would not haue followed that it is therefore infallible and cannot erre I haue not time to descend into particulars therefore to the Generall still S. Augustine puts a difference betweene the Rules of Scripture and the definitions of men This difference is Praeponitur Scriptura That the Scripture hath the Prerogatiue That Prerogatiue is That whatsoeuer is found written in Scripture may neither be doubted nor disputed whether it be true or right But the Letters of Bishops may not onely be disputed but corrected by Bishops that are more learned and wise than they or by
in the second The Conclusion and not the Meanes For the Conclusion must follow the nature of the premisses or Principles out of which it is deduced therefore if they be sometimes vncertaine as is prooued before the Conclusion cannot be infallible Not in the third The Meanes and not the Conclusion For that cannot but be true and necessarie if the Meanes be so And this I am sure you will neuer graunt because if you should you must denie the infallibilitie which you seeke to establish To this for I confesse the Argument is old but can neuer be worne out nor shifted off your great Maister Stapleton who is miserably hampered in it and indeed so are yee all answers That the infallibilitie of a Councell is in the second course that is It is infallible in the Conclusion though it be vncertaine and fallible in the Meanes and proofe of it How comes this to passe It is a thing altogether vnknowne in Nature and Art too That fallible Principles can either father or mother beget or bring forth an infallible Conclusion Well that is graunted in Nature and in all Argumentation that causes knowledge But wee shall haue Reasons for it First because the Church is discursiue and vses the weights and moments of Reason in the Meanes but is Propheticall and depends vpon immediate Reuelation from the Spirit of God in deliuering the Conclusion It is but the making of this appeare and all Controuersie is at an end Well I will not discourse here to what end there is any vse of Meanes if the Conclusion be Propheticall which yet is iustly vrged for no good cause can be assigned of it If it be Propheticall in the Conclusion I speake still of the present Church for that which included the Apostles which had the Spirit of Prophesie and immediate Reuelation was euer propheticke in the Definition Then since it deliuers the Conclusion not according to Nature and Art that is out of Principles which can beare it there must be some supernaturall Authoritie which must deliuer this Truth That say I must be the Scripture For if you flye to immediate Reuelation now the Enthusiasme must be yours But the Scriptures which are brought in the verie Exposition of all the Primitiue Church neyther say it nor inforce it Therefore Scripture warrants not your Prophesie in the Conclusion I know no other thing can warrant it If you thinke the Tradition of the Church can make the World beholding to you Produce any Father of the Church that sayes this is an vniuersall Tradition of the Church That her Definitions in a Generall Councell are Propheticall and by immediate Reuelation Produce any one Father that sayes it of his owne authoritie That he thinkes so Nay make it appeare that euer any Prophet in that which he deliuered from God as infallible Truth was euer discursiue at all in the Meanes Nay make it but probable in the ordinarie course of Prophesie and I hope you goe no higher nor will I offer at Gods absolute Power That that which is discursiue in the Meanes can be Propheticke in the Conclusion and you shall be my great Apollo for euer In the meane time I haue learned this from yours That all Prophesie is by Vision Inspiration c. and that no Vision admits discourse That all Prophesie is an Illumination not alwayes present but when the Word of the Lord came to them and that was not by discourse And yet you say againe That this Propheticke infallibilitie of the Church is not gotten without studie and Industrie You should doe well to tell vs too why God would put his Church to studie for the Spirit of Prophesie which neuer anie particular Prophet was put vnto And whosoeuer shall studie for it shall doe itin vaine since Prophesie is a Gift and can neuer be an acquired Habite And there is somewhat in it that Bellarmine in all his Dispute for the Authoritie of Generall Councels dares not come at this Rocke He preferres the Conclusion and the Canon before the Acts and the deliberations of Councels and so doe wee but I doe not remember that euer he speakes out That the Conclusion is deliuered by Prophesie or Reuelation Sure he sounded the Shore and found danger here He did sound it For a little before he speakes plainely Would his bad cause let him be constant Councels doe deduce their Conclusions What from Inspiration No But out of the Word of God and that per ratiocinationem by Argumentation Neyther haue they nor doe they write any immediate Reuelations The second Reason why hee will haue it propheticke in the Conclusion is Because that which is determined by the Church is matter of Faith not of Knowledge And that therefore the Church proposing it to be beleeued though it vse Meanes yet it stands not vpon Art or Meanes or Argument but the Reuelation of the Holy Ghost Else when we embrace the Conclusion proposed it should not be an Assent of Faith but a Habit of Knowledge This for the first part That the Church vses the Meanes but followes them not is all one in substance with the former Reason And for the latter part That then our admitting the Decree ofa Councell would be no Assent of Faith but a Habit of Knowledge What great inconuenience is there if it be graunted For I thinke it is vndoubted Truth That one and the same Conclusion may be Faith to the Beleeuer that cannot prooue and Knowledge to the Learned that can And S. Augustine I am sure in regard of one and the same thing euen this the verie Wisedome of the Church