it is impudencie to denie his conclusion so apparently proued on the other side we dare not grant it for feare of the people Here is neuer a true word First his conclusion is not proued For the arguments which he propounded to demonstrate it he hath not followed nor vpholden but leauing them in the field behind him he runs away without so much as looking behind him and in all his Reply rescues not one of them Secondly his conclusion is iustly denied and without impudencie for it is no impudencie to denie that which cannot be proued but it is impudencie to require men to beleeue that which hath no proofe He speakes of his proofes as he doth of his Church all is eminent illustrous apparent plaine visible to all when yet no man sees them Thirdly the reason why we grant not the Church to be in his sence visible is not for feare of the people nor because we cannot giue the Professors of our faith in euery age but because it is the truth which with all his boasting he cannot remoue for albeit the Church neuer failes but abides perpetually visible in some degree to the end yet is there not alway therein a visible companie by profession and gouernment distinct from the rest that is free from the generall corruption that preuailes in the Church of which company onely the question is He maintaining that the Church cannot erre nor be subiect to any such corruption but hath alway in it eminent professors and speciall congregations that are neuer infected with any part of the corruption nor need reformation which persons and congregations appeare as visibly and distinctly to all men as worldly kingdomes are distinctly seene and knowne and we holding the Church to be perpetuall onely because there are alway in the world which hold the true worship of God and to be visible in regard it may at all times be seene though heresie may so preuaile and persecution so arise that a visible companie shall not appeare which is not in some measure touched with the common errors or needs not repentance and reformation All which is so true that I challenge the Replier and prouoke the zealousest of my aduersaries to say ingenuously if the learned Papists alledged Digress 17. say not in effect as much themselues 2 Our answer therefore is direct and plaine both to the conclusion and the reasons and so direct that the Iesuite hath no stomack to reply but exceeding grosly falsly expounds affixes a meaning to vs that we neuer meant First he says we distinguish two seuerall Churches whereof we call the one the Catholicke Church mentioned in the Creed containing onely the elect the other the Militant Church containing as part of the Catholick the professors of the true faith whether good or bad beleeuers or hypocrites elect or reprobate Next he sayes the reason why we thus distinguish two seuerall Churches is that when we are hunted out of the one we may runne into the other This he expounds something more plainly That which as I guesse for he hath no certaintie of what he sayes driues them to admit such a Church militant distinguisht from the Catholicke is least if none should be said to pertaine to the Church but onely the elect it would follow that men might despaire of attaining true faith which is not had but by the teaching of the Church for as much as they could neuer know who are elected Thirdly he says this Militant Church which other Protestants commonly call the visible Church M. White will needs defend to be sometimes inuisible That these things may the better be vnderstood and answered note FIRST that by the word Church taken in his full latitude The Church we meane the whole companie of all those whom God calls to the knowledge and profession of his truth and so to saluation Of which calling and separation from the rest of the world liuing in Atheisme and idolatry without the knowledge or acceptation of those supernatural verities that leade to God it hath the denomination and is called the Church as if you should say a companie called or gathered forth of the rest of the world But one church Note SECONDLY that the Church absolutely and simply considered in this latitude is but One as the state and company of the kingdome of Great Brittain is but one in as much as all and euery one called to this grace of how different state qualities or condition soeuer belong one way or other to this companie for the faith being but one and the maner of calling by reuealing the same but one the companies that receiue and professe it how many soeuer respectiuely yet absolutely and abstracting from particular conditions of times and persons can be but one Note THIRDLY that in the Church being absolutely but one there are sundry differences and respects that is to say the persons called to the faith of Christ are of diuers sorts as the kingdome of Great Brittain being but one yet is diuers waies considered For some part of the Church being reduced from the state of this mortall life reignes with God in heauen and is glorified with that