by it are founded upon it And yet hence it cannot follow That the thing that is so founded is Fundamentall in the Faith For things may be d Mos fundatissimus S. Aug. Ep. 28. founded upon Humane Authority and be very certaine yet not Fundamentall in the Faith Nor yet can it follow This thing is founded therefore every thing determined by the Church is founded Again that which followes That those things are not to be opposed which are made firme by full Authority of the Church cannot conclude they are therefore Fundamentall in the Faith For full Church Authority alwayes the time that included the Holy Apostles being past by and not comprehended in it is but Church Authority and Church Authority when it is at full sea is not simply e Staple Rebect cont 4. q. 3. A. 1. Divine therefore the Sentence of it not fundamentall in the Faith And yet no erring Disputer may be endured to shake the foundation which the Church in Councell layes But plaine Scripture with evident sense or a full Demonstrative Argument must have Roome where a wrangling and erring Disputer may not be allowed it And ther 's f Quae quidem si tam manifesta monstratur ut in dubium venire non possit praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholicâ teneor Ita si aliquid apertissimum in Evangelio S. Aug. contra Fund c. 4. neither of these but may Convince the Definition of the Councell if it be ill founded And the Articles of the faith may easily proove it is not Fundamentall if indeed and verily it be not so And I have read some body that sayes is it not you That things are fundamentall in the Faith two wayes One in their Matter such as are all things which be so in themselves 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 arc of Faith But in plaine truth this is no more then if you should say some things are Fundamentall in the faith and some are not For wrangle while you will you shall never be able to proove that any thing which is but de modo a consideration of the manner of being only 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 finde it a Ezek. 13. 11. untempered Your Assertion is All poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall Your proofe this Place Because that is not to be shaken which is setled by b Plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate full Authority of the Church Then it seemes your meaning is that this poynt there spoken of The remission of Originall 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 c 1. 2. de Author Concil c. 5. §. A solis particularibus Bellarmine will tell you it is false and that the Pelagian Heresie was never condemned in an Oecumenicall Councell but only in Nationalls But Bellarmine is deceived For while the Pelagians stood out impudently against Nationall Councels some of them defended Nestorius which gave occasion to the first d Can. 1. 4. Ephesine Councell to Excommunicate and depose them And yet this will not serve 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 if you say it was not then Defined in an Oecumenicall Synode Plena authoritas Ecclesiae the full Authority 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 * Concil Milevit Can. 2 Nationall Councell And then the full Authority of the Church here is no more then the full Authority of this Church of †Nay if your owne Capellus be true De Appell Eccl Afric c. 2. n. 5. It was â—…ut a Provinciall of Numidia not a Plenary of Africk Africk And I hope that Authority doth not make all Points defined by it to be Fundamentall You will say yes if that Councell be confirmed by the Pope And then I must ever wonder why S. Augustine should say The full Authority of the Church and not bestow one word upon the Pope by whose Authority only that Councell as all other have their fulnesse of Authority in your Iudgement An inexpiable Omission if this Doctrine concerning the Pope were true But here A. C. steps in againe to helpe the Iesuite and he tells us over and over againe That all A. C. p. 45. points made firme by full Authority of the Church are Fundamentall so firme he will have them and therefore fundamentall But I must tell him That first 't is one thing in Nature and Religion too to be firme and another thing to be fundamentall These two are not Convertible T is true that every thing that is fundamentall is firme But it doth not follow that every thing that is firme is fundamentall For many a Superstructure is exceeding firme being fast and close joyned to a sure foundation which yet no man will grant is fundamentall Besides what soever is fundamentall in the faith is fundamentall to the Church which is one by the vnity a Almain in 3. Sent. Dis. 25. q. 2. A Fide enim unà Ecclesia dicitur una of faith Therefore if every thing Defined by the Church be fundamentall in the faith then the Churches Definition is the Churches Foundation And so upon the matter the Church can lay her owne foundation and then the Church must be in absolute and perfect Being before so much as her Foundation is laide Now this is so absurd for any man of learning to say that by and by after A. C. is content to affirm not only that the prima Credibilia the Articles of Faith but all which so pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith as that thereby Christ doth dwell in our hearts c. is the Foundation of the Church under Christ the Prime Foundation And here he 's out againe For first all which pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith is not by and by b Aliquid pertinet ad Fidem dupliciter Uno modo directè sicut ea quae nobis sunt principalitèr divinitùs tradita ut Deum esse Trinum c. Et circa haec opinari falsum hoc ipso inducit Haeresin c. Alio modo indirectè Ex quibus consequitur aliquid contrarium Fidei c. Et in his aliquis potest falsum opinari absque periculo Haeresis donec Sequela illa ei innotescat c. Tho. p. 1. q. 32. A. 4. C. There are things Necessary to the Faith and
speake of the Written Word and so lie crosse to Stapleton as is mention'd But to returne If A. C. will he may but I cannot believe That a Definition of the Church which is made by the expresse Word of God and another which is made without so much as a probable Testimony of it or a cleare Deduction from it are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation Nay I must say in this case that the one Determination is firme by Divine Revelation but the other hath no Divine Revelation at all but the Churches Authority onely 2. Secondly I cannot believe neither That all Determinations of the Church are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church For the Authority of the Church though it be of the same fulnesse in regard of it self and of the Power which it commits to Generall Councels lawfully called yet it is not alwayes of the same fulnesse of knowledge and sufficiency nor of the same fulnesse of Conscience and integrity to apply Dogmata Fidei that which is Dogmaticall in the Faith For instance I thinke you dare not deny but the Councell of Trent was lawfully called and yet I am of opinion that few even of your selves believe that the Councell of Trent hath the same fulnesse with the Councell of Nice in all the fore-named kinds or degrees of fulnesse Thirdly suppose That all Determinations of the Church are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation and sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority yet it will not follow that they are all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I hope A. C. himselfe will not say that the Definitions of the Church are in better condition than the Propositions of Canonicall Scripture Now all Propositions of Canonicall Scripture are alike firme because they all alike proceed from Divine Revelation but they are not all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For this Proposition of Christ to S. Peter and S. Andrew Follow me and I will make you fishers of men a S. Matth. 4. 19 is as firm a Truth as that which he delivered to his Disciples That he must die and rise againse the third day b S. Matth. 16. 21 For both proceed from the same Divine Revelation out of the mouth of our Saviour and both are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which receives the whole Gospell of S. Matthew to be Canonicall and infallible Scripture And yet both these Propositions of Christ are not alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I dare say No man shall be saved in the ordinary way of salvation that believes not the Death and the Resurrection of Christ. And I believe A. C. dares not say that No man shall be saved into whose Capacity it never came that Christ made S. Peter and Andrew fishers of men And yet should he say it nay should he shew it sub annulo Piscatoris no man will believe it that hath not made shipwrack of his Common Notions Now if it be thus betweene Proposition and Proposition issuing out of Christ's own Mouth I hope it may well be so also betweene even Iust and True Determinations of the Church that supposing them alike true and firme yet they shall not be alike Fundamentall to all mens beliefe F. Secondly I required to know what Points the Bishop would account Fundamentall He said all the Points of the Creed were such B. Against this I hope you except not For § 11 since the a Tertull. Apol. contra Gentes c. 47. de veland virg c. 1. S. August Serm. 15. de Temp. cap. 2. Ruffin in Symb. apud Cyprian p. 357. Fathers make the Creed the Rule of Faith b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. since the agreeing sense of Scripture with those Articles are the two Regular Precepts by which a Divine is governed about the Faith since your owne Councell of c Concil Trident Sess. 3. Trent decrees That it is that Principle of Faith in which all that professe Christ doe necessarily agree Fundamentum firmum unicum not the firme alone but the onely Foundation since it is Excommunication d Bonavent ibid. Dub. 2. 3. in literam ipso jure 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 e Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. Art 7. c. substance of it was believ'd even before the comming of Christ though not so expresly as since in the number of the Articles since f Bellar. L. 4. de Verb. Dei non Script c. 11. §. Primum est Bellarmine confesses That all things simply necessary for all mens salvation are in the Creed and the Decalogue what reason can you have to except And yet for all this everything Fundamentall is not of a like nearenesse to the Foundation nor of equall Primenesse in the Faith And my granting the Creed to be Fundamentall doth not deny but that there are g Tho. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 7. C. quaedam prima Credibilia certaine prime Principles of Faith in the bosome whereof all other Articles lay wrapped and folded up One of which since Christ is that of S. h 1. S. Iohn 4. 2. Iohn Every 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 i Heb. 11. 6. He that comes to God must believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him Here A. C. tels you That either I must meane that those Points are onely Fundamentall which are expressed A. C. p. 46. in the Creed or those also which are infolded If I say those onely which are expressed then saith he to believe the Scriptures is not Fundamentall because 't is not expressed If I say those which are infolded in the Articles then some unwritten Church Traditions may be accounted Fundamentall The truth is I said and say still that all the Points of the Apostles Creed as they are there expressed are Fundamentall And therein I say no more than some of your best Learned have said before me But I never either said or meant That they onely are Fundamentall That they are a Conc. Trident. Sess. 3. Fundamentum unicum the only Foundation is the Councell of Trent's 't is not mine Mine is That the Beliefe of Scripture to be the Word of God and infallible is an equall or rather a preceding Prime Principle of Faith with or to the whole Body of the Creed And this agrees as before I told the Iesuite with one of your owne great Masters Albertus Magnus b In 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. Regula Fidei est concors Scriptururum sensus cum Articulis Fidei Quia illis duobus regularibus Praeceptis regitur Theologus who is not farre from
that Proposition in terminis So here the very Foundation of A. C ' s. Dilemma fals off For I say not That onely the Points of the Creed are Fundamentall whether expressed or not expressed That all of them are that I say And yet though the Foundation of his Dilemma be fallen away I will take the boldnesse to tell A. C. That if I had said That those Articles onely which are expressed in the Creed are Fundamentall it would have beene hard to have excluded the Scripture upon which the Creed it selfe in every Point is grounded For nothing is supposed to shut out its owne Foundation And if I should now say that some Articles are Fundamentall which are infolded in the Creed it would not follow that therefore some unwritten Traditions were Fundamentall Some Traditions I deny not true and firme and of great both Authority and Vse in the Church as being Apostolicall but yet not Fundamentall in the Faith And it would be a mighty large fold which should lap up Traditions within the Creed As for that Tradition That the Bookes of holy Scriptures are Divine and Infallible in every part I will handle that when I come to the proper place * §. 16. N. 1. for it F. I asked how then it happened as M. Rogers saith that the English Church is not yet resolved what is the right sense of the Article of Christs Descending into Hell B. The English Church never made doubt that § 12 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 a Art 3. Article among those to which she requires Subscription not as doubting of the sense but to prevent the Cavils 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 surely for my part I thinke the Church of England is better resolved of the right sense of this Article then the Church of Rome especially if shee must be tryed by her Writers as you try the Church of England by M. Rogers For you cannot agree whether this Article be a meere Tradition or whether it hath any Place of Scripture to vvarrant it a Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus and b Stapleton Relect. Con. 5. q. 5. Art 1. Stapleton allow it no footing in Scripture but c Bellarm 4. de Christo. c. 6. 12. Scripturae passim hoc docent Bellarmine is resolute that this Article is every where in Scripture and d Thom. 2 â—…ae q. 1. A 9 ad 1. Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed The Church of England never doubted it and S. e S. Aug. Ep. 99. Augustine prooves 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 go downe into Hell really and was present there or vertually and by effects only For g Tho. p. 3. q. 52. A. 2. c. per suam essentiam Thomas holds the first and h Dur in 3. d. 22. q. 3. Durand the later 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 i Bellar. L. 4. do Christo. c. 16. Bellarmine once held probable and prooved it or really only into that place or Region of Hell which you call Limbum Patrum and then but vertually from thence into the Lower Hell to which k Bellar. Recog p. 11. Bellarmine reduces himselfe and gives his reason because it is the l Sequuntur enim Tho. p. 3. Q. 52. A. 2. common Opinion of the Schoole Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in the Creed and believes them without farther Dispute and in that sense which the ancient Primitive Fathers of the Church agreed in And yet if any in the Church of England should not be throughly resolved in the sense of this Article Is it not as lawfull for them to say I conceive thus or thus of it yet if any other way of his Descent be found truer then this I deny it not but as yet I know no other as it was for m Non est pertinaciter asserendum quin Anima Christi per alium modum nobis ignotum potuerit descendere ad Infernum Nec nos negamus alium modum esse for sit an veriorem sed fatemur nos illum ignor arc Durand in 3. sent Dist. 22. q. 3. Nu. 9. Durand to say it and yet not impeach the Foundation of the Faith F. The Bishop said That M. Rogers was but a private man But said I if M. Rogers writing as he did by publike Authority be accounted only a private man c. B. I said truth when I said M. Rogers was a private § 13 man And I take it you will not allow every speech of every man though allowed by Authority to have his Bookes Printed to be the Doctrine of the Church of Rome * And this was an Ancient fault too for S. Augustine checks at it in his time Noli colligere calumnias ex Episcoporum scriptis sive Hillarii sive Cypriani Agrippini Primò quia hoc genus literarum ab Authoritate Canonis distinguendum est Non enim sic leguntur tanquam it a ex iis testimonium proferatur ut contrà sentire non liceat sicubi fortè aliter sentirent quà m veritas postulat S. Aug. Ep. 48. c. And yet these were farre greater men in their generations then M. Rogers was This hath beene oft complained of on both sides The imposing particular mens assertions upon the Church yet I see you meane not to leave it And surely as Controversies are now handled by some of your party at this day I may not say it is the sense of the Article in hand but I have long thought it a kinde os descent into Hell to be conversant in them I would the Authors would take heed in time and not seeke to blinde the People or cast a mist before evident Truth least it cause a finall descent to that place of Torment But since you will hold this course Stapleton was of greater note with you then M. Rogers his exposition of Notes upon the Articles of the Church of England is with us And as he so his Relection And is it the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which Stapleton affirmes †Stapl. Cont. 5. q. 5. A. 1. 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 Popes Supremacie over the whole Church Shall he have his Power over the Catholike Church given him expresly in Scripture in the a S. Mat. 16. 19. Keyes to enter and in b S. Ioh. 21. 15. Pasce
traditum est S. Cypri ad Pompeium cont Epist. Stephan princ tradere non traditum make a Tradition of that which was not delivered to her and by some of Them then She is unfaithful to God and doth not servare depositum faithfully keepe that which is committed to her Trust. * 1 Tim. 6. 20. and 2 Tim. 1. 14. 1 Tim. 6. And her Sonnes which come to know it are not bound to obey her Tradition against the c Si ipsa Ecclesia contraria Scripturae diceret Fidelis ipsi non crederet c. Hen. a Gand. Sum. p. 1. A. 10. q. 1. And Bellarmiâ—…e himselfe that he might the more safely defend himselfe in the Cause of Traditions sayes but how truly let other men Iudge Nullam Traditionem admittimus contra Scripturam L. 4. 〈◊〉 Verbo Dei c. 3. §. Deindè commune Word of their Father For wheresoever Christ holds his peace or that his words aâ—…e not Registred I am of S. d S. Aug. Tom. 96. in 〈◊〉 Ioh. in illâ—… Ferba Multa habeo dicere sed non potestis portare modò Augustines Opinion No man may dare without rashnesse say they were these or these So there were many unwritten Words of God which were never delivered over to the Church and thereâ—…ore never made Tradition And there are many Traditions which cannot be said to be the unwritten word of God For I believe a Learned Romanist that will weigh before he speakes will not easily say That to Annoint or use Spittle in Baptisme or to use three Dippings in the use of that Sacrament or diverse other like Traditions had their Rise from any Word of God unwritten Or if he be so hardy as to say so 't is gratis dictum and he will have enough to doe to prove it So there may be an unwritten Word of God which is no Tradition And there are many Traditions which are no unwritten Word of God Therfore Tradition must be taken two wayes Either as it is the Churches Act delivering or the Thing thereby delivered and then 't is Humane Authority or from it and unable infallibly to warrant Divine Faith or to be the Object of it Or els as it is the unwritten Word of God and then where ever it can be made to appeare so 't is of divine and infallible Authority no question But then I would have A. C. consider where he is in A. C. p. 49. this Particular He tels us We must know infallibly that the Bookes of Holy Scripture are Divine and that this must be done by unwritten Tradition but so as that this Tradition is the Word of God unwritten Now let him but prove that this or any Tradition which the Church of Rome stands upon is the Word of God though unwritten and the businesse is ended But A. C. must not thinke that because the Tradition of the Church tels me these Bookes are Verbum Dei Gods A. C. p. 50. Word and that I do both honour and believe this Tradition That therefore this Tradition it selfe is Gods Word too and so absolutely sufficient and infallible to worke this Beliefe in me Therefore for ought A. C. hath yet added we must on with our Inquiry after this great Businesse and most necessary Truth 2. For the second way of proving That Scripture should be fully and sufficiently knowne as by Divine and Infallible Testimony Lumine proprio by the resplendency of that Light which it hath in it selfe onely and by the witnesse that it can so give to it selfe I could never yet see cause to allow a Hook l. 2. §. 4 For as there is no place in Scripture that tels us Such Books containing such and such Particulars are the Canon and infallible Will and Word of God So if there were any such place that were no sufficient proofe For a man may justly aske another Booke to beare witnesse of that and againe of that another and where ever it were written in Scripture that must be a part of the Whole And no created thing can alone give witnesse to it selfe and make it evident nor one part testifie for another and satisfie where Reason will but offer to contest Except those Principles onely of Naturall knowledge which appeare manifest by intuitive light of understanding without any Discourse And yet they also to the weaker sort require Induction preceding Now this Inbred light of Scripture is a thing coincident with Scripture it selfe and so the Principles and the Conclusion in this kind of proofe should be entirely the same which cannot be Besides if this inward Light were so cleare how could there have beene any variety among the Ancient Believers touching the Authority of S. a Euseb. L. 2. c. 27. fine Edit Basil. 1549. Iames and S. Jude's Epistles and the b Euseb. L. 3. c. 25. Apocalyps with other Bookes which were not received for diverse yeares after the rest of the New Testament For certainly the Light which is in the Scripture was the same then which now it is And how could the Gospell of S. Bartholomew of S. Thomas and other counterfeit peeces obtaine so much credit with some as to be received into the Canon if the evidence of this Light were either Universall or Infallible of and by it selfe And this though I cannot approve yet me thinks you may and upon probable grounds at least For I hope no †Except A. C. whose boldness herein I cannot but pitie For he denies this light to the Scripture and gives it to Tradition His words are p. 52. Tradition of the Church is of a company which by its owne light shewes it selfe to bee infallibly assisted c. Romanist will deny but that there is as much light in Scripture to manifest and make ostension of it selfe to be infallibly the written Word of God as there is in any Tradition of the Church that it is Divine and infallibly the unwritten Word of God And the Scriptures saying from the mouthes of the Prophets b Isa 44. passina Thus saith the Lord and from the mouthes of the a Act. 28. 25. Apostles that the Holy Ghost spake by them are at least as able and as fit to beare witnesse to their owne Verity as the Church is to beare witnesse to her owne Traditions by bare saying they come from the Apostles And your selves would never go to the Scripture to prove that there are Traditions b 2. Thess. 2. 15. Iude vers 3. as you do if you did not thinke the Scripture as easie to be discovered by inbred light in itselfe as Traditions by their light And if this be so then it is as probable at the least which some of ours affirme That Scripture may bee knowne to bee the Word of God by the Light and Lustre which it hath in it selfe as it is which you c In your Articles delivered to D. W. to be answered And A. C. p. 52. affirme That a
more Credit then hee can give them But that which followes I cannot approve to wit That the Lawfully sent Preachers of the Gospell are Gods Legats and the Scriptures Gods Letters which hee hath appointed his Legates to deliver and expound So farre 't is well but here 's the sting That these Letters doe warrant that the People may heare and give Credit to these Legats of Christ as to Christ the King himselfe Soft this is too high a great deale No * Will A. C. maintaine that any Legate à Latere is of as great Credit as the Pope himselfe Legate was ever of so great Credit as the King Himselfe Nor was any Priest never so lawfully sent ever of that Authority that Christ himselfe No sure For yee call mee Master and Lord and yee doe well for so I am saith our Saviour S. Iohn 13. And certainly this did not suddenly S. Iohn 13. 13. drop out of A. C ' s. Penne. For hee tould us once before That this Company of men which deliver the present Churches Tradition that is the lawfully sent A. C. p. 52. Preachers of the Church are assisted by Gods Spirit to have in them Divine and Infallible Authority and to bee worthy of Divine and Infallible Credit sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Why but is it possible these men should goe thus farre to defend an Error bee it never so deare unto them They as Christ Divine and Infallible Authority in them Sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith I have often heard some wise men say That the Iesuite in the Church of Rome and the Precise party in the Reformâ—…d Churches agree in many things though they would seeme most to differ And surely this is one For both of them differ extreamely about Tradition The one in magnifying it and exalting it into Divine Authority The other vilifying and depressing it almost beneath Humane And yet even in these different wayes both agree in this consequent That the Sermons and Preachings by word of mouth of the lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of the Church are able to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Nay are the * For this A. C. sayes expresly of Tradition p. 52. And then he addes that the Promise for this was no lesse but rather more Expresly made to the lawfully sent Pastors and Doctors of the Church in all ages in their teaching by word of mouth then in writing c. p. 53. very word of God So A. C. expresly And no lesse then so have some accounted of their owne factious words to say no more then as the †For the freeing of factious and silenced Ministers is termed the Restoring of Gods Word to â—…s Liberty In the Godly Author of the late Newes from Ipswich p. 5. Word of God I ever tooke Sermons and so doe still to be most necessary Expositions and Applications of Holy Scripture and a great ordinary meanes of saving knowledge But I cannot thinke them or the Preachers of them Divinely Infallible The Ancient Fathers of the Church preached farre beyond any of these of either faction And yet no one of them durst thinke himselfe Infallible much lesse that whatsoever hee preached was the VVord of God And it may be Obserued too That no men are more apt to say That all the Fathers were but Men and might Erre then they that thinke their owne preachings are Infallible The next thing after this large Interpretation of A C. which I shall trouble you with is That this method and manner of proving Scripture to bee the VVord of God which I here use is the same which the Ancient Church ever held namely Tradition or Ecclesiasticall Authority first and then all other Arguments but especially internall from the Scripture it selfe This way the Church went in S. Augustine's a And S. Aug. himselfe L. 13. contr Faustum c. 5. proves by an Internall Argument the fulfilling of the Prophets Scriptura saith he quae fidem suam rebus ipsis probat quae per temporum successiones hac impleri c. And Hen. a Gand. Par. 1. Sum. A. 〈◊〉 q. 3. cites S. Aug. Book de vera Religione In which Book though these Foure Arguments are not found iâ—… Termes together yet they fill up the scope of the whole Book Time He was no enemy to Church-Tradition yet when hee would prove that the Authour of the Scripture and so of the whole knowledge of Divinity as it is supernaturall is Deus in Christo God in Christ he takes this as the All-sufficient way and gives foure proofes all internall to the Scripture First The Miracles Secondly That there is nothing carnall in the Doctrine Thirdly That there hath been such performance of it Fourthly That by such a Doctrine of Humility the whole world almost hath beene converted And whereas ad muniendam Fidem for the Defending of the Faith and keeping it entire there are two things requisite Scripture and Church-Tradition b Duplici modo muniri fideÌ„ c. Primò Divinae Legis Authoritate tum deinde Ecclesia Catholicae Traditione cont Har. c. 1. Vincent Lirinens places Authority of Scriptures first and then Tradition And since it is apparent that Tradition is first in order of time it must necessarily follow that Scripture is first in order of Nature that is the chiefe upon which Faith rests and resolves it selfe And your owne Schoole confesses this was the way ever The Woman of a S. Ioh. 4. Samaria is a knowne Resemblance but allowed by your selves For b Hen. à Gand. Sum. Par. 1. A. 10. q 1. Sic quotidie apudillos qui forts sunt intrat Christus per mulierem i. Ecclesiam credunt per istam famam c. Gloss. in S. Ioh. cap. 4. quotidâ—…è daily with them that are without Christ enters by the woman that is the Church and they believe by that fame which she gives c But when they come to heare Christ himselfe they believe his words before the words of the Woman For when they have once found Christ c Ibid. Plus verbis Christi in Scripturae credit quam Ecclesiae testificanti Quia propter illam jam credit Ecclesiae Et si ipsa quidem contraria Scripturae diceret ipsi non crederet c. Primam fidem tribuamus Scripturis Canonicis secundam sub ista Definitionibus Consuctudinibus Ecclesiae Catholicae post ist as studiosis viris non sub poena perfidiae sed proterviae c. Walden Doct. Fid. To. 1. L. 2. Art 2. c. 23. Nu. 9. they do more believe his words in Scripture then they do the Church which testifies of him because then propter illam for the Scripture they believe the Church And if the Church should speake contrary to the Scripture they would not believe it Thus the Schoole taught then And thus the Glosse commented then And when men have tyred themselves hither they must come
Felicity and then leave him utterly destitute of all Instrumentall Helps to make the Attainment possible since * Deus natura nihil frustrà faciunt Arist. L. 1. de Coelo T. 32. frustra autem est quod non potest habere suum usuÌ„ Thom. ibid. God and Nature do nothing but for an end And Helpe there can bee none sufficient but by Revelation And once grant mee that Revelation is necessary and then I will appeale to Reason it selfe and that shall prove abundantly one of these two That either there was never any such Revelation of this kinde from the worlds beginning to this day And that will put the frustrà upon God in point of mans Felicitie Or that the Scriptures which wee now embrace as the Word of God is that Revelation And that 's it we Christians labour to make good against all Atheisme Prophanenesse and Infidelity Last of all To prove that the Booke of God which Pun. 8. we honour as His Word is this necessary Revelation of God and his Truth which must and is alone able to leade us in the way to our eternall Blessednesse or else the world hath none comes in a Cloud of witnesses Some for the Infidel and some for the Beleever Some for the VVeake in Faith and some for the Strong And some for all For then first comes in the Tradition of the Church the present Church so 't is no Hereticall or Schismaticall Beliefe Then the Testimony of former Ages so 't is no New Beliefe Then the consent of Times so 't is no Divided or partiall Beliefe Then the Harmony of the Prophets and them fulfilled so 't is not a * 2 Pet. 1. 16. Devised but a forespoken Beliefe Then the successe of the Doctrine contained in this Booke so 't is not a Beliefe stisted in the Cradle but it hath spread through the world in despite of what the world could doe against it And increased from weake and unlikely Beginnings to incredible Greatnesse Then the Constancy of this Truth so 't is no Moone-Beliefe For in the midst of the worlds Changes it hath preserved it's Creede entire through many generations Then that there is nothing Carnall in the Doctrine so 't is a Chast Beliefe And all along it hath gained kept and exercised more power upon the minds of men both learned and unlearned in the increase of vertue and repression of vice then any Morall Philosophie or Legall Policy that ever was Then comes the inward Light and Excellency of the Text it self and so 't is no darke or dazling Beliefe And 't is an Excellent Text For see the riches of Naturall knowledge which are stored up there as well as Supernaturall Consider how things quite above Reason consent with things Reasonable Weigh it well what Majesty lyes there hid under Humility a Quasi quidam fluvius est planus Altus in quo Agnus ambulet Elephas naâ—…et S. Greg. Prâ—…fat in Lib. Moralium c. 4. What Depth ther is with a Perspicuity unimitable What b In Lege Domini voluntas ejus Psa. 1. 2. Dulcior super mel favum Psa 18. 11. passim Delight it works in the Soule that is devoutely excercised in it how the c Multa dicuntur submissâ—…s humirepeÌ„tibus animis ut accommodatiùs per humana in Divina consurgant Multa etiam figuratè ut studiosa mens quaesitis exerceatur utiliùs uberiùs laetetur inventis S. Aug. de Mor. Ec. Cat. c. 17. Sed nihil sub spirituali sensu continetur Fidei necessarium quod Scriptura per Literalem sensum alicubi manifeste non tradat Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 10 ad 1. Sublimest wits finde in it enough to amaze them while the c simplest want not enough to direct them And then we shall not wonder if with the assistance of d Credimus c. sicut ob alia multa certiora Argumenta quà m est Testimonium Ecclesia tum propter hoe potissimum quòd Spiritus Sanctus nobis intùs has esse Dei voces persuadeat Whitaker Disput de Sa. Scrip. Controvers 1. q. 3. c. 8. Gods Spirit who alone workes Faith and Beliefe of the Scriptures and their Divine Authority as well as other Articles wee grow up into a most Infallible Assurance such an Assurance as hath made many lay downe their lives for this Truth such as that * Though an Angell from Heaven should Preach unto us another Gospell we would not believe Gal. 1. 8. Him or it No though wee should see as great and as many Miracles done over againe to disswade us from it as were at first to win the world to it To which firmnesse of Assent by the Operation of Gods Spirit the Will conferres as much or more strength then the Vnderstanding Clearenesse the whole Assent being an Act of Faith and not of Knowledge And therefore the Question should not have beene asked of mee by F. How I knew But vpon what Motives I did believe Scripture to bee the VVord of God And I would have him take heed lest hunting too close after a way of Knowledge hee loose the way of Faith and teach other men to loose it too So then the Way lyes thus as farre as it appeares Pun. 9. to me The Credit of Scripture to bee Divine Resolves finally into that Faith which wee have touching God Himselfe and in the same order For as that so this hath Three maine Grounds to which all other are Reducible The First is the Tradition of the Church And this leades us to a Reverend perswasion of it The Second is The light of Nature And this shewes us how necessary such a Revealed Learning is and that no other way it can be had * Cum Fides infallibili veritati innitaâ—… Et ideo cum impossibile sit de vero demonstrari Contrarium sequitur omnes Probationes qua contra fidem inducuntur non posse esse Demonstrationes sed solubilia Argumenta Tho. p. 1. q. A. 1. 8. c. Nay more that all Proofes brought against any Point of Faith neither are nor can be Demonstrations but soluble Arguments The Third is The light of the Text it selfe in Conversing wherewith wee meet with the †Fidei ultima Resolutio est in Deum illuminantem S. Aug. cont Fund c. 14. Spirit of God inwardly inclining our hearts and sealeing the full Assurance of the sufficiency of all Three unto us And then and not before wee are certaine That the Scripture is the VVord of God both by Divine and by Infallible Proofe But our Certainty is by Faith and so voluntary not by Knowledge of such Principles as in the light of Nature can enforce Assent whether we will or no. I have said thus much upon this great Occasion because this Argument is so much pressed without due respect to Scripture And I have proceeded in a Syntheticall way to build up the Truth for the benefit of the Church