in her Doctrine ascribes Vnderstanding to one sort of men and Beleefe to another weaker sort And Thomas goes with him And for further satisfaction if not of you of others this may be considered too Man lost by sinne the Integritie of his Nature and cannot haue Light enough to see the way to Heauen but by Grace This Grace was first merited after giuen by Christ. This Grace is first kindled in Faith by which if wee agree not to some supernaturall Principles which no Reason can demonstrate simply wee can neuer see our way But this Light when it hath made Reason submit it selfe cleares the Eye of Reason it neuer puts it out In which sense it may be is that of Optatus That the verie Catholike Church it selfe is reasonable as well as diffused euerie where By which Reason enlightned which is stronger than Reason the Church in all Ages hath beene able either to conuert or conuince or stop the mouthes at least of Philosophers and the great men of Reason in the verie point of Faith where it is at highest To the present occasion then The first immediate Fundamentall Points of Faith without which there is no saluation they as they cannot be prooued by Reason so neither need they be determined by any Councell nor euer were they attempted they are
so plaine set downe in the Scripture If about the sense and true meaning of these or necessarie deduction out of these prime Articles of Faith Generall Councels determine any thing as they haue done in Nice and the rest there is no inconueuience that one and the same Canon of the Councell should be beleeued as it reflects vpon the Articles and Grounds indemonstrable and yet knowne to the Learned by the Meanes and Proofe by which that deduction is vouched and made good And againe the Conclusion of a Councell suppose that in Nice about the Consubstantialitie of Christ with the Father in it selfe considered is or may be indemonstrable by Reason There I beleeue and assent in Faith but the same Conclusion if you giue me the ground of Scripture and the Creed and somewhat must be supposed in all whether Faith or Knowledge is demonstrable by naturall Reason against any Arrian in the World And if it be demonstrable I may know it and haue a habit of it And what inconuenience in this For the weaker sort of Christians which cannot deduce when they haue the Principle graunted they are to rest vpon the Definition onely and their assent is meere Faith yea and the Learned too where there is not a Demonstration euident to them assent by Faith onely and not by Knowledge And what inconuenience in this Nay the necessitie of Nature is such that these Principles once giuen the vnderstanding of man cannot rest but it must be thus And the Apostle would neuer haue required a man to be able to giue a reason and an account of the Hope that is in him if he might not be able to know his account or haue lawfull interest to giue it when he knew it without preiudicing his Faith by his Knowledge And suppose exact Knowledge and meere Beleefe cannot stand together in the same person in regard of the same thing by the same meanes yet that doth not make void this Truth For where is that exact Knowledge or in whom that must not meerely in points of Faith beleeue the Article or Ground vpon which they rest But when that is once beleeued it can demonstrate many things from it And Definitions of Councels are not Principia Fidei Principles of Faith but Deductions from them 7. And now because you aske Wherein wee are neerer to Vnitie by a Councell if a Councell may erre Besides the Answer giuen I promised to consider which Opinion was most agreeable with the Church which most able to preserue or reduce Christian Peace the Romane That a Councell cannot erre orthe Protestants That it can And this I propose not as a Rule but leaue the Christian World to consider of it as I doe 1. First then I consider Whether in those places of Scripture before mentioned or other there be promised and performed to the present Church an absolute infallibilitie or whether such an infallibilitie will notserue the turne as Stapleton after much wriggling is forced to acknowledge One not euerieway exact because it is enough if the Church doe diligently insist vpon that which was once receiued and there is not need of so great certaintie to open and explicate that which lyes hid in the Seed of Faith sowne and deduce from it as to seeke out and teach that which was altogether vnknowne And if this be so then sure the Church of the Apostles required guidance by a greater degree of infallibilitie than the present Church which if it follow the Scripture is infallible enough though it hath not the same degree of certaintie which the Apostles had and the Scripture hath Nor can I tell what to make of Bellarmine that in a whole Chapter disputes 〈◊〉 Prerogatiues in certaintie of Truth that the Scripture hath aboue a Councell and at last concludes That they may be said to be equally certaine in infallible Truth 2. The next thing I consider is Suppose this not Exact but congruous infallibilitie in the Church Is it not residing according to power and right of Authoritie in the whole Church and in a Generall Councell onely by power deputed with Mandate to determine The places of Scripture with Expositions of the Fathers vpon them make me apt to beleeue this S. Peter saith S. Augustine did not receiue the Keyes of the Church but in the person of the Church Now suppose the Key of Doctrine be to let in Truth and shut out Error and suppose the Key rightly vsed infallible in this yet this infallibilitie is primely in the Church in whose person not strictly in his owne S. Peter receiued the Keyes Here Stapleton layes crosse my way againe He would thrust me out of this Consideration He graunts that S. Peter receiued these Keyes indeed and in the person of the Church but that was because he was Primate of the Church 〈◊〉 therefore the Church receiued the Keyes finally but S. Peter