glorie whereto it was called when it was here on earth The triumphant Church This we call the Triumphant Church because as triumphers they enioy the reward due to conquerers The other part of the Church is that which successiuely in all ages liues here in this world professing that it desires to follow the Triumphant The militant Church and enioy eternall life this we call the Church Militant because it lies as it were in the campe fighting against the world the diuell and the flesh vnder the banner of Christ waiting for the victorie But among these againe there are two sorts of people the first all such as are called effectually The Church of the elect these are the elect onely whom God not onely calls but inspires also effectually to obey his calling and to liue holy and vnblameable in such sort that they shal infallibly be saued in the life to come The inuisible Church This company we call the inuisible Church because God onely sees who are his we can see the men and by their fruits hope they are Gods elect but to speake precisely no mortall eie can discerne them to be Gods elect but God alone by reason hypocrites and the reprobate do many times resemble them in shew and profession The second sort of the Militant Church are hypocrites and vnsound members that are not called effectually but disobey the truth whereof they make profession such are heretickes schismatickes and all the wicked that will not obey the truth whom we call the false and malignant church The malignant Church Note FOVRTHLY that howsoeuer the elect liuing here vpon earth and effectually called be inuisible in the sence deliuered yet when we say the Church militant is sometimes inuisible we meane it of the Church Militant that liues in
the world and outwardly professes the faith of Christ whether they therein that do it be the elect or others for we onely speake of the place and companie where the truth is professed and may be found which may well be where the wicked and the elect are mingled together Note FIFTHLY that the Church is called Catholick or vniuersal in two sences first the Church taken in his full latitude Catholicke Church for the whole company of all that are called both in heauen and in earth visible and inuisible elect and hypocrites is called the Catholicke Church in as much as it comprehends all that haue bene called to the profession of the Catholick faith then againe for so much as any part may synecdochically be termed after the name of the whole it sometimes fals out that the Militant Church or any part of it iâ— called the Catholick as well as the Militant and Triumphant together But when the elect alone most perfectly haue the Catholicke faith and not onely vse the faith ministerie and Sacraments reuealed but also enioy the effectâ— and benefits thereof which the false Church neuer doth hence it comes that they principally and as the vniuersall members thereof are called the Catholicke Church mentioned in the Creed a Alià s omnes homines etiam infideles etiaÌ„ damnati dicerentur pertinere ad corpus Ecclesiae tanquam eius meÌ„bra quod est absurdum Turrecrem sum l. 4. part 2. c. 20. ad 6. idem l. 1. c. 57. the rest in very deed and truth not being of the Church at all for Bellarmine b De Eccl. l. 3. c. 10. pag. 13â— d sayes The Church chiefly and in her intention gathers together onely the faithfull but when dissemblers and such as beleeue not truly are mingled that fals out besides the intention of the Church for if she could know them she would neuer admit them or being admitted she would presently exclude them Againe c Ibi. pag 141. a Heretickes faining themselues to be Catholickes are not of the Church indeed but onely in reputation and outward appearance 3 This being the manner how we distinguish and hold touching the Church and the manner thereof now I answer that which the Rplier hath reported * Ad. 1. To the first it is false and malicious that we make two Churches for the Catholicke Church mentioned in the Creed and the Militant make but one Church which in one sence is called Catholick and Militant in another For the multiplication of diuers states degrees and relations belonging to a thing multiplies not the essence of the things as he that deuides the world into parts or distinguishes the climates or shews the diuersitie of the inhabitants doth not distinguish seuerall worlds but affirmes diuers states and conditions in one and the same world I am ashamed when I reade d See Staplet relect pag. 36. our aduersaries that should haue learning and shamefac'dnesse or at least ordinarie wit thus wrangling with vs as if we made two Churches * Ad 2. To the second it is likewise false and fitter for a parasite that sets himselfe onely to boast and reproach then for a diuine For our answer is plaine and direct that the Church considered in such state as it is ordained and fit to teach men the true faith and as mortall men can haue accesse to it which belongs onely to the Militant state is sometimes so