their own and are with all submission to be observed by every Christian where Scripture or evident Demonstration come not against them Nor doth it make way for the Whirlewind of a private Spirit For Private Spirits are too giddy to rest upon Scripture and too heady and shallow to be acquainted with Demonstrative Arguments And it were happy for the Church if she might never be troubled with Private Spirits till they brought such Arguments I know this is hotly objected against c Praefat. p. 29. Hooker the d Dialogus â—…ctus Deus Rex Authour cals him a e Cordatus Protestans Wise Protestant yet turnes thus upon him If a Councell must yeeld to a Demonstrative Proofe Who shall Iudge whether the Argument that is brought be a Demonstration or not For every man that will kicke against the Church will say the Scripture he urges is evident and his Reason a Demonstration And what is this but to leave all to the wildenesse of a Private Spirit Can any ingenuous man read this Passage in Hooker and dreame of a Private Spirit For to the Question Who shall judge Hooker answers as if it had beene then made f Praef. p. 29. And therefore A. C. is much to blame after all this to talk of a pretext of seeming evident Scripture or Demonstration As he doth p 59. An Argument necessary and Demonstrative is such saith he as being proposed to any man and understood the minde cannot chuse but inwardly assent unto it So it is not enough to thinke or say it is Demonstrative The Light then of a Demonstrative Argument is the Evidence which it selfe hath in it selfe to all that understand it Well but because all understand it not If a Quarrell be made Who shall decide it No Question a § 32. Nu. 2. but a Generall Councell not a Private Spirit first in the intent of the Authour for Hooker in all that Discourse makes the Sentence of the Councell b Praesat p. 28. binding and therefore that is made Judge not a Private Spirit And then for the Judge of the Argument it is as plaine For if it be evident to any man then to so many Learned men as are in a Councell doubtlesse And if they cannot but assent it is hard to thinke them so impious that they will define against it And if that which is thought evident to any man be not evident to such a grave Assembly it is probable 't is no Demonstration and the producers of it ought to rest and not to trouble the Church Nor is this Hooker's alone nor is it newly thought on by us It is a Ground in Nature which Grace doth ever set right never undermine And c 2 de Bapt cont Don. cap. 4. S. Augustine hath it twice in one Chapter That S. Cyprian and that Councell at Carthage would have presently yeelded to any one that would d Uni verum dicenti demonstr anti demonstrate Truth Nay it is a Rule with e Cont. Fund cap. 4. him Consent of Nations Authority confirmed by Miracles and Antiquity S. Peters Chaire and Succession from it Motives to keepe him in the Catholike Church must not hold him against Demonstration of Truth f Quae quidem si tam manifesta monâ—…ratur ut in dubtum â—…enire non possit praeponenâ—…a est omâ—…ibus ills rebus quiius in Catholica 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 aciquid apertissimâ—… in Euangelâ—… 〈◊〉 c. 4. which if it bee so clearely demonstrated that it cannot come into doubt it is to be preferred before all those things by which a man is held in the Catholike Church Therefore an evident Scripture or Demonstration of Truth must take place every where but where these cannot be had there must be Submission to Authority And doth not Bellarmine himselfe grant this For speaking of Councels he delivers this Proposition That Inferiours may not judge whether their Superiours and that in a Councell do proceed lawfully or not But then having bethought himselfe that Inferiours at all times and in all Causes are not to be cast off he adds this Exception a L. 2 de Concil c. 8. §. Alii dicunt Cencilium Nisi manifestissimè constet intolerabilem Errorem committi Unlesse it manifestly appeare that an intolerable Errour be committed So then if such an Errour be and be manifest Inferiours may do their duty and a Councell must yeeld unlesse you will accuse Bellarmine too of leaning to a Private Spirit for neither doth he expresse who shall judge whether the Errour be intolerable This will not downe with you but the Definition of a Generall Councell is and must be infallible Your Fellowes tell us and you can affirme no more That the Voice of the Church determining in Councell is not b Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. Q. 3. Ar. 1. Humane but Divine That is well Divine then sure Infallible yea but the Proposition stickes in the throat of them that would utter it It is not Divine simply but in a c Divina suo modo Ibid. And so A. C. too who hath opened his mouth very wide to proove the Succession of Pastors in the Church to be of Divine and infallible Authority yet in the close is forced to add At least in some sort p. 51. manner Divine Why but then sure not infallible because it may speak lowdest in that manner in which it is not Divine Nay more The Church forsooth is an infallible Foundation of Faith d In altiori genere viz. in geners causae efficientis atque adeò aliquâ exparte formalis Ibid. Q. 4. Ar. 3. in an higher kinde then the Scripture For the Scripture is but a Foundation in Testimony and Matter to be believed but the Church as the efficient cause of Faith and in some sort the very formall Is not this Blasphemie Doth not this knock against all evidence of Truth and his owne Grounds that sayes it Against all evidence of Truth For in all Ages all men that once admitted the Scripture to be the Word of God as all Christians doe doe with the same breath grant it most undoubted and infallible But all men have not so judged of the Churches Definitions though they have in greatest Obedience submitted to them And against his owne Grounds that sayes it For the Scripture is absolutely and every way Divine the Churches Definition is but suo modo in a sort or manner Divine But that which is but in a sort can never be a Foundation in an Higher Degree then that which is absolute and every way such Therefore neither can the Definition of the Church be so infallible as the Scripture much lesse in altiori genere in a higher kinde then the Scripture But because when all other things faile you flie to this That the Churches Definition in a Generall Councell is by Inspiration and so Divine and infallible My haste shall not carrie mee from a little Consideration of that too Sixtly then If the
Emmanuel Sa in his Aphorismes Verbo Tyrannus yet he is so moderate that he would not have this done till he be Sentenc'd but then Quisquis potest fieri Executor Mariana is farre worse For he sayes it is lawfull to kill him postquam à paucis Seditiosts sed doctis caeperit Tyrannus appellari L. 1. de Rege Reg. Iustitutione c. 6. Yea but Mariana was disclaimed for this by the Iesuites Yea but for all that there was an Apology printed in Italy An. 1610. permissu Superiorum And there 't is said They were all Enemies of the Holy name of Iâ—…sus 〈◊〉 condemned Mariana for any such Doctrine As for Testatus no Sentence hath touched upon him at all for it And whose Deposition and Vnthron ing nay killing of Princes the like if they were not yours For I dare say and am able to proove there 's none of these but are rather contrary then conformable to Scripture Neither is A. C. or any Iesuite able to shew any * Corpus Christi veraciter esse in Eucharistià ex Evangelio habemus Conversionem vero Panis in Corpus Christi Evangelium non explicavit sed expresse ab Ecclesià accepimus Cajetan in Thâ—…m 3. q. 75. Art 1. Scripture interpreted by Vnion or †De Transubstantiatione Panis in Corpus Christi rara est in antiquis Scriptoribus mentio Alph. a Castro L. 8. advers Haer. Uerbo Indulgentia Consent of Fathers of the Primitive Church to proove any one of these Nor any Definition of Ancient Councels but only a Conc. Lateran Can. 1. Lateran for Transubstantiation and that of b Conc. Constan. Sess. 13. Constance for the Eucharist in one kinde which two are moderne at least farre downward from the Primitive Church and have done more mischiefe to the Church by those their Determinations then will be cured I feare in many Generations So whatever A. C. thinks yet I had reason enough to leave the Iesuite to looke to his owne soule But A. C. having as it seemes little new matter is at the same againe and over and over it must goe That there is but one saving faith That this one Faith was A. C. p. 70. once the Romane And that I granted one might bee saved in the Romane Faith To all which I have aboundantly answered c §. 35. N. 1. §. 38. N 10. before Marry then hee inferres That hee sees not how we can have our soules saved without we entirely hold this faith being the Catholike faith which S. Athanasius saith unlesse a man hold entirely he cannot be saved Now here againe is more in the Conclusion then in the premises and so the Inference failes For say there was a time in which the Catholike and the Romane Faith were one and such a time there was when the Romane faith was Catholike and famous through the world Rom. 1. Yet it doth not follow since the d Concil Triden Bulla Pii 4 super formâ Iuramenti professionis Fidei ad finem Concil Trident. Councell Rom. 1. 8. of Trent hath added a new Creed that this Romane faith is now the Catholike For it hath added extranea things without the Foundation disputable if not false Conclusions to the faith So that now a man may Believe the whole and entire Catholike Faith even as S. Athanasius requires and yet justly refuse for drosse a great part of that which is now a And this is so much the more Remarkâ—…ble if it be true which Thomas hath S. 〈◊〉 non composuisse hanc â—…nifestationem Fideâ—… per mâ—…dum Symboli sed per modum Doctrinae c. Et deinde Authoritate summi Pontificis receptam esse ut quasi Regula fidei habeatur The. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 10. ad 3. Symbolo Apostâ—…rum addita sunt duo alia scilicet Symbolum Nicaenum S. Athanasii admajorem Fidei Explanationem Biel. in 3. Sent. D. 25. q. unicâ A. 1. D. the Romane Faith And Athanasius himselfe as if he meant to arme the Catholike Faith against all corrupting additions hath in the beginning of his b S. Athanas. in Symb. Creed these words This is the Catholike Faith This and no other This and no Other then here followes And againe at the end of his Creed c And yet the Councell of Trent having added twelve new Articles sayes thus oâ—… them also Haec est vera Catholica Fideâ—… extra quam nemo salvus esse potest c. Bulla 〈◊〉 4. super forma Iuramenti professionis Fidei In sine Concil Triaent This is the Catholike Faith d Integram Fidâ—…i Veritatem ejus Doctrina breviter continet Tho. 2. 〈◊〉 q. 1. A. 10. ad 3. This and no more then is here delivered alwaies presupposing the Apostles Creed as Athanasius did and this is the largest of all Creeds So that if A. C. would wipe his eyes from the mist which rises about Tyber he might see how our soules may be saved believing the Catholike Faith and that entire without the Addition of Romane Leaven But if he cannot or I doubt will not see it 't is enough that by God's Grace wee see it And therefore once more I leave him and his to looke to their owne soules After this A. C. is busie in unfolding the meaning of this great Father of the Church S. Athanasius And A. C. p. 70. he tels us That he sayes in his Creed that without doubt every man shall perish that holds not the Catholike Faith entire that is saith A. C. in every point of it and inviolate that is in the right sense and for the true formall reason of divine Revelation sufficiently applied to our understanding by the Infallible Authority of the Catholike Church proposing to us by her Pastours this Revelation Well we shall not differ much from A. C. in expounding the meaning of S. Athanasius yet some few things I shall here observe And first I agree that he which hopes for salvation must believe the Catholike Faith whole and entire in every point Next I agree that he must likewise hold it inviolate if to believe it in the right sense be to hold it inviolate But by A. C s. leave the Believing of the Creed in the right sense is comprehended in the first branch The keeping of it whole and entire For no man can properly be said to believe the Whole Creed that believes not the Whole Sense as well as the Letter of it and as entirely But thirdly for the word inviolate 't is indeed used by him that translated Athanasius But the Father 's owne words are That he that will be saved must keepe the Faith 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is the sound and entire Faith And it cannot be a sound Faith unlesse the Sense be as whole and entire as the Letter of the Creed And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is compounded of the privative particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is reproach or infamie So that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the holding of the entire Faith in such holinesse of life and conversation as is without all infamy and reproach That is as our English renders that Creed exceeding well Which Faith unlesse a man do keep whole and * Sic Ecclesia dicitur 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Eph. 5. 27. in veteri Glossario Immaculatus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 undefiled even with such a life as Momus himselfe shall not be able to carpe at So Athanasius who certainly was passing able to expresse himselfe in his owne language in the beginning of that his Creed requires That we keepe it entire without diminution and undefiled without blame And at the end that we believe it faithfully without wavering But Inviolate is the mistaken word of the old Interpreter and with no great knowledge made use of by A. C. And then fourthly though this be true Divinity that he which hopes for salvation must believe the whole Creed and in the right sense too if he be able to comprehend it yet I take the true and first meaning of Inviolate could Athanasius his word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 have signified so not to be the holding of the true sense but not to offer violence or a forced sense or meaning upon the Creed which every man doth not that yet believes it not in a true sense For not to believe the true sense of the Creed is one thing But 't is quite another to force a wrong sense upon it Fiftly a reason would be given also why A. C. is so earnest for the whole faith and bawkes the word which goes with it which is holy or undefiled For Athanasius doth alike exclude from salvation those which keepe not the Catholike Faith holy as well as these which keepe it not whole I doubt this was to spare many of his †§. 33. Nu. 6. holy Fathers the Popes who were as farre as any the very lewdest among men without exception from keeping the Catholike Faith holy Sixtly I agree to the next part of his Exposition That a man that will be saved must believe the whole Creed for the true formall reason of divine Revelation For upon the Truth of God thus revealed by himselfe lies the Infallible certainty of the Christian Faith But I do not grant that this is within the Compasse of S. Athanasius his word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor of the word Inviolate But in that respect 't is a meere straine of A. C. And then lastâ—…y though the whole Catholike Church be sufficient in applying this to us and our Beliefe not our Understanding which A. C. is at A. C. p. 70. againe yet Infallible She is not in the proposall of this Revelation to us by every of her Pastours Some whereof amongst you as well as others neglect or forget at least to feed Christ's sheepe as Christ and his Church hath fed them But now that A. C. hath taught us as you see the meaning of S. Athanasius in the next place he tels us A. C. p. 70. That if we did believe any one Article we finding the same formall Reason in all and applied sufficiently by the same meanes to all wou'd easily believe all Why surely we do not believe any one Article onely but all the Articles of the Christian Faith And we believe them for the same formall Reason in all namely Because they are revealed from and by God and sufficiently applied in his Word and by his Churches Ministration But so long as they do not believe all in this sort saith A. C. Looke you He A. C. p. 70. tels us we do not believe all when we professe we do Is this man become as God that he can better tell what we believe them we our selves Surely we do believe all and in that sort too Though I believe were S. Athanasius himselfe alive againe and a plaine man should come to him and tell him he believed his Creed in all and every particular he would admit him for a good Catholike Christian though he were not able to expresse to him the formall reason of that his beliefe Yea but saith A. C. while they will as all Heretickes doe make choice of what they will and what they A. C. p. 70. will not believe without relying upon the Infallible Authority of the Catholike Church they cannot have that one saving Faith in any one Article Why but whatsoever Hereticks doe we are not such nor do we so For they which believe all the Articles as once againe I tell you we do make no choice And we do relie upon the Infallible Authority of the Word of God and the whole Catholike Church And therefore we both can have and have that one saving Faith which believes all the Articles entirely though we cannot believe that any particular Church is infallible And yet againe A. C. will not thus be satisfied but on he goes and adds That although we believe the same A. C. p. 71. truth which other good Catholikes doe in some Articles yet not believing them for the same formall reason of Divine Revelation sufficiently applied by Infallible Church Authority c. we cannot be said to have one and the same Infallible and Divine Faith which other good Catholike Christians have who believe the Articles for this formall Reason sufficiently made knowne to them not by their owne fancy nor the fallible Authority of humane deductions but by the Infallible Authority of the Church of God If A. C. will still say the samething I must still give the same answer First he confesses we believe the same Truth in some Articles I pray marke his phrase the same Truth in some Articles with other good Catholike Christians so farre his pen hath told Truth against his will for he doth not I wot well intend to call us Catholikes and yet his pen being truer then himselfe hath let it fall For the word other cannot be so used as here it is but that we as well as they must be good Catholikes For he that shall say the old Romans were valiant as well as other men supposes the Romans to be valiant men And he that shall say The Protestants believe some Articles as well as other good Catholikes must in propriety of speech suppose them to be good Catholikes Secondly as we do believe those some Articles so do we believe them and all other Articles of Faith for the same formall reason and so applied as but just * §. 38. Nu. 13. before I have expressed Nor do we believe any one Article of Faith by our own fancy or by fallible Authority of humane deductions but next to the Infallible Authority of God's Word we are guided by his Church But then A. C. steps into a Conclusion whither we cannot A. C. p. 71. follow him For he sayes that the Articles to be believed must be sufficiently made
Foundation for all cannot be one and another to different Christians in regard of it selfe for then it could be no common Rule for any nor could the soules of men rest upon a shaking foundation No If it be a true Foundation it must be common to all and firme under all in which sense the Articles of Christian Faith are Fundamentall And f Quum exim una cadem sides sit neque is qui multum de ipsà dicere potest plusquam oportet dicit neque qui parùm ipsam imminuit Iren. L. 1. advers haeres c. 3. Ireneus layes this for a ground That the whole Church howsoever dispersed in place speakes this with one mouth He which among the Guides of the Church is best able to speake utters no more then this and lesse then this the most simple doth not utter Therefore the Creed of which he speaks is a common is a constant Foundation And an Explicite faith must be of this in them which have the use of Reason for both Guides and simple people All the Church utter this Now many things are defined by the Church w ch are but Deductions out of this which suppose them deduced right move far from the Foundation without which Deductions explicitly believed many millions of Christians go to Heaven and cannot therefore be Fundamentall in the faith True Deductions from the Article may require necessary beliefe in them which are able and do go along with them from the Principle to the Conclusion But I do not see either that the Learned do make them necessary to all or any reason why they should Therfore they cannot be FundameÌ„tall yet to some mens Salvation they are necessary Besides that which is Fundamentall in the Faith of Christ is a Rocke immoveable and can never be varied Never a Resolutio Occhami est quòd nâ—… tota Ecclesia nec Concilium Generale nec summus Pontifex potest facere Articulum quod non suit Articulus Sed in dubiis propositionibus potest Ecclesia determinare an sint Cathilicae c. Tamen sic determinando non facit quod sint Catholicae quum prius essent ante Ecclesiae Determinationem c. Almain in 3. D. 25. Q. 1. Therefore if it be Fundamentall after the Church hath defined it it was Fundamentall before the Definition els it is mooveable and then no Christian hath where to rest And if it be immooveable as b Regula Fidei una omnino est solailla immobilis irreformabilis Tertul. de Virg. vel cap. 1. In hac fide c. Nihil transmutare c. Athan. Epist. ad Iovin de side indeed it is no Decree of a Councell be it never so Generall can alter immooveable Verities no more than it can change immooveable 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 she might make a New Article of the Faith c Occham Almain in 3. Sent. D. 25. q. 1. which the Learned among your selves deny For the Articles of the Faith cannot increase in substance but onely in Explication d Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. Ar. 7. C. And for this I 'le be judg'd by Bellarmine f Fides Divina non ideo habet certitudinem quia toti Ecclesiae communis est sed quia nititur Authoritate Dei qui nec falli nec fallere potest quum sit ipsa Veritas L. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Quod verò Concilium Probatio Ecclesiae facit ut omnibus innotescat Objectum Fidei Divinae esse revelatum à Deo propter hoc certum indubitatum non autem tribuit firmitatem verbo Dei aliquid revelantis Ibid. §. At inqust who disputing against Amb. Catharinus about the certainty of Faith tels us That Divine Faith hath not its certainty because 't is Catholike .i. common to the whole Church but because it builds on the Authority of God who is Truth it self and can neither deceive nor be deceived And he addes That the Probation of the Church can make it known to all that the Object of Divine Faith is revealed from God and therefore certaine and not to be doubted but the Church can adde no certainty no firmenesse to the word of God revealing it Nor is this hard to be farther proved out of your owne Schoole For a Scotus in 1. Sent. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus professeth it in this very 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 verè Haeretici truly and indeed Hereticks And he speakes this of the old Greekes long before any Decision of the Church in this Controversie 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 Hereticks is his challenge I deny not but that Scotus adds there That howsoever 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 he intend by it That whatsoever the Church defines shall be ipso ficto and for that Determination's sake Fundamentall For if before the Determination supposing the Difference reall some of those Worthies were truly Hereticks as he confesses then somewhat made them so And that could not be the Decree of the Church which then was not Therefore it must be somwhat really false that made them so and fundamentally false if it made them Hereticks against the Foundation But Scotus was wiser than to intend this It may be he saw the streame too strong for him to swim against therfore he 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 he goes no further than Ecclesia declaravit since the Church hath declared it which is the word that is used by diverse b Bellarm. L. 2. de Conc. Auth. c. 12. Concilia cùm definiunt non faciunt aliquid esse infallibilis veritatis sed declarant Explicare Bonavent in 1. d. 11. A. 1. q. 1. ad sinem Explanare declarare Tho 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. 2. 2. q. 1 A. 10. ad 1. Quid unquam aliud Ecclesia Câ—… ili rum Decretis enisa est nisi ut quod anica simplicitèr credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur Vin. Lyr. cont 〈◊〉 c. 32 Now the a Sent. 1. D. 11 Master teaches and the b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11 Art 7. Schollers too That every thing which belongs to the Exposition or Declaration of
Testificandum de Christo Legibus ejus vilior est Christi legibus Scripturis Sanctis necessariò postponenda Wald. L. 2. Doct. Fidei Art 2. cap. 21. Numb 1. though this be contrary to their owne Doctrine must bee finally Resolved into the Authority of the Present Romane Church And though they would seeme to have us believe the Fathers and the Church of old yet they will not have us take their Doctrine from their owne Writings or the Decrees of Councels because as they say wee cannot know by reading them what their meaning was but from the Infallible Testimony of the present Romane Church teaching by Tradition Now by this two things are evident First That they ascribe as great Authority if not greater to a part of the Catholike Church as they doe to the whole which wee believe in our Creede and which is the Society of all Christians And this is full of Absurdity in Nature in Reason in All things That any c Totum est majus suâ parte Etiamsi Axioma sit apud Euclâ—…dem non tamen ideò Geometricum put andum est quia Geometres to utitur Vtitur enim tota Logica Ram in Schol. Matth. And Aristotle vindicates such Propositions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from being vsurped by Particular Sciences 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Quia conveniunt omni Eâ—…ti non alicui Generi separatim 4. Metapb cap. 3. T. 7. Part should bee of equall worth power credit or authority with the Whole Secondly that in their Doctrine concerning the Infallibility of their Church their proceeding is most unreasonable For if you aske them Why they believe their whole Doctrine to be the sole true Catholike Faith Their Answer is Because it is agreeable to the Word of God and the Doctrine and Tradition of the Ancient Church If you aske them How they know that to be so They will then produce Testimonies of Scripture Councells and Fathers But if you aske a third time By what meanes they are assured that these Testimonies doe indeed make for them and their Cause They will not then have recourse to Text of Scripture or Exposition of Fathers or phrase and propriety of Language in which either of them were first written or to the scope of the Author or the d Intelligentia dictorum ex causis est assumenda dicendi quia non Sermonires sed Rei Sermo est subjectus S. Hilar. L. 4. de Trin. Ex materiâ dicti dirigendus est sensus Tert. L. de Resur carnis c. 37. Causes of the thing uttered or the Conference with like e Uidendo differentias Similium ad Similia Orig. Tract 19 in S Matth. Places or the Anteceden's f Recolendum est unde venerit ista Sententia qua illam superiora pepererint quibúsque connexa dependeat S. Aug. Ep. 29 Solet circumstantia Scriptura illuminare Sementiam S. Aug. L. 83. Quaest. q. 69. and Consequents of the same Places g Quae ambiguè obscurè in nonnullis Scripturae Sacrae locis dicta videntur per ea quae alibi certa indubitata habentur dâ—…clarantur S Basil in Regulis contractis Reg. 267. Manifestiora quaeque praevaleant de incertis certiora praescribant Tert. L. de Resur c. 19 21. S. Aug. L. 3. De Doct Christ. c. â—…6 Moris est Scripturarum obscuris Manifesta subnectere quod prius sub aenigmatibus dixerint apertâ voce proferre S. Hieron in Esa 19. princ Uide §. 26. Nu. 4. or the Exâ—…osition of the darke and doubtfull Places of Scripture by the undoubted and manifest With divers other Rules given for the true knowledge and understanding of Scripture which do frequently occurre in h S. Aug. L. 3. de Doctr. Christianâ S. Augustine No none of these or the like helpes That with them were to Admit a Private Spirit or to make way for it But their finall Answer is They know it to be so because the present Romane Church witnessethit according to Tradition So arguing à primo ad ultimum from first to last the Present Church of Rome and her Followers believe her owne Doctrine and Tradition to bee true and Catholike because she professes it to be such And if this bee not to proove idem per idem the same by the same I know not what is which though it be most absurd in all kind of learning yet out of this I see not how 't is possible to winde themselves so long as the last resolution of their Faith must rest as they teach upon the Tradition of the present Church only It seemes therefore to mee very necessary * And this is so necessary that Bellarmine confesses that if Tradition which he relies upon be not Divine He and his can have no Faith Non habemus fidem Fides enim verbo Dei nititur L. 4. de verbo Dei c. 4. §. At si ita est And A. C. tells us p. 47. To know that Scripture is Divine and Infallible in every part is a Foundation so necessary as if it be doubtfully questioned all the Faith built upon Scripture falls to the ground And he gives the same reason for it p. 50. which Belarmine doth that we bee able to proove the Bookes of Scripture to bee the Word of God by some Authority that is absolutely Divine For if they bee warranted unto us by any Authority lesse then Divine then all things contained in them which have no greater assurance then the Scripture in which they are read are not Objects of Divine beliefe And that once granted will enforce us to yeeld That all the Articles of Christian Beliefe have no greater assurance then Humane or Morall Faith or Credulity can afford An Authority then simply Divine must make good the Scriptures Infallibility at least in the last Resolution of our Faith in that Poynt This Authority cannot bee any Testimony or Voyce of the * Ecclesiam spiritu afflatam esse certè credo Non ut veritatâ—…m authoritatemve Libris Canonicis triâ—…uat sed ut doc eat illos non alios esse Canonicos Nec fi aditum nobis praebet ad hujusmodi sacros Librâ—…s cognoscendos protinus ibi acquiescendum est sed ultra oportet progredi solidâ Dei veritate niti Quâ ex re intelligitur quid sibi volucrit Augustinus quam ait Evangelio non crederem nisi c. M. Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8 fol. 34. b. Non docet fundatam esse Evangelii fidem in Ecclesiae Authoritate sed c. Ibid. Church alone For the Church consists of men subject to Error And no one of them fince the Apostles times hath beene assisted with so plentifull a measure of the Blessed Spirit as to secure him from being deceived And all the Parts being all liable to mistaking and sallible the VVhole cannot possibly bee Infallible in and of it self and priviledged from being deceived in some Things oâ—…
more wee finde that the thing it selfe doth answer our received opinion concerning it so that the former inducement prevailing somewhat with us before doth now much more prevaile when the very thing hath ministred farther Reason Here then againe in his Iudgement Tradition is the first Inducement but the farther Reason and Ground is the Scripture And Resolution of Faith ever settles upon the Farthest Reason it can not upon the First Inducement So that the State of this Question is firme and yet plaine enough to him that will not shut his eyes Now here after a long silence A. C. thrusts himselfe in againe and tels me That if I would A. C. p. 52. consider the Tradition of the Church not onely as it is the Tradition of a Company of Fallible men in which sense the Authority of it as himselfe confesses is but Humane and Fallible c. But as the Tradition of a Company of men assisted by Christ and his Holy Spirit in that sense I might easily finde it more then an Introduction indeed as much as would amount to an Infallible Motive Well I have considered The Tradition of the present Church both these wayes And I finde that A. C. confesses That in the first sense the Tradition of the Church is meere humane Authority and no more And therefore in this sense it may serve for an Introduction to this Beliefe but no more And in the second sense as it is not the Tradition of a Company of men onely but of men assisted by Christ and His Spirit In this second sense I cannot finde that the Tradition of the present Church is of Divine and Infallible Authority till A. C. can prove That this Company of men the Romane Prelates and their Clergie he meanes are so fully so cleerely so permanently assisted by Christ and his Spirit as may reach to Infallibility much lesse to a Divine Infallibility in this or any other Principle which they teach For every Assistance of Christ and the Blessed Spirit is not enough to make the Authority of any Company of men Divine and infallible but such and so great an Assistance onely as is purposely given to that effect Such an Assistance the Prophets under the Old Testament and the Apostles under the New had but neither the High-Priest with his Clergie in the Old nor any Company of Prelates or Priests in the New since the Apostles ever had it And therefore though at the entreaty of A. C. I have considered this very A. C. p. 52. well yet I cannot no not in this Assisted sense thinke the Tradition of the present Church Divine and Infallible or such Company of men to be worthy of Divine and infallible Credit and sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Which I am sorrie A. C. should affirme so boldly as he doth What A. C. p. 52. That Company of men the Romane Bishop and his Clergie of Divine and Infallible Credit and sufficient to breed in us Divine and Infallible Faith Good God! Whither will these men goe Surely they are wise in their generation but that makes them never a whit the more the Children of light a S. Luke 16. 8. S. Luke 16. And could they put this home upon the world as they are gone farre in it what might they not effect How might they and would they then Lord it over the Faith of Christendome contrary to b 1. S. Pet. 5. 3. S. Peter's Rule whose Successours certainly in this they are not But I pray if this Company of men be infallibly assisted whence is it that this very Company have erred so dangerously as they have not only in some other things but even in this Particular by equaling the Tradition of the present Church to the written Word of God Which is a Doctrine unknowne to the a S. Basil goes as farre for Traditions as any For he sayes Parem vim habent ad pictatem L. de Sp. Sanct. c. 27. But first he speaks of Apostolicall Tradition not of the Tradition of the Present Church Secondly the Learned take exceptions to this Booke of S. Basil as corrupted BP Andr. Opusc. cont Peron p. 9. Thirdly S. Basil himself Ser. de Fide professes that he uses somtimes Agrapha sed ca solùm quae non sunt aliona à piâ secundum Scripturam sententiâ So he makes the Scripture their Touch-stone or tryall And therefore must of Necessity make Scripture superior in as much as that which is able to try another is of greater force and superiour Dignity in that use then the thing tried by it And Stapleton himselfe confesses Traditionem recentiorem posteriorem sicut particularem nullo modo cum Scripturâ vel cum Traditionibus priùs à se explicatis comparandam esse Stapleton Relect. Controv. 5. q. 5. A. 2. Primitive Church and which frets upon the very Foundation it selfe by justling with it So belike he that hath but halfe an indifferent eye may see this Assisted Company have erred and yet we must wink in obedience and think them Infallible But. A. C. would have me consider againe That A. C. p 52. it is as easie to take the Tradition of the present Church in the two fore-named senses as the present Scriptures printed and approved by men of this Age. For in the first sense The very Scriptures saith he considered as printed and approved by men of this Age can be no more then of Humane Credit But in the second sense as printed and approved by men assisted by God's Spirit for true Copies of that which was first written then we may give Infallible Credit to them Well I have considered this too And I can take the Printing and Approving the Copies of Holy-Writ in these two senses And I can and do make a difference betweene Copies printed and approved by meere morall men and men assisted by Gods Spirit And yet for the Printing onely a skilfull and an able morall man may doe better service to the Church then an illiterate man though assisted in other things by God's Spirit But when I have considered all this what then The Scripture being put in writing is a thing visibly existent and if any errour be in the Print 't is easily corrigible by b Ut §. 18. Nu. 4. Eâ—… S. Aug. L. 32. cont Faustum 〈◊〉 1â—… former Copies Tradition is not so easily observed nor so safely kept And howsoever to come home to that which A. C. inferres upon it namely That the A. C. p. 53. Tradition of the present Church may be accepted in these two senses And if this be all that he will inferre for his penne here is troubled and forsakes him whether by any checke of Conscience or no I know not I will and you see have granted it already without more adoe with this Caution That every Company of men assisted by Gods Spirit are not assisted to this height to be Infallible by Divine Authority For all this