formally that is if I mistake him not S. Peter for himselfe and his Successors receiued the Keyes in his owne Right but to this end to benefit the Church of which he was made Pastor But I am in a Consideration and I would haue this considered where it is euer read That to receiue a thing in the person of another is onely meant finally to receiue it that is to his good and not in his right I should thinke he that receiues any thing in the person of another receiues it indeed to his good and to his vse but in his right too And that the primarie and formall right is not in the receiuer but in him whose person hee sustaines while he receiues it This stumbling-blocke then is nothing and in my Consideration it stands still That the Church in generall receiued the Keyes and all Power signified by them and by the assistance of Gods Spirit may be able to vse them and perhaps to open and shut in some things infallibly when the Pope and a Generall Councell too forgetting both her and her Rule the Scripture are to seeke how to turne these Keyes in their Wards 3. The third thing I consider is Suppose in the whole Catholike Church Militant an absolute infallibilitie in the prime Foundations of Faith absolutely necessarie to saluation and that this power of not erring so is not communicable to a Generall Councell which represents it but that the Councell is subiect to error This supposition doth not onely preserue that which you desire in the Church an Infallibilitie but it meets with all inconueniences which vsually haue done and doe perplexe the Church And here is still a remedie for all things For if priuate respects if Bandies in a Faction if power and fauour of some parties if weakenesse of them which haue the managing if any mixture of State-Councels if any departure from the Rule of the Word of God if any thing else sway and wrinch the Councell the whole Church vpon euidence found in expresse Scripture or demonstration of this
heauier if wee mis-lead on eytherside than theirs 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vs. But I see I must looke to my selfe for you are secure For F. Dr White said I hath secured me that none of our Errors be damnable so long as wee hold them not against our Conscience And I hold none against my Conscience B. It seemes then you haue two Securities Dr Whites Assertion and your Conscience What Assurance Dr White 〈◊〉 you I cannot tell of my selfe nor as things stand may I rest vpon your Relation It may be you vse him no better than you doe the Bishop And sure it is so For I haue since spoken with Dr White and hee auowes this and no other Answere Hee was asked in the conferense betweene you Whether Popish Errors were Fundamentall To 〈◊〉 hee gaue 〈◊〉 by distinction of the persons which held and professed the Errors namely That the Errors were Fundamentall reductiue by a Reducement if they which embraced them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adhere to them hauing sufficient 〈◊〉 to be better enformed nay further that they were materially and in the verie kind and nature of them Leauen Drosse Hay and Stubble Yet hee thought withall that such as were mis-led by Education or long Custome or over-valuing the 〈◊〉 of the 〈◊〉 Church and did in 〈◊〉 of heart embrace them might by their generall 〈◊〉 and Faith in the Merit of Christ attended with Charitie 〈◊〉 other Vertues find mercie at Gods hands But that hee should say Signanter and expressely That none eyther of yours or your fellowes 〈◊〉 were damnable so long as you hold them not against Conscience that hee vtterly disauowes You deliuered nothing to 〈◊〉 such a Confession from him And for your selfe hee could obserue but small loue of Truth few signes of Grace in you as hee tells mee Yet hee will not presume to iudge you or your Saluation it is the Word of Christ that must iudge you as the latter Day For your Conscience you are the happier in your Error that you hold nothing against it especially if you speake not against it while you say so But this no man can know but your Conscience For no man knowes the thoughts of a man but the spirit of a man that is within him to which I leaue you But yet you leaue not For you tell me F. The doubting partie asked Whether shee might be saued in the Protestants Faith Vpon 〈◊〉 Soule said the B. you may Vpon my Soule said I there is but one sauing Faith and that is the Romane B. So it seemes the B. was confident for the Faith professed in the Church of England else hee would not haue taken the Saluation of another vpon his Soule And sure hee had reason of his Confidence For to beleeue the Scripture and the Creeds to beleeue these in the sense of the antient Primitiue Church to receiue the foure great Generall Councels so much magnified by Antiquitie to beleeue all Points of Doctrine generally receiued as Fundamentall in the Church of Christ is a Faith in which to liue and die cannot but giue Saluation And therefore the B. went vpon a sure ground in the aduenture of his Soule vpon that Faith Besides in all the Points of Doctrine that are controuerted betweene vs. I would faine see anie one Point maintained by the Church of England that can bee prooued to depart from the Foundation You haue manie dangerous Errors about it in that which you call the Romane Faith But there I leaue you to looke to your owne Soule and theirs whom you seduce Yet this is true too That there is but one sauing Faith But then euerie thing which you call De Fide Of the Faith because some Councell or other hath defined it is not such a breach from that one sauing Faith as that hee which expressely beleeues it not nay as that hee which beleeues the contrarie is excluded from Saluation And Bellarmine is forced to graunt this There are manie things de Fide which are not absolutely necessarie to Saluation Therefore there is a Latitude in Faith especially in reference to Saluation To set a Bound to this and strictly to define it Iust thus