ouerwhelmed with persecutions â—nd heresies that a true Church entirely teaching the faith of Christ without errors and freely vsing the word Sacraments and Ecclesiasticall discipline apart from the rest of the Church cannot be seene in all the world And our aduersaries arguments being applied to this neither hunt nor pursue vs so but we can answer them without flying into the Church of the elect for we do not say that the elect alone are thus obscured but euen all whether elect or reprobate that openly hold the state mentioned in this sence that not onely the elect are inuisible not to be discerned with mortall eye for they are alwaies so in this world but the whole Church Militant containing both elect and others is at some times so defaced and obscured that the world cannot see where the substance of faith is holden without errors mingled And so it is meerly vntrue that the Replier sayes touching our flying to the Church of the elect For as I answered in e Pag. 100. THE WAY though we hold the Catholicke Church mentioned in the Creed euery member whereof is saued to be inuisible because God alone sees who are elected yet the Church thus considered is not it that we speake of in this question but the Militant whereof we say it IS ALWAY manifest to the world but a companie therein that needs not reformation is NOT ALWAY manifest And whereas he sayes we will neuer be able sufficiently to proue the Church spoken of in the Creed and in the Scripture where the promises of the Spirit are made to the Church to containe none but the elect he is deceiued For though this be not materiall to the point in hand and without any disaduantage to our cause might be granted yet the best learned of his owne side say as we do that none are simply absolutely and vniuocally of the Church but the elect alone as I haue shewed immediatly before For f Eph. 5.23 Col. 1.18 the Church being nothing else but the bodie of Christ and Christ being the Sauiour of his bodie how shall hypocrites and other euill men whom he neuer saues be truly said to be his Church And when g Jtaque neque pro illu qui non saluantur obtulis suam passionem qui nunquam participauerunt ipsius merita neque pro eis qui iustificati non sunt Patrem orauit Christus Non pro mundo inquit rogo sed pro eis quos dedisti mihi Dicitur autem mortuus esse pro omnibus quia mors illius sufficiens fuit ad satisfaciendum pro omnibus Omnium delictis pro innumerabilibus alijs si essent ad perducendum omnes homines ad Dei gratiam And. Vega. pro concil l. 4 c. 10. pag 49. the effects and power of Gods calling and the benefits of his grace and the redemption of Christ reach no further then to the elect alone neuer touching the wicked that l ue among them how can the wicked either perfectly or properly be long to the Church But as I said this is not materiall to the point in hand and therefore I will not diuert into it our assertion being that not the elect alone are alway inuisible but sometimes also all the congregations of the world wherein they liue and professe Christ are so corrupted or oppressed that albeit the substance of sauing faith contained in the Creed and rule of faith be retained in them yet there is no congregation visible that hath not diuers corruptions needing reformation hanging on them
should fall on the Inquisitors as the diuell had promised him we felt no fire touch vs but himselfe was soone burnt and consumed to ashes TO THE READER HItherto my aduersarie hath prosecuted the defence of the twelue first Chapters of his Treatise where he giues ouer and proceeds no further Now followes the SECOND PART of his Booke Pag. 251. which he entitles AN APPENDIX TO THIS FIRST PART OF REPLY wherein an issue or triall is made whereby may be seene whether Catholicks or Protestants be the true VISIBLE CHVRCH wherein he first sets downe as he entitles it A CATALOGVE OF THE NAMES OF SOME CATHOLICK PROFESSORS to shew that the Romane Church hath bin as the true Church must be continually visible in all ages since Christ And then after the Catalogue A CHALLENGE TO PROTESTANTS Pag. 265. requiring them to make a like Catalogue of the Professors of their faith in all ages since Christ as he hath it downe a catalogue of his Church His Catalogue is nothing else but a chronologicall Table containing and representing the names of all the POPES and the most DOCTORS and ancient Fathers and some GENERAL COVNCELS and many PROFESSORS as he cals them of the Romane faith which in euery age haue bin in the Church to this day distinguishing the ages by centuries of yeares and vnder euery centurie placing the Popes Fathers Councels and Professors that liued were therein In the first centurie he names our blessed Sauiour Christ with his Apostles and Euangelists and the Churches of Rome Corinth Galatia with the rest of the Apostolick Churches In the second and so forward be sets downe the ancient Fathers of the Primitiue Church with the Martyrs Councels holy men and nations conuerted that