The Key that lets men in to the Scriptures even to this knowledge of them That they are the Word of God is the Tradition of the Church but when they are in d In sacrâ Scripturâ Ipse immediatè loquitur fidelibus Ibid. They heare Christ himselfe immediately speaking in Scripture to the Faithfull e S. Iohn 10. 4. And his Sheepe doe not onely heare but know his voice And then here 's no vicious Circle indeed of prooving the Scripture by the Church and then round about the Church by the Scripture Onely distinguish the Times and the Conditions of men and all is safe For a Beginner in the Faith or a Weakling or a Doubter about it begins at Tradition and proves Scripture by the Church But a man strong and growne up in the Faith and understandingly conversant in the Word of God proves the Church by the Scripture And then upon the matter we have a double Divine Testimony altogether Infallible to confirme unto us That Scripture is the Word of God The first is the Tradition of the Church of the Apostles themselves who delivered immediately to the world the Word of Christ. The other the Scripture it selfe but after it hath received this Testimony And into these we doe and may safely Resolve our Faith a Quod autem credimus posterioribus circa quos non apparent virtutes Divinae hoc est Quia non praedicant alia quà m quae illi in Scriptis certissimis reâ—…iquerunt Qua constat per midios in nullo fuisse vitiata ex consensione concordi in eis omnium succedentium usque ad tempora nostra Henr. à Gand. Sum. P. 1. A. 9. q. 3. As for the Tradition of after Ages in and about which Miracles and Divine Power were not so evident we believe them by Gandavo's full Confession because they doe not preach other things then those former the Apostles left in scriptis certissimis in most certaine Scripture And it appeares by men in the middle ages that these writings were vitiated in nothing by the concordant consent in them of all succeeders to our owne time And now by this time it will be no hard thing to reconcile the Fathers which seeme to speake differently in no few places both one from another and the same from themselves touching Scripture and Tradition And that as well in this Point to prove Scripture to be the Word of God as for concordant exposition of Scripture in all things else When therefore the Fathers say b Scripturas habemus ex Traditione S. Cvril Hier. Catech. 4. Multa quae non inveniuntur in Literis Apostolorum c. non nisi ab illis tradita commendata creduntur S. Aug. 2. de Baptism contra Denat c. 7. We have the Scripture by Tradition or the like either They meane the Tradition of the Apostles themselves delivering it and there when it is knowne to be such we may resolve our Faith Or if they speake of the Present Church then they meane that the Tradition of it is that by which we first receive the Scripture as by an according Meanes to the Prime Tradition But because it is not simply Divine we cannot resolve our Faith into it nor settle our Faith upon it till it resolve it selfe into the Prime tradition of the Apostles or the Scripture or both and there we rest with it And you cannot shew an ordinary consent of Fathers Nay can you or any of your Quarter shew any one Father of the Church Greeke or Latine that ever said We are to resolve our Faith that Scripture is the Word of God into the Tradition of the present Church And againe when the Fathers say we are to relie upon Scripture a Non aliundè scientia Coelestium S. Hilar L. 4. dc Trinit Si Angelus dc Coelo annunciaverit praeterquam quod in Scripturis c. S. Aug. L. 3. cont Petil. c. 6. onely they are never to bee understood with Exclusion of Tradition in what causes soever it may be had b Quùm sit perfectus Scripturarum Canon sibique ad omnia satis superque sufficiat c. Vin. Lir. contra Haeres c. 2. And if it be sibi ad omnia then to this To prove it self at least after Tradition hath prepared us to receive it Not but that the Scripture is abundantly sufficient in and to it self for all things but because it is deepe and may be drawne into different senses and so mistaken if any man will presume upon his owne strength and go single without the Church To gather up whatsoever may seeme scattered in this long Discourse to prove That Scripture is the Word of God I shall now in the Last Place put all together that so the whole state of the Question may the better appeare First then I shall desire the Reader to consider Pun. 1. that every Rationall Science requires some Principles quite without its owne Limits which are not proved in that Science but presupposed Thus Rhetoricke presupposes Grammar and Musicke Arithmeticke Therefore it is most reasonable that c Omnis Scientia praesupponit fidem aliquam S. Prosper in Psalm 123. And S. Cynl Hierosol Catechesi 5. shewes how all things in the world do side consistere Therefore most unreasonable to deny that to Divinity which all Sciences nay all things challenge Namely somethings to be presupposed and believed Theologie should be allowed to have some Principles also which she proves not but presupposes And the chiefest of these is That the Scriptures are of Divine Authority Secondly that there is a great deale of difference Pun. 2. in the Manner of confirming the Principles of Divinity and those of any other Art or Science whatsoever For the Principles of all other Sciences doe finally resolve either into the Conclusions of some Higher Science or into those Principles which are per se nota known by their own light and are the Grounds and Principles of all Science And this is it which properly makes them Sciences because they proceed with such strength of Demonstration as forces Reason to yeeld unto them But the Principles of Divinity resolve not into the Grounds of Naturall Reason For then there would be no roome for Faith but all would bee either Knowledge or Vision but into the Maximes of Divine Knowledge supernaturall And of this we have just so much light and no more then God hath revealed unto us in the Scripture Thirdly That though the Evidence of these Supernaturall Pun. 3. Truths which Divinity teaches appeares not so manifest as that of the Naturall a Si vis credere manifestis invisibilibus magis quà m visibilibus oportet credere Licet dictum sit admirabile verum est c. S. Chrysostom Hom. 46. ad Pot. And there he proves it Aliae Scientiae certitudinem habent ex Naturali Lumine Rationis Humanae quae decipi potest Haec autem ex Luminc Divinae Scientiae quae decipi non potest
it but not Evident And therefore he is after forced to confesse That the soule somtimes assents not to the Miracles but in great timidity which cannot stand with cleere Evidence And after againe That the soule may renounce the Doctrine formerly confirmed by Miracles unlesse some inward and supernaturall Light be given c. And neither can this possibly stand with Evidence And therefore Bellarmine goes no farther then this Miracula esse sufficientia efficacia ad novam fidem persuadendam L. 4. de Notis Eccles. c. 14. §. 1. To induce and perswade but not to Convince And Thomas will not grant so much for he sayes expresly Miraculum non est sufficiens Causa inducens Fidem Quia videntium unum idem Miraculâ—… quidam credunt quidam non Tho. 2. 2. q. 6. A. 1. c. And Ambros. Catharin in Rom. 10. 15. is downe-right at Nulla fides est habenda signo Examinanda sunt c. Anastasius Nicanus Episcopus apud Baron ad An. 360. num 21 Non sunt necessaria signâ—… vera sidet c. Suarez defens Fidei Catho L. 1. c. 7. Nu. 3. Infallâ—…ble nor Inseparable Markes of Truth in Doctrine Not Infallible For they may be Marks of false Doctrine in the highest degree d Deut. 13. 1 2 3. 2. Thess. 2. 9. S. Marc. 13. 22. Deut. 13. Not proper and Inseparable For e Operatio Virtutum alteri datur 1. Cor. 12. 10. To one and another he saith not to al. Damonia fugare Mortuâ—…s suscitare c. dedit quibusdam Discipulis suis quibusdam non dedit That is to doe Miracles S. Aug. Serm. 22. de Verbis Apost 〈◊〉 5. all which wrote by Inspiration did not confirm their Doctrine by Miracles For we do not finde that David or Solomon with some other of the Prophets did any neither were any wrought by S. Iohn the Baptist †S. Ioh. 10. 41. S. Ioh. 10. So as Credible Signes they were and are still of as much forceto us as 't is possible for things on the credit of Relation to be For the Witnesses are many and such as spent their lives in making good the Truth which they saw But that the Workers of them were Divinely and Infallibilly inspired in that which they Preacht and writ was still to the †Here it may be observed how warily A. C. carries himselfe For when hee hath said That a cleare Râ—…lation was made to the Apostles which is most true And so the Apostles knew that which they taught simpliciter à priori most Demonstratively from the Prime Cause God himselfe Then hee addes p 51. I say cleare in attestante That is the Revelation of this Truth was cleare in the Apostles that witnessed it But to make it knowledge in the Auditors the same or like Revelation and as cleare must be made to them For they could have no other knowing Assurance Credible they might and had So A. C. is wary there but comes not home to the Businesse And so might have held his peace For the Question is not what cleare Evidence the Apostles had but what Evidence they had which heard them Hearers a matter of Faith and no more evident by the light of Humane Reason to men that lived in those Dayes then to us now For had that beene Demonstrated or beene cleare as Prime Principles are in its owne light both they and we had apprehended all the Mysteries of Divinity by Knowledge not by Faith But this is most apparent was not For had the Prophets or Apostles been ordered by God to make this Demonstratively or Intuitively by Discourse or vision appeare as cleare to their Auditors as to themselves it did that Whatsoever they taught was Divine and Infallible Truth all men which had the true use of Reason must have beene forced to yeeld to their Doctrine a Esay 53. 1. Esay could never have beene at Domine quis Lord who hath believed our Report Esay 53. Nor b Ier 20. 7. Ieremy at Domine factus sum Lord I am in derision daily Ier. 20. Nor could any of S. Pauls Auditors have mocked at him as some of them did * Acts 17. 32. And had Zedcchiah and the people seene it as clearely as Ieremy himselfe did that the word he spake was Gods word and Infallible Ierusalem for oughâ—… we know had not beene layd desolate by the Chaldean But because they could not see this by the way of knowledge and would not believe it by way of Faith they and that City perished together Jer. 38. 17. Act. 17. for Preaching the Resurrection if they had had as full a view as S. Paul himselfe had in the Assureance which God gave of it in and by the Resurrection of Christ. vers 31. But the way of Knowledge was not that which God thought fittest for mans Salvation For Man having sinned by Pride God thought fittest to humble him at the very root of the Tree of Knowledge and make him deny his understanding and submit to Faith or hazard his happinesse The Credible Object all the while that is the Mysteries of Religion and the Scripture which containes them is Divine and Infallible and so are the Pen-men of them by Revelation But we and all our Fore-Fathers the Hearers and Readers of them have neither * Nemo pius nisi qui Scripturae credit S. Aug. L. 26. cont Faustum c. 6. Now no Man believes the Scripture that doth not believe that it is the Word of God I say which doth not believe I doe not say which doth not know oportâ—…t quod Credatur Authoritati eorum quibus Revelatio facta est Tho p. 1. q. 1. A. 8. ad secundum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 C c. Quod vero Animam habemus unde manis stâ—…m Si enim Uisibilibus credere velâ—… de Deo de Angelis de mente de Anima dubitabis sic tibi omnia veritatis dogmata deperibunt Et certè si manifestis credere velis Invisibilibus magis quam Uisibilibus credere oportet Liâ—…et enim admirabile sit dictum verum tamâ—…n apud mentem habentes valde certum vel in confesso Ex homil 13 S Chryâ—…ost in S. Mat. To. 1. Edit Fronto Paris 1630. knowledge nor vision of the Prime Principles in or about them but * Faith only And the Revelation which was cleare to them is not so to us nor therefore the Prime Tradition it selfe delivered by them Sixthly That hence it may be gathered that Pun. 6. the Assent which we yeeld to this maine Principle of Divinity That the Scripture is the Word of God is grounded vpon no Compelling or Demonstrative Ratiocination but relyes upon the strength of Faith more then any other Principle whatsoever †And this is the Ground of that which I said before §. 15. Nu. 1. That the Scripture only and not any unwritten Tradition was the â—…oundation of our Faith Namely when the Authority of
of Divinity in this sort is a Science because it proceeds out of Principles that are knowne by the light of a Superiour Knowledge which is the Knowledge of God and the Blessed in Heaven In this Superiour Science this Principle The Scriptures are the Oracles of God is more then evident in full light This Superiour Science delivered this Principle in full revealed Light to the Prophets and Apostles †Non creditur Deus esse Author bujus Scientiae quia Homines hoc testati sunt in quantum Homines nudo Testimonio Humano sed in quantum circa eos effulsit virtus Divina â—…sa Deus iis sibi ipsi in eis Testimonium pâ—…buit Hen. à Gand. Sum. P. 1. A. 9. q. 3. This Infallible Light of this Principle made their Authority derivatively Divine By the same Divine Authoriâ—…y they wrote and delivered the Scripture to the Church Therefore from them immediately the Church received the Scripture and that uncorrupt though not in the same clearenesse of Ligâ—…t which they had And yet since no sufficient Reason hath or can be given that in any Substantiall thing it hath beene * Corruâ—…pi non possunt quia in manibus sunt omnium Christianorum Et quisquis hoc primitùs ausus esset multorum Codicum vetustiorum collatione confutaretur Maximè quia non unâ—… linguá sea multis continetur Scriptura Nonnullae autem Codicum mendositates vel de Antiquioribus vel de Linguá praecedente emendantur S. Aug. L. 32. cont Faustum c. 16. Corrupted it remaines firme at this day and that proved in the most Supreme Science and therefore now to bee supposed at least by all Christians That the Scripture is the Word of God So my Answer is good even in strictnesse That this Principle is to be supposed in this Dispute Besides the Iewes never had nor can have any other Proofe That the Old Testament is the Word of God then we have of the New For theirs was delivered by Moses and the Prophets and ours was delivered by the Apostles which were Prophets too The Iewes did believe their Scripture by a Divine Authority For so the Iewes argue themselves a S. Iohn 9. 29. S. Ioh. 9. We know that God spake with Moses b Maldonat in S. Ioh. 9. It aque non magis errare posse eum sequentes quà m si Deum ipsum sequerentur And that therefore they could no more erre in following Moses then they could in following God himselfe And our Saviour seemes to inferre as much c S. Ioh. 5. 47. S. Ioh. 5. where he expostulates with the Iewes thus If you believe not Moses his Writings how should you believe Me Now how did the Iewes know that God spake to Moses How why apparently the same way that is before set downe First by Tradition So S. d Hom. 57. iâ—… S. Ioh. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysostome We know why By whose witnesse do you know By the Testimony of our Ancestors But he speakes not of their immediate Ancestors but their Prime which were Prophets and whose Testimony was Divine into which namely their Writings the Iewes did Resolve their Faith And even that Scripture of the Old Testament was a e 2. S. Pet. 1. 19. Light and a shining Light too And therefore could not but be sufficient when Tradition had gone before And yet though the Iewes entred this way to their Beliefe of the Scripture they do not say f S. Chrys. ubi suprà 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Audivimus We have heard that God spâ—…ke to Moses but We know it So they Resolved their Faith higher and into a more inward Principle then an Eare to their immediate Ancestors and their Tradition And I would willingly learne of you if you can shew it me where ever any one Iew disputing with another about their Law did put the other to prove that the Old Testament was the Word of God But they still supposed it And when others put them to their Proofe this way they went And yet you say F. That no other Answer could be made but by admitting some Word of God unwritten to assure us of this Point B. I thinke I have shewed that my Answer is § 19 good and that no other Answer need be made If there were need I make no Question but another Answer might be made to assure us of this Point though we did not admit of any Word of God unwritten I say to assure us and you expresse no more If you had said to assure us by Divine Faith your Argument had beene the stronger But if you speake of Assurance onely in the generall I must then tell you and it is the great advantage which the Church of Christ hath against Infidels a man may be assured nay infallibly assured by Ecclesiasticall and Humane Proofe Men that never saw Rome may be sure and infallibly believe That such a Citie there is by Historicall and acquired Faith And if Consent of Humane Storie can assure me this why should not Consent of Church-storie assure me the other That Christ and his Apostles delivered this Body of Scripture as the Oracles of God For Iewes Enemies to Christ they beare witnesse to the Old Testament and Christians through almost all Nations †Tant a hominum temporum consensione firmatum S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccles Cath. c. 29. Is Libri quoquo modo se habent sancti tamen Divinarum Rerum pleni prope totius generis humani Confessione diffamantur c. S. Aug. de util cred c. 7. L. 13. cont Faust. c. 15. give in evidence to both Old and New And no Pagan or other Enemies of Christianity can give such a Worthy and Consenting Testimonie for any Authoritie upon which they rely or almost for any Principle which they have as the Scripture hath gained to it self And as is the Testimony which it receives above all * Super omnes omnium Gentiâ—… Literas S. Aug. 11. de Civit. Dei c. 1. Writings of all Nations so here is assurance in a great measure without any Divine Authority in a Word written or Vnwritten A great assurance and it is Infallible too Only then we must distinguish Infallibility For first a thing may be presented as an infallible Object of Beliefe when it is true and remaines so For Truth quà talis as it is Truth can not deceive Secondly a thing is said to be Infallible when it is not only true and remains so actually but when it is of such invariable constancy and upon such ground as that no Degree of falshood at any time in any respect can fall upon it Certain it is that by Humane Authority Consent and Proofe a man may be assured infallibly that the Scripture is the Word of God by an acquired Habit of Faith cui non su'est falsum under which nor Error nor falshood is But he cannot be assured infallibly by Divine Faith a Incertum
esso non potest hos esse Libros Canonicos Wal. Doct. fid l. 2. a. 2. c. 20. cui subesse non potest falsum into which no falshood can come but by a Divine Testimony This Testimony is absolute in Scripture it selfe delivered by the Apostles for the Word of God and so sealed to our Soules by the operation of the Holy Ghost That which makes way for this as an b Canus Loc. l. 2 c. 8. facit Ecclesiam Causam sine quanon Introduction and outward motive is the Tradition of the present Church but that neither simply Divine nor sufficient alone into which we may resolve our Faith but only as is †§. 16. before expressed And now to come close to the Particular The time was before this miserable Rent in the Church of Christ which I thinke no true Christian can looke upon but with a bleeding heart that you and Wee were all of One Beliefe That beliefe was tainted in tract and corruption of times very deepely A Division was made yet so that both Parts held the Creed and other Common Principles of Beliefe Of these this was one of the greatest †Inter omnes penè constat aut certè id quod satis est inter me illos cum quibus nunc agitur convenit hoc c. Sic in aliâ Causá cont Manichaos S. Aug. L. de Mor. Eccl. Cath. c. 4. That the Scripture is the VVord of God For our beliefe of all things contained in it depends upon it Since this Division there hath beene nothing done by us to discredit this Principle Nay We have given it all honour and ascribed unto it more sufficiency even to the containing of all things necessary to salvation with * Vin. Lir. cont Hares c. 2. Satis super que enough and more then enough which your selves have not done do not And for begetting and setling a Beliefe of this Principle we goe the same way with you and a better besides The same way with you Because we allow the Tradition of the present Church to be the first induceing Motive to embrace this Principle onely we cannot goe so farre in this way as you to make the present Tradition alwayes an Infallible VVord of God unwritten 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 only to receive us in but another after to let us out into more open and richer ground And We go a better way then you Because after we are moved and prepared and induced by Tradition we resolve our Faith into that Written Word and God delivering it in which we finde materially though not in Termes the very Tradition that led us thither And so we are sure by Divine Authority that we are in the way because at the end we find the way proved And doe what can be done you can never settle the Faith of man about this great Principle till you rise to greater assurance then the Present Church alone can give And therefore once againe to that known place of S. Augustine * Contr. Epist. Fund c. 5. The words of the Father are Nisi commoveret Vnlesse the Authority of the Church mooved me but not alone but with other Motives eâ—…se it were not commovere to move together And the other Motives are Resolvers though this be Leader Now since we goe the same way with you so farre as you goe right and a better way then you where you go wrong we need not admit any other Word of God then We doc And this ought to remaine as a Presupposed Principle among all Christians and not so much as come into this Question about the sufficiency of Scripture betweene you and us But you say that F. From this the Lady called us and desiring to heare VVhether the Bishop would grant the Romane Church to be the Right Church The B. granted That it was B One occasion which mooved Tertullian to § 20 write his Booke de Praescript adversùs Haereticos was That he * Pamel in Summar Lib Uiaens Disputationibus â—…ihil ant parum profici saw little or no Profit come by Disputations Sure the Ground was the same then and now It was not to deny 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 unprofitable If it had S. Stephen a Acts 6 9. would not have disputed with the Cyrenians nor S. Paul with the b Acts. 9. 29. Grecians first and then with the Iewes c Acts 19. 17. 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 own though it â—…e by unworthy means and disparagement d Debilitaetur generosa indoles conjecta in argutias Sen. Aep 48. of truth And so I finde it here For as it is true that this Question was asked so it is altogether false that it was asked in this * Here A. C. hath nothing to say but that the Iesuite did not affirme That the Lady askâ—…d this Question in this or any other precise forme No why the words preceding are the Iesuites own Therefore if these were not the Ladies words he wrongs her not I him forme or so Answâ—…red There is a great deale of Difference especially as Romanists handle the Question of the Church between The Church and A Church and there is some betvveene a True Church and a Right Church vvhich is the vvord you use but no man else that I knovv I am sure not I. For The Church may import in our Language The only true Church and perhaps as some of you seeme to make it the Root and the Ground of the Catholike And this I never did grant of the Romane Church nor ever meane to doe But A Church can imply no more then that it is a member of the Whole And this I never did nor ever will deny if it fall not absolutely away from Christ. That it is a True Church I granted also but not a Right as you impose upon me For Ens and Verum Being and True are convertible one with another and every thing that hath a Being is truly that Being which it is in truth of Substance But this word Right is not so used but is referd more properly to perfection in Conditions And in this sense every thing that hath a true and reall Being is not by and by Right in the Conâ—…itions of it A man that is most dishonest and unworthy the name a very Thiefe if you will is a True man in the verity of his Essence as he is a Creature endued with Reason for this none can steale from him nor he from himselfe but Death But he is not therefore a Right or an upright man And a Church that is
Councell which shall be lawfully called and fairely and freely held with indifferency to all parties And that must judge the Difference according to Scripture which must be their Rule as well as Private Mens And here after some lowd Cry against the Pride and Insolent madnesse of the Protâ—…stants A. C. addes That A. C. p. 58. the Church of Rome is the Principall and Mother Church And that therefore though it be against common equity that Subjects and Children should be Accusers Witnesses Iudges and Executioners against their Prince and Mother in any case yet it is not absurd that in some Cases the Prince or Mother may Accuse Witnesse Iudge and if need be execute Iustice against unjust and rebellious Subjects or evill Children How farre forth Rome is a Prince over the whole Church or a Mother of it will come to be shewed at after In the meane time though I cannot grant her to be either yet let 's suppose her to be both that A. C s. Argument may have all the strength it can have Nor shall it force me as plausible as it seemes to weaken the just power of Princes over their Subjects or of Mothers over their Children to avoid the shocke of this Argument For though A. C. may tell us 't is not absurd in some Cases yet I would faine have him name any one Moderate Prince that ever thought it just or tooke it upon him to be Accuser and VVitnesse and Iudge in any Cause of moment against his Subjects but that the Law had Libertie to Iudge betweene them For the great Philosopher tells us 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Arist. Eto c. 6. That the Chiefe Magistrate is Custos juris the Guardian and keeper of the Law and if of the Law then both of that equity and equality which is due unto them that are under him And even Tiberius himselfe in the Cause of Silanus when Dolabella would have flatter'd him into more power then in wisdome he thought fit then to take to himselfe he put him off thus No †Minui Jura quoties gliscat Potestas nec utendum Imperio ubi Legibus agi possit Tacit. L. 3 Annal. the Lawes grow lesse where such Power enlarges Nor is absolute Power to be used where there may be an orderly proceeding by Law And for * Heb. 12. 9. Parents 't is true when Children are young they may chastise them without other Accuser or VVitnesse then themselves and yet the children are to give them reverence And 't is presumed that naturall affection will prevaile so far with them that they will not punish them too much For all experience tells us almost to the losse of Education that they * God used Samuel as a Messenger against Eli for his overmuch indulgence to his sonnes 1 Sam. 3. 13. And yet Samuel himselfe committed the very same fault concerning his own sonnes 1 Sam. 8. 3. 5. And this Indulgence occasioned the Change of the Civill government as the former was the losse of the Priesthood punish them too little even when there is cause Yet when Children are growne up and come to some full use of their owne Reason the Apostles Rule is †Coloss. 3. 21. Colos. 3. Parents provoke not your Children And if the Apostle prevaile not with froward Parents there 's a Magistrate and a Law to relieve even a sonne against a Crimini ci Tribunus inter eatera dabat quod filium juvenem nullius probri compertum extorrem urbe domo penatibus foro luce congressu aequalium prohibituÌ„ in opus servile propè in carcerem atque in ergastulum dederit Liv. dec 1. l. 7. unnaturall Parents as it was in the Case of T. Manlius against his over Imperious Father And an expresse Law there was among the Iewes Deut. 21. when Children Deut. 21. 19. were growne up and fell into great extremities that the Parents should then bring them to the Magistrate and not be too busie in such cases with their own Power So suppose Rome be a Prince yet her Subjects must be tryed by Gods Law the Scripture And suppose her a Mother yet there is or ought to be Remedy against her for her Children that are growne up if she forget all good Nature and turne Stepdame to them Well the Reason why the Iesuite asked the Question Quo Iudice Who should be Iudge He sayes was this Because there 's no equity in it that the Protestants should be Iudges in their owne Cause But now upon more Deliberation A. C. tells us as if he A. C. p. 57. knew the Iesuites minde as well as himselfe as sure I thinke he doth That the Iesuite directed this Question chiefly against that speech of mine That there were Errors in Doctrine of Faith and that in the Generall Church as the Iesuite understood my meaning The Iesuite here tooke my meaning right For I confesse I said there were Errours in Doctrine and dangerous ones too in the Church of Rome I said likewise that when the Generall Church could not or would not Reforme such it was Lawfull for Particular Churches to Refâ—…rme themselves But then I added That the Generall Church not universally taken but in these Westerne parts fell into those Errours being swayed in these latter Ages by the predominant Power of the Church of Rome under whose Government it was for the most part forced And all men of understanding know how oft and how easily an Over-potent Member carries the whole with it in any Body Naturall Politick or Ecclesiasticall Yea but A. C. telles us That never any Competent Iudge did so censure the Church And indeed that no Power A. G. p. 57. on Earth or in Hell it selfe can so farre prevaile against the Generall Church as to make it Erre generally in any one Point of Divine Truth and much lesse to teach any thing by its full Authority to be a Matter of Faith which is contrary to Divine Truth expressed or involved in Scriptures rightly understood And that therefore no Reformation of Faith can be needfull in the Generall Church but only in Particular Churches And for proofe of this he cites S. Mat. 16. and 28. S. Luk. 22. S. Iohn 14. and 16. In this trouâ—…lesome and quarrelling Age I am most unwilling to meddle with the Erring of the Church in generall The Church of England is content to passe that over And though * Art 19. She tels us That the Church of Rome hath Erred even in matters of Faith yet of the Erring of the Church in generall She is modestly silent But since A. C. will needs have it That the whole Church did never generally Erre in any one Point of Faith he should doe well to Distinguish before he be so peremptory For if he mean no more then that the whole Vniversal Church of Christ cannot universally Erre in any one Point of Faith simply necessary to altmens salvation he fights against no Adversary that I know
because I take the Beliefe of the Primitive Church as it is expressed and delivered by the Councels and Ancient Fathers of those times As for the Foure Councels if A. C. aske how I have them that is their true and entire Copies I answer I have them from the Church-Tradition onely And that 's Assurance enough for this And so I am fully as sure as A. C. is or can make mee But if hee aske how I know infallibly I believe them in their true and uncorrupted sense Then I answer There 's no man of knowledge but hee can understand the plaine and simple Decision expressed in the Canon of the Councell where 't is necessary to Salvation And for all other debates in the Councels or Decisions of it in things of lesse moment 't is not necessary that I or any man else have Infallible Assurance of them though I thinke 't is possible to attaine even in these things as much Infallible Assurance of the uncorrupted sense of them as A. C. or any other Iesuites have A C. askes againe What Text of Scripture tels That Protestants now living do believe all this or that all A. C. p. 69. this is expressed in those particular Bibles or in the Writings of the Fathers and Councels which now are in the Protestants hands Good God! Whither will not a strong Bias carrie even a learned Iudgement Why what Consequence is there in this The Scripture now is the onely Ordinary Infallible Rule of Divine Faith Therefore the Protestants cannot believe all this before mentioned unlesse a particular Text of Scripture can be shewed for it Is it not made plaine before how we believe Scripture to be Scripture and by Divine and Infallible Faith too and yet wee can shew no particular Text for it Beside were a Text of Scripture necessary yet that is for the Object and the thing which we are to believe not for the Act of our believing which is meerely from God and in our selves and for which wee cannot have any Warrant from or by Scripture more then that we ought to believe but not that we in our particular do believe The rest of the Question is farre more inconsequent Whether all this bee expressed in the Bibles which are in Protestants hands For first we have the same Bibles in our hands which the Romanists have in theirs Therefore either we are Infallibly sure of ours or they are not Infallibly sure of theirs For we have the same Booke and delivered unto us by the same hands and all is expressed in ours that is in theirs Nor is it of moment in this Argument that we account more Apocryphall then they do For I will acknowledge every Fundamentall point of Faith as proveable out of the Canon as we account it as if the Apocryphall were added unto it Secondly A. C. is here extremely out of himselfe and his way For his Question is Whether all this be expressed in the Bibles which we have All this All what why before there is mention of the foure Generall Councels and in this Question here 's mention of the Writings of the Fathers and the Councels And what will A. C. look that we must shew a Text of Scripture for all this and an expresse one too I thought and doe so still 't is enough to ground Beliefe upon * Nâ—…n potest aliquid certum esse certitudire Fidei nisi aut immediate contineatur in verbo Dei aut ex verbo Dei per evidentem Consequentiam deducatur Bellar. L. 3. de Iustif. c. 8 §. 2. Necessary Consequence out of Scripture as well as upon expresse Text. And this I am sure of that neither I nor any man else is bound to believe any thing as Necessary to Salvation be it found in Councels or Fathers or where you will †Nec ego Nicaenum nec tu debes Ariminense tanquà m praejudicaturus proferre Concilium Nec ego hujus Authoritate nec tu illius detineris Scripturarum Au thoritatibus c. Res cum re Causa cum causâ Ratio cum ratione concertet S. Aug. L. 3. cont Maximinum c. 14. Testimonia Divina in fundamento ponenda sunt S. Aug. L. 20. de Civ Dei c. 1. Quia principia hujus Doctrinae per Revelationens habentur c. Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 8. ad 2. Solis Scriptur arum Libris Canonicis didâ—… hunc honorem deferre ut nullum Authorem corum in scribendo errâsse aliquid firmissimè credam Alios autem ita lego ut quant alibet sanctitate doctrináque praepolleant non ideò verum putem quod ipsi it à senserunt vel scripserunt S. Aug. Epist. 19. if it be Contrary to expresse Scripture or necessary Consequence from it And for the Copies of the Councels and Fathers which are in our hands they are the same that are in the hands of the Romanists and delivered to Posterity by Tradition of the Church which is abundantly sufficient to warrant that So we are as Infallibly sure of this as 't is possible for any of you to bee Nay are wee not more sure For wee have used no Index Expurgatorius upon the Writings of the Fathers * Sixtus Senens in Epist. ad Pium quintum as you have done So that Posterity hereafter must thanke us for true Copies both of Councels and Fathers and not you But A. C goes on and askes still Whether Protestants bee Infallibly sure that they rightly understand the A. C. p. 69. sense of all which is expressed in their Books according to that which was understood by the Primitive Church and the Fathers which were present at the foure first Generall Councels A. C. may aske everlastingly if hee will aske the same over and over againe For I pray wherein doth this differ from his †§. 38. N. 5. first Question save only that here Scripture is not named For there the Question was of our Assurance of the Incorrupted sense And therefore thither I refer you for Answer with this That it is not required either of us or of them that there should be had an Infallible assurance that wee rightly understand the sense of all that is expressed in our Bookes And I thinke I may believe without sinne that there are many things expressed in these Bookes for they are theirs as well as ours which A. C. and his Fellowes have not Infallible assurance that they rightly understand in the sense of the Primitive Church or the Fathers present in those Councels And if they say yes they can because when a difficulty crosses them they believe them in the Churches sense Yet that dry shift will not serve For beliefe of them in the Churches sense is an Implicit Faith but it works nothing distinctly upon the understanding For by an Implicite Faith no man can be infallibly assured that hee doth rightly understand the sense which is A. C s. Question whatever perhaps he may rightly believe And an Implicite