farre you must beleeue in euerie particular or incurre Damnation is no worke for my Penne. These two things I am sure of One That your peremptorie establishing of so manie things that are remote Deductions from the Foundation hath with other Errors lost the Peace and Vnitie of the Church for which you will one day answere And the other That you are gone further from the Foundation of this one sauing Faith than can euer bee prooued wee haue done But to conclude you tell vs F. Vpon this and the precedent Conferences the Ladie rested in iudgement fully satisfied as shee told a confident friend of the Truth of the Romane Churches Faith Yet vpon frailetie and feare to offend the King shee yeelded to goe to Church For which shee was after verie sorrie as some of her friends can testifie B. This is all personall And how that Honourable Ladie is settled in Conscience how in Iudgement I know not This I thinke is made cleare enough That that which you said in this and the precedent Conferences could settle neyther vnlesse in some that were settled or setting before As little doe I know what shee told anie Friend of the Romane Cause No more whether it were frailetie or feare that made her yeeld to goe to Church nor how sorrie shee was for it nor who can testifie that sorrow This I am sure of If shee repent and God forgiue her other sinnes shee will farre more easily bee able to answere for her comming to Church than shee will for the leauing of the Church of England and following the Superstitions and Errors which the Romane Church hath added in point of Faith and worship of God I pray God giue her Mercie and all of you a Light of his Truth and a Loue to it first that you may no longer be made Instruments of the Popes boundlesse Ambition and this most vnchristian braine-sicke Deuice That in all Controuersies of the Faith hee is infallible and that by way of Inspiration and Prophesie in the Conclusion which hee giues To due consideration of this and Gods Mercie in Christ I leaue you FINIS Optat. lib. 3. c. Parmen Aug. c. Cresc lib. 3. ca. 51. Isid. d. sum bon lib. 3. ca. 53. Aug. Epist. 48. ad Vincent Idem Ep. 52. ad Macedon Idem Ep. 61. ad Dulcit Euseb. Hist. Eccles li. 10. ca. 9. Et d. vit Const. li. i. ca. 37. Ministrorum Dei coegit Concilium lib. 2. c. 43. lib. 3. ca. 6 10 12 16 17 18 23. Interdum 〈◊〉 quae ad Ecclesiarum Dei commodū spectabant prescribendo ib. ca. 63. lib. 4. c. 14. c. 18. Festos dies instituit ca. 22 23 27. Episcoporū Decreta cōfirmauit Theoderit Hist. Eccles li. 1. cap. 7. August d. Ciu. Dei li. 5. c. 25. Tertul. ad
c. Hanc Catholicam fidem extra quam nemo saluus esse 〈◊〉 c. b Sentent Card. Baron sup excom venetorum b Gretsar Def. Bellarm. d. verb. Dei pag. 1713. Regula non dicit id esse Traditionem Apostolicam quod vniuersa Ecclesia semper omni tempore credidit sed quod tota Ecclesia Papa cum Concilio vel sine Concilio Colloq Ratisbon p. 35. credit amplectitur in presenti a Sixt. 〈◊〉 Biblioth Ep. Dedicat ad Piū 5. Deinde expurgari emaculari curasti omnia Catholicorū Scriptorum ac precipue veterum patrum scripta Haereti corum nostrae aetatis foecibus contaminata venenis 〈◊〉 In the summe of the Conference before his Maiestie pa. 〈◊〉 a Summe Confer at Hampton Court Ianuar. 14. 1603. pag. 75. This being his constant resolution That no Church ought further to seperate it selfe from the Church of Rome either in Doctrine or Ceremonie than she had departed from herselfe when she was in her flourishing and best estate and from Christ her Lord Head b Aug. d. Bapt. c. Donat. li. 6. ca. 44. Ipsi Gentiles si quid diuinum rectum c. Orig sup Exod. Hom. 11. Basil. Hexam Hom. 5. Clem. Alexand. Strom. li. 1. c Symb. Othonis Imp. pax cum hominibus cum vitijs bellum d There is difference betweene the Mother-church which fignifieth a Church out of whose wombe all other Churches issue and a Mother-Church which as Turtullian calleth Matrices Ecclesias importeth not fingularitie of One Holy c. but only Veritie and Prioritie before others whereof it was a Mother e Gratian. Dist. 12. ca. 1. Non decet à capite membra discedere sed iuxta sacrae Scripturae testimonium omnia membra caput sequantur Nulli vero dubium est quod Apostolica Ecclesia mater est omnium Ecclesiarum à cuius vos regulis nullatenus conuenit deuiare sicut Dei filius venit facere voluntatem patris sic vos voluntatem vestrae impleatis matris quae est Ecclesia cuius caput vt praedictum est Romana existit Ecclesia a Theod. Hist. Eccles. lib. 5. cap. 9. Matris omnium 〈◊〉 Hierosolomitanae reuerendistimum Dei 〈◊〉 Cyrillum Episcopum esse vobis significamus b Sarisbur Policrat li. 6. ca. 24. c Espenc Digres in 1. Timoth. li. 1. ca. 11. Fides ex diuini verbi auditu Ro. 10. Vbi ergo id nec legitur nec auditur fidem perire ac labefactari necesse est 〈◊〉 hodie 〈◊〉 dolor omnib ' fere locis cernimus vt ad tempora propinquare videamur de quib ' Dominus putas filius hominis veniens fidem inueniet super terram August tr 3. in ep Ioh. Est mater Ecclesia vbera eius duo testamenta Scripturarum diuinarum c. d Iren. li. 3. ca. 19. 〈◊〉 d. fid Orthod c. Arian c. 1. Vt Gypsum aqua permixtum lac colore mentitur ita per verisimilem confessionem Traditio inimica suggeritur e Espenceus in 2. Timoth. 4. digr 21. pa. 150. 