were in euery age successiuely till he come to the yeare 1600. The folly and error of this his Table stands in fiue things first that he assumes these persons Councels and nations to himselfe as professing his Popish faith who were indeed eminent members of the Church in their times but neuer either professed or saw that part of his Romane faith which we haue cast off For how ridiculous is it to say that our Sauiour and his Apostles and the rest that follow for a thousand yeares beleeued and professed as the Iesuites now do or as the Trent Councell hath decreed in the Canons and new Creed thereof The second is that the persons named in the first ages till 800 or a 1000 yeares after Christ not onely professed not the Papacie but beleeued professed that which directly destroyes it They held that which the Church of Rome holds according to the Scriptures and wherein the Papists and we consent but the things in time and by peece-meale added to the truth wherein we differ from them they held not but the contrary Let the Iesuite therefore shew a catalogue of such as in those times professed and beleeued not onely what the Church of Rome beleeues aright but what it holds against vs in the seuerall articles of our difference The third is that diuers Councels especially latterward which resisted the Papacie comming on are omitted as those of Constantinople Frankford Pisa Constance Basil c. and many famous eminent Doctors omitted that professed directly against diuers articles of the now Church of Rome The fourth is that many false and fabulous Saints are named and things set downe out of Legends that can never be proued as the tale of the Iewes of Berytum conuerted by a bleeding Crucifixe and such like The last is that divers Popes for many yeares together namely in the ninth age succeeded not but entred violently and disorderly and very many especially in the latter ages are excepted against vpon diuers points purposely let downe in * Digr 53. my former writing His Catalogue therefore is to no purpose as shall fully appeare in that which follower for euen we our selues lay claime to so much of it as is true and if he will giue vs leaue to adde the names of some others that liued after the 800 yeares we will exhibite this very Catalogue our selues and no other saue that the Legend Saints and the Friars and apostaticall Popes and Iesuites with such traitors as Allen was we need not Next after the Catalogue ensues the CHALLENGE TO PROTESTANTS that they shew the like Catalogue But this is idle For we shew the same if he will permit vs to supply some wants in the latter ages professing the Church of Rome it selfe in all ages to haue bin the visible Church of God as I haue shewed in * From ch 36. forward that which goes before though the Papacie therein were not the Church After his challenge containing onely one leafe the whole matter whereof is the same that I haue answered in the sixe last chapters he propounds certaine obiections which he thought might be made against his Catalogue thereby to give colour to the succession of his Poperie The which obiections with his answers to them I will set downe and handle as I haue done the rest of his Reply and so proceed CHAP. XLII An obiection against the Repliers Catalogue Diuers Articles condemned by the Fathers mentioned in the Catalogue that the Church of Rome now vses What consent there is betweene Antiquitie and Papistrie A. D. My aduersaries will obiect Pag. 267. that all there which I set downe in my Catalogue especially those of the Primitiue age were not professors of our religion in regard as they will say there be diuers points held by vs now adayes whereof no mention is made in the writings of the Fathers of that age To this I answer first retorting more strongly the argument against Protestants who falsly and absurdly challenge as M. Iewell did the Fathers of the first sixe hundred yeares or as M. White doth the whole Christian Church of the first eight hundred yeares to be Protestants And I say that Protestants do hold diuers points now adayes whereof either no mention is made in the writings of the Fathers of those ages or if any mention be made it is expresly contrary to Protestants and for vs and this sometimes with vnanime consent whereas Protestants are neuer able to shew for themselues and against vs in any point such an vnanime consent of those Fathers BEfore he retort the obiection or be too busie with B. Iewels 600 yeares and M. Whites 800 I would haue him to be better aduised what they obiect For touching the Fathers of those times three things will be granted him First that diuers maine articles of the now Romish faith which we reiect are mentioned most amply and frequently in their writings For example the Popes PRIMACIE and being vniuersall Bishop aboue all other Bishops is mentioned by Gregorie himselfe a Pope in the first age and a Per elationem pompatici sermonis Christâ— sibi studet membra subiugare lib. 4. ep 36. Quis rogo in hoc tam