comes this short of Bâ—…asphemy to make the Trinity and Pâ—…y things alike and equally Credible Yea but A. C. will give you a Reason why no man may 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 much lesse deny any thing that A C. â—…7 is defiâ—…ed by a Generall Councell And his Reason is Because every such doubt and denyall is a breach from the one saving faith This is a very good reason if it bee true But how appeares it to be true How why it takes away saith A. C. Infallible credit from the Church and so the Divine Revelation being not sufficiently applyed it cannot according A. C. p. 71. to the ordinary course of Gods providence breed Infallible Beliefe in us VVhy but deliberately to douâ—…t and constantly to deny upon the grounds and in the manner * §. 38. N. 15. aforesaid doth not take away Infallible credit from the whole Church but onely from the Definition of a Generall Councell some way or other missed And that in things not absolutely Necessary to all mens salvation For of such things †Though every Thing Defined to bee a Divine Truth in Generall Councels is not absolutely necessary to bee expresly known and actually believed by all sorts c. A. C. p. 71. A. C. here speakes expresly Now to take away Infallible credit from some Definitions of Generall Councels in things not absolutely necessary to salvation is no breach upon the one saving faith which is necessary nor upon the Credit of the Catholike Church of Christ in things absolutely necessary for which onely it had Infallible Assistance promised So that no breach being made upon the faith nor no credit which ever it had being taken from the Church the Divine Revelation may bee and is as sufficiently applyed as ever it was and in the ordinary course of Gods providence may breed as Infallible beliefe in things necessary to salvation as ever it did But A. C. will proove his Reason before given and therefore hee askes us out of Saint Paul A. C. p. 71. Rom. 10. How shall men believe unlesse they heare How shall they heare without a Preacher And how shall they Rom. 10. 14. 15. preach to wit Infallibly unlesse they bee sent that is from God and infallibly assisted by his Spirit Here 's that which I have twise at least spoken to already namely That A. C. by this will make every Priest in the Church of Rome that hath Learning enough to preach and dissents not from that Church an Infallible Preacher which no Father of the Primitive Church did ever assume to himselfe nor the Church give him And yet the Fathers of the Primitive Church were sent and from God were assisted and by God and did sufficiently propose to men the Divine Revelation and did by it beget and breed up Faith saving Faith in the Soules of men Though * Aliâ—…s ab 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Se ripâ—… 〈◊〉 legâ—… 〈◊〉 saâ—…ctitate 〈◊〉 prapoâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ver 〈◊〉 pâ—…teÌ„ 〈◊〉 ipsi ita 〈◊〉 vel scripsâ—… Tho. 〈◊〉 q 1. A. 8. ad 2. Ex S. Aug. Ep. 19. Miâ—…i 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Demonstr 〈◊〉 accipias ex saâ—…ris Liâ—…eris S. Cyril 〈◊〉 Caâ—… 4. no one among them since the Apostles was an Infallible Preacher And A. C. should have done very well here to have made it manifest That this Scripture How shall they preach to wit Infallibly is so interpreted by Union Consent of Fathers and Definitions of Councels as hee a A. C. p. 70. bragged before that they use to interpret Scripture For I doe not finde How shall they Preach to wit †〈◊〉 Apostoli 〈◊〉 possunt intelligi ae Fide infusa illa 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a Deocreata est non est ex 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 haec apertissimè colligitur ex Bâ—… 3. sent D. 23 q. 2. A. 2. Conclus 1. Ergo Fides acquisiea necessaria est â—…d sed prater Acquisitam Infusa etiam requiritur non solum propter Intentionem Act us sedetiam propter Assensum Certâ—…nern Quia non potest esse firmus Assensus à Fide acquisita Quia per cam nullus credit alicui nisi 〈◊〉 scit posse fâ—…lli fallers licet credâ—… cum non Uelle fallere Scotus in 3. sent D. 23. q. unica Therefore in the judgement of your owne Schoole your Preachers can both deceive and be deceived And therefore certainly are not Infallible And M. Canus very expresly makes this but an Introduction to Infallible faith Primum ergo id statno juxta Commâ—…em Legem aliqua exterior a humâ—…a inciâ—…â—…ta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 esse 〈◊〉 ad Evangelii fidem 〈◊〉 Quomodo enim crâ—…nt ei quem non audierâ—…t c. Canus L. 2. de Lâ—…is c. 8. §. Primum ergo Et iterum St Fides infusa ita Fidei acquisitae niteretur tanquam suo fundamento ipsum Fundamentum Fiaâ—… nostra non esset Divina sed Humana Veritas Ibid § Cut tertium Therefore surely A. C. abâ—…ses this place of the Apostle very boldly Infallibly to bee the Comment of any one of the Fathers or any other approved Author And let him shew it if he can After this for I see the good man is troubled and forward and backward he goes he fals immediately A. C. p. 7â—… upon this Question If a whole generall Councell defining what is Divine Truth be not believed to be sent and assisted by Gods Spirit and consequently of Infallible Credit what man in the World can bee said to bee of Infallible Credit Well first A. C. hath very ill lucke in fitting his Conclusion to his Premises and his Consequent to his Antecedent And so 't is here with him For a Generall Councell may be assisted by God's Spirit and in a great measure too and in a greater then any private man not inspired and yet not consequently be of Inâ—… Credit for all assistance of God's Spirit reaches not up to Infallibility I hope the Ancient Bishops and Fathers of the Primitive Church were assisted by God's Spirit and in a plentifull measure too and yet A. C. himselfe will not say they were Infallible And secondly for the Question itselfe If a Generall Councell be not what man in the world can be said to be of Infallible Credit Truly I 'le make you a ready Answer No man Not the Pope himselfe No Let God and his word be true and every man a lyer Rom. 3. for so more or lesse every man will Rom. 3. 4. be found to be And this is neither dammage to the Church nor wrong to the person of any But then A. C. asks a shrewder Question then this If such a Councell lawfully called continued and confirmed A. C. p. 71. may erre in defining any one Divine Truth how can we be Infallibly certaine of any other Truth defined by it For if §. 10. N. 15. it may erre in one why not in another and another and so in all 'T is most true if such a Councell may erre in one it may
in another and another and so in all of like nature I say in all of like nature And A. C. may remember he expressed himselfe a little before to A. C. p. 71. speake of the Defining of such Divine Truths as are not absolutely necessary to be expresly knowne and actually believed of all sorts of men Now there is there can be no necessity of an Infallible certainty in the whole Catholike Church and much lesse in a Generall Councell of things not * §. 21. N. 5. absolutely necessary in themselves For Christ did not intend to leave an Infallible certainty in his Church to satisfie either Contentious or Curious or Presumptuous Spirits And therefore in things not Fundamentall not Necessary 't is no matter if Councels erre in one and another and a third the whole Church having power and meanes enough to see that no Councell erre in Necessary things and this is certainty enough for the Church to have or for Christians to expect especially since the Foundation is so strongly and so plainely laid downe in Scripture and the Creed that a modest man might justly wonder why any man should run to any later Councell at least for any Infallible certainty Yet A. C. hath more Questions to aske and his next is How we can according to the ordinary Course be A. C. p. 72. Infallibly assured that it erres in one and not in another when it equally by one and the same Authority defines both to be Divine Truth A. C. taking here upon him to defend M. Fisher the Jesuite could not but see what I had formerly written concerning this difficult Question about Generall Councels And to all that being large he replied little or nothing Now when he thinks that may be forgotten or as if it did not at all lie in his way he here turnes Questionist to disturbe that businesse and indeed the Church as much as he can But to this Question also I answer againe If any Generall-Councell doe now erre either it erres in things absolutely necessary to Salvation or in things not necessary If it erre in things Necessary we can be infallibly assured by the Scripture the Creeds the foure first Councels and the whole Church where it erres in one and not in another If it be in non necessariis in things not necessary 't is not requisite that we should have for them an infallible assurance As for that which followes it is notoriously both cunning and false 'T is false to suppose that a Generall Councell defining two things for Divine Truths and erring in one but not erring in another doth define both equally by one and the same Authority And 't is cunning because these words by the same Authority are equivocall and must be distinguished that the Truth which A. C. would hide may appeare Thus then suppose a Generall Councell erring in one point and not in another it doth define both and equally by the same delegated Authority which that Councell hath received from the Catholike Church But it doth not define both and much lesse equally by the same Authority of the Scripture which must be the Councels Rule as well as private mens no nor by the same Authority of the whole Catholike Church who did not intentionally give them equall power to define Truth and errour for Truth And I hope A C. dares not say the Scripture according to which all Councels that will uphold Divine Truth must Determine doth equally give either ground or power to define Errour and Truth To his former Questions A. C. adds That if we leave this to be examined by any private man this examination not being Infallible had need to be examined by another A. C p. 72. and this by another without end or ever comming to Infallible certainty necessarily required in that one faith which is necessary to salvation and to that peace and unity which ought to be in the Church Will this inculcating the same thing never be left I told the lesuite a §. 32. N. 5. §. 33. Consid. 7. Nu. 4. before that I give no way to any private man to be Iudge of a Generall Councell And there also I shewed the way how an erring Councell might be rectified and the peace of the Church either preserved or restored without lifting any private spirit above a Councell and without this processe in Infinitum which A. C. so much urges and which is so much declined in all b Arist. 1. Post Tex 6 4. Metaph T. 14. Sciences For as the understanding of a man must alwaies have somewhat to rest upon so must his Faith But a c §. 38 Nu. 〈◊〉 private man first for his owne satisfaction and after for the Churches if he have just cause may consider of and examine by the a Hic non loquimur de Decisione seu Determinatione Doctrinali quae ad unumquemque virum peritum spectare dignoscitur sed de Authoritativâ Iudiciali c la. Almain L. de Author Eccl. c. 10. princ Iudgement of discretion though not of power even the Definitions of a Generall Councell But A. C. concludes well That an Infallible certainty is necessary for that one Faith which is necessary to salvation And of that as I expressed b §. 38. Num. 1. before a most infallible certainty we have already in the Scripture the Creeds and the foure first Generall Councels to which for things Necessary and Fundamentall in the Faith we need no assistance from other Generall Councels And some of your c Sunt qui nescio quà ducti ratione sentiunt non esse opus Generali Concilio De Constantiensi loquitur dicentes omnia bene à Patribus nostris Ordinata ac Constituta modò ab omnibus legitimè fideliter servarentur Fatemur equidem id ipsum esse verissimum Tamen cùm nihil fere servetur c. Pet. de Aliaco L. de reformat Eccles. fine So that after-Councels are rather to Decree for Observance then to make any new Determinations of the Faith owne very honest and very Learned were of the same Opinion with me And for the peace and unity of the Church in things absolutely necessary we have the same infallible direction that wee have for Faith But in Things not necessary though they be Divine Truths also if about them Christian men doe differ 't is no more then they have done more or lesse in all Ages of the Church and they may differ and yet preserve the d Non omnis Error in his qua fidei sunt est aut Infidelitas aut Haeresis Holkot in 1. Sent. q. 1. ad 4. K. One necessary Faith and e Scimus quosdam quod semel imbiberint nolle deponere nec proposstum suum facilè mutare sed salvo inter Collegas pacis concordiae vinculo quaedam propria quae apud se semel sint usurpata retinere Quâ in re nec nos vim cuiquam facimus aut legem
other Whether you have related the two former truly appeares by D. White the late Reverend L. Bishop of Ely his Relation or Exposition of them I was present at none but this Third of which I here give the Church an Account But of this Third whether that were the Cause which you alledge I cannot tell You say F. It was observed 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 a certaine Lady required satisfaction as having formerly setled in her minde That it was not for her or any other unlearned Persons to take up on them to judge of Particulars without depending upon the Iudgement of the true Church B. The Opinion of that Honourable Person in § 2 this was never opened to mee And it is very fit the people should looke to the Iudgement of the Church before they bee too busie with Particulars But yet neither a 1 Cor. 10. 15. Scripture nor any good Authority denies them some moderate use of their owne understanding and Iudgement especially in things familiar and evident which even b Quis non sine ullo Magistro aut interprete ex se facilè cognoscat c. Novat de Trin. c. 23. Et loquitur de Mysterio Passion is Christi Dijudicare est Mensurare c. Unde Mens dicitur a Metiendo Tho. p. 1. q. 79. A. 9. ad 4. To what end then is a m nde and an understanding given a Man if he may not apply it to measure Truth Et 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 i. ab eo quod confiderat discernit Quiadecernit inter verum falsum Damasc. l. 2. Fid. Orth. c. 22. And A. C. himselfe p. 41. denyes not all Iudgement to private men but sayes they are not so to relie absolutely upon their private Iudgement as to adventure salvation upon it alone or chiefly which no man will deny ordinary Capacities may as easily understand as reade And therefore some Particulars a Christian may judge without depending F. This Lady therefore having heard it granted in the first Conference That there must bee a continuall visible Company ever since Christ teaching unchanged Doctrine in all Fundamentall Points that is Poynts necessary to salvation 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 salvation And therefore having appointed a time of Meeting betweene a B. and me and thereupon having sent for the B. and me before the B. came the Lady and a friend of hers 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 granted by D. White and L. K. c. B. What D. White and L. K. granted I heard § 3 not But I thinke both granted a continuall and a visible Church neither 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 leave it out But this concernes D. W. and he hath answered it Here A. C. steps in and sayes The Iesuite did not speake distractedly but most advisedly For saith he A. C. p. 40. where he relates what D. White or L. K. granted hee leaves out the word Infallible because they granted it not But where he speakes of the Lady there he addes it because the Iesuite knew it was an infallible Church which she sought to rely upon How farre the Catholike Militant Church of Christ is infallible is no Dispute for this Place though you shall finde it after But sure the Iesuite did not speake most advisedly nor A. C. neither nor the Lady her selfe if she said she desired to relie upon an Infallible Church For an Infallible Church denotes a Particular Church in that it is set in opposition to some other Particular Church that is not infallible Now I for my part doe not know what that Lady desired to relie upon This I know if she desired such a Particular Church neither this Iesuite nor any other is able to shew it her No not Bellarmine himselfe though of very great ability to make good any Truth which he undertakes for the Church of Rome †Feritas vincat necesse est sive Negantem sive confitentem c. S. Aug. Epist. 174. Ocâ—…ultari potest ad tempus veritas vinci non potest S. Aug. in Psal. 61. But no strength can uphold an Error against Truth where Truth hath an able Defendant Now where Bellarmine sets himselfe purposely to make Lib. 4. De Rom. Pont. Cap. 4. §. 1. Romana particularis Ecclesta non potest errare in Fide this good That the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in matter of Faith Out of which it followes That there may be found a Particular infallible Church you shall see what he is able to performe 1. First then after he hath Distinguished to expresse his meaning in what sense the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in things which are de Fide of the Faith he tells us this Firmitude is because the Sea Apostolike is fixed there And this he saith is most true * Ibid. §. 2. And for proofe of it he brings three Fathers to justifie it 1. The first S. Cyprian a Navigare audent ad Petri Cathodram Ecclesiam principalem c. Nec cogitare eos esse Romanos ad quos Perfidia habere non potest accessum Cypr. l. 1. Ep. 3. whose words are That the Romanes are such as to whom Perfidia cannot have accesse Now Perfidia can hardly stand for Error in Faith or for Misbeliefe But it properly signifies malicious Falsehood in matter of Trust and Action not error in faith but in fact against the Discipline and Government of the Church And why may it not here have this meaning in S. Cyprian For the Story there it is this b Bin. Concil To. 1. p. 152. Edit Paris 1636. Baron Annal. an 253. 254. 255. In the Yeare 255. there was a Councell in Carthage in the cause of two Schismatiks Felicissimus and Novatian about restoring of them to the Communion of the Church which had lapsed in time of danger from Christianity to Idolatry Felicissimus would admit all even without penance and Novatian would admit none no not after penance The Fathers forty two in number went as the Truth led them between both Extreames To this Councell came Privatus a knowne Heretick but was not admitted because he was formerly Excommunicated and often condemned Hereupon he gathers his Complicies together and chooses one Fortunatus who was formerly condemned as well as himselfe Bishop of Carthage and set him up against S. Cyprian This done
and after that by Pope Stephen and after both in the first b Can. 1. Councell of Carthage yet no one word is there in that Councell which mentions this as an Error That hee thought Pope Stephen might erre in the faith while he proclaimed he did so In which though the particular Censure which he passed on Pope Stephen was erroneous for Stephen erred not in that yet the Generall which results from it namely That for all his being in the Popedome he might erre is most true 2. The second Father which Bellarmine cites is S. Ierome d Attamen scito Romanam sidem Apostolica vove laudatam ejusmodi praestigias non recipere etiamsi Angelus aliter annunciet quà m semel praedicatum est Pauli authoritate munitam non posse mutari S. Hicron L. 3. Apol. contra Ruffinum Tom. 2. Edit Paris 1534. sol 84. K. Peradventure it is here to be read jam si For so the place is more plaine and more strong but the Answer is the same His words are The Romane Faith commended by the Apostle admits not such praestigia's deceits and delusions into it though an Angell should preach it otherwise than it was preach'd at first and being armed and fenced by S. Paul's authority cannot be changed Where first I will not doubt but that S. Ierome speakes here of the Faith For the Praestigiae here mentioned are afterwards more plainely expressed For he tels us after a Deinde ut Epistolas contra te ad Orientem mitteret cauterium tibi Haereseós inureret Diceretque libros Origenis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à te translatos simplici Ecclesiae Romanae plebi traditos ut fidei veritatem quam ab Apostolo didicerant per te perderent S. Hicron ibid. fol. 85. K. That the Bishop of Rome had sent Letters into the East and charged Heresie upon Ruffinus And farther that Origen's Books 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were translated by him and delivered to the simple people of the Church of Rome that by his meanes they might loose the verity of the Faith which they had learned from the Apostle Therefore the Praestigiae before mentioned were the Cunning Illusions of Ruffinus putting Origen's Book under the Martyr Pamphilus his name that so he might bring in Heresie the more cunningly under a name of Credit and the more easily pervert the Peoples Faith So of the Faith he speakes And secondly I shall as easily confesse that S. Ierome's speech is most true but I cannot admit the Cardinal's sense of it For he imposes upon the word Fides For by Romana Fides the Romane Faith he will understand the Particular Church of Rome Which is as much as to say Romanos Fideles the Faithfull of that Church And that no wilie Delusions or Cousenage in matter of Faith can be imposed upon them Now hereupon I returne to that of S. Cyprian If Fides Romana must signifie Fideles Romanos why may not Perfidia before signifie Perfidos Especially since these two words are commonly used by these Writers as Termes a Qui cum Fidei dux esse non potuit perfidiae existat S. Cyprian L. 1. Epist. 7. Fidem perfidi c. Ibid. Facti sunt ex Ovibus Vulpes ex fidelibus perfidi Optatus L. 7. Quomodo iis prosit quum baptizantur Parentum Fides quorum iis non potest obesse perfidia S. Aug. Epist. 23. Quantò potiùs Fides aliena potest consulere parvulo cui sua perfidia c. S. Aug. L. 3. de lib. Arbit c. 23. Opposite And therefore by the Law of Opposition may interpret each other proportionably So with these great Masters with whom 't is almost growne to be Quod volumus rectum est what we please shall be the Authours meaning Perfidia must signifie absolutely Errour in Faith or Misbeliefe But Fides must relate to the Persons and signifie the Faithfull of the Romane Church And now I conceive my Answer will proceed with a great deale of Reason For Romana Fides the Romane Faith as it was commended by the Apostle of which S. Ierome speakes is one thing and the Particular Romane Church of which the Cardinall speakes is another The Faith indeed admits not Praestigias wilie delusions into it if it did it could not be the Whole and Vndefiled Faith of Christ which they learned from the Apostle And which is so fenced by Apostolicall Authority as that it cannot be changed though an Angell should preach the contrary But the Particular Church of Rome hath admitted Praestigias diverse crafty Conveyances into the Faith and is not fenced as the Faith it selfe is And therefore though an Angell cannot contrary that yet the bad Angell hath sowed tares in this By which meanes Romana Fides though it be now the same it was for the words of the Creed yet it is not the same for the sense of it Nor for the super and praeter-structures built upon it or joyned unto it So the Romane Faith that is the Faith which S. Paul taught the Romanes and after commended in them was all one with the Catholike Faith of Christ. For S. Paul taught no other than that One. And this one can never be changed in or from it selfe by Angell or Divell But in mens hearts it may receive a change And in particular Churches it may receive a change And in the particular Church of Rome it hath received a change And yee see S. Hierome himselfe confesses that the Pope himselfe was afraid b Ne fidei veritatem quam ab Apostolo didicerant per te perderent ut suprà ne perderent least by this Art of Ruffinus the People might loose the verity of the Faith Now that which can be lost can be changed For usually Habits begin to alter before they be quite lost And that which may be lost among the People may be lost among the Bishops and the rest of the Clergie too if they looke not to it as it seemes they after did not at Rome though then they did Nay at this time the whole Romane Church was in danger enough to swallow Origen's Booke and all the Errors in it comming under the Name of Pamphilus and so S. Ierome himselfe expresly and close upon the Place cited by Bellarmine For he desires a Muta titulum Romanam simplicitatem tanto periculo libera ibid. fol. 84. K. Ruffinus to change the Title of the Booke that Error may not be spread under the specious Name of Pamphilus and so to free from danger the Romane simplicity Where by the way Romane unerring Power now challenged and Romane simplicity then feared agree not very well together 3. The third Father alledged by Bellarmine is a Uetus Roma ab antiquis temporibus habet rectam Fidem semper eam retinet sicut decet Urbem quae toti Orbt prâ—…sidet semper de Deo integram fidem habere Greg. Naz. in Carmine de vità suà Ante medium p. 9. Edit
Paris 1609. S. Gregory Nazianzen And his words are that Ancient Rome from of old hath the right Faith and alwayes holds it as becomes the City which is Governesse over the whole World to have an entire faith in and concerning God Now certainly it became that City very well to keepe the Faith sound and entire And having the Government of a great part of the World then in her power it became her so much the more as her Example thereby was the greater And in S. Gregory Nazianzen's time Rome did certainly hold both rectam integram fidem the right and the whole entire Faith of Christ. But there is nor Promise nor Prophecy in S. Gregory that Rome shall ever so doe For his words are plaine semper decet it alwayes becomes that great City to have and to hold too integram Fidem the entire Faith But at the other semper 't is b The words in the Greeke are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haec quidem fuit diu nunc adhuc est recti grada 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Est So S. Gregory sayes but of an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a retinebit he sayes nothing retinet that City from of old holds the right faith yet but he saith not retinebit semper that the City of Rome shall retaine it ever no more then it shall ever retaine the Empire of the World Now it must be assur'd that it shall ever hold the entire faith of Christ before we can be assured That that Particular Church can never erre or be Infallible Besides these the Cardinall names Cyrillus and Ruffinus but he neither tells us where nor cites their words Yet I thinke I have found the most pregnant place in S * Petram opinor per agnominationem nihil aliud quà m inconcustam firmissimam Discipuli fidem vocavit In quà Ecclesia Christi ita fundata firmata esset ut non laberetur esset inexpugnabilis inferorum portis in perpetuuâ—… manens S. Cyril Alex. Dial. de Trin. l. 4. p. 278. Parisiis An. 1604. Cyril and that makes clearly against him For I finde expresly these three things First that the Church is Inexpugnable and that the Gates of Hell shall never prevaile against it but that it shall in perpetuum manere remaine for ever And this all Protestants grant But this That it shall not fall away doth not secure it fromall kinds oferror Secondly Bellarmine quotes S. Cyril for the Particular Romane Church and S. Cyril speakes not of the Romane at all but of the Church of Christ that is the Catholike Church Thirdly that the Foundation and firmenesse which the Church of Christ hath is placed not in or upon the * Et ego dico tibi i. tuae Confessioni quâ mihi diâ—…isti Tu es Christus c. Dion Carthus in S. Mat. 16. 18. Et super hanc Petram i. Fidei hujus sirmitatem fundamentum Vel super hanc Petram quam confessus es i. super Meipsum Lapidem Angularem c. Ibid. Person much lesse the Successor of S. Peter but upon the * faith which by Gods Spirit in him he so firmely professed which is the Common received Opinion both of the Ancient Fathers and the Protestants Vpon this Rocke that is upon this faith will I build my Church S. Matth. 16. So here 's all the Good he hath gotten S. Matt. 16. 18. by S. Cyril unlesse he can cite some other place of S. Cyril which I believe he cannot And for Ruffinus the Place which Bellarmine aimes at is in his Exposition upon the Creed and is quoted in part the b Bellar. L. 4. de Rom. Pont. Cap. 3. §. penult Chapter before But when all his words shall be laid together they will make no more for Bellarmine and his Cause then the former Places have done c Illud non importunè commonendum puto quod in diversis Ecclesiis aliqua in his verbis inveniunt ur adjecta In Ecclesiâ tamen Vrbis Romae hoc non deprehenditur factum Pro eo arbritror quod neque Haeresis ulla illic sumpsit exordium mos ibi servatur antiquus eos qui gratiam Baptismi suscepturi sunt publicò id est Fidelium populo audiente Symbolum reddere Et utique adjectionem unius saltem Sermonis eorum qui praecesserunt in Fide non admittit auditus In caeteris autem Locis quantum intelligi datur propter nonnullos Haereticos addita quaedam videntur per quae novellae Doctrinae sensus crederetur excludi c. Ruffin in Exposit. Symbol ut habetur inter Opera S. Cypriani Praefat. Expos. Ruffinus his words then runne thus Before I come to the Words of the Creed this I thinke fit to warne you of That in divers Churches some things are found added to the words of the Creed But in the Church of the City of Rome this is not found done And as I thinke it is for that no Haeresie did take its rise or beginning there And for that the old Custome is there observed Namely that they which are to receive the grace of Baptisme doe publikely repeate the Creed in the hearing of the People who would not admit such Additions But in other places as farre as I can understand by reason of some Hereticks some things were added but such as were to exclude the sense of their Novell Doctrine Now these words make little for Bellarmine who cites them and much against Ruffinus that uttered them They make little for Bellarmine First because suppose Ruffinus his speech to be true yet this will never follow In Ruffinus his time no Haeresie had taken its beginning at Rome therefore no Haeresie hath had rooting there so many hundred yeares since Secondly Bellarmine takes upon him there to proove That the particular Church of Rome cannot erre Now neither can this be concluded out of Ruffinus his words First because as I said before to argue from Non sumpsit to Ergo sumere non potest No Haeresie hath yet begun there therefore none can begin there or spring thence is an Argument drawne Ab actu ad Potentiam negative from the Act to the Power of Being which every Novice in Learning can tell proceeds not Negatively And Common Reason telles every man 't is no Consequence to say Such a thing is not or hath not beene Therefore it cannot be Secondly because though it were true that no Haeresie at all did ever take its beginning at Rome yet that can never proove that the particular Church of Rome can never erre which is the thing in Question For suppose that no Haeresie did ever beginne there yet if any that began elswhere were admitted into that Church it is as full a proofe That that Church can erre as if the Haeresie had beene hatched in that Nest. For that Church erres which admits an Haeresie into it as well as that which broaches it Now Ruffinus sayes no more
of the Romane Church then non sumpsit exordium no Heresie tooke its beginning there but that denyes not but that some Haereticall taint might get in there And 't is more then manifest that the most famous Haeresies in their severall Times made their aboade even at Rome And 't is observable too that Bellarmine cites nomore of Ruffinus his words then these In Ecclesiâ urbis Romae neque Haeresis ulla sumpsit exordium mos ibi servatur antiquus as if this were an entire speech whereas it comes in but as a Reason given of the speech precedent and as if Ruffinus made the Church of Rome the great observer of the Customes of the Church whereas he speaks but of one Particular Custome of Reciting the Creed before Baptisme But after all this I pray did no Heresie ever begin at Rome where did Novatianisme begin At Rome sure For a Baron To. 2. An. 254. Num. 62. Baronius b Pamel in Cyprian Epist. 41. 73. Pamelius and c Petavius in Epiphan Haeres 59. Petavius doe all dispute the Point whether that sect was denominated from Novatianus the Romane Priest or Novatus the African Bishop And they Conclude for Novatian He then that gave that Name is in all right the Founder and Rome the nest of that Heresie And there it Continued with a succession d Onuph in Notis ad Plat. in vita Cornelii of Bishops from Cornelius to Caelestine which is neare upon two hundred yeares Nay could Ruffinus himselfe be ignorant that some Haeresie began at Rome No sure For in this I must challenge him either for his weake memory or his wilfull error For Ruffinus had not only read Eusebius his History but had beene at the paines to translate him Now * Haeretici alii in morem venenatorum serpentum in Asiam Phrygiam irrepserunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quorum Dux Florinus Euseb. L. 5. cap. 14. And in Ruffinus his Translation c. 15. And then afterwards c. 19. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. Now this Blastus taught that God was the Author of sin Eusebius sayes plainely that some Hereticks spread their venome in Asia some in Phrygia and others grew at Rome and Florinus was the Ring-leader of them And more clearely after Irenaeus saith he directed diverse Epistles against this Florinus and his fellow Blastus and condemnes them of such Heresies as threw them and their Followers into great Impiety c. Those at Rome corrupting the sound Doctrine of the Church Therefore most manifest it is that some Heresie had its rise and beginning at Rome But to leave this slip of Ruffinus most evident it is that Ruffinus neither did nor could account the Particular Church of Rome infallible For if he had esteemed so of it he would not have dissented from it in so maine a Point as is the Canon of the Scripture as he plainely doth a Ruff. in Exposit Symb. p. 188. In which reckoning heplainly agrees with the Church of England Art 6. For reckoning up the Canonicall Bookes he most manifestly dissents from the Romane Church Therefore either Ruffinus did not think the Church of Rome was infallible or els the Church of Rome at this day reckons up more Bookes within the Canon than heretofore she did If she do then she is changed in a maine Point of Faith the Canon of Scripture and is absolutely convinced not to be infallible For if she were right in her reckoning then she is wrong now And if she be right now she was wrong then And if she do not reckon more now than she did when Ruffinus lived then he reckons fewer than she and so dissents from her which doubtlesse he durst not have done had he thought her judgement infallible Yea and he sets this marke upon his Dissent besides b Novi Veteris Testamenti Volumina c. sicut ex Patrum Monumentis accepimus Ruff. in Symb. p. 188. Et haec sunt quae Patres intra canonem concluserunt Et ex quibus Fidei nostrae Assertiones constare voluerunt Ib. p. 189. That he reckons up the Bookes of the Canon just so and no otherwise than as he received them out of the Monuments of the Forefathers And out of which the Assertions of our Faith are to be taken Last of all had this place of Ruffinus any strength for the Infallibility of the Church of Rome yet there is very little reason that the Pope and his Clergie should take any Benefit by it For S. c Si Episcopi Romani est stultè facis ab eo Exemplar Epistolae petere cui missa non est c. Vade potiùs Romane praesens apâ—… eum expostula cur tibi absenti innocenti fecerit injuriaÌ„ Primum ut non reciperâ—…t Expositionem Fidei tuae quam omnis ut scribis Italia comprobavâ—… c. Deinde ut Cauterium tibi Haerescôs dum nescis inureret S. Hicron Apol. 3. advers Ruffin fol. 85. K. Ierome tels us That when Ruffinus was angry with him for an Epistle which he writ not he plainly sent him to the Bishop of Rome and bid him expostulate with him for the Contumely put upon him in that he received not his exposition of the Faith which said He all Italy approved and in that he branded him also dùm nesciret behind his back with Heresie Now if the Pope which then was rejected this Exposition of the Creed made by Ruffinus and branded him besides with Haeresie his sentence against Ruffinus was Iust or Vnjust If Vnjust then the Pope erred about a matter of Faith and so neither He nor the Church of Rome infallible If Iust then the Church of Rome labours to defend herself by his pen which is judged Haereticall by her self So whether it were Iust or Vnjust the Church of Rome is driven to a hard strait when she must beg help of him whom she branded with Haeresie and out of that Tract which she her self rejected And so uphold her Infallibility by the Iudgement of a man who in her Iudgement had erred so foully Nor may she by any †Quum quis se vellâ—… personaâ—… tâ—…stium post publicationem repellere fuerit protestatus Si quid pro ipso dixerint iis non creditur Extra Tex ibi Gloss. c. Praesentium 31. de Testibus Law take benefit of a Testimony which her self hath defamed and protested against With these Bellarmine is pleased to name Sixe Popes which he saith are all of this Opinion But he a Bellar. L. 4. de RoÌ„ Pont. c. 4. §. Addo etiam Quae eâ—…si ab Haereticis contemnentur c. adds That these Testimonies will be contemned by the Haereticks Good words I pray I know whom the Cardinall meanes by Hereticks very well But the best is His Call cannot make them so Nor shall I easily contemne Sixe ancient Bishops of Rome concurring in Opinion if apparent verity in the thing it selfe do not