151. sup 1. Tim. digress lib. 1. ca. 11. Maiores nostri tanta licet quanta nos erga sanctos deuotione iustum tamen non putarunt tot sanctorum gestarecitari vt legi non possint sacra vtriusquè Testam volumina Facilius Augiae Stabulum quam talibus fabellis c. Ludouic Viues lib. 2. d. corrupt artium in fine Ib. li. 5. f Nauar. Enchir. ca. 11. n. 6. In vniuersa Repub. Christiana tanta est circa haec 〈◊〉 dia vt multos passim inuenias nihil magis in particulari explicite de hijs rebus credere quam Ethnicum quendam Philosophum sola vnius Dei naturali cognitione 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 d. vnit Eccles. cap. 3. Non audiamus hec dico haec dicis sed audiam ' haec dicit Domin ' Sunt certi libri dominici quorū authoritati vtriquè consentimus vtrique credimus vtriquè seruimus ibi quaeramus Ecclesiam ibi discutiam ' causam nostram Ibid. Auserantur illa de medio quae aduersus nos inuicem nō ex diuinis Canonicis libris sed aliunde recitam ' Nolo humanis documentis sed diuinis oraculis Ecclesiam demonstrari Ib. ca. 16. Ecclesiam suam demonstrent si possunt non in sermonibus rumoribus Afrorum non in concilijs Episcoporum suorum c. sed in praescripto legis c. in ipsius Pastoris vocib ' c. hoc est in omnibus Canonicis sanctorum librorum authoritatibus b Canus loc Theolog. li. 11. ca. 4. Praetèr Authores sacros nullus Historicus certus esse potest c. Horant loc lib. 5. cap. 3. Gillius d. Deo sacr Doctr. li. 1. tr 7. ca. 15. August d. Ciuit. Dei li. 18. ca. 38. 40. li. 21. ca. 6. c Read a late Treatise touching the visibilitie of the 〈◊〉 Sect. 15. pa. 68.69 how Papists burned the workes of 〈◊〉 and others which were opposite to them d The Storie of Pope 〈◊〉 affirmed at least by thirtie Popish Historians and other Doctors and of late stifly opposed by other Papals Vid. Ioan. Wolph memorabil An. Dom. 854. 〈◊〉 loc 〈◊〉 5. d. Ecclesia sect 197. And by the Storie touching Pope 〈◊〉 who is affirmed to haue beene an Hereticke by antient Historie and by many Papals yet the same is stifly contradicted by Modernes Albertus Pighius Bellarmine Baronius Andradius c. e Bellarm. d. Concil li. 1. ca. 2. Libri ipsi 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 conseruati sunt multis vitijs scatent c. Espenc sup 1. Timoth. Digress li. 1. ca. 11. pag. 223. Argumentum est conciliorum acta non vbiquè integra esse f Paramo d. Orig. Inquisit lib. 3. d. pontif author in Temporal q. 1. Opinio 1. num 95. pag. 436. Nec curandum est de opinione historia Eusebij cum ab Ecclesia sit reprobara vt inquit Gelasius d. 15. c. Sancta Romana vel eo quià Arrianus Arrianorum protector fuit c. g 〈◊〉 Anal. tom 1. praefat Idem Anno 395. n. 41. anno 400. n. 42. Idem Anno 774. n. 10.12.13 〈◊〉 Anno 996. n. 54. Idem An. 1048. num 1. h Bannes 22. quest 1. ar 10. pa. 58. Et certè 〈◊〉 est quod post 900. 〈◊〉 Albertus Pighius inuenerit testes illos falsarios 〈◊〉 a 〈◊〉 d. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pag. 273. 〈◊〉 Resp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 5. pag. 140. Nequè enim patres censentur cum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quod ab Ecclesia 〈◊〉 acceperunt vel scribunt vel docent 〈◊〉 Mus. Comment Rom. c. 14. Ego vt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 plus vni 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 crederem in hijs quae 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 tangunt quam mille 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gregorijs c. pa. 606. 〈◊〉 Prier li. d. Mod. Inquir Reg. 6. Dimitte Doctores doctores esse Ecclesiam 〈◊〉 necesse est illi possunt errare Ecclesia non potest errare b 〈◊〉 Dialog pa. 1. lib. 4. ca. 9. lib. 5. cap. 7. 〈◊〉 Arms.
such power in Scripture inspired of God that the maiestie of God shineth in it And this speech is the same in effect with that of Constantine the great reported by Theoderet Hist. li. 1. ca. 24. Obseruans fidem diuinam adipiscor lumen veritatis sequens lumen veritatis agnosco diuinam fidem Marking the diuine Faith I obtaine the light of Truth and following the light of Truth I acknowledge diuine Faith Quod est manifestatiuum alterius simul potest manifestare seipsum sicut lux quo actu prodit colores prodit seipsam cum ego quicquam loquor eadem locutione manifesto rem loguelam sayth Petrus de Lorca 22. q. 1. ar 1. disp 4. n. 8. That which is a manifestator of another thing may together manifest it selfe as appeareth inlight which doth manifest it selfe by the same act whereby it sheweth colours and by speech for when I speake by one and the same speech I manifest the thing spoken and mine owne speaking The same is affirmed by Peresius Canus Fra. Petigianus and it is so farre from being vnlikely that the holy Scripture when it is receiued doth manifest it selfe and his author that it is most absurd to imagine the contrarie for the Scripture is a diuine light Psal. 119.105.2 Pet. 1.19.2 Cor. 4. 6. And it is the voice and speech of God Luc. 1. 71. And the Iesuit cannot persuade any reasonable man to thinke that God almightie who bestowed tongues and voices vpon men with abilitie so to expresse themselues that others might vnderstand their voice and know them by it should speake himselfe in the Scripture so darkely and secretly that people when they are eleuated by grace cannot discerne the same to be his word or voice We know other creatures to be Gods worke by footsteps of his power wisdome and goodnesse appearing in them The holy Scripture excelleth all created things in wisdome and perfection it cannot therefore be destitute of signes and impressions to manifest vnto them which are inspired with grace vnto beleeuing that God himselfe is the author IESVITS 3. Argument If the mayne and substantiall points of Christian faith must be firmely knowne and beleeued before we can securely reade and truely vnderstand the holy Scriptures then the mayne and substantiall points of faith are beleeued not vpon Scripture but vpon Tradition precedently vnto Scripture This is cleare because true faith is not built but vpon Scripture truely vnderstood of man neither can Scripture vntill it be truely vnderstood of a man bee to him a ground of assured persuasion But we cannot vnderstand the Scripture securely and aright before wee know the substantiall Articles of faith which all are bound expresly to beleeue the summarie comprehension of which point is tearmed The rule of faith Tertul. de prescrip c. 13. ANSVVER The sequel of the Maior is denied It followeth not that although the mayne and substantiall points of faith must be firmely knowne and beleeued before we can securely reade and truely vnderstand the holy Scriptures in the particular texts and sections thereof therefore the said substantiall points are not beleeued vpon Scripture but vpon Tradition vnwritten The reason of the inconsequence is for that the mayne and substantiall points of faith may be knowne and beleeued by the doctrine of the Scripture touching the said points deliuered to people by those which haue faithfully collected the same into a Summarie out of the particular and distinct sentences of the holy Scriptures And they that beleeue this doctrine of the Scriptures may attaine the knowledge and faith of substantiall points of Christianity before themselues can reade and vnderstand the said Bookes yet they resolue not their faith into vnwritten Tradition according to the Popish meaning where by vnwritten Tradition is vnderstood doctrine of faith neither expresly nor inuoluedly contained in holy Scripture but into the doctrine of the Scripture collected and deliuered vnto them by others and vertually and immediately into the holy Scripture it selfe as I haue formerly shewed in answer to the second Argument That which followeth in the obiection touching the rule of faith prooueth not that Christian beliefe is resolued lastly and finally into vnwritten Tradition because the rule of faith is not such vnwritten Tradition as is neither exprefly nor by consequent contained in Scripture but a Summarie of the principall Articles of Christian 〈◊〉 contained in the Apostles Creed and which may be gathered out of the plaine texts and sentences of holy Scripture and therefore all they which resolue their faith into the said rule refolue the same also into the plaine doctrine of the Scripture And that the rule of faith is such it appeareth First by the branches and Articles of that rule which are I beleeue in God the Father Almighty c. And in Iesus Christ his onely Sonne our Lord c. With the rest of the Articles of the Apostles Creed reade 1. Cor. 15.1 2 3.1 Tim. 3.16 And Tertull. in the place alleaged by the Iesuite and in his Booke d. vel virg rehearsing the ancient rule of faith doth not mention any one Article which is not expresly or by deriuation contained in holy Scripture Secondly the rule of faith extendeth not it selfe beyond the bounds of the Gospel Gallath 1.8 Tertul. de prescript c. 6. but all the mayne and substantiall Articles of faith necessary to bee beleeued generally to saluation are contained in the plaine places of Euangelicall Scripture as both 〈◊〉 Augustine and learned Papists themselues affirme wherefore if the rule of faith be only a summarie comprehension of the mayne and substantiall Articles of Christianity and all these Articles are contained in holy Scripture then it followeth that the rule of faith is not vnwritten Tradition alone according to the Popish meaning but a Summarie of beleese contained in the plainer sentences of holy Scripture either expresly or by deduction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 li. 3. d. doct Christ. c. 2. saith Let a man seeke the rule of faith which he hath learned of 〈◊〉 places of Scripture and of the authoritie of the Church now the plainer places of Scripture are a part of Scripture and the authority of the Church exceedeth not the bounds of the Scripture according to St. Hierom. com Mich. c. 1. And Durand the famous Schooleman 2. dist 44. q. 3. n. 9. Out of the former definition of the rule of faith it followeth That because according to our Aduersaries doctrine the beleefe of Christians touching all maine and substantiall points of faith is resolued into the rule of faith and the said rule exceedeth not the limits of holy Scripture being onely a summarie comprehension of the principall heads of Christian doctrine collected from the plainer places of Scripture and propounded by the authority of the Church confined to Scripture that therefore the finall resolution of faith is not made into Tradition vnwritten
as the same signifies Doctrine neither expresly nor inuoluedly contained in holy Scripture but into the Scripture or doctrine of the Scripture it selfe IESVITS 4. Argument Those that vnderstand the Scriptures aright must be such as they were to whom the Apostles writ and deliuered the Scriptures and whose instruction they intended by their writing But the Apostles as Dr. Field acknowledgeth wrote to them they had formerly taught more at large that were instructed and grounded in all substantiall and necessarie points of faith that knew the common necessary obseruations of Christianitie Ergo they that reade and presume to iuterpret the Scriptures without first knowing and firmely beleeuing by Tradition at the least all necessary substantiall points of faith cannot with assurance vnderstand them but may euen in manifest points mightily mistake for the blessed Apostles writing to Christians that were before hand fully taught and setled in substantiall Christian doctrines and customes doe ordinarily in their writings suppose such things as aboundantly knowne without declaring them anew onely tuching them cursorily by the way and therefore 〈◊〉 so that the already taught might well vnderstand their sayings and no other ANSWER The question is Whether the last and finall resolution of Faith is made into vnwritten Tradition and not into Scripture The fourth Argument produced by the Aduersarie to prooue this is taken from the necessitie of vnwritten Traditian to expound the Scripture And the summe of the Argument is Without a precedent instruction or teaching by Tradition vnwritten the necessarie and substantiall points of Faith wee cannot be firmely assured that we haue the right sence of the Scripture as appeareth by the example of the Primitiue hearers of the Apostles who were formerly instructed by them and had the right Faith taught them more at large and then being thus informed and prepared they receiued the Scripture and we haue no reason to promise vnto our selues more vnderstanding than