force me to dissent And in that Case I shall do it without Contempt too This onely I will say b Nemini in sua causa eredendum nisi conformitter ad Legem Divinam Naturalem Canouicam loquatur So Io. Gerson the Doctors of Paris cited in Lib. Anon. de Ecclesiastica Politica Potestate c. 16. Ed. Paris 1612. Now these Popes doe not speak here conformably to these Lawes That Sixe Popes concurring in opinion shall have lesse waight with me in their own Cause than any other Sixe of the more Ancient Fathers Indeed could I swallow b L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. Bellarmines Opinion That the Popes Iudgement is Infallible I would then submit without any more adoe But that will never downe with me unlesse I live till I doate which I hope in God I shall not Other Proofes than these Bellarmine brings not to prove that the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in or from the Faith And of what force these are to sway any Iudgement I submit to all indifferent Readers And having thus examined Bellarmines Proofes That the Particular Church of Rome cannot erre in Faith I now returne to A. C. and the A. C. p. 42. Iesuite and tell them that no Iesuite or any other is ever able to prove any Particular Church Infallible But for the Particular Church of Rome and the Pope with it erred it hath And therefore may erre Erred I say it hath in the Worship of Images and in altering Christs Institution in the blessed Sacrament by taking away the Cup from the People and diverse other particulars as shall appeare at †§. 33. Consid. 7. Num. 5. 12 after And as for the Ground which is presumed to secure this Church from Errour 't is very remarkable How the c Romanae Ecclesia Particularis non potest errare persistente Romae Apostolicá sede Propositio haec est verissima fortasse tam vera quam illa prima de Pontifice L. 4 de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. 2. And that first proposition is this Summus Pontifex cum totam Ecclesiam docet in his quae ad fidem pertinent nullo casu errare potest Ibid. c. 3. §. 1. Learned Cardinall speakes in this Case For he tells us that this Proposition So long as S. Peter's Chaire is at Rome that Particular Church cannot erre in the Faith is verissima most true and yet in the very next words 't is Fortasse tam vera peradventure as true as the former that is That the Pope when he teaches the whole Church in those things which belong to the faith cannot erre in any case What is that Proposition most true And yet is it but at a peradventure 't is as true as this Is it possible any thing should be absolutely most true and yet under a Peradventure that it is but as true as another truth But here without all Peradventure neither Proposition is true And then indeed Bellarmine may say without a Fortasse That this proposition The Particular Church of Rome cannot erre so long as the Sea Apostolike is there is as true as this The Pope cannot erre while he teaches the whole Church in those things which belong to the Faith For neither of them is true But he cannot say that either of them is verissima most true when neither of them hath Truth 2. Secondly if the Particular Church of Rome be Infallible and can neither erre in the Faith nor fall from it then it is because the Sea Apostolike cannot be transferred from Rome but must ever to the consummation of the World remaine there and keepe that Particular Church from erring Now to this what sayes Bellarmine what why he tells us a Pia probabilissima Sententia est Cathedram Petri non posse separari à Româ proinde Romanam Ecclesiam absolutè non posse errare vel deficere L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. Quod nihilominus That it is a pious and most probable Opinion to thinke so And he reckons foure Probabilities that it shall never be remov'd from Rome And I will not deny but some of them are faire Probabilities But yet they are but Probabilities and so unable to convince any man Why but then what if a man cannot thinke as Bellarmine doth but that enforced by the light of his understanding he must thinke the quite contrary to this which Bellarmine thinks pious and so probable What then Why then b Contraria sententia nee est Haeretica nee manifestè erronea L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. At socundum Bellarmine himselfe tells you that the quite contrary Proposition to this namely That S. Peter's Chayre may be severed from Rome and that theâ—… that Particular Church may erre is neither Haereticall nor manifestly erroneous So then by Bellarmines owne Confession I am no Haereticke nor in any manifest error if I say as indeed I doe and thinke it too that 't is possible for S. Peter's Chaire to be carried from Rome and that then at least by his owne argument that Church may erre Now then upon the whole matter and to returne to A. C. If that Lady desired to rely upon a A. C. p. 42. particular infallible Church 't is not to be found on earth Rome hath not that gift nor her Bishop neither And Bellarmine who I thinke was as able as any Champion that Church hath dares not say t is either Haeresie or a manifest error to say That the Apostolike Sea may be removed thence and That Church not only erre in Faith but also fall quite away from it Now I for my part have not ignorance enough in me to believe That that Church which may Apostatize at some one time may not erre at another Especially since both her erring and failing may arise from other Causes besides that which is mention'd by the Cardinall And if it may erre 't is not Infallible F. The Question was Which was that Church A friend of the Ladies would needs defend That not only the Romane but also the Greek Church was right B. When that Honourable Personage answered § 4 I was not by to heare But I presume He was so farre from granting that only the Romane Church was right as that He did not grant it right And that He tooke on him no other Defence of the poore Greeke Church then was according to truth F. I told him That the Greeke Church had plainly changed and taught false in a Poynt of Doctrine concerning the Holy Ghost and That I had hear'd say that even His Majestie should say That the Greeke Church having erred against the Holy Ghost had lost the Holy Ghost B. You are very bold with His Majesty to § 5 relate Him upon Heare-say My Intelligence serves me not to tell you what His Majestie said But if he said it not you have beene too credulous to believe and too suddaine to report it Princes deserve and were
another intùs est is not another contrary thing but is contained within the Bowels and nature of that which is interpreted from which if the Declaration depart it is faulty and erroneous because instead of Declaring it gives another and contrary c Hoc semper nec quicquam praeterea Vin. Lyr. c. 32. sense Therefore when the Church declares any thing in a Councell either that which she declares was intùs or extrà in the Nature and verity of the thing or out of it If it were extrà without the nature of the thing declared then the Declaration of the thing is false and so farre from being Fundamentall in the Faith d In novâ Haeresi Veritas prius erat de Fide et si non ita deâ—… rata Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 〈◊〉 fine Haeretici multa quae erâ—… implicita sidei nostra compâ—… runt explicare Bonavent in 〈◊〉 D. 11. A. 1. Q. 1. ad finem Tho. 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. Quamvis Apostolica Sedes aut Generale Concilium de Haeresi censere possit non tamen ideò Assertio aliqua erit Haeresis qui. Ecclesia definivit sed quia 〈◊〉 dei Catholica repugnat Ecclesia siquidèm suâ definitione 〈◊〉 facit talem Assertionem esse Haeresin quùm etiamsi ipsa non definivisset esset Haeresis sed id efficit ut paeteat c. Alphon à Castro L. 1. Advers Haeres c. 8. fol. 21. D. If it were intùs within the Compasse and nature of the thing though not open and apparent to every eye then the Declaration is true but not otherwise Fundamentall than the thing is which is declared for that which is intùs cannot be larger or deeper than that in which it is if it were it could not be intùs 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 Evasion that is commonly used that the Declaration of the Church makes it Fundamentall quoad nos in respect of us for it doth not that neither For no respect to us can varie the Foundation The Churches Declaration can binde us 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 us that is not so in its owne nature 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 away from the Foundation and make it by Declaring not to be Fundamentall which all men grant no power of the Church can doe e Ecclesia non amputat necessaria non apponit superâ—…ua Vin. Lir. c. 32. Deut. 4. 2. For the power of adding any thing contrary and of detracting any thing necessary are alike forbidden * Thom. Supp q. 6. A. 6. C. and alike denyed Now nothing is more apparent then 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 nor can be made so by her adjudging them Now to all this Discourse That the Church hath not power to make any thing Fundamentall in the Faith that intrinsecally and in its owne nature is not such A. C. is content to say nothing 2. For the second That it is prooved by this place of S. Augustine That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall You might have given 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 body should see how you wrong it The place of S. Augustine is this against the Pelagians about Remission of Originall sinne in Infants * August Serm. 14. de verb. Apost c. 12. Fundata res est In aliis Quastionibus non diligentèr digestis nondum plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate sirmatis ferendus est Disputator errans ibi ferendus est error non tantum progredi debet ut etiam Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliâ—… This is a thing founded An erring Disputer is to be borne with in other Questions not diligently digested not yet made firme by full Authority of the Church there 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 never follow out of this Place I thinke That every 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 tels us b Ibid. cap. 20. There was a Question moved to S. Cyprian Whether Baptisme was concluded to the eight Day as well as Circumcision And no doubt was made then of the c Origine Peccati beginning of sin and that d Ex eâ re unde nulla erat Quaestio soluta est exorta Quaestio out of this thing about which no Question was mooved that Question that was made was Answered And e Hoc de Fundamento Ecclesiae sumpsit ad confirmandum Lapidem nut antem againe That S. Cypryan tooke that which he gave in answer from the Foundation of the Church to confirme a stone that was shaking Now S. Cyprian in all the Answer that he gives 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 setled Scripture-Doctrine not any Definition of the Church Therefore that which he tooke out of 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 upon which it is builded as appeareth in the f Concil Milevit c. 2. Milevitane Councell where the Rule by which Pelagius was condemned is the Rule of g Rom. 5. 15. Scripture Therefore Saint Augustine goes on in the same sense That the Disputer is not to be borne any longer that shall h Vt Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliatur endeavour to shake the Foundation it selfe upon 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 firm by full Authority of the Church and the words following these to shake the foundation of the Church yet it can never follow out of any or all these Circumstances and these are all That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall in the faith For first no man denies but the Church is a c 1 Tim. 3. 15. Foundation That things defined
things which are but Accessory c. Hooker L. 3. Eccl. Pol. §. 3. Fundamentall in the Faith to all men And secondly the whole Discourse here is concerning Faith as it is taken Objectivè for the Object of Faith and thing to be Beleeved but that Faith by which Christ is said to dwell in our hearts is taken Subjectivè for the Habit and Act of Faith Now to confound both these in one period of speech can have no other ayme than to confound the Reader But to come closer both to the Iesuite and his Defender A. C. If all Poynts made firme by full Authority of the Church be Fundamentall then they must grant that every thing determined by the Councell of Trent is Fundamentall in the Faith For with them 't is firme and Catholike which that Councell Decrees Now that Councell decrees b Si quis dixerit Ordines ab Episcopis collatos sine populi vel potestatis saecularis consensu aut vocatione irritos esse Anathema sit Con. Trid. Sess. 23. Can. 7. That Orders collated by the Bishop are not void though they be given without the Consent or calling of the People or of any secular Power And yet they can produce no Authour that ever acknowledged this Definition of the Councell Fundamentall in the Faith 'T is true I do not grant that the Decrees of this Councell are made by full Authority of the Church but they do both grant and maintaine it And therefore 't is Argumentum ad hominem a good Argument against them that a thing so defined may be sirme for so this is and yet not Fundamentall for so this is not But A. C. tels us further That if one may deny or doubtfully dispute against any one Determination of the A. C. p. 45. Church then he may against another and another and so against all since all are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which being weakened in any one cannot be firme in any other First A. C. might have acknowledged that he borrowed the former part of this out of a Cont. Haer. c. 31. Abdicatà enim qualibet parte Catholici Dogmatis alia quoque at que item alia c. Quid aliud ad extremum sequetur nisi ut totum pariter repudictur Vin. Lir. And as that Learned Father uses it I subscribe to it but not as A. C. applies it For Vincentius speaks there de Catholico Dogmate of Catholike Maximes and A. C. will force it to every Determination of the Church Now Catholike Maximes §. 30. N. 21. which are properly Fundamentall are certaine Prime Truths deposited with the Church and not so much determined by the Church as published and manifested and so made firme by her to us For so b Ecclesia Deâ—…sitorum apud se Dogmatum Custos c. Denique quid unquam Conciliorum Decretis enisa est nisi ut quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur c. Vin. Lir. cont Harcs c. 32. Vincentius expresly Where all that the Church doth is but ut hoc idem quod anteà that the same thing may be believed which was before Believed but with more light and cleerenesse and in that sense with more firmenesse than before Now in this sense give way to a Disputator errans every cavilling Disputer to deny or quarrell at the Maximes of Christian Religion any one or any part of any one of them and why may he not then take liberty to do the like of any other till he have shaken all But this hinders not the Church her selfe nor any appointed by the Church to examine her owne Decrees and to see that she keepe Dogmata deposita the Principles of Faith unblemished and uncorrupted For if she do not so but that c Vin. Lir. cont haer c. 31. Impiorum turpium Errorum Lupanar ubi erat antè castae incorruptâ—… Sacrarium Veritatis Novitia veteribus new Doctrines bee added to the old the Church which is Sacrarium Veritatis the Repository of Verity may be changed in lupanar errorum I am loth to English it By the Church then this may nay it ought to be done however every wrangling Disputer may neither deny nor doubtfully dispute much lesse obstinately oppose the Determinations of the Church no not where they are not Dogmata Deposita these deposited Principles But if he will be so bold to deny or dispute the Determinations of the Church yet that may be done without shaking the Foundation where the Determinations themselves belong but to the Fabricke and not to the Foundation For a whole Frame of Building may be shaken and yet the Foundation where it is well lay'd remaine firme And therefore after all A. C. dares not say the Foundation is shaken but onely in a sort And then 't is as true that in a sort A. C. p. 46. it is not shaken 2. For the second part of his Argument A. C. must pardon me if I dissent from him For first all Determinations of the Church are not made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation For some Determinations of the Church are made firme to us per a Vin. Lir. cont Haer. c. 32. chirographum Scripturae by the Hand-writing of the Scripture and that 's Authenticall indeed Some other Decisions yea and of the Church too are made or may be if b Relect. cont 4. q. 1. Art 3. Etiamsi nullo Scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili Testimonio c. Stapleton informe us right without an evident nay without so much as a probable Testimony of Holy-Writ But c Non potest aliquid certum esse certitudine fidei nisi aut immediatè contineatur in Uerbo Dei aut ex Uerbo Dei per evidentem consequentiam deducatur Bellar. L. 3. de Justifica c. 8. §. 2. Bellarmine fals quite off in this and confesses in expresse termes That nothing can be certaine by Certainty of Faith unlesse it be contained immediately in the Word of God Or be deduced out of the Word of God by evident Consequence And if nothing can be so certaine then certainly no Determination of the Church it selfe if that Determination be not grounded upon one of these either expresse Word of God or evident Consequence out of it So here 's little Agreement in this great Point betweene Stapleton and Bellarmine Nor can this be shifted off as if Stapleton spake of the Word of God written and Bellarmine of the Word of God unwritten as he cals Tradition For Bellarmine treats there of the knowledge which a man hath of the Certainty of his owne Salvation And I hope A. C. will not tell us There 's any Tradition extant unwritten by which particular men may have assurance of their severall Salvations Therefore Bellarmine's whole Disputation there is quite beside the matter Or els he must
to feede when he is in and when he had fed to c S. Luk. 22. 35. Confirme and in all these not to erre and faile in his Ministration And is the Catholike Church in and over which he is to do all these great things quite left out of the Scripture Belike the Holy Ghost was carefull to give 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 he could so prescribe for what he now Claymes But what if after all this M. Rogers there sayes no such thing As in truth he doth not His words are d Rogers in Art Eccle. Angl. Art 3. 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 then others And againe e Ibid. Till we know the native and undoubted sense of this Article is M. Rogers We the Church of England or rather his and some others Iudgement in the Church of England Now here A. C. will have somewhat againe to say though God knowes 't is to little purpose 'T is A. C. p. 47. that the Iesuite urged M. Roger's Booke because it was set out by Publike Authority And because the Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England A. C. may undoubtedly urge M. Rogers if he please But he ought not to say that his Opinion is the Doctrine of the Church of England for neither of the Reasons by him expressed First not because his Booke was publikely allowed For many Bookes among them as well as among us have beene Printed by publike Authority as containing nothing in them contrary to Faith and good manners and yet containing many things in them of Opinion only or private Iudgement which yet is farre from the avowed Positive Doctrine of the Church the Church having as yet determined neither way by open Declaration upon the words or things controverted And this is more frequent among their Schoolemen then among any of our Controversers as is well knowne Nor secondly because his Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England For suppose the worst and say M. Rogers thought a little too well of his owne paines and gave his Booke too high a Title is his private Iudgement therefore to be accounted the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England Surely no No more then I should say every thing said by * Angelici D. S. Tho. Summa Thomas or †Celebratissimi Patris Dom. Bonaventurae Doctoris Seraphici in 3. L. Sent. Disputata Bonaventure is Angelicall or Seraphicall Doctrine because one of these is stiled in the Church of Rome Seraphicall and the other Angelicall Doctor And yet their workes are Printed by Publike Authority and that Title given them Yea but our private Authors saith A. C. are not allowed for ought I know in such a like sorte to expresse A. C. p. 47. our Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to Question Here are two Limitations which will goe farre to bring A. C. off whatsoever I shall say against him For first let me instance in any private man that takes as much upon him as M. Rogers doth he will say he knew it not his Assertion here being no other then for ought he knowes Secondly If he be unwilling to acknowledge so much yet he will answer 't is not just in such a like sort as M. Rogers doth it that is perhaps it is not the very Title of his Booke But well then Is there never a Private man allowed in the Church of Rome to expresse your Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to question What not in any matter Were not Vega and Soto two private men Is it not a mâ—…tter subject to Question to great Question in these Dayes Whether a man may be certaine of his Salvation câ—…rtitudine fidei by the certainty of Faith Doth nâ—…t * Bellar. Lib. 3. de Justificat c. 1. 14. Bellarmine make it a Controversie And is it not a part of your Catholike Faith if it be determined in the †Huic Concilio Catholici omnes ingenia sua judicia sponte subjiciunt Bellar. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Sed Concilii Tridâ—…i Councell of Trent And yet these two great Friers of their time Dominicus Soto and Andreas Vega a Hist. Concil Trident. Lib. 2. p. 245. Edit Lat. Leidae 1622. were of contrary Opinions and both of them challenged the Decree of the Councell and so consequently your Catholike Faith to be as each of them concluded and both of them wrote Bookes to maintaine their Opinions and both of their Bookes were published by Authority And therefore I think 't is allowed in the Church of Rome to private men to expresse your Catholike Doctrine and in a matter subject to Question And therefore also if another man in the Church of England should be of a contrary Opinion to M. Rogers and declare it under the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England this were no more then Soto and Vega did in the Church of Rome And I for my part cannot but wonder A. C. should not know it A. C. p. 47. For he sayes that for ought he knowes Private men are not allowed so to expresse their Catholike Doctrine And in the same Question both Catharinus and Bellarmine b Bellar. L. 3. de Iustif. c. 3. take on them to expresse your Catholike Faith the one differing from the other almost as much as Soto and Vega and perhaps in some respect more F. But if M. Rogers be only a private man in what Book may we finde the Protestants publike Doctrine The Bishop answered That to the Booke of Articles they were all sworne B. What Was I so ignorant to say The Articles § 14 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 seems to imply Sure I was not Was not the immediate speech before of the Church of England And how comes the Subject of the Speech to be varied 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 and in the maine Exceptions which they joyntly take against the Romane Church as appeares by their severall Confessions But if A. C. will say as he doth that because there was speech before of the Church of A. C. p. 47. England the Iesuite understood mee in a limited sense and meant only the Protestants of the English Church Bee it so ther 's no great harme done †And therfore A. C. needs not make such a Noise about it as he doth p. 48 but this that the Iesuite offers to enclose me too much For I did not
hope this is no part of your meaning Yet I doubt this b Qui conantur sidem destruere sub specie Questionis difficilis aut fortè indissolubilis c. Orig. Q. 35. in S. Matth. Question How doe you know Scripture to be Scripture hath done more harme than you will be ever able to helpe by Tradition But I must follow that way which you draw me And because it is so much insisted upon by you and is in it self a c To know that Scriptures are Divine and infallible in every part is a Foundation so necessary as if it bee doubtfully question'd all the Faith built upon Scripture fals to the ground A. C. p. 47. Necesse est nôsse extare Libros aliquos vere Divinos Bellarm. L. 4. de verb. Dei non scripto c. 4. §. Quarto necesse Et etiam libros qui sunt in manibus esse illos Ibid. §. Sexto oportet matter of such Consequence I will sift it a little farther Many men labouring to settle this great Principle in Divinity have used diverse meanes to prove it All have not gone the same way nor all the right way You cannot be right that resolve Faith of the Scriptures being the Word of God into onely Tradition For onely and no other proofe are equall To prove the Scripture therefore so called by way of Excellence to be the Word of God there are severall Offers at diverse proofes For first some flie to the Testimony and witnesse of the Church and 1. her Tradition which constantly believes and unanimously delivers it Secondly some to the Light 2. and the Testimony which the Scripture gives to it selfe with other internall proofes which are observed in it and to be found in no other Writing whatsoever Thirdly some to the Testimony of the Holy 3. Ghost which cleares up the light that is in Scripture and seales this Faith to the soules of men that it is Gods Word Fourthly all that have not imbrutished 4. themselves and sunke below their species and order of Nature give even Naturall Reason leave to come in and make some proofe and give some approbation upon the weighing and the consideration of other Arguments And this must be admitted if it be but for Pagans and Infidels who either consider not or value not any one of the other three yet must some way or other bee converted or left without excuse Rom. 1. and that is Rom. 1. 20. done by this very evidence 1. For the first The Tradition of the Church which is your way That taken and considered alone it is so farre from being the onely that it cannot be a sufficient Proofe to believe by Divine Faith that Scripture is the Word of God For that which is a full and sufficient proofe is able of it selfe to settle the soule of man concerning it Now the Tradition of the Church is not able to doe this For it may bee further asked why wee should believe the Churches Tradition And if it be answered we may believe Because the Church is infallibly governed by the Holy Ghost it may yet be demanded of you How that may appeare And if this be demanded either you must say you have it by speciall Revelation which is the private Spirit you object to other men or else you must attempt to prove it by Scripture a Esse aliquas veras Traditiones demonstratur ex Scripturis Bellar L. 4 de verbo Dei non Scripto c. 5. and A. C p. 50. proves Tradition out of 2 Thes. 2. as all of you doe And that very offer to prove it out of Scripture is a sufficient acknowledgement that the Scripture is a higher Proofe then the Churches Tradition w ch in your own Grounds is or may be Questionable till you come thither Besides this is an Inviolable ground of Reason * Arist. 1. Post. c. 2. T. 16. Per Pacium Quocirca si 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 propter prima scimus credimus illa quoque scimus credimus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 magis quia per illa scimus credimus etiam posteriora That the Principles of any Conclusion must be of more credite then the conclusion it self Therefore if the Articles of Faith The Trinity the Resurrection and the rest be the Conclusions and the Principles by which they are prooved be only Ecclesiasticall Tradition it must needs follow That the Tradition of the Church is more infallible then the Articles of the Faith if the Faith which we have of the Articles should be finally Resolved into the Veracity of the Churches Testimony But this †Eorum errorem dissimulare non possum qui asserunt fidern Nostram cò tanquà m in ultimam credendi causam reducendam esse Vt Credamus Ecclesiam esse Veracem c. M. Canus L. 2. de Locis c. 8. §. Cui tertium your Learned and wary men deny And therefore I hope your selfe dare not affirme Againe if the Voyce of the Church saying the Bookes of Scripture commonly received are the Word of God be the formall Object of Faith upon which alone absolutely I may resolve my selfe then every man not only may but ought to resolve his Faith into the Voyce or Tradition of the Church for every man is bound to rest upon the proper and formall Object of the Faith But nothing can bee more evident then this That a man ought not to resolve his Faith of this Principle into the sole Testimony of the Church Therefore neither is that Testimony or Tradition alone the formall Object of Faith * Uox Ecclesiae non est formale Obiectum Fidei Stapl. Relect. Cont 4. q. 3. A. 2. Licet in Articulo Fidei Credo Ecclesiam fortè contineatur hoc totum Credo ea quae docet Ecclesia tamen non intelligitur necessariò quod Credo docenti Ecclesiae tanquam Testi insallibili ibid. Vbi etiam rejicit Opinionem Durandi Gabr. Et Waldens L. 2 Doctr. Fidei Art 2. c. 21. Num. 4. Testimonium Ecclesiae Catholicae est Objectum Fidei Christianae Legislatio Scripturae Canonica subjicitur tamen ipsi sicut Testis Iudici Testimonium Veritati c. Canus Loc. Lib. 2. cap. 8. Nec si Ecclesia aditum nobis prabet ad hujusmodi Libros Sacros cognoscendos protinus ibi acquiescendum est sed ultrà â—…portet progredi Solidà Dei veritate niti c. The Learned of your owne part grant this †Although in that Article of the Creed I believe the Catholike Church peradventure all this be contained I believe those things which the Church teacheth yet this is not necessarily understood That I believe the Church teaching as an Infallible Witnesse And if they did not confesse this it were no hard thing to prove But here 's the cunning of this Devise All the Authority's of Fathers Councels nay of Scripture too b Omnis ergo Ecclesiastica Authoritas cùm sit ad
other And even in those Fundamentall Things in which the Whole Vniversall Church neither doth nor can Erre yet even there her Authority is not Divine because She delivers those supernatural Truths by Promise of Assistance yet tyed to Meanes And not by any speciall Immediate Revelation which is necessarily required to the very least Degree of Divine Authority And therefore our †Hook l. 3. §. 9 VVorthies do not only say but prove That all the Churches Constitutions are of the nature of Humane Law a Stapl. Relect. Con. 4. q. 3. A. 1. 2. And some among you not unworthy for their Learning prove it at large That all the Churches Testimony or voyce or Sentence call it what you will is but suo modo or aliquo modo not simply but in a manner Divine Yea and A. C. himselfe A. C. p. 51. after all his debate comes to that and no further That the Tradition of the Church is at least in some sort Divine and Infallible Now that which is Divine but in a sort or manner bee it the Churches manner is aliquo modo non Divina in a sort not Divine But this Great Principle of Faith the Ground and Proofe of whatsoever else is of Faith cannot stand firme upon a Proofe that is and is not in a manner and not in a manner Divine As it must if we have no other Anchor then the Externall Tradition of the Church to lodge it upon and hold it steddy in the midst of those waves which daily beate upon it Now here A. C. confesses expresly That to prove the Bookes of Scripture to bee Divine we must bee A. C. p. 49. warranted by that which is Infallible Hee confesses farther that there can be no sufficient Infallible Proofe of A. C. p. 50. this but Gods Word written or unwritten And he gives his Reason for it Because if the Proofe be meerely Humane and Fallible the Science or Faith which A. C. p. 51. is built upon it can be no better So then this is agreed on by mee yet leaving other men to travell by their owne way so bee they can come to make Scripture thereby Infallible That Scripture must bee knowne to bee Scripture by a sufficient Infallible Divine Proofe And that such Proofe can be nothing but the Word of God is agreed on also by me Yea and agreed on for me it shall be likewise that Gods Word may be written and unwritten For Cardinall †Verbum Dei non est tale nec habet ullam Authoritatem quia scriptum est in membranis sed quia à Deo profectum est Bellar. l. 4 de Verb. Dei 2 §. Ecclesiasticae Traditiones Bellarmine tells us truly that it is not the writing or printing that makes Scripture the Word of God but it is the Prime Vnerring Essentiall Truth God himselfe uttering and revealing it to his Church that makes it Verbum Dei the Word of God And this Word of God is uttered to men either immediately by God himselfe Father Sonne and Holy Ghost and so 't was to the Prophets and Apostles Or mediately either by Angels to whom God had spoken first and so the Law was given * Lex ordinata per Angelos in manu 〈◊〉 Gal. 3 19. Gal. 3. and so also the Message was delivered to the Blessed Virgin a S. Luk. 1. 0. S. Luke 1. or by the Prophets b The Holy Ghost c. which spake by the Prophets in Symb. Nicen. and Apostles and so the Scriptures were delivered to the Church But their being written gave them no Authority at all in regard of themselves VVritten or unwritten the VVord was the same But it was written that it might bee the better c Nam Psiudoprophetae etiam viventibus adâ—…c Apostolis multas fingebant corruptelas sub â—…oc praetextu titulo quasi ab Apostolis vivà veccessent traditae propter hanc ipsâ—…m causam Apostoli Doctrinam suam coeperunt Literis comprehendere Ecclesiis commendare Chem. Exam. Concil Trid. de Traditionibus sub octavo genere Tradit And so also Iansâ—…n Comment in S. Ioh 5. 47. Sicut enim firmius est quod mandatur Literis ita est culpabiliâ—…s majus non credere Scriptis quam non credere Verbis preserved and continued with the more integrity to the use of the Church and the more faithfully in our d Labilis est memoria ideo indigâ—…mus Scripturâ Dicendum quod verum est sed hoc non habet nisi ex inundantia peccatorum Hent a Gand. Sum. p. 1 Ar. 8. q. 4. sine Christus ipse de pectore morituro Testamentum transfert in tabulas diù duraturas Optat. L 5. Christus ipse non transtulit sed ex Optati sew entiâ Ejus Inspiratione si non Iussâ—… Apostoli transtulerunt Memories And you have been often enough told were truth and not the maintaining of a party the thing you seek for that if you will shew us any such unwritten word of God delivered by his Prophets and Apostles we will acknowledge it to be Divine and Infallible So written or unwritten that shall not stumble us But then A. C. must not tell us at least not thinke we shall swallow it into our Beliefe that every thing which he sayes is the unwritten VVord of God is so indeed I know Bellarmine hath written a whole Booke * Bellar. L. 4. De Verbo Dei non script De Verbo Dei non scripto of the Word of God not written in which he handles the Controversie concerning Traditions And the Cunning is to make his weaker Readers believe that all that which He and his are pleased to call Traditions are by and by no lesse to be received and honoured then the unwritten word of God ought to be Whereas 't is a thing of easie knowledge That the unwritten VVord of God and Tradition are not Convertible Termes that is are not all one For there are many Vnwritten VVords of God which were never delivered over to the Church for ought appeares And there are many Traditions affirmed at least to be such by the Church of Rome which were never warranted by any unwritten Word of God First That there are many unwritten words of God which were never delivered over to the Church is manifest For when or where were the words which Christ spake to his Apostles during the a Acts 1. 3. forty dayes of his Conversing with them after his Resurrection first delivered over to the Church or what were the unwritten Words He then spake If neither Heâ—… nor His Apostles or Evangelists have delivered them to the Church the Church ought not to deliver them to her Children Or if she doe b Annunciare aliquid Christianis Catholicis praeter id quod acceperunt nunquam licuit nusquam licet nunquam licebit Vincen. Lir. c. 14. Et praeâ—…ipit nihil aliu â—…innovari nisi quo 〈◊〉