the Apostles immediat hearers And the Scriptures without Tradition are obscure and do onely cursorily touch matters formerly taught more at large Ergo The last and finall resolution of Faith is made into vnwritten Tradition and not into Scripture In the Antecedent or leading part of this Argument some things cannot be admitted without distinction and some parts hereof are false and the Argument it selfe is inconsequent First they which in our daies vnderstand the Scripture aright must be such as they were to whom the Apostles wrote and deliuered the Scriptures c. not simply and in all things for many things are requisit for the first plantation of Faith which are not necessarie for the future continuance and propagation thereof but in such things onely as are common and ordinarie for all ages Wherefore they which in our daies vnderstand the Scriptures aright must ordinarily haue a preuious introduction by the teaching of others and also there must be in them a mind desirous of Truth and a resolution and diligence to vse the meanes appointed by God to learne the same but that they must be instructed in the same manner as the Apostles hearers were or learne all the necessarie points of Faith before they begin to read the Scriptures without any certaine vnderstanding is affirmed by the Aduersarie but not prooued Also many of the Apostles hearers read part of the Scriptures to wit the Scriptures of the Old Testament with profit and some right vnderstanding before they were generally taught all the grounds of the Gospell for otherwise how could they haue examined the Doctrine of the Apostles by the Scriptures Acts 17.11 And to what purpose did our Sauiour command the Iewes to search the Scriptures Ioh. 5.39 And why did the Apostles preaching both to Iewes and Gentiles confirme their Doctrine by the testimonie of the Scriptures Ro. 9.9 25 29 33. ca. 10.11.13.16 19. ca. 11.2.8.9 cap. 4.3.6.17 Iam. 2.23 1. Pet. 2.6 if the people to whom they preached could at all haue no right vnderstanding of the Scriptures before they were fully and perfectly grounded in the knowledge of all necessarie and substantiall points of Christian Faith Secondly whereas the Iesuit addeth for confirmation of his Antecedent That the Scriptures without Tradition are obscure and that the Apostles did in them onely cursorily touch matters formerly taught both those assertions according to the Popish meaning are false We acknowledge that many particular Texts and passages of holy Scripture are obscure and hard to be vnderstood 2. Pet. 3. 16. But in such points as are necessarie for Christians to vnderstand because they are primarie or fundamentall and in such things as are necessary for the declaring and applying that which is fundamentall the same is not so obscure but it may by diligent reading and vsing ordinarie meanes and helpes of knowledge be rightly vnderstood by the learned and also in a competent measure by the vnlearned after the same is expounded and declared vnto them For if the Scripture were generally and absolutely obscure to the vnlearned then God would not haue commanded them to read the same nor required them to heare the reading thereof much lesse would he haue said That by hearing the same they and their children might learne to feare him and keepe his commandements Deut. 31.11 12 13. And that the holy Scripture is in this manner perspicuous the antient Fathers constantly affirme S. Gregorie and S. Bernard compare the holy Scriptures to a Riuer wherein the Elephant may swim and the Lambe may wade S. Ireneus saith that some things in Scripture are apertly and cleerely without ambiguitie manifested to the eyes of our vnderstanding Saint Augustine Some things are set downe so plainely in the Scriptures that they rather require a hearer than an expositar And in another place Although some things are vailed with mysteries yet againe some things are so manifest that by the helpe of them obscure things may bee opened And againe All matters which containe faith and good manners are found in those things which are manifestly placed in the Scriptures Saint Chrysostome In diuine Scriptures all necessary things are plaine To the like purpose speaketh St. Hierom Fulgentius Hugo Victor Theoderit Lactantius Theophilus Antiochenus Clem. Alexandrinus and the same is the common Tenet of the Primatiue Fathers And Gregory Valence confesseth that such places of Scriptures as containe Articles of faith absolutely necessary are almost all of them plaine The like is affirmed by Aquinas Vasques and Gonzales The other clause of the Iesuits speech to wit That the Apostles in their Scripture did onely touch matters cursorily formerly taught is false First this Assertion is repugnant to Saint Augustine who speaking of the doctrine and deeds of our Sauiour saith Quicquid ille de suis factis dictis nos legere voluit hoc scribendum illis tanquam manibus suis imperauit Whatsoeuer Christ would
Sacrifices were offered to God onely Exod 22.20 Iud. 13.16.2 Chron. 34.25 so likewise oblations and vowes Deut. 23.21 Leuit. 24.5.6 and as the Lord condemned people of Idolatrie for sacrificing to creatures so the Israelites are reprooued for burning incense to the brasen Serpent 2. Kings 18.4 and to the queene of heauen Ierem. 