others And Miracles are not sufficient alone to prove it unlesse both They and the Revelation too agree with the Rule of Scripture which is now an unalterable Rule by b Gal. 1. 8. man or Angell To all this A. C. sayes nothing save that I seeme not to admit of an infallible Impulsion of a private Spirit ex parte subjecti A. C. p. 52. without any infallible Reason and that sufficiently applied ex parte objecti which if I did admit would open a gap to all Enthusiasmes and dreames of fanaticall men Now for this yet I thank him For I do not onely seeme not to admit but I doe most clearely reject this phrensie in the words going before 4. The last way which gives c Utitur tamâ—… sacra Doctrina Ratione Humanâ non quidem ad probandum Fidem ipsam sed ad manifest andum aliqua alia quae traduntur in hac Doctrina Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 8. ad 2. Passibus rationis novus homo tendit in Deum S. Aug. de vera Relig. c. 26. Passibus veruÌ„ est sed nec aequis nec solis Nam Invisibilia Dei altiori modo quantum ad plura pâ—…rcipitg Fides quà m Ratio naturalis ex Creaturis in Deum procedens Tho. 2. 2. q. 2. A. 3. ad 3. Reason leave to come in and prove what it can may not justly be denied by any reasonable man For though Reason without Grace cannot see the way to Heaven nor believe this Booke in which God hath written the way yet Grace is never placed but in a reasonable creature and proves by the very seat which it hath taken up that the end it hath is to be spirituall eye-water to make Reason see what by †Animalis homo non percipit 1. Cor. 2. 14. Nature onely it cannot but never to blemish Reason in that which it can comprehend Now the use of Reason is very generall and man do what he can is still apt to search and seeke for a Reason why he will believe though after he once believes his Faith growes d Quia scientiae certitudinem habent ox naturali lumine Rationis humanae quae potest errare Theologia autem quae docet Objectum Notitiam Fidei sicut Fidem ipsam certitudinem habet ex lumine Divinae scientiae quae decipi non potest Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 5. c. Vt ipsà fide valentiores facti quod credimus intelligere mereamur S. Aug. cont Ep. Manichaei dictam Fundamentum c. 14. Hoc autem it a intelligendum est ut scientia certior sit Certitudine Evidentiae Fides verò certior Firmitate Adhaesionis Majus lumen in Scientia majus Robur in Fide Et hoc quia in Fide ad Fidem Actus imperatus Voluntatis concurrit Credere enim est Actus Intellectus Vero assentiontis productus ex Voluntatis Imperio Biel. in 3. Sent. d. 23. q. 2. A. 1. Unde Tho. Intellectus Credentis determinatur ad Unum non per Rationem sed per Voluntatem ideo Assensus hic accipitur pro Actu Intellectus secundum quod à Voluntate determinatur ad Vnum 2. 2. q. 2. A. 1. ad 3. stronger than either his Reason or his Knowledge and great reason for this because it goes higher and so upon a safer Principle than either of the other can in this life In this Particular the Bookes called the Scripture are commonly and constantly reputed to bee the Word of God and so infallible Verity to the least point of them Doth any man doubt this The world cannot keepe him from going to weigh it at the Ballance of Reason whether it bee the Word of God or not To the same Weights hee brings the Tradition of the Church the inward motives in Scripture it selfe all Testimonies within which seeme to beare witnesse to it and in all this there is no harme the danger is when a man will use no other Scale but Reason or preferre Reason before any other Scale For the Word of God and the Booke containing it refuse not to bee weighed by a Si vobis rationi veritati consentanca videntur in pretio habete c. de mysteriis Religionis Iustin. Mart. Apol. 2. Igitur si fuit dispositio Rationis c. Tertull. L de Carne Christi c. 18. Rationabile est credere Deum esse Autorem Scripturae Henr. a Gand. Sum To. 1. Ar. 9. q. 3. Reason But the Scale is not large enough to containe nor the Weights to measure out the true vertue and full force of either Reason then can give no supernaturall ground into which a man may resolve his Faith That Scripture is the Word of God infallibly yet Reason can go so high as it can prove that Christian Religion which rests upon the Authority of this Booke stands upon surer grounds of Nature Reason common Equity and Iustice than any thing in the World which any Infidell or meere Naturalist hath done doth or can adhere unto against it in that which he makes accounts or assumes as Religion to himselfe The Ancient Fathers relied upon the Scriptures no Christians more and having to doe with Philosophers men very well seene in all the subtilties which Naturall Reason could teach or learne They were often put to it and did as often make it good That they had sufficient warrant to relie so much as They did upon Scripture In all which Disputes because they were to deale with Infidels they did labour to make good the Authority of the Booke of God by such Arguments as unbelievers themselves could not but thinke reasonable if they weighed them with indifferency For though I set the Mysteries of Faith above Reason which is their proper place yet I would have no man thinke They contradict Reason or the Principles thereof No sure For Reason by her own light can discover how firmely the Principles of Religion are true but all the Light shee hath will never bee able to finde them false Nor may any man thinke that the Principles of Religion even this That Scriptures are the Word of God are so indifferent to a Naturall eye that it may with as just cause leane to one part of the Contradiction as to the other For though this Truth That Scripture is the Word of God is not so Demonstratively evident a priori as to enforce Assent yet it is strengthen'd so abundantly with probable Arguments both from the Light of Nature it selfe and Humane Testimony that he must be very wilfull and selfe-conceited that shall dare to suspect it Nay yet farther a Hook L. 3. §. 8. Si Plato ipse viveret me interrogantem non aspernaretur c. S. Aug. de verá Relig. c. 3. Vide amus quatenus Ratio potest progredi á visibilibus ad invisibilia c. Ibid. c. 29. It is not altogether impossible to proove it even by Reason a Truth infallible or else to make them deny some
speake contrary to himselfe in a Point of this moment Next since A. C. speeds no better with Irenaeus he will have it out of Scripture And he still tels us the A. C. p. 58. Bishop of Rome is S. Peter's Successour Well Suppose that What then What Why then he succeeded in all S. Peter's c Bellar. L. 1. de Ro. Pont. c. 9. §. Respondeo Pontificatum Prerogatives which are Ordinary and belonged to him as a Bishop though not in the Extraordinary which belonged to him as an Apostle For that 's it which you all say d §. 25. Nu. 10. but no man proves If this be so yet then I must tell A. C. S. Peter in his Ordinary Power was never made Pastour of the whole Church Nay in his Extraordinary he had no e Bellar. Ibid. more powerfull Principality then the other Apostles had A a The Fathers gave three Prerogatives to S. Peter Of Authority Of Primacy And of Principality But not of Supremacy of Power Raynold cont Hart. c. 5. Divis. 3. And he proves it at large Primacy of Order was never denied Him by the Protestants And an Vniversall Supremacy of Power was never granted him by the Primitive Christians Yea but Christ promised the keyes to S. Peter b S. Mat. 16 18. S. Mat. 16. True but so did he to all the rest of the Apostles c S. Mat. 18. 18. S. Ioh. 20. 22. S. Mat. 18. and S. Ioh. 20. And to their Successours as much as to His. So 't is Tibi Illis not Tibi non Illis I give the Keyes to thee and them not to thee to exclude them Vnlesse any man will thinke Heaven Gates so easie that they might open and shut them without the Keyes And S. Augustine d Si hoc Petro tantùm dictum est non sacit hoc Ecclesia c. S. Aug. Tract 50. in S. Ioh. is plaine If this were said onely to S. Peter then the Church hath no power to doe it which God forbid The Keyes therefore were given to S. Peter and the rest in a Figure of the Church to whose power and for whose use They were given But there 's not one Key in all that Bunch that can let in S. Peter ' Successour to a more powerfull Principality universall the the Successors of the other Apostles had Yea but Christ prayed That S. Peteâ—… Faith might A. C. p. 58. not faile e S. Luk. 22. 32. S. Luke 22. That 's true And â—…n that sense that Christ prayed S. Peter's Faith faileâ—… not That is in Application to his person for his Perseverance in the Faith as f Deum dare ut in fide perseveretur S. Prosper L. 1. de Vocat Gent. c. 24. S. Prosper applies it Which Perseverance yet he must owe and acknowledge to the grace of Christ's Prayer for him not to the power and ability of his owne Free-Will as g Rogavi ut non deficeret c. Et certè juxta vos in Apostoli erat positum potestate si voluisset ut non deficeret fides ejus c. S. Hieron L. 2. adversus Pelagianos S. Ierome tels us h Aliquid speciale Bellar. L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 3. §. Secundo quia sine Bellarmine likes not this Because saith he Christ here obtained soâ—…e speciall Priviledge for S. Peter whereas Perseverance in Grace is a Gift common to all the Elect. And he is so farre right And the Speciall Grace which this Prayer of Christ obtained for S. Peter was That he should not fall into a finall Apostacy no not when Sathan had sisted him to the branne that he fell most horribly even into a threefold Denyall of his Master and that with a Curse And to recover this and Persevere was aliquid speciale I trow if any thing ever were But this will not down with Bellarmine No The a Vt nec ipse ut Pontifex doceret unquam aliquid contra fidem sive ut in Sede ejus inveniretur qui doceret Bellar. L. 4 de Rom. Pont. c. 3. §. Alterum Privilegium est Aliquid speciale the speciall Thing here obtained was saith he That neither S. Peter himselfe nor any other that should sit in his Seat should ever teach any thing contrary to the true Faith That S. Peter after his recovery should preach nothing either as Apostle or Bishop contrary to the Faith will easily be granted him But that none of his Successors should doe it but be all Infallible that certainly never came within the Compasse of Rogavi pro te Petre I have prayed for thee Peter And Bellarmines Proofe of this is his just Confutation For he prooves this Exposition of that Text only by the Testimony of seven Popes in their owne Cause And then takes a leape to Theophylact who sayes nothing to the purpose So that upon the matter Bellarmine confesses there is not one Father of the Church disinteressed in the Cause that understands this Text as Bellarmiue doth till you come downe to Theophylact. So the Popes Infallibility appeared to no body but the Popes themselves for above a Thousand yeares after Christ. For so long it was before * Theophylactus floruit circa An. Dom. 1072. Theophylact lived And the spite of it is Theophylact could not see it neither For the most that Bellarmine makes him say is but this †Quia 〈◊〉 habco Principem disâ—…ipuloruÌ„ confirma caeteros Hoc enim decet Te qui post me Ecclesia Petraes Fundamentum Bellar. L. 4. De Rom. Pont. c. 3. §. Praeter hos Ex Theophyl in 21. S Luc. Because I account thee as chiefe of my Disciples confirme the rest for this becomes Thee which art to be a Rock and Foundation of the Church after me For this is â—…ersonall too and of S. Peter and that as he was an Apostle For otherwise then as an Apostle he was not a Rocke or Foundatiâ—…n of the Church no not in a Secondary sense The speciall priviledge therefore which Christ prayed for was personall to S. Peter and is that which before I mentioned And Bellarmine himselfe sayes That Christ †Impetravit c. ibid. §. Est igitur tertia obtained by this Prayer two Priviledges especiall ones for S. Peter The one That he should never quite fall from the true Faith how strongly soever he were tempted The other That there should never be found any sitting in his Seate that should teach against it Now for the first of these * Ex quibus pri vilegiis primum fortasse non manavit ad posteros at secundum sine dubio manavit ad Posteros sive Successores Bellar. Ibid. §. Alterum Privilegium Bellarmine doubts it did not flow over to his Successors Why then 't is true which I here say That this was Personall to S. Peter But the second he sayes Out of all doubt passed over to his Successors Nay that 's not out
Hath Christ our Lord saith hee in this Case provided no Rule no Iudge Infallibly to determine Controversies and to procure Vnitie and Certainty of Beliefe Indeed the Protestants admit no Infallible Meanes Rule or Iudge but onely Scripture which every man may interpret as hee pleases and so all shall bee uncertaine Truly I must confesse there are many Impediments to hinder the Calling of a Generall Councell You know in the Auncient Church there was †Christianitas in diversas Haereses scissa est quia non er at licentia Episcopis in unum convenire persecutione saeviente usque ad tempora Constantini c. Isidor praefat in Concil Edit Uenetiis 1585. hinderance enough and what hurt it wrought And afterward though it were long first there was provision made for †Frequens Generalium Conciliorum celebratio est praecipua cultura Agri Dominici c. Et illorum neglectus Errores Hareses Schismata disseminat Hee prateritorum temporum recordatio praesentium consideratio ante oculos nostros ponunt Itaque sancimus ut amodo Concilia Generalia celebrentur it a quod Primum à fine hujus Concilii in quin juâ—…nnium immediatè sequens Secundum verò à fine illius in septennium deinceps de decennio in decennium perpetuo celebrentur c. Concil Constan. Sess. 39. Et apud Gerson Tom. 1. p. 230. Et Pet. de Aâ—…aco Card Cameracensis libellum obtulit in Concil Constant. de Reformatione Ecclesiae contra Opinionem eorum qui putarunt Concilia Generalia minus necessariaesse quia Omnia benè a Pâ—…tribus nostris ordinata sunt c. In fascic Rerum expetendarum fol. 28. Et Schismatibus debet Ecclesia cito per Concilia Generalia provideri ut in Primitiva Ecclesia docuerunt Apostoli Ut Act. 6. Act. 15. Ibid fol. 204. A. frequent calling of Councels and yet no Age since saw them called according to that Provision in every Circumstance therefore Impediments there were eenough or else some declined them wilfully though there were no Impediments Nor will I deny but that when they were called there were as many * In Concil Arimincusi multis paucorum fraude deceptis c. S. Aug. L. 3. cont Maximinum c. 14. Practices to disturbe or pervert the Councels And these Practices were able to keepe many Councels from being all of one minde But if being called they will not be of one minde I cannot helpe that Though that very not agreeing is a shrewd signe that the other Spirit hath a partie there against the Holy Ghost Now A. C. would know what is to be done for Re-uniting of a Church divided in Doctrine of the Faith when this Remedy by a Generall Councell cannot be had Sure Christ our Lord saith he hath provided some Rule some Iudge in such and such like Cases to procure unity and certainty of beliefe I believe so too for he hath left an Infallible Rule the Scripture And that by the manifest Places in it which need no Dispute no Externall Iudg is a Non per difficiles nos Deus ad Beat am vitam Quaestiones vocat c. In absoluto nobis facili est aeternitas Iesum suscitatum à mortuis per Deum Credere Ipsum esse Dominum consiteri c. S. Hilar. L. 10. de Trin. ad finem able to settle Vnity and Certainty of Beliefe in Necessaries to Salvation And in Non necessariis in and about things not necessarie there ought not to bee a Contention to a a Cyprianus Collegae ipâ—…us credentes Haereticos Schismaticos Baptismum non habere sine Baptismo receptis c. iis tamen communicare quam separari ab Vnitate maluerunt S. Aug L. 2. de Baptis cont Donatist c 6. Et hi non contaminabant Cyprianum Ibid. sine Separation And therefore A. C. does not well to make that a Crime that the Protestants admit no Infallible Rule but the Scripture onely Or as he I doubt not without some scorne termes it beside onely Scripture For what need is there of another since this is most Infallible and the same which the b Recensuit cuncta sanctis Scripturis consona Euseb. L. 5. Hist. c. 20. De Irenaeo Regula Principalis de quâ Paracletus agnitus Tert. de Monogam c. 2. And this is true though the Authour spoke it when he was Lapsed Ipsas Scripturas apprimè tenens S. Hieron ad Marcellum adversus Montanum To. 2. Hoc quia de Scripturts non habet authoritatem eâdem facilitate contemnitur quà probatur S. Hieron in S. Matth. 23. Manifestus est fidei lapsus liquidum superbiae vitium vel respuere aliquid eorum quae Scriptura habet vel inducere quicquam quod scriptum non est S. Basil. Sâ—…rm de Fide To. 2. p. 154. Edit Basileae 1565. Contra insurgentes Hareses saepe pugnavi Agraphis verùm non alienis à piâ secundùm Scripturam sententiâ Ibid. p. 153. And before Basil Tertul. Adoro Scripturae plenitudinem c. si non est scriptum timeat Hermogenes Vae illud adjicientibus vel detrahentibus destinatum Tertul. advers Hermog c. 22. And Paulinus plainely cals it Regulam Directionis Epist. 23. De hâc Regula tria observanda sunt 1. Regula est sed à tempore quo scripta 2. Regula est sed per Ecclesiam applicanda non per privatum Spiritum 3. Regula est mensurat omnia quae continet continet autem omnia necessaria ad salutem vel mediatè vel immediatè Et hoc tertium habet Biel. in 3. D. 25. q. unicâ Conclus 4. M. And this is all we say Hook L. 5. Eccles Pol. §. 22. Ancient Church of Christ admitted And if it were sufficient for the Ancient Church to guide them and direct their Councels why should it be now held insufficient for us at least till a free Generall Councell may bee had And it hath both the Conditions which c Regula Catholica sidei debet esse certa nota Si certa non sit non erit Regula Si nota non sit non erit Regula nobis Bellar. L. 1. de Verbo Dei c. 2. §. 5. Sed nihil est vel certius vel notius sacrâ Scripturâ Bellar. ibid. §. 6. Therefore the Holy Scripture is the Rule of Catholike Faith both in it selfe and to us also For in things simply Necessary to Salvation it is abundantly knowne and manifest as §. 16. Nu. 5. Bellarmine requires to a Rule Namely that it be Certaine and that it bee Knowne For if it bee not certaine it is no Rule and if it be not knowne 't is no Rule to us Now the d Convenit inter nos omnes omnino Haereticos Verbum Dei esse Regulam fidei ex quâ de Dogmatibus judicandum sit Bellarm. Praefat. To. 1. fine And 〈◊〉 there perhaps he includes Traditions yet thaâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 proved yet Nâ—…ther
indeed can he include 〈◊〉 For he speakes of that Word of God upon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reâ—…cks consent But concerning Traditions they â—…ll consent not That they are a Rule of Faith Therâ—… he speakes not of them Romanists dare not deny but this Rule is â—…aine and that it is 〈◊〉 â—…ntly Knowne in 〈◊〉 â—…lest Places of 〈◊〉 â—…uch as are 〈◊〉 to Salvation none of the Ancients did ever 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…here's an Infallible Rule Nor need there be such feare 〈◊〉 Private Spirit in these manifest things which beâ—… 〈◊〉 read or heard teach themselves Indeed you 〈◊〉 had need of some other Iudge and he a pâ—…opitious one to crush the Pope's more powerfull â—…rincipality out of Pasce oves feed my sheepe And yet this must be the meaning if you will have it whether Gideon's fleece bee wet or dry Iudg. 6. that is whether there be dew Iudg. 6. enough in the Text to water that sense or no. But I pray when God hath left hisâ—… Church this Infallible Rule what warrant have you to seeke another You have shewed us none yet what e're you thinke you have And I hope A. C. cannot thinke it followes that Christ our Lord hatâ—… provided no Rule to determine necessary Controversies because hee hath not provided the Rule which he would have Besides let there be such a living Iudge as A. C. would have and let the * For so he affirmes p. 58. Pope be he yet that is not sufficient against the malice of the Divell and impious men to keepe the Church at all Times from Renting even in the Doctrine of Faith or to soder the Rents which are made For Oportet esse Haereses 1. Cor. 11. Heresies there will be and Heresies properly there cannot 1. Cor. 11. 19. be but in Doctrine of the Faith And what will A. C. in this Case do Will he send Christ our Lord to provide another Rule then the Decision of the Bishop of Rome because he can neither make Unity nor Certainty of Beliefe And as 't is most apparent he cannot doe it de facto so neither hath he power from Christ over the Whole Church to doe it nay out of all doubt 't is not the least reason why de facto he hath so little successe because de Iure he hath no power given But since A. C. requires another Iudge besides the Scripture and in Cases when either the time is so difficult that a Generall Councell cannot be called or the Councell so set that they will not agree Let 's see how he proves it 'T is thus every earthly kingdome saith he when matters cannot be composed by a Parliament which cannot A. C. p. 60. be called upon all Occasions why doth he not adde here And which being called will not alwaies be of one minde as he did adde it in Case of the Councell hath besides the Law Bookes some living Magistrates and Judges and above all one visible King the Highest Iudge who hath Authority sufficient to end all Controversies and settle Unity in all Temporall Affaires And shall we thinke that Christ the wisest King hath provided in his kingdome the Church onely the Law-bookes of the Holy Scripture and no living visible Iudges and above all one Chiefe so assisted by his Spirit as may suffice to end all Controversies for Vnity and Certainty of Faith which can never be if every man may interpret Holy Scripture the Law-Bookes as he list This is a very plausible Argument with the Many But the foundation of it is but a †Qua subtilissime de hoc disputari possunt ità ut non similitudinibus quae plerunque fallunt sed rebus ipsis satisfiat c. S. Aug. L. de Quant Animae c. 32. Whereupon the Logicians tell us rightly that this is a Fallacy unlesse it be taken reduplicativè i. e. de similibus qua similia sunt And hence Arist. himself 2. Top. Loc. 32. sayes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rursum in Similibus si similitèr se habent Similitude and if the Similitude hold not in the maine the Argument's nothing And so I doubt it will proove here I 'le observe Particulars as they lie in order And first he will have the whole Militant Church for of that we speake a Kingdome But this is not certaine For they are no meane ones which thinke our Saviour Christ left the Church Militant in the Hands of the Apostles and their Successours in an Aristocraticall or rather a Mixt Government and that the Church is not a When Gerson writ his Tract De Auferibilitate Pape sure hee thought the Church might continue in a very gooâ—… Being without a Monarchicall Head Therefore in his Iudgement the Church is not by any Command or Institution of Christ Monarchicall Gerson par 1. pag. 154. When S. Uierom wrote thus Ubicuaque fuerit Episcopus sive Romae sive Eugubii sive Constantinopoli sive Rhegit sive Alexandriae sive Tanis ejusdem meriti cjusdem est Sacerdotii S. Hieron Epist. ad Evagrium doubtlesse he thought not of the Romane Bishops Monarcâ—…y For what Bishop is of the same Merit or of the same Degree in the Priesthood with the Pope as things are now carried at Rome Affirmamus etiam Patribus Graecis Latinis ignot as esse voces de Petro aut Papa Monarcha Monarchia Namquod in superioribus obscrvabamus reperiri obsâ—…rvabamus dictiones positas pro Episcopatu nihil hoc ad râ—…m facit 〈◊〉 Casaub. Excrcitatione 15. ad Annales Eccles. Baron §. 12. p. 378. §. 11 p. 360. diserte asserit probat Ecclesiae Regimen Aristocraticum fuisse Monarchicall otherwise then the Trumphant and Militant make one Body under Christ the Head And in this sense indeed and in this onely the Church is a most absolute Kingdome And the very Expressing of this sense is a full Answer to all the Places of Scripture and other Arguments brought by b Bellar. L. a. de Concil c. 16. §. 1 2 3. Bellarmine to prove that the Church is a Monarchie But the Church being as large as the world Christ thought it fitter to governe it Aristocratically by Diverse rather then by One Vice Roy. And I believe this is true For all the time of the first three hundred yeares and somewhat better it was governed Aristocratically if we will impaitially consider how the Bishops of those times carried the whole Businesse of admitting any new consecrated Bishops or others to or rejecting them from their Communion For I have carefully Examined this for the first sixe hundred yeares even to and within the time of S. Gregory the great c S. Greg. L. 9. Epist. 58. L. 12. Epist. 15. Who in the beginning of the seventh hundred yeare sent such Letters to Augustine then Archbishop of Canterburie and to d S. Greg. L. 9. Epist. 61. Quirinus and other Bishops in Ireland And I finde That the Literae Communicatoriae which certified from one Great
prâ—…ng can be questioned in another unlesse it to tall out that 〈◊〉 Scriptuâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 appeare against it Buâ—… eâ—…t 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 thâ—…se aâ—…e â—…o 〈◊〉 and manâ—…t and â—…ving the it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whâ—… or 〈◊〉 wiâ—…h 〈◊〉 without a Councell §. 33. 〈◊〉 5. Nâ—… 1. 2. another Councell of equall authority did reverse it And indeed I might have returned upon you againe If a Generall Councell not Confirmed by the Pope may erre which you affirme to what end then a Generall Councell And you may Answer yes For although a Generall Councell may erre yet the Pope as Head of the Church cannot An excellent meanes of unity to have all in the Church as the Pope will have it what ever Scripture say or the Church thinke And then I pray to what end a Generall Councell Will his Holinesse be so holy as to confirme a Generall Councell if it Determine against him And as for * 〈◊〉 L 4. dâ—… 〈◊〉 Pâ—…t â—…7 §. 3. c. Bellarmines reasons why a Generall Councell should be usefull if not necessary though the Pope bee Iâ—…fallible they are so weake in Part and in part so unworthy that I am sory any necessity of a bad cause should force so learned a man to make use of them Here A. C. tels mee The Caution mentioned as omitted makes my Answer werse then the Iesuite related A. C. p. 63. â—…4 it And that in two things First in that the Iesuite relates it thus Although it may erre but the Caution makes it as if it did actually erre Secondly in that the Iesuite relates That wee are bound to hold it till another come to reverse it that is wâ—…e not knowing whether it doe erre or not but onely that it may erre But the Caution puts the Case so as if the Determination of a Generall Councell actually erring were not ipso jure invalid but must stand in force and have externall Obedience yeelded to it till not onely morall Certainty but Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the errour appeare And when it appeares wee must yeeld our Obedience till a Councell of equall Authority reverse it which perhaps will not bee found in an whole Age. So either the Iesuite relates this speech truly or lesse disgracefully And A. C. thinkes that upon better Iudgement I Will not allow this Caution Truly I shall not thanke the Iesuite for any his kindnesse here And for the Caution I must and doe acknowledge it mine even upon advisement and that whether it make my Answer worse or better And I thinke farther that the Iesuite hath no great Cause to thanke A. C. for this Defence of his Relation First then the Iesuite so sayes A. C. doth in his Relation make it but a supposition That a Generall Councell A. C. p. 63 may erre But the Caution expresses it as actually erring True But yet I hope this Expression makes no Generall Councell actually erre And then it comes all to one whether I suppose that such a Councell may erre or that it doe erre And 't is fitter for clearing the Difficulties into which the Church fals in such a Case to suppose and more then a supposition it is not a Generall Councell * Synodum Generalem aliquoties errâsse percepimus Wald. L. 2. de Doctrin Fidri Art 2. c. 19. §. 1. actually erring then as only under a Possibility of Erring For the Church hath much more to doe to vindicate it selfe from such an Errour actually being then from any the like Errour that might be Secondly A. C. thinkes he hath got great advantage A. C. p. 63. by the words of the Caution in that I say A Generall Councell erring is to stand in force and have externall Obedience at least so farre as it consists in silence Patience and forbearance yeelded to it till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration to the Contrary make the Error appeare and untill therupon another Councell of equal Authority did reverse it Well! I say it again But is there any one word of mine in the Caution that speakes of our knowing of this Errour Surely not one that 's A. C s. Addition Now suppose a Generall Councell actually Erring in some Point of Divine Truth I hope it will not follow that this Errour must bee so grosse as that forthwith it must needes be knowne to private men And doubtlesse till they know it Obedience must be yeelded Nay when they know it if the Errour be not manifestly against Fundamentall verity in which case a Generall Councell can not easily erre I would have A C. and all wise men Consider Whether Externall Obedience be not even then to be yeelded For if Controversies arise in the Church some end they must have or they 'll teare all in sunder And I am sure no wisdome can thinke that fit Why then say a Generall Councell Erre and an Erring Decree be ipso jure by the very Law it selfe invalid I would have it wisely considered again whether it be not fit to allow a Generall Councell that Honour and Priviledge which all other Great Courts have Namely That there be a Declaration of the Invalidity of its Decrees as well as of the Laws of other Courts before private men can take liberty to refuse Obedience For till such a declaration if the Councel stand not in force A. C sets up Private Spirits to controll Generall Councels w ch is the thing he so often and so much cryes out against in the Protestants Therefore it may seeme very fit and necessary for the Peace of Christendome that a Generall Councell thus erring should stand in force till Evidence of Scripture or a Demonstration make the Errourto appeare * It is not long since A C. compared Councels to Parliaments it was but p. 60. And I hope a Parliament and the Acts of it must stand in force thoughsomthing bemistaken in them or found hurtfull till another Parliament of equal Authority reverse it and them For I presume you will not have any inferiour Authority to abrogate Acts of Parliament as that another Councell of equall Authority reverse it For as for Morall Certainty that 's not strong enough in Points of Faith which alone are spoken of here And if another Councell of equall Authority cannot be gotten together in an Age that is such an Inconvenience as the Church must beare when it happens And far better is that inconvenience then this other †§. 33. Consid. 4. N. 1. that any Authority lesse then a Generall Councell should rescinde the Decrâ—…es of it unlesse it erre manifestly and intolera'ly Or that the whole Church upon peaceable and just complaint of this Errour neglect or refuse to call a Councell and examine it And there come in Nationall or Provinciall Councels to a § 24. Nu. 1. reforme for themselves But no way must lye open to private men to b §. 38. Nu. 15. Refuse obedience till the Councell be heard
and weighed as well as that which they say against it yet with c Non est inferiorum judicare an Superiores legitimè procedant necne nisi manifestiss imè constet intolerabilem Errorem committâ—… Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c 8. §. Alii dicunt Concilium Nisi manifestè constet Iacob Almaln in 3. sent D. 24. q. unicâ fine Bellarmines Exception still so the errour be not manifestly intolerable Nor is it fit for Private men in such great Cases as this upon which the whole peace of Christendome depends to argue thus The Error appeares Therefore the Determination of the Councell is ipso jure invalid But this is farre the safer way I say still when the Errour is neither Fundamentall nor in it selfe manifest to argue thus The Determination is by equall Authority and that secundùm jus according to Law declared to be invalid Therefore the Errour appeares And it is a more humble and conscientious way for any private man to suffer a Councell to goe before him then for him to out-runne the Councell But weake and Ignorant mens outrunning both God and his Church is as bold a fault now on all sides as the daring of the Times hath made it Common As for that which I have added concerning the Possibility of a Generall Councells erring I shall goe on with it without asking any farther leave of A. C. For upon this Occasion I shall not hold it § 33 amisse a little more at large to Consider the Poynt of Generall Councels How they may or may not erre And a little to looke into the Romane and Protestant Opinion concerning them which is more agreeable to the Power and Rule which Christ hath left in his Church and which is most preservative of Peace established or ablest to reduce perfect unity into the Church of Christ when that poore Ship hath her ribs dashed in sunder by the waves of Contention And this I will adventure to the World but only in the Nature of a Consideration and with submission to my Mother the Church of England and the Mother of us all the Universall Catholike Church of Christ As I doe most humbly All whatsoever else is herein contained First then I Consider whether all the Power Consid. 1. that an Oecumenicall Councell hath to Determine and all the Assistance it hath not to erre in that Determination it hath it not all from the a Si Ecclesiae Vniversitati non est data ulla Authoritas Ergo neque Concilio Generali quatenâ—… Ecclesiam Universalem repraesentat Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c. 16. §. Quòd si Ecclesia Catholike Universall Body of the Church and Clergie in the Church whose b Concilium Generale Ecclesiam reprasentans Ia. Almain in 3. Sent D. 24. Qâ—…unicâ Episcopi sunt Ecclesia reprasentativè ut nostri loquuntur Bellar. L. 3. de Eccl. Milit. c. 14. §. 3. Representative it is And it seemes it hath For the Government of the Church being not c §. 26. Nu. 8. Monarchicall but as Christ is Head this Principle is inviolable in Nature Every Body Collective that represents receives power priviledges from the Body which is represented els a Representation might have force without the thing it represents which cannot be So there is no Power in the Councell no Assistance to it but what is in and to the Church But yet then it may be Questioned whether the Representing Body hath d Omnis repraesentatio virtute minor est Reipsâ vel Veritate cujus Reprasentatio est Colligigitur apertè ex Tho. 1. 2. q. 101. A. 2. ad 2. all the Power Strength and Priviledge which the Represented hath And suppose it hath all the Legall Power yet it hath not all the Naturall either of strength or wisdome that the whole hath Now because the Representative hath power from the Whole and the Maine Body can meet no other way therefore the Acts Lawes and Decrees of the Representative be it Ecclesiasticall or Civill are Binding in their Strength But they are not so certaine and free from Errour as is that Wisdome which resides in the Whole For in Assemblies meerely Civill or Ecclesiasticall all the able and sufficient men cannot be in the Body that Represents And it is as possible so many able e Posset enim contingere quòd Congregati in Concilio Generali essent pauci viles tam in re quà m in hominum reputatione respectu illorum qui ad illud Concilium Generale minime convenissent c. Ockam Dial par 3. lib. 3. c. 13. and sufficient men for some particular businesse may be left out as that they which are in may misse or mis apply that Reason and Ground upon which the Determination is principally to rest Here for want of a cleare view of this ground the Representative Body erres whereas the Represented by vertue of those Members which saw and knew the ground may hold the Principle inviolated Secondly I Consider That since it is thus in Nature Consid. 2. and in Civill Bodies if it be not so in Ecclesiasticall too some reason must be given why a Ecclesia est tinum Corpus mysticâ—…m per Similitudâ—…nem ad Naturale Durand 3. D. 14. Q. 2. N. 5. Biel. Lect. 23. in Can. Miss For that Body also consists of men Those men neither all equall in their perfections of Knowledge and Iudgement whether acquired by Industry or rooted in Nature or infused by God Not all equall nor any one of them perfect and absolute or freed from passion and humane infirmities Nor doth their meeting together make them Infallible in all things though the Act which is hammered out by many together must in reason be perfecter then that which is but the Child of one mans sufficiency If then a Generall Councell have no ground of Not erring from the Men or the Meeting either it must not be at all or it must be by some assistance and power upon them when they are so met together And this if it bee lesse then the Assistance of the Holy Ghost it cannot make them secure against Errour Thirdly I Consider That the Assistance of the Consid. 3. Holy Ghost is without Errour That 's no Question and as little there is That a Councell hath it But the Doubt that troubles is Whether all assistance of the Holy Ghost be afforded in such a High manner as to cause all the Definitions of a Councell in matters Fundamentall in the Faith and in remote Deductions from it to be alike infallible Now the Romanists to prove there is b Omnem veritatem infallibiliter docendi c. Stapl. Relect. Praf ad Lectorem infallible assistance produce some places of Scripture but no one of them inferres much lesse enforces an infallibility The Places which Stapleton there rests upon are these c S. Ioh. 16. 13. I will send you the Spirit of Truth which will lead you into all Truth And d
I think it is undoubted Truth That one and the same Conclusion may be Faith to the Believer that cannot prove and Knowledge to the Learned that can And b Cont. Fund c. 4. S. Augustine I am sure in regard of one and the same thing even this the very Wisdome of the Church in her Doctrine ascribes Vnderstanding to one sort of men and Beliefe to another weaker sort And c Tho. p. 1. q. 2. A. 2. ad 1. Nihil prohibet illud quod secundùm se demonstrabile est scibile ab aliquo acciti ut Credibile qui Demonstrationem non capit Thomas goes with him Now for further satisfaction if not of you yet of others this may well be thought on Man lost by sin the Integrity of his Nature and cannot have Light enough to see the way to Heaven but by Grace This Grace was first merited after given by Christ this Grace is first kindled in Faith by which if we agree not to some Supernaturall Principles which no Reason can demonstrate simply we can never see our way But this Light when it hath made Reason submit it self cleares the Eye of Reason it never puts it out In which sense it may be is that of a L. 3. Rationabilu ubique diffusa Optatut That the very Catholike Church it selfe is reasonable as well as diffused every where By which b Ut ipsâ fide valentiores facti quod credimus intelligere mereannur non jam hominibus sed Deo intrinsecùs mentem nostram firmante illuminante S. Aug. cont Epist Fundamenti c. 14. Reason inlightened which is stronger then Reason the Church in all Ages hath beene able either to convert or convince or at least c Omnia genera Ingeniorum subdita Scripturae S. Aug. L. 22. cont Faust. cap. 96. stop the mouthes of Philosophers and the great men of Reason in the very 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 salvation as they cannot be proved by Reason so neither need they be determined by any Councell nor ever were they attempted they are so plaine set downe in the Scripture If about the sense and true meaning of these or necessary deduction out of these Prime Articles of Faith Generall Councels determine any thing as they have done in Nice and the rest there is no inconvenience that one and the same Canon of the Councell should be believed as it reflects upon the Articles and Grounds indemonstrable and d Almain 3. D. 24. q. 1. Tho. 2. 2a q. 1. A. 5. C. Id quod est scitum ab uno homine etiam in statu via est ab alio Creditum qui hoc Demonstrare non novit 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 Consubstantiality of Christ with the Father in it selfe considered is indemonstrable by Reason There I believe and assent in Faith But the same Conclusion e Concilium Nicanum deduxit Conclusionem ex Scripturis Bellar 2. de Concil c. 12. §. Sic etià m if you give 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 have an Habit of it And what inconvenience in this For the weaker sort of Christians which cannot deduce when they have the Principle granted they are to rest upon the Definition only and their Assent is meere Faith yea and the Learned too where there is not a Demonstration evident to them assent by Faith onely and not by knowledge And what inconvenience in this Nay the necessity of Nature is such that these Principles once given the understanding of man cannot rest but it must be thus And the †S. Pet. 3. 15. Apostle would never have required a man to be alle to give a Reason and an account of the hope that is in him if he might not be able to know his account or have lawfull interest to give it when he knew it without prejudicing his Faith by his knowledge And suppose exact knowledge and meere Beliefe 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 believe the Article or Ground upon which they rest But when that is once believed it can demonstrate many things from it And Definitions of Councels are not Principia Fidei Principles of Faith but Deductions from them And now because you aske Wherein are we nearer Consid. 7. to unity by a Councell if a Councell may erre Besides the Answer given I promised to consider which Opinion was most agreeable with the Church which most able to preserve or reduce Christian Peace The Romane That a Councell cannot erre Or the Protestants That it can And this I propose not as a Rule but leave the Christian world to consider of it as I doe First then I Consider Whether in those Places of Scripture before mentioned or any other there bâ—…e promised to the present Church an absolute Infallibility Or whether such an Infallibility will not serve the turne as * Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. Notab 3 Exacta Omnimodâ Infallibilitate non indiget sed satis est semel acceptis c. Stapleton after much wrigling is forced to acknowledge One not every way exact because it is enough if the Church doe diligently insist upon that which was once received and there is not need of so great certainty 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 unknowne And if this be so then sure the Church of the Apostles required guidance by a greater degree of Infallibility then the present Church which yet if it follow the Scripture is Infallible enough though it hath not the same degree of Certainty which the Apostles had and the Scripture hath Nor can I tell what to make of Bellarmine that in a whole Chapter disputes five Prerogatives in Certainty of Truth a L. 2 de Con. c. 12. §. ult Cùm utraque sint infallibilis veritatis aquè certa dici possunt that the Scripture hath above a Councell and at last Concludes That They may be said to be equally certain in Infallible Truth The next thing I Consider is Suppose this not Exact but congruous Infallibility in the Church Is it not residing according to Power and Right of Authority in the whole Church and in a Generall Councell only by Power deputed b Nam si Ecclesiae Vniversitati non
or Crimes are against Points Fundamentall or of great Consequence Els S. Paul would not have given the Rule for Excommunication 1 Cor. 5. Nor Christ 1 Cor. 5. 5. himselfe have put the man that will not heare and Obey the Church into the place and condition of an Ethnick and a Publican as he doth S. Mat. 18. And Salomon's S Mat. 18. 17. Rule is generall and he hath it twice My Son forsake not the teaching or instruction of thy Mother Now this is either spoken and meant of a naturall Mother And her Prov. 18. Uid S. Aug. 2. Conf. e. 3. and Prov. 6. 20. Eccluâ—… 3. 3. Prov. 15. 20. Authority over her Children is confirmed Ecclus. 3. And the foole will be upon him that despiseth her Prov. 15 Or'tis extended also to our Mystiâ—…all and Spirituall Mother the Church And so the Geneva b For sake not thy Mothers instruction that is the Teaching of the Church where in the faithfull are begotten by the incorruptible seed of Gods Word Annot. in Prov 1. 8. Note upon the Place expresses it And I cannot but incline to this Opinion Because the Blessings which accompany this Oâ—…edience are so many and great as that they are not like to be the fruits of Obedience to a Naturall Mother onely as Salomon expresses them all Prov. * Prov. 6. 21 6. And in all this here 's no Exception of the Mothers erring For Mater errans an erring Mother looses neither the right nor the power of a Mother by her error And I marvell what Sonne should shew reverence or Obedience if no Mother that hath erred might exact it 'T is true the Sonne is not to follow his Mothers error or his Mother into Error But 't is true too 't is a grievous crime in a Sonne to cast off all obedience to his Mother because at some time or in some things she hath fallen into error And howsoever this Consideration meetes with this Inconvenience as well as the rest For suppose as I said in the whole Catholike Militant Church an absolute Infallibility in the prime Foundations of Faith absolutely necessary to Salvation And then though the Mother Church Provinciall or Nationall may erre yet if the Grand-Mother the whole Vniversall Church cannot in these necessary things all remaines safe and all Occasions of Disobedience taken from the possibility of the Churches erring are quite taken away Nor is this Mother lesse to be valued by her Children because in some smaller things age had filled her face fuller of wrinkles For where 't is said that Christ makes to himselfe a Church without spot or wrinkle Eph. 5. That is not understood of the Ephes. 5. 27. Church Militant but of the Church Triumphant * In id progrediuntur Pelagiani ut dicant vitam Iustorum in hoe seculo nullum omnino habere peccatum ex his Ecclesiam Christi in hac mortalitate perfici ut sit omnino sine maculâ rugâ Quasi non sit Christi Ecclesia quae in toto terrarum orbe clamat ad Deum Dimitte nobis deâ—…ita nostra c. S. Aug. L. de Haeresibus Haer. 88. And to maintaine the contrary is a Branch of the spreading Heresy of Pelagianisme Nor is the Church on earth any frâ—…er from wrinkles in Doctrine and Discipline then she is from Spots in Life and Conversation The next thing I consider is Suppose a Generall Councell infallible in all things which are of Faith If it prove not so but that an Error in the Faith be concluded the same erring Opinion that makes it thinke it selfe infallible makes the Error of it seeme irrevocable And when Truth which lay hid shall be brought to light the Church who was lulled asleepe by the opinion of Infallibility is left open to all manner of Distractions as it appeares at this day And that a Councel may erre besides al other instances which are not few appeares by that Error of the Councell of a Sess. 13. Constance And one Instance is enough to overthrow a Generall be it a Councell b S. Matth. 26. Christ instituted the Sacrament of his Body and Blood in both Kinde 1 Cor. 11. 23. To breake Christs Institution is a damnable Error and so confessed by c Returne of Vntruths vpon Mr. Ieweil Ar. 2. untruth 49. Stapleton The Councel is bold and defines peremptorily That to communicate in both kindes is not necessary with a Non obstante to the Institution of Christ. Consider now with me Is this an Error or not d 4. De Eucharist c. 26. Bellarmine and Stapleton and you too say 't is not because to receive under both kindes is not by Divine Right No no sure For it was not Christs e Bellarm. ibid. §. Vicesimo proferunt Precept but his Example Why but I had thought Christs Institution of a Sacrament had beene more then his Example only and as binding for the Necessaries of a Sacrament the Matter and Forme †And now lately in a Catechisme printedat Paris 1637. without the Authors Name 't is twice affirmed thus The Institution of a Sacrament is of it selfe a Command Conference 14. p. 244. And againe p. 260. Institution is a Precept as a Precept Therefore speake out and deny it to bee Christs Institution or els grant with Stapleton It is a damnable Error to goe against it If you can prove that Christs Institution is not as binding to us as a Precept which you shall never be able take the Precept with it g S. Matth. 26. 1 Cor. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Liturg. S. Chrysost. Drinke ye All of this which though you shift as you can yet you can never make it other then it is A binding Precept But Bellarmine hath yet one better Devise then this to save the Councell He saith it is a meere Calumny and that the Councell hath no such thing That the Non obstante hath no reference to Receiving under both kindes but to the time of receiving it after Supper in which the Councell saith the Custome of the Church is to be observed Non obstante notwithstanding Christs Example How foule Bellarmine is in this must appeare by the Words of the Councell which are these * Licet Christus post Coenam instituerit suis Discipulis administraverit sub utrâque specie Panis Uini hoc venerabile Sacramentum tamen hoc Non obstante non debet confici post Coenam nec recipi nifi a jejunis Here Bellarmine stayes and goes no farther but the Councell goes on Et similitèr quòd licèt in Primitivâ Ecclesiâ Sacramenta reciperentur sub utrâque Specie à fidelibus tamen haec Consuetudo ut à Laicis sub Specie Panis tantum suscipiatur habenda est pro Lege quam non licet reprobare Et asserere hanc esse illicitam est Erroneum Et pertinacitèr asserentes sunt arcendi tanquam Haretici Sess. 13. Though
Catholikes utterly condemne it And well they may For no man can affirme it but he shall make himselfe a scorne to all the Learned Men of Christendome whose Iudgements are not Captivated by Romane Power And for my owne part I am cleare of a Et mirum est quod Adversarii non asserant cum Impiccabilem Et credo assercrent nisi quotidiana Summorum PontificuÌ„ Opera ad credendnÌ„ Oppositum compellerent Almain de Author Eccles cap. 10. sine Jacobus Almain's Opinion And a great wonder it is to me That they which affirme the Pope cannot erre do not affirme likewise that he cannot sinne And I verily believe they would be bold enough to affirme it did not the daily Workes of the Popes compell them to believe the Contrary For very many of them have led lives quite Contrary to the Gospell of Christ. Nay such lives as no Epicurean Monster storied out to the world hath out-gone them in sensuality or other grosse Impiety if their owne Historians be true Take your choice of b Platina Onuphrius in Vitis eorum John the thirteenth about the yeare 966. Or of Sylvester the second about the yeare 999. Or John the eighteenth about the yeare 1003. Or Benedict the ninth about the yeare 1033. Or Boniface the eighth about the yeare 1294 Or Alexander the sixt about the yeare 1492. And yet these and their like must be infallible in their Dictates and Conclusions of Faith Do your owne believe it Surely no. For c Non enim credo aliquem esse adeo impudentem Papae Assentatorem ut ci tribuere hoc velit ut nec errare nec in Interpretatione SS Literarum ballucinari possit Alphons à Castro I. 1. Advers Hares c. 4. And the Glosse confesses it plainely in C. 24. q. 〈◊〉 C. A recta ergo Alphonsus à Castro tels us plainly That he doth not believe that any man can be so grosse and impudent a flatterer of the Pope as to attribute this unto him that he can neither erre nor mistake in expounding the Holy Scripture This comes home And therefore it may well be thought it hath taken a shrewd Purge For these words are Expresse in the Edition at Paris 1534. But they are not to be found in that at Colen 1539. Nor in that at Antwerp 1556. Nor in that at Paris 1571. a Parding his Detection of Errours against Iewell p. 64. Harding sayes indeed Alphonsus left it out of himselfe in the following Editions Well First Harding sayes this but proves it not so I may chuse whether I will believe him or no. Secondly bee it so that hee did that cannot helpe their Cause a whit For say hee did dislike the sharpnesse of the Phrase or ought els in this speech yet he alter'd not his judgment of the thing For in all these later Editions he speakes as home if not more then in the first and sayes Expresly * Coelestinus crravit non solùm ut privata persona sed ut Papa c. Alph. à Castro L. 1. adv Haeres c. 4. Ibid. That the Pope may erre not onely as a private person but as Pope And in difficult Cases he adds That the Pope ought to Consult Viros doctos men of Learning And this also was the Opinion of the Ancient Church of Christ concerning the Pope and his Infallibility For thus Liberius and he a Pope himselfe writes to Athanasius Brother Athanasius if you thinke in the presence of God and Christ as I doe I pray subscribe this Confession which is thought to be the true Faith of the Holy Catholike and Apostolike Church that we may be the more certaine that you thinke concerning the Faith as We doe †〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Liberius in Epist. ad Athanas. apud Athanas To. 1. p. 42. Edit Parisuns 1608. Et Edit Paris Latino-Grac 1627. Vt ego etiam persuasus sim inhaesitantèr That I also may be perswaded without all doubting of those things which you shall be pleased to Command me Now I would faine know if the Pope at that time were or did thinke himselfe Infallible how he should possibly be more certainly perswaded of any Truth belonging to the Faith by Athanasius his Concurring in judgment with him For nothing can make Infallibility more certaine then it is At least not the Concurring Iudgement that is Fallible as S. Athanasius was Beside the Pope Complemented exceeding low that would submit his unerring Iudgement to bee Commanded by Athanasius who hee well knew could Erre Againe in the Case of Easter which made too great a noyse in the Church of old a Post Aegyptiorum supputationes Alexandrinae Ecclesiae definitionem Episcopi quoque Romanae Ecclesiae per Literas plerique meam adhuc expectant sententiam quid existimem de die Paschae S. Ambros. L. 10. Epist. 83. Very many men called for S. Ambrose his Iudgement in that Point even after the Definition of the Church of Alexandria and the Bishop of Rome And this I presume they would not have done had they then conceived either the Pope or his Church Infallible And thus it continued downe till Lyra's time For he sayes expresly b Ex hoc patot quòd Ecclesia non consistit in hominibus ratione Potestatis vel Dignitatis Ecclesiasticae vel sacularis quid multi Principes summi Pontifices alii inferiores inventi sunt Apostat âsse à Fide c. Lyra in S. Matth. 16. 18. That many Popes as well as other Inferiours have not onely erred but even quite Apostatized from the Faith And yet now nothing but Infallibility will serve their turnes And sometimes they have not onely taken upon them to bee Infallible in Cathedrâ in their Chaire of Decision but also to Prophecie Infallibly out of the Scripture But Propheticall Scripture such as the Revelation is was too dangerous for men to meddle with which would bee carefull of their Credit in not Erring For it fell out in the time of Innocent the third and Honorius the third as c Ram. Pontifices ex S. Historiâ 〈◊〉 Qua mendaciâ—…sima esse exitus prob avâ—… Aventm Annaâ—… Boicrum L. 7. p. 529. Edit Basil. 1580. Aventine tels us That the then Popes assured the world that Destruction was at hand to Saracens Turks and Mahumetans which the Event shewed were notorious untruths And 't is remarkeable which happened Anno 1179. For then in a Councell held at Rome Pope Baron An. 1179. N. 13. Alexander the third Condemned Peter Lombard of Heresie And he lay under that Damnation for thirty and sixe yeares till Innocent the third restored him and condemned his Accusers Now Peter Lombard was then Condemned for some thing which hee had written about the humane Nature of our Saviour Christ. So here was a great Mystery of the Faith in hand something about the Incarnation And the Pope was in Cathedrâ and that in a Councell of three hundred Archbishops
and Bishops And in this Councell he condemned Peter Lombard and in him his Opinion about the Incarnation And therefore of necessity either Pope Alexander erred and that in Cathedrâ as Pope in Condemning him Or Pope Innocentius in restoring him The truth is Pope Alexander had more of Alexander the Great then of S. Peter in him And being accustomed to warlike Imployments he understood not that which Peter Lombard had written about this Mystery And so He and his Learned Assistants Condemned him unjustly And whereas you professe * Apud A. C. p. 68. after That you hold nothing against your Conscience I must ever wonder much how that can be true since you hold this of the Pope's Infallibility especially as being Propheticall in the Conclusion If this be true why doe you not lay all your strength together all of your whole Society and make this one Proposition evident For all Controversies about matters of Faith are ended and without any great trouble to the Christian World if you can but make this one Proposition good That the Pope is an Infallible Iudge Till then this shame will follow you infallibly and eternally That you should make the Pope a meere man Principium Fidei a Principle or Authour of Faith and make the mouth of him whom you call Christ's Vicar sole Iudge both of Christ's Word be it never so manifest and of his Church be she never so Learned and carefull of his Truth And for Conclusion of this Point I would faine know since this had beene so plaine so easie a way either to prevent all Divisions about the Faith or to end all Controversies did they arise why this briefe but most necessary Proposition The Bishop of Rome cannot erre in his Iudiciall Determinations concerning the Faith is not to be found either in Letter or sense in any Scripture in any Councell or in any Father of the Church for the full space of a thousand yeares and more after Christ For had this Proposition been true and then received in the Church how weake were all the Primitive Fathers to prescribe so many Rules and Cautions for avoydance of Heresie as Tertullian and Vincentius Lirinensis and others do and to indure such hard Conflicts as they did and with so many various Haereticks To see Christendome so rent and torne by some distempered Councels as that of Ariminum the second of Ephesus and others Nay to see the whole world almost become Arrian to the amazement of it selfe And yet all this time not so much as call in this Necessary Assistance of the Pope and let the world know That the Bishop of Rome was infallible that so in his Decision all differences might cease For either the Fathers of the Church Greeke as well as Latine knew this Proposition to be true That the Pope cannot Erre Iudicially in matters belonging to the Faith or they knew it not If you say they knew it not you charge them with a base and unworthy Ignorance no wayes like to over-cloud such and so many Learned men in a Matter so Necessary and of such infinite use to Christendome If you say they knew it and durst not deliver this Truth how can you charge them which durst die for Christ with such Cowardise towards his Church And if you say they knew it and with-held it from the Church you lay a most unjust Load upon those Charitable Soules which loved Christ too well to imprison any Truth but likely to make or keepe peace in his Church Catholike over the world But certainly as no Divine of worth did then dreame of any such Infallibility in Him so is it a meere dreame or worse of those Moderne Divines who affirme it now a The wilde Extent of the Popes Infallibility and Jurisdiction is a Mistake These are the Words of a Great Romane Catholike uttered to my selfe But I will spare his Name because he is living and I will not draw your Envy upon him And as b Puto quòd ipsi etiam rideant quum hoc audiunt tamen nifi hoc dicant quod erabescant si dicant non habent omninò quod dicant Sed quid ad nos Nâ—…ini invidemus Legant nobis hoc de Scripturis Sanctis credimus S. August de Vnit. Eccl. c. 17. S. Augustine somtimes spake of the Donatists and their absurd limiting the whole Christian Church to Africa onely so may I truly say of the Romanists confining all Christianity to the Romane Doctrine governed by the Pope's Infallibility I verily perswade my selfe That even the Jesuites themselves laugh at this And yet unlesse they say this which they cannot but blush while they say they have nothing at all to say But what 's this to us we envy no man If the Pope's Decision bee infallible Legant Let them read it to us out of the Holy Scripture and wee 'l believe it In the meane time take this with you that most certaine it is That the Pope hath no Infallibility to attend his Cathedrall Iudgement in Things belonging to the Faith For first besides the silence of Impartiall Antiquity Diverse c Papa non solùm Errore Personali sed Errore Iudiciali potest errare in Materia Fidei Almain L. de Author Eccles. c. 10. of your Owne confesse it yea and proove it too by sundry Instances Secondly there is a great Question among the Learned both Schoole-men and Controversers Whether the Pope comming to bee an Hereticke may bee Deposed And 't is learnedly disputed by d L. 2. de Rom. Font c. 30. Bellarmine The Opinions are different For the e Si sit à Fide de vius Dist. 40. Can. Si Papa Canon-Law saies expresly He may be judged and deposed by the Church in Case of Heresie †Iure Divino Papatu privatus est c. Io. de Turrecrem L. 4. Par. 2. c. 20. Et Bellar. L. 2. de Re. Pent. c. 30. Io. de Turrecremata is of Opinion That the Pope is to be deposed by the Church so soone as he becomes an Hereticke though as yet not a manifest one Because he is already deprived by Divine Right And recites another opinion That the Pope cannot be deposed though be fall into secret or manifest Heresie * Papa factus Hareticus non est ipso facte vel jure Divino vel humano depositus sed deponendus Cajet Tract de Author Papa Concilii c. 20. Cajetan thinkes that the Pope cannot be deposed but for a manifest Heresie and that then he is not deposed ipso facto but must be deposed by the Church †Papa Hareticus manifestus per se desinit esse Papa Caput c. Et tum potest ab Ecclesiâ Iudicari puniri Bellar. L. 2. de Rom. Pont. c. 30. §. Est ergo quinta Bellarmines owne Opinion is That if the Pope become a manifest Hereticke he presently ceases to be Pope and Head of the Church and may then be Iudged and
punished by the Church Bellarmine hath disputed this very learnedly and at large and I will not fill this Discourse with another mans labours The use I shall make of it runnes through all these Opinions and through all alike And truly the very Question it selfe supposes that A Pope may be an Heretick For if he cannot be an Heretick why doe they question whether he can be Deposed for being One And if he can be one then whether he can be deposed by the Church Before he be manifest or not till after or neither before nor after or which way they will it comes all to one for my purpose For I question not here his Deposition for his Heresie but his Heresie And I hope none of these Learned men nor any other dare deny but that if the Pope can be an Hereticke he can erre For every Heresie is an errour and more For 't is an Errour ofttimes against the Errants knowledge but ever with the pertinacie of his Will Therefore out of all even your owne Grounds If the Pope can be an Heretick he can erre grosly he can erre wilfully And he that can so Erre cannot bee Infallible in his Iudgement private or publike For if he can be an Hereticke he can and doubtlesse will Iudge for his Heresie if the Church let him alone And you your selves maintaine his Deposition lawfull to prevent this I verily believe a Pighius L. 4. Ecclesiastica Hierarchia c. 8. Alb. Pighius foresaw this blow And therefore he is of Opinion That the Pope cannot become an Hereticke at all And though b Communis Opinio est in contrarium Bellar L. 2. de Ro. Pont. c. 30. §. 2. Bellarmine favour him so farre as to say his Opinion is probable yet he is so honest as to adde that the common Opinion of Divines is against him Nay though c L. 4. de Ro. Pont. cap. 11. he Labour hard to excuse Pope Honorius the first from the Heresie of the Monothelites and sayes that Pope Adrian was deceived who thought him one yet d Tamen non possumus negare quin Adrianus cum Romano Concilio imò tota Synodus octava Generalis senserit in causâ Haresis posse Rom. Pontificem judicari Adde quod esset miserrima Conditio Ecclesia si Lupum manifestè grassantem pro Pastore agnoscere cogeretur Bellar L. 2. de Ro. Pont. c 30. §. 5. He confesses That Pope Adrian the second with the Councell then held at Rome and the eight Generall Synod did thinke that the Pope might be judged in the Cause of Heresie And that the condition of the Church were most miserable if it should be constrained to acknowledge a Wolfe manifestly raging for her Shepheard And here againe I have a Question to aske whether you believe the eight Generall Councell or not If you believe it then you see the Pope can erre and so He not Infallible If you believe it not then in your Iudgement that Generall Councell erres and so that not Infallible Thirdly It is altogether in vaine and to no use that the Pope should be Infallible and that according to your owne Principles Now God and Nature make nothing in vaine Therefore either the Pope is not Infallible or at least God never made him so That the Infallibility of the Pope had he any in him is altogether vaine and uselesse is manifest For if it be of any use 't is for the setling of Truth and Peace in the Church in all times of her Distraction But neither the Church nor any member of it can make any use of the Popes Infallibility that way Therefore it is of no use or benefit at all And this also is as manifest as the rest For before the Church or any particular man can make any use of this Infallibility to settle him and his Conscience hee must either Know or Believe that the Pope is Infallible But a man can neither Know nor Believe it And first for Beliefe For if the Church or any Christian man can believe it he must believe it either by Divine or by Humane Faith Divine Faith cannot be had of it For as is before prooved it hath no Ground in the written Word of God Nay to follow you closer it was never delivered by any Tradition of the Catholike Church And for Humane Faith no Rationall man can possibly believe having no Word of God to over-rule his Vnderstanding that he which is Fallible in the meanes as a Staple Relect. cont 4. q. 2. Notab 4. your selves confesse the Pope is can possibly be Infallible in the Conclusion And were it so that a Rationall man could have Humane Faith of this Infallibility yet that neither is nor ever can be sufficient to make the Pope Infallible No more then my strong Beliefe of another mans Honesty can make him an Honest man if he be not so Now secondly for Knowledge And that is altogether impossible too that either the Church or any Member of the Church should ever know that the Pope is Infallible And this I shall make evident also out of your owne Principles For your b Omnia Sacramenta tribus persiciuntur c. Decret Eugenii 4 in Concil Fleren Councell of Florence had told us That three things are necessary to every Sacrament the Matter the Forme of the Sacrament And the Intention of the Priest which Administers it that he intends to do as the Church doth Your c Con. Trid. Ses. 7. Can. 1. Councell of Trent confirmes it for the Intention of the Priest Vpon this Ground be it Rocke or Sand it is all one for you make it Rocke and build upon it I shall raise this Battery against the Popes Infallibility First the Pope if he have any Infallibility at all he hath it as he is Bishop of Rome and S. Peters Successor Bellaâ—… L 4. de Ro. Pent. c. 3. § 〈◊〉 Pâ—…vilegium est This is granted Secondly the Pope cannot be Bishop of Rome but he must be in holy Orders first And if any man be chosen that is not so the Election is void ipso facto propter errorem Personae for the Errour of the Person †Constantinus ex Laiâ—…o Papa circa Ann. 767. ejectus Papatu Et Steph 3. qui successit habito Concilio statuit ne quis nisi per Gradus Ecclesiasticos ascendens Pontifiâ—…atuÌ„ occupare auderet sub paenâ Anathematis Decret Dist. 79. c. Nullus This is also granted Thirdly He that is to be made Pope can never be in Holy Orders but by receiving them from One that hath Power to Ordaine This is notoriously knowne So is it also that with you Order is a Sacrament properly so called And if so then the Pope when he did receive the Order of Deacon or Priesthood at the hands of the Bishop did also receive a Sacrament Vpon these Grounds I raise my Argument thus Neither the Church nor any Member of the Church can know that
this Pope which now sits or any other that hath beene or shall be is Infallible For he is not Infallible unlesse he be Pope and he is not Pope unlesse he be in Holy Orders And he cannot be so unlesse he have received those Holy Orders and that from one that had Power to Ordaine And those Holy Orders in your Doctrine are a Sacrament And a Sacrament is not perfectly given if he that Administers it have not intentionem faciendi quod facit Ecclesia an intention to doe that which the Church doth by Sacraments Now who can possibly tell that the Bishop which gave the Pope Orders was first a man qualified to give them and secondly so devoutly set upon his Worke that he had at the Instant of giving them an Intention and purpose to doe therein as the Church doth Surely none but that Bishop himselfe And his testimony of himselfe and his owne Act such especially as if faulty he would be loth to Confesse can neither give Knowledge nor Beliefe sufficient that the Pope according to this Canon is in Holy Orders So upon the Whole matter let the Romanists take which they will I give them free choyce either this Canon of the Councell of Trent is false Divinity and there is no such Intention necessary to the Essence and Being of a Sacrament Or if it be true it is impossible for any man to know and for any advised man to Believe That the Pope is Infallible in â—…is Iudiciall Sentences in things belonging to the Faith And so here againe a Generall Councell at least such an One as that of Trent is can Erre or the Pope is not Infallible But this is an Argument ad Hominem good against your Partie onely which maintaine this Councâ—…ll But the plaine Truth is Both are Errours For neither is the Bishop of Rome Infallible in his Iudicialls about the Faith Nor is this Intention of either Bishop or Priest of Absolute Necessity to the Essence of a Sacrament so as to make void the gracious Institution of Christ in case by any Tentation the Priests Thoughts should wander from his Worke at the Instant of using the Essentials of a Sacrament or have in him an Actuall Intention to scorne the Church And you may remember if you please that a Neopolitan †Minorensis Episcopus suit Bishop then present at Trent disputed this Case very learnedly and made it most evident that this Opinion cannot be defended but that it must open a way for any unworthy Priest to make infinite Nullities in Administration of the Sacraments And his Arguments were of such strength * L 2. Hist. Trident p 276. 277. Lâ—…idae An. 1622 ut caeteros Theologos dederint in stuporem as amazed the other Divines which were present And concluded That no Internall Intention was required in the Minister of a Sacrament but that Intention which did appeare Opere externo in the VVorke it selfe performed by him And that if hee had unworthily any wandring thoughts nay more any contrary Intention within him yet it neither did nor could hinder the blessed effect of any Sacrament And most certaine it is if this be not true besides all other Inconveniences which are many no man can secure himselfe upon any Doubt or trouble in his Conscience that he hath truly and really beene made partaker of any Sacrament whatsoever No not of Baptisme and so by Consequence be left in Doubt whether he be a Christian or no even after he is Baptised Wheras 't is most impossible That Christ should so order his Sacraments and so leave them to his Church as that poore Believers in his Name by any unworthinesse of any of his Priests should not be able to know whether they have received His Sacraments or not even while they have received them And yet for all this such great lovers of Truth and such Carefull Pastors over the Flock of Christ were these Trent Fathers that they regarded none of this but went on in the usuall track and made their Decree for the Internall Intention and purpose of the Priest and that the Sarcament was invalid without it Nay one Argument more there is and from your owne Grounds too that makes it more then manifest That the Pope can erre not Personally only but Iudicially also and so teach false Doctrine to the Church which a Summus Pontifâ—… quum 〈◊〉 Ecclesiam â—…ct in his quae al Fidem pertinent nullo casu â—…rrare potest Bel. l. 4. De Ro. Pâ—…t c. 3. §. 1. Bellarmine tels us No Pope hath done or can doe And a Maxime it is with you That a Generall Councell can erre if it be not confirmed by the Pope b Concilia Genâ—…ralia à Pontifiâ—… Consirmata 〈◊〉 non possunt 〈◊〉 L. 2. de Con. c. 2. §. 1. But if it be confirmed then it cannot erre Where first this is very improper Language For I hope no Councell is Confirmed till it be finished And when 't is finished even before the Popes Confirmation be put to it either it hath Erred or not erred If it have Erred the Pope ought not to Confirme it and if he do t is a void Act. For no power can make falshood Truth If it have not Erred then it was True before the Pope Confirmed it So his Confirmation addes nothing but his owne Assent Therefore his Confirmation of a Generall Councell as you will needs call it is at the most Signum non Causa A Signe and that such as may faile but no Cause of the Councels not Erring But then secondly if a Generall Councell Confirmed as you would have it by the Pope have Erred and so can Erre then certainly the Pope can Erre Iudicially For he never gives a more solemne Sentence for Truth then when he Decrees any thing in a Generall Councell Therefore if he have Erred and can Erre there then certainly he can Erre in his Definitive Sentence about the Faith and is not Infallible Now that he hath Erred and therefore can Erre in a Generall Councell Confirmed in which he takes upon him to teach all Christendome is most cleere and evident For the Pope teaches in and by the a Conc. Lateran Can. 1. Councell of Lateran Confirmed by Innocent the third Christ is present in the Sacrament by way of Transubstantiation And in and by the b Concil Constan Sess. 13. Councell of Constance the Administration of the Blessed Sacrament to the Laity in one kinde notwithstanding Christs Institution of it in both kindes for all And in and by the c Concil Trid. Sess. 25. Decret de Invotatione Councell of Trent Invocation of Saints and Adoration of Images to the great Scandall of Christianity and as great hazard of the Weake Now that these Particulars among Many are Errours in Divinity and about the Faith is manifest both by Scripture and the Iudgement of the Primitive Church For Transubstantiation first That was never heard of in the Primitive Church nor