44.25 This law in respect of the substance is morall and consequently obligeth Christian people as well in case of Oblations as of Sacrifices Now by what authoritie and right the Roman Church can abrogate this law in whole or in part and appropriating Sacrifices to God make prayer vowes Incense and oblations common to God and Saints our aduersaries haue not as yet made remonstrance and the Iesuit in this place alleadgeth no diuine authoritie to giue his Maiestie satisfaction but produceth onely an historicall narration out of S. Augustine and 〈◊〉 who report certaine miracles wrought by God Almightie at the Sepulchres of Martyrs IESVIT I answer if any Catholike should offer to the blessed mother of God by way of sacrifice any the least thing he were seuerely to be rebuked and better instructed for sacrifice is a religious homage due to God onely in which respect the sacrifice of the holy Eucharist is neuer offered vnto any but vnto God in memorie and honour of Saints herein the Collyridians women Priests did erre who did sacrifice a wafer cake vnto the blessed Virgin which kind of worship vnder the title of adoration S. Epiphanius reprooues allowing the Catholike worship as thereby tearming her honourable not for humane or ciuill but for diuine and supernaturall respects True it is that in Catholike countryes people offer vnto Saints lights flowers and cheynes not as sacrifices but as ornaments to set foorth their tombes and shrines wherein they doe not dissent from antiquitie nor from Gods holy will who hath confirmed such deuotions by miracle as diuers Authours worthy of all credit relate particularly S. Augustine by Protestants allowed as the most faithfull witnesse of antiquitie He tells that a woman starke blind recouered her sight by laying to her eyes flowers which had touched the shrine wherein were carried about the Relikes of the most glorious Martyr S. Stephan A more wonderfull example in the same kind he relateth done vpon an old man of good note who being sicke and readie to die did yet very obstinately refuse to beleeue in Christ and leaue his Idolatrie although he was very earnestly mooued thereunto by his children that were zealous Christians His son in law despairing to preuaile by persuasion resolued to goe and pray at the tombe of S. Stephan and hauing performed his deuotions with burning affection with many groanes and 〈◊〉 being to depart tooke with him some flowers that were on the shrine and laid them secretly vnder his father in law his head the night as he went to sleepe Behold the next morning the old man awaking outof his sleepe cryeth out desiring them to come to call the Bishop to baptise him He had his desire he was baptised afterwards as long as he liued he had this prayer in his mouth Lord Iesu receiue my spirit being altogether ignorant that that prayer was the last speech of S. Stephan when he was stoned to death by the Iewes which also were the last words of this happy old man for not long after pronouncing these words be gaue vp his soule Other oblations also Catholikes vse to offer vnto Saints not as sacrifices but as memories and monuments of benefits receiued as pictures of limmes by Saints prayers miraculously cured that therein they doe not deflect from antient Christian deuotion and that the Christian Church in her best times vsed vniuersally to make such oblations Theodoret is a sufficient witnesse who writing against the Gentiles alleadgeth as a manifest signe of Christs Godhead and omnipotencie that Idols being excluded he brought in Martyrs to be honoured in their roome not superstitiously as Gods but Religiously as diuine men inuocating and beseeching them to be Intercessours for them vnto God And those that piously and faithfully pray obtaine what they desire as testifie the oblations which they being therevnto bound by their vowes present in the Chappels of the Saints as tokens of health recouered for some hang vp images of eyes others of eares others of hands some made of gold some of siluer Thus he So generall and so notorious euen vnto Infidells was this Christian deuotion ANSWER Touching the Collyridians I answer that notwithstanding there is some difference in the materiall act betweene Romists and them yet because Epiphanius condemneth not onely externall sacrifice but all Oblation to the blessed virgin and alloweth onely that honour and not adoration shal be yeelded vnto her therefore Prayers incense-offerings and presents to Saints deceased were held vnlawfull in this Fathers dayes Secondly Saint Augustine de Ciuit. Dei l. 22. c. 8. doth not mention any Prayers Oblations Vowes or donatiues offered to Saints and Martyrs but he reporteth what miraculous cures were performed at the toombes of some Martyrs now because these things were extraordinarie and the credit of diuers of them dependeth vpon fame which is many times vncertaine and St. Augustine himselfe saith They are not commended vnto vs by such waightie authoritie as that without all doubt they must needs be credited they cannot be sufficient grounds or foundations of Catholicke Doctrine or Practise Thirdly Theoderit d. cur Graec. Affect lib. 8. saith Wee Oh Grecians neither offer sacrifice to Martirs nor drinke offerings but honour them as holy men and as the friends of God And whereas he further saith That some hang vp the shapes of eyes others of eares c. he meaneth that these were monuments of miraculous cures wrought in those dayes extraordinarily by God at the Sepulchres of Martyrs but he affirmeth not that they were oblations offered to Martyrs And yet the particular practise of some people in those dayes whatsoeuer it was if it haue not ground in Diuine Reuelation cannot raise an Article of Faith or necessarie dutie IESVIT § 8. The Romane Church set formes of Prayer without cause misliked FInally Protestants dislike the circumstance of praying in a set forme vnto Saints and that we appoint a particular office to the blessed Virgin Mary which cannot be proued to haue been vsed in the Primatiue Church ANSVVER THe Romish set formes of Prayers to the Virgin Marie and other Saints deceased are iustly condemned by vs not meerely because they are exercised in a set forme which is accidentall but in respect of the matter and substance of them neither can our Aduersaries demonstrate that such Prayers either in a set forme or by sudden inspiration were vsed in the Primatiue Church for the holy Apostles which are the prime Fathers and founders of that Church prescribed and practised no other forme of Prayer than such as was consonant to their Scriptures and the Churches which