Animas reâ—…runt Pet. Matt. Loc. Com. Class 3. Ca. 15. Nu 4. they utterly deny any Resurrection of the Body after Death So with them that Article of the Creed is gone Now then if any man will guide his Faith by this Rule of A. C. The Consent of dissenting Parties or the Confession of the Adverse Part hee must denie the Resurrection of the Body from the Grave to Glory and believe none but that of the Soule from sinne to Grace which the Adversaries Confesse and in which the Dissenting Parties agree Punct 3. Thirdly in the great Dispute of all others about the Vnity of the Godhead All dissenting parties Iew Turke and Christian Among Christians Orthodoxe and Anti-Trinitarian of old And in these later times Orthodoxe and Socinian that Horrid and mighty monster of all Heresies agree in this That there is but one God And I hope it is as necessary to believe one God our Father as one Church our Mother Now will A. C. say here 't is safest believing as the dissenting Parties agree or as the Adverse Parties Confesse namely That there is but one God and so deny the Trinity and therewith the Sonne of God the Saviour of the world Fourthly in a Point as Fundamentall in the Faith as Punct 4. this Namely whether Christ be true and very God For which very Point most of the a Hebr. 11. 37. Cyrillus Alexandrinut malè audivit quod Ammonium Martyrem appellavit quem constitit temeritatis poenas dedisse non Necessitate negandi Christi in tormentis esse mortuum Socr. Hist. Eccl. L. 7. c. 14. Martyrs in the Primitive Church laid down their lives The dissenting Parties here were the Orthodoxe Believers who affirme Hee is both God and Man for so our Creed teaches us And all those Hereticks which affirme Christ to bee Man but denie him to bee God as the b Optatus L. 4. Cont. Parmen Arrians and c Tertul. L. de Prascrip c. 48. Carpocratians and d Tertul. Ibid. Cerinthus and e Tertul. L. de Carne Christi c. 14. Hebion with others and at this day the f Si ad Iesu Christi respicias Essentiam at que Naturam non nisi Hominem eum fuisse constantèr affirmaâ—…us Volkelius Lib. 3. de Religione Christianâ cap. 1. Socinians These dissenting Parties agree fully and clearely That Christ is Man Well then Dare A. C. sticke to his Rule here and say 't is safest for a Christian in this great Point of Faith to governe his Beliefe by the Consent of these dissenting Parties or the Confession and acknowledgement of the Adverse Partie and so settle his Beliefe that Christ is a meere Man and not God I hope hee dares not So then this Rule To Resolve a mans Faith into that in which the Dissenting Parties agree or which the Adverse Part confesses is as often false as true And false in as Great if not Greater Matters then those in which it is true And where 't is true A. C. and his fellowes dare not governe themselves by it the Church of Rome condemning those things which that Rule proves And yet while they talke of Certainty nay of Infallibility lesse will not serve their turnes they are driven to make use of such poore shifts as these which have no certainty at all of Truth in them but inferre falshood and Truth alike And yet for this also men will be so weake or so wilfull as to be seduced by them I told you * §. 35. Nu. 2. fine before That the force of the preceding Argument lies upon two things The one expressed and that 's past the other upon the Bye which comes now to be handled And that is your continuall poore Out-cry against us That we cannot be saved because we are out of the Church Sure if I thought I were out I would get in as fast as I could For we confesse as well as you That a Extra Ecclesiam veminem Vivificat Spiritus Sanctus S. Aug. Epist. 5 0. ad finem Field L. 1. de Eccles. c. 13. Vna est Fidelium Vniversalis Ecclesia extra quam nullus salvatur Conc Lateran Can. 1. And yet even there there is no mention of the Romane Church Out of the Catholike Church of Christ there is no Salvation But what do you meane by Out of the Church Sure out of the b And so doth A. C. too Out of the Catholiâ—… Romane Church there is no Possibility of Salvaâ—…on A C. p. 65. Romane Church Why but the Romane Church and the Church of England are but two distinct members of that Catholike Church which is spread over the face of the earth Therefore Rome is not the House where the Church dwels but Rome it selfe as well as other Particular Churches dwels in this great Universall House unlesse you will shut up the Church in Rome as the Donatists did in Africke I come a little lower Rome and oâ—…her Nationall Churches are in this Vniversall Catholike House as so many * And Daughter Sion was God's owne phrase of old of the Church Isa. 1. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hyppol Orat. de Consum mundi Et omnis Ecclesia Virgo appellata est S. Aug. Tr. 13. in S. Ioh. Daughters to whom under Christ the care of the Houshold is committed by God the Father and the Catholike Church the Mother of all Christians Rome as an Elder Sister †For Christ was to be preached to all Nations but that Preaching was to begin at Ierusalem S. Luc. 24. 47. according to the Prophesie Mic. 4. 2. And the Disciples were first called Christians at Antioch Act. 11. 26. And therefore there was a Church there before ever S. Peter came thence to settle One at Rome Nor is it an Opinion destitute either of Authority or Probability That the Faith of Christ was preached and the Sacraments administred here in England before any settlement of a Church in Rome For S. Gildas the Ancientest monument we have and whom the Romanists themselves reverence sayes expresly That the Religion of Christ was received in Britannie Tempore ut scimus summo Tiberii Caesaris c. In the later time of Tiberius Caesar Gildas deexcid Brit. whereas S. Peter kept in Iewrie long after Tiberius his death Therefore the first Conversion of this Iland to the Faith was not by S. Peter Nor from Rome which was not then a Church Against this Rich. Broughton in his Ecclesiasticall History of Great Britaine Centur. 1. C. 8. §. 4. sayes expresly That the Protestants do freely acknowledge that this Clause of the time of Tiberius tempore summo Tiberii Caesaris is wanting in other Copies of that holy Writer and namely in that which was set forth by Pol. Virgil and others Whereas first these words are expresse in a most faire and ancient Manuscript of Gildas to be seene in S t. Rob. Cotton's Study if any doubt it Secondly these words are as expresse in
Contrary to his Conscience Presupposing it granted that the Church of Rome erres only in not Fundamentals and such Errours not Damnable which is absolutely and clearly denyed by D. White To this A. C. sayes nothing but that D. VVhite did not give this Answer A. C. p. 67. at the Conference I was not present at the Conference betweene them so to that I can say nothing as a witnesse But I thinke all that knew D. White will believe his affirmation as soone as the Iesuites To say no more And whereas A. C. referres to the Relation of the Conference betweene D. White and M. Fisher A. C. p. 67. most true it is there * A. C. in his relation of that Conference p. 26. D. VVhite is charged to have made that Answer twise But all this rests upon the credit of A. C. only For †For so 't is said in the Title-page by A. C. he is said to have made that Relation too as well as this And against his Credit I must engage D. Whites who hath avowed another Answer as a §. 37. Nu. 1. NUM 8. before is set downe And since A. C. relates to that Conference which it seemes hee makes some good account of I shall here once for all take occasion to assure the Reader That most of the Points of Moment in that Conference with D. VVhite are repeated againe and againe and urged in this Conference or the Relation of A. C. and are here answered by me For instance In the Relation of the first Conference the Iesuite takes on him to prove 1 the Vnwritten VVord of God out of 2. Thes. 2. pag. 15. And so he doth in the Relation of this Conference with me pag. 50. In the first he stands upon it That the Protestants 2 upon their Principles cannot hold that all Fundamentall points of Faith are contained in the Creed pag. 19. And so he doth in this pag. 46. In the first he would faine through 3 M. Roger's sides wound the Church of England as if shee were unsetled in the Article of Christ's Descent into Hell pag 21 And he endeavours the same in this pag. 46. In the first he is very earnest to prove That the Schisme was made by the Protestants pag. 23. And he is as earnest for 4 it in this pag. 55. In the first he layes it for a Ground That Corruption of Manners is no just Cause of separation 5 from Faith or Church pag. 24. And the same Ground he layes in this pag. 55. In the first he will have it That the 6 Holy Ghost gives continuall and Infallible Assistance to the Church pag. 24. And just so will he have it in this p 53. In the first he makes much adoe about the Errig of the 7 Greeke Church page 28. And as much makes he in this page 44. In the first he makes a great noyse about the 8 place in S. Augustine Ferendus est disputator errans c. page 18. and 24. And so doth hee here also page 45. In the first he would make his Proselytes believe That 9 he and his Cause have mighty advantage by that Sentence of S. Bernard 'T is intolerable Pride And that of S. Augustine 'T is insolent madnesse to oppose the Doctrine or Practice of the Catholike Church page 25. And twise he is at the same Art in this page 56. and. 73. In the first he 10 tels us That * Postquam discessionem a toto mundo facere coacti sumus Calv. Epist. 141. Calvin confesses That in the Reformation there was a Departure from the whole world page 25. And though I conceive Calvine spake this but of the Roman world and of no Uoluntary but a forced Departure and wrote this to Melancthon to worke Vnity among the Reformers not any way to blast the Reformation Yet we must heare of it againe in this page 56. But over and above the rest one Place with his owne glosse upon 11 it pleases him extremely 'T is out of S. Athanasius his Creed That whosoever doth not hold it entire that is saith he in all Points and Inviolate that is saith hee in the true unchanged and uncorrupted sense proposed unto us by the Pastors of his Catholike Church without doubt he shall perish everlastingly This he hath almost verbatim in the first page 20. And in the Epistle of the Publisher of that Relation to the Reader under the Name of VV. I. and then againe the very same in this if not with some more disadvantage to himselfe page 70. And perhaps had I leasure to search after them more Points then these Now the Reasons which mooved mee to set downe these Particulars thus distinctly are two The One that whereas the * In the begining of the Conference set out by A. C. Iesuite affirmes that in a second Conference all the speech was about Particular matters and little or nothing about the maine and great generall Point of a Continuall Infallible Uisible Church in which that Lady required satisfaction and that therefore this third Conference was held It may hereby appeare that the most materiall both Points and Proofes are upon the matter the very same in all the three Conferences though little bee related of the second Conference by A. C. as appeares in the Preface of the Publisher VV. I. to the Reader So this tends to nothing but Ostentation and shew The Other is that Whereas these men boast so much of their Cause and their Ability to defend it It cannot but appeare by this and their handling of other Points in Divinity that they labour indeed but no otherwise then like an Horse in a Mill round about in the same Circle no farther at night then at noone The same thing over and over againe from Tu es Petrus to Pasce oves from thou art Peter to Do thou feed my Sheepe And backe againe the same way F. The Lady asked Whether she might be saved in the Protestant Faith Vpon my soule said the Bishop you may Vpon my soule said I there is but one saving Faith and that is the Romane B. So it seems I was confident for the Faith professed § 38 in the Church of England els I would not have taken the salvation of another upon my soule And sure I had reason of this my Confidence For to believe the Scripture and the Creeds to believe these in the sense of the Ancient Primitive Church To receive the foure great Generall Councels so much magnified by Antiquity To believe all Points of Doctrine generally received as Fundamentall in the Church of Christ is a Faith in which to live and die cannot but give salvation And therefore I went upon a sure ground in the adventure of my soule upon that Faith Besides in all the Points of Doctrine that are contioverted betweene us I would faine see any one Point maintained by the Church of England that can be proved
Faith and an Infallible understanding of the same thing under the same Considerations cannot possibly stand together in the same man at the same time A. C. hath not done asking yet But he would farther know Whether Protestants can be Infallibly sure that all and onely those points which Protestants account A. C. p. 69. Fundamentall and necessary to be expressely knowne by all were so accounted by the Primitive Church Truly Vnity in the Faith is very Considerable in the Church And in this the Protestants agree and as Vnisormely as you and have as Infallible Assurance as you can have of all points which they account Fundamentall yea and of all which were so accounted by the Primitive Church And these are but the Creed and some few and those Immediate deductions from it And †Tert. praescript adversus Haeres c. 13. c Tertullian and * Ruffin in Symb. Ruffinus upon the very Clause of the Catholike Church to decypher it make a recitall only of the Fundamentall Points of Faith And for the first of these the Creed you see what the sense of the Primitive Church was by that famous and knowne place of a Et neque qui valde potens est in dicendo ex Ecclesiae Praefectis alia ab his dicet c. Neque debilis in dicendo hanc Traditionem imminuet Quùm euim una cadem fides sit ueque is qui multum de eâ dicere potest plusquam oportet dicit neque qui parum ipsam imminuit Irenae L. 1. Adv. Haer. c. 2. 3. Et S. Basil. Serm. de Fide To. 2. p. 195. Edit Bafil 1505. Vna Immobilis Regula c. Tert. de veland Virg. c. 1. Irenaeus where after hee had recited the Creed as the Epitome or Briefe of the Faith he addes That none of the Governors of the Church be they never so potent to Expresse themselves can say alia ab his other things from these Nor none so weake in Expression as to diminish this Tradition For since the Faith is One and the same He that can say much of it sayes no more then he ought Nor doth he diminish it that can say but little And in this the Protestants all agree And for the second the immediate Deductions they are not formally Fundamentall for all men but for such b Quantum ad prima Credibilia quae sunt Articuli Fidei tenetur homo Explicitè credere sicut tenetur habere fidem Quantum autem ad alia Credibilia c. non tenetur Explicitè credere nisi quando hoc ci constiterit in Doctrinâ Fidei contineri Tho. 2. 2 q. 2. A. 5. c. Potest quis Errare Credendo oppositum Alicui Articulo subtill ad cujas sidem explicitam non â—…mnis teuentur Holkot in 1. sent q. 1. ad quartum as are able to make or understand them And for others t is enough if they doe not obstinatâ—…ly or Schismatically refuse them after they are once revealed Indeed you account many things Fundamentall which were never so accounted in any sense by the Primitive Church such as are all the Decrees of Generall Councels which may be all true but can never be all Fundamentall in the Faith For it is not in the power of * Resolutio Ocbam est Quod nec tota Ecclesiae nec Concilium Generale nâ—… suminus Pontifex potest facere Artiâ—…ulum quod non suit Articulus Articulus cuim est ex co solo qui à Deo Revelatuâ—… est Almain in 3. sent D. 15. q. unica Coâ—…clus 4. Dub 3. the whole Church much lesse of a Generall Councell to make any thing Fundamentall in the Faith that is not contained in the Letter or sense of that common Faith which was once given and but once for all to the Saints S. Lude 3. But if it be A. C's meaning to call S. Iude vers 3. for an Infallible Assurance of all such Points of Faith as are Decreed by Generall Councels Then I must bee bold to tell him All those Decrees are not necessary to all mens salvation Neither doe the Romanists themselves agree in all such determined Points of Faith Be they determined by Councels or by Popes For Instance After those Bookes which wee account Apochryphall were †Concil Trid Sess 4. defined to bee Canonicall and an Anathema pronounced in the Case a Six Senens Biblioth Sanct. L. 1. Sixtus Senensis makes scruple of some of them And after b Non est necessariò credendum Detâ—…minatis per Sum Pontificem c. Aimain in 3. sent D. 24. q. unica Conclus 6. Dubio 6. fine Pope Leo the tenth had defined the Pope to be aboue a Generall Councell yet many Romane Catholikes defend the Contrary And so doe all the Sorbonists at this very day Therefore if these be Fundamentall in the Faith the Romanists differ one from another in the Faith nay in the Fundamentals of the Faith And therefore cannot have Infallible Assurance of them Nor is there that Unity in the Faith amongst them which they so much and so often boast of For what Scripture is Canonicall is a great point of Faith And I believe they will not now Confesse That the Popes power over a Generall Councell is a small one And so let A. C. looke to his owne Infallible Assurance of Fundamentals in the Faith for ours God be thanked is well And since he is pleased to call for a particular Text of Scripture to proove all and every thing of this nature which is ridiculous in it selfe and unreasonable to demand as hath beene * §. 38. N. 6. shewed yet when he shall bee pleased to bring forth but a particular knowne Tradition to proove all and every thing of this on their side it will then be perhaps time for him to call for and for us to give farther Answer about particular Texts of Scripture After all this Questioning A. C. inferres That I had need seeke out some other Infallible Rule and meanes by A. C. p. 69. which I may know these things infalliâ—…ly or else that I have no reason to be so confident as to adventure my soule that one may be saved living and dying in the Protestant faith How weake this Inference is will easily appeare by that which I have already said to the premises And yet I have somewhat left to say to this Inference also And first I have lived and shall God willing dye in the Faith of Christ as it was professed in the Ancient Primitive Church and as it is professed in the present Church of England And for the Rule which governes me herein if I cannot bee confident for my soule upon the Scripture and the Primitive Church expounding and declaring it I will be confident upon no other And secondly I have all the reason in the world to be confident upon this Rule for this can never deceive me Another that very other which A. C. proposes
damus c. S Cypr. L. 2. Epist. 1. Concordia quae est Charitatis effectus est â—…nio Voluntatum non Opinionum Tho. 2. 2 9. 37. Ar. 1. c. Dissensio de Minimis de Opinionibus repugnat quidem paci perfectae in quá plenè veritaes cognoscetur omnis appetitus complebitur Non tamen repugnat paci imperfectae qualis habetur in via Tho. 2. 2a q. 29. A. 3. ad 2. Charity too entire if they be so well minded I confesse it were heartily to be wished that in these things also men might be all of one mind and one judgement to which the Apostle exhorts †1 Cor. 1. 10 Phil 2 2. 1. Cor. 1. But this cannot be hoped for till the Church be Triumphant over all humane frailties which here hang thick and close about her The want both of Vnity and Peace proceeding too often even where Religion is pretended from Men and their Humours rather then from Things and Errours to be found in them And so A. C. tels me That it is not therfore as I would perswade the fault of Councels Definitions but the pride of A. C. p. 72. such as will preferre and not submit their private Iudgements that lost and continues the losse of peace and unity of the Church and the want of certainty in that one afore-said soule-saving Faith Once againe I am bold to tell A. C. that there is no want of certainty most infallible certainty of That one soule-saving Faith And if for other opinions which flutter about it there be a difference a dangerous difference as at this day there is yet necessary it is not that therfore or for prevention thereof there should be such a Certainty an Infallible Certainty in these things For he understood himselfe well that said Oportet esse Haereses 1. Cor. 11. There must there will be Heresies And wheresoever that Necessity lies 't is out of doubt 1. Cor. 11. 19. enough to prove That Christ never left such an Infallible Assurance as is able to prevent them Or such a Mastering Power in his Church as is able to over-awe them but they come with their Oportet about them and they rise and spring in all Ages very strangely But in particular for that which first caused and now continues the losse of Vnity in the Church of Christ as I make no doubt but that the Pride of men is one Cause so yet can I not think that Pride is the adaequate and sole Cause thereof But in part Pride caused it and Pride on all sides Pride in some that would not at first nor will not since submit their private judgements where with good Conscience they may and ought And Pride in others that would not first nor will not yet mend manifest great and dangerous errours which with all good Conscience they ought to do But 't is not Pride not to submit to known and grosse Errours And the Definitions of some Councels perhaps the Lateran Constance and Trent have beene greater and more urgent Causes of breach of Unity then the Pride of men hath been which yet I shall never excuse where'ere it is How farre this one soule-saving Faith extends A. C. tels me I have confessed it not a worke for my pen But A. C. p. 72. he sayes it is to be learned from that One Holy Catholike Apostolike alwayes Visible and Infallible Roman Church of which the Lady once doubting is now fully satisfied c. Indeed though A. C. sets this down with some scorn which I can easily passe over 't is true that thus I a §. 38. Nu. 1. said There is a Latitude in Faith especially in reference to different mens salvation But to set a Bound to this and strictly to define it Iust thus farre you must Believe in every particular or incurre damnation is no work for my pen. Thus I said and thus I say still For though the Foundation be one and the same in all yet a b §. 38. Nu. 8. Latitude there is and a large one too when you come to Consider not the Foundation common to all but things necessary to many particular mens Salvation For to whom soever God hath given more of him shall more be required c S. Luc. 12. 48. 〈◊〉 secundùm proportionem suam secundùm differentiam Scientiae vel Ignorantiae c. Et postea Extenditur doctrina hac non solum ad Donum Scientia c. Cajetan in S. Luc. 12. Ecce quomodo Scientia aggravat Culpam Unde Gregorius c. Gorran in S. Luc. 12. Therefore many things may be necessary for a Knowing mans Salvation which are not so for a poore Ignorant soule Si quis de Antecossoribus nostris vel ignorantèr vel simplicitèr non hoc observavit tenuit quod nos Dominus facere exemplo magisterio suo docuit potest simplicitati ejus de Indulgentiá Domini Venia concedi Nobis verò non poterit ignosci qui nunc à Domino admoniti instructi sumus S. Cyprian L. 2. Epist. 3. S. Luc. 12. as well in Beliefe as in Obedience and Performance And the gifts of God both ordinary and extraordinary to particular men are so various as that for my part I hold it impossible for the ablest pen that is to expresse it And in this respect I d § 38. Nu. 1. said it with humility and Reason That to set these bounds was no worke for my pen. Nor will I ever take upon me to expresse that Tenet or Opinion the deniall of the Foundation onely excepted which may shut any Christian the meanest out of heaven And A. C. I believe you know very well to what a narrow scantling some a Articuli Fidei sunt sicut Principia per se nota Et sicut quadam corum in aliis implicitè continentur ita omnes Articuli implicitè continentur in aliquibus primis Credibilibus c. secundùm illud ad Heb. 11. Tho. 2 2a q. 1. A. 10. c. In absoluto nobis facili est aternitas Iesum suscitatum à mortuis per Deum credere ipsum esse Dominum consiteri c. S. Hilar. L. 10. de Trin. ad finem Learned of your owne side bring the very Foundation it selfe rather then they will loose any that lay hold on Christ the Sonne of God and Redeemer of the world And as Christ Epitomizes the whole Law of Obedience into these two great Commandements The Love of God and our Neighbour S. Mat. 22. So the Apostle epitomizes the whole S. Matth. 22. 37. Law of Beliefe into these two great Assents That God is And that He is a Rewarder of them that seeke hun Heb. 11. That seeke him in Christ. And S. Peter Heb. 11. 6. was full of the Holy Ghost when he exprest it That there is no salvation to them that seeke it in or by another Name Act. 4. Act. 4. 12. But since this is no
Errour and Superstition which sutes not with my own fancy But how can this possibly be since I submit my judgement in all humility to the Scripture interpreted by the Primitive Church and upon new and necessary doubts to the judgement of a lawfull and free Generall Councell And this I do from my very heart and do abhorre in matters of Religion that my own or any private mans fancy should take any place and least of all against things generally held or practised by the Vniversall Church which to oppose in such things is certainly as d S. Aug. Epist. â—…8 〈◊〉 5. S. Augustine cals it Insolentissimae insaniae an Attempt of most insolent madnesse But those things which the Church of England charges upon the Romane Party to be superstitious and erroneous are not held or practised in or by the universall Church generally either for time or place And now I would have A. C. consider how justly all this may be turned upon himselfe For he hath nothing to pretend that there are not grosse Superstitions and Errours in the Romane Perswasion unlesse by intolerable pride he will make himselfe and his Party Iudge of Controversies as in effect he doth for he will be judged by none but the Pope and a Councell of his ordering or unlesse he will take Authority to free from Superstition and Errour whatsoever sutes with his fancy though it be even Superstition it selfe and run crosse to what hath been generally held in the Catholike Church of Christ Yea though to do so be in S. Augustine's judgement most insolent madnesse And A. C. spake in this most properly when he called it taking of Authority For the Bishop and Church of Rome have in this particular of judging Controversies indeed taken that Authority to themselves which neither Christ nor his Church Catholike did ever give them Here the Conference ended with this Conclusion And as I hope God hath given that Lady mercy so I heartily pray that he will be pleased to give all of you a Light of his Truth and a Love to it that you may no longer be made Instruments of the Pope's boundlesse Ambition and this most unchristian * §. 33. Nu 6. braine-sick device That in all Controversies of the Faith he is Infallible and that by way of Inspiration and Prophecie in the Conclusion which he gives To the due Consideration of which and God's mercy in Christ I leave you To this Conclusion of the Conference between me and the Iesuite A. C. sayes not much But that which he doth say is either the selfe same which he hath said already or els is quite mistaken in the businesse That which he hath said already is this That in matters A. C. p. 73. of Faith we are to submit our judgements to such Doctors and Pastors as by Visible Continuall Succession without change brought the Faith downe from Christ and his Apostles to these our dayes and shall so carrie it to the end of the world And that this Succession is not found in any other Church differing in Doctrine from the Romane Church Now to this I have given a full Answer a §. 57. Nu. 3 4. already and therefore will not trouble the Reader with needlesse and troublesome repetition Then he brings certaine places of Scripture to prove the Pope's Infallibility But to all these places I have likewise answered b §. 25. Nu. 5. before And therefore A. C. needed not to repeat them againe as if they had been unanswerable One Place of Scripture onely A. C. had not urged before either for proofe of this Continued Visible Succession or for the Pope's Infallibility Nor doth A. C. distinctly A. C. p. 73. set down by which of the two hee will prove it The Place is c Epheâ—… 4. 11. Ephes. 4. Christ ascending gave some to be Apostles some Prophets some Euangelists some Pastors and Teachers c. for the edification of the Church Now if he do mean to prove the Pope's Infallibility by this place in his Pastorall Iudgement Truly I doe not see how this can possibly be Collected thence d Pontificatus Summus disertè positus est ab Apostolo in illis verbis Eph. 4. 11. in illis clarioribus 1. Cor. 12. 28. Ipse posuit in Ecclesia primùm Apostolos c. Bellar. L. 1. de Ro. Pont. c. 1. §. Respondeo Pontificatum And he gives an excellent reason for it Siquidem summa potestas Ecclesiastica non solùm data est Petro sedetiam aliis Apostolis Ibid. So belike by this Reason the Apostle doth clearely expresse the Popedome because all the rest of the Apostles had as much Ecclesiasticall Power as S. Peter had But then Bellarmine would salve it up with this That this Power is given Petro ut Ordinarie Pastori cui succederetur aliis verò tanquam Delegatis quibus non succederetur Ibid. but this is meere Begging of the Question and will never be granted unto him And in the meane time we have his absolute Confession for the other That the Supreme Ecclesiasticall Power was not in S. Peter alone but in all the Apostles Christ gave some to be Apostles for the Edification of his Church Therefore S. Peter and all his Successours are infallible in their Pastorall Iudgment And if he meane to prove the Continued Visible Succession which he saith is to he found in no Church but the Romane there 's a little more shew but to no more purpose A little more shew Because it is added †Eph. 4. 13. verse 13. That the Apostles and Prophets c. shall continue at their worke and that must needs be by succession till we all meet in Vnity and perfection of Christ. But to no more purpose For t is not said that they or their Successors should Continue at this their worke in a Personall uninterrupted Succession in any one Particular Church Romane or other Nor ever will A. C. bee able to proove that such a Succession is necessary in any one particular place And if he could yet his owne words tell us the Personall Succession is nothing if the Faith be not brought downe without change from Christ and his Apostles to this day and so to the end of the world Now here 's a peece of cunning too The Faith A. C. p. 73. brought down unchanged For if A. C. meane by the Faith the Creed and that in Letter 't is true the Church of Rome hath received and brought downe the Faith unchanged from Christ and his Apostles to these our dayes But then t is apparently false That no Church differing from the Romane in Doctrine hath kept that Faith unchanged and that by a visible and continued Succession For the Greek Church differs from the Romane in Doctrine and yet hath so kept that Faith unchanged But if he meane by the Faith unchanged and yet brought down in a continuall visible Succession not only the Creed in Letter but in Sense
but that it shall still be a maiâ—… Note of the true Church and in that sense which he would have it And his Reason is b Quia Doctrina Sana est ab ipsa verà legiâ—…ima Successione indivâ—…lsa Stapl. Ibid. Bâ—…se sound Doctrine is indivisible from true and Lawfull Succession Where you shall see this great Clarke for so hee was not able to stand to himselfe when he hath forsaken Truth For 't is not long after that he tels us That the People are led along and judge the Doctrine by the Pastors But when the Church comes to examine she judges the Pastors by their Doctrine And this c Nam è Pastore Lâ—…s fieri potâ—…st Stap. ibid. Nâ—…tab 4. he sayes is necessary Because a Man may become of a Pastor a Wolfe Now then let Stapleton take his choise For either a Pastor in this Succession cannot become a Wolfe and then this Proposition's false Or els if he can then sound Doctrine is not inseparable from true and Legitimate succession And then the former Proposition's false as indeed it is For that a good Pastour may become a Wolfe is no newes in the Ancient Story of the Church in which are registred the Change of many a Vincent Lit. cont Har. c. 23. 24. Great men into Hereticks I spare their Names And since Iudas chang'd from an Apostle to a Divell S. Ioh. 6. 't is no wonder to see S. Ioh. 6. 70. others change from Shepheards into Wolves I doubt the Church is not empty of such Changelings at this day Yea but Stapleton will helpe all this For he adds That suppose the Pastors do forsake true Doctrine yet Succession shall still be a true Note of the Church Yet not every Succession but that which is Legitimate and true Well And what is that Why b Legitima autem est illorum Pastorum qui Vnitatem tenent Fidem Stap. ibid. Notab 5. That Succession is lawfull which is of those Pastors which hold entire the Unity and the Faith Where you may see this Samson's haire cut off againe For at his word I 'le take him And if that onely be a Legitimate Succession which holds the Vnity and the Faith entire then the Succession of Pastors in the Romane Church is illegitimate For they have had c In their owne Chronologer Onuphrius there are Thirty acknowledged more Schismes among them then any other Church Therefore they have not kept the unity of the Church And they have brought in grosse Superstition Therefore they have not kept the Faith â—…ntire Now if A. C. have any minde to it he may do well to helpe Stapleton out of these bryars upon which he hath torne his Credit and I doubt his Conscience too to uphold the Corruptions of the Sea of Rome As for that in which he is quite mistaken it is his Inference which is this That I should therefore consider carefully Whether it be not more Christian and lesse braine-sicke to think that the Pope being S Peter's Successour with a Generall Councell should be Iudge of Controversies c. And that the Pastorall Iudgement of him should be accounted Infallible rather then to make every man that can read the Scripture Interpreter of Scripture Decider of Controversies Controller of Generall Councels and Judge of his Judges Or to have no Judge at all of Controversies of Faith but permit every man to believe as he list As if there were no Infallible certainty of Faith to be expected on earth which were instead of one saving Faith to induce a Babilonicall Confusion of so many faiths as fancies Or no true Christian Faith at all From which Evils Sweet Jesus deliver us I have Considered of this very carefully But this Inference supposes that which I never granted nor any Protestant that I yet know Namely That if I deny the Pope to be Iudge of Controversies I must by and by either leave this supreme Judicature in the hands and power of every private man that can but read the Scripture or els allow no Iudge 〈◊〉 and so let in all manner of Confusion No God forbid I should grant either For I have expâ—…esly * §. 26. Nu. 1. declared That the Scripture interpreted by the Primitive Church and a Lawfull and free Generall Councell determining according to these is Iudge of Controversies And that no private man whatsoever is or can be Iudge of these Therefore A. C. is quite mistaken and I pray God it be not wilfully to beguile poore Ladiâ—… and other their weake adherents with seeming to say somewhat I say quite mistaken to inferre that I am either for a private Iudge or for no Iudge for I utterly disclaime both and that as much if not more then he or any Romanist who ever he be But these things in this passage I cannot swallow First That the Pope with a Generall Councell should be Iudge for the Pope in ancient Councels never had more power then any the other Patriarchs Precedency perhaps for Orders sake and other respects he had Nor had the Pope any Negative voice against the rest in point of difference †Patrum Avorum nostrorum tempore pauci audebant dicere Papam esse supra Concilium Aeneas Sylvius sen Pius 2. L. 1. de Gestis Concil Basil. Et illâ—… imprimis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…nes qui aliquo numero sâ—… Concilio subjiciâ—…nt Ibid. in fascic rerum Expetend fol. 5. 〈◊〉 autem Papam esse non solùm supra Concilium Generale sed Vniversam Ecclesiam est propositio ferè de Fide Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c. 17. 〈◊〉 1. No nor was he held superiour to the Councell Therefore the ancient Church never accounted or admitted him a Iudge no net with a Councell much lesse without it Secondly it will not downe with me that his Pastorall Iudgement should be Infallible especially since some of them have been as * Quum hoc tempore nullus sit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fâ—…nd est qui sacras Litâ—…ras dâ—…dicerit quâ—… fronte aliquis eorum docere audebit quod non didicerit Arnulph in Concil Rheâ—…nsi Nam câ—… constet plures eorum adeò illiteratos esse ut Grammaticam penitùs ignorarent qui sit ut Sacras Literas interpretari possint Alphons à Castro L. 1. advers Hâ—… c. 4. versùs medium Edit Paris 1534. For both that at Antwerpe An. 1556. and that at Paris An. 15â—… 〈◊〉 beene in Purgatorie And such an Ignorant as these was Pope Iohn the foure and twentieth Platiâ—… 〈◊〉 Vitae ejus Et § 33. Nu. 6. Ignorant as many that can but read the Scripture Thirdly I cannot admit this neither though hee doe most cunningly thereby abuse his Readers That any thing hath been said by me out of which it can justly be inferred That there 's no Infallible certainty of Faith to bee expected on earth For there is most Infallible certainty of it that is of the Foundations of it in Scripture and the Creeds And 't is so clearely delivered there as that it needs no Iudge at all to sit upon it for the Articles themselves And so entire a Body is this one Faith in it selfe as that the †Resolutio Occham est Quod nec tota Ecclesia net Concilium Generale nec Summus Pontifex potest facere Articulum quod non fuit Articulus Sed Ecclesia bene determinat de Propositionibus Catholicis de quibus erat dubium c. Ia. Almain in 3 Sent. D. 25. q. unicâ Dub. 3. Sicut ad ea quae spectant ad Fidem nostram nequaquam â—…x voluntate humana dependent non potest Summus Pontifex nec Ecclesia ae Assertione non verâ veram nec de non falsâ falsam facere it à non potest de non Catholicâ Catholicam facere nec de non Haretica Hareticam Et ideo non potest â—…ovum Articulum facere nec Articulum Fidei tollere Quoniam sicut Veritates Catholicae absque omni approbatione Ecclesiae ex naturâ rei sunt immutabiles immutabilitèr verae it à sunt immutabilitèr Catholica reputandae Similitèr sicut Hareses absque omni reprobatione damnatione sunt falsae it à absque omni reprobatione sunt Haereses reputanda c. Et posteà Patet ergo quod nulla Veritas est Catholica ex approbatione Ecclesiae vel Papae Gab. Biel. in 3. Sâ—…nt Dist. 25. q. unica Art 3. Dub. 3. versùs sinem Whole Church much lesse the Pope hath not power to adde one Article to it nor leave to detract any one the least from it But when Controversies arise about the meaning of the Articles or Superstructures upon them which are Doctrines about the Faith not the Faith it selfe unlesse where they be immediate Consequences then both in and of these a a §. 26. Nu. 1. Lawfull and free Generall Councell determining according to Scripture is the best Iudge on earth But then suppose uncertainty in some of these superstructures it can never be thence concluded That there is no Infallible certainty of the Faith it selfe But 't is time to end especially for me that have so Many Things of Weight lying upon me and disabling me from these Polemicke Discourses beside the Burden of sixty five yeares complete which drawes on apace to the period set by the Prophet David Psal. 90. and to the Psal. 90. 10. Time that I must goe and give God and Christ an Account of the Talent committed to my Charge In which God for Christ Iesus sake be mercifull to me who knowes that however in many Weaknesses yet I have with a faithfull and single heart bound to his free Grace for it laboured the Meeting the Blessed Meeting of Truth and Peace in his Church and Psal. 85. 10. which God in his own good time will I hope effect To Him be all Honour and Praise for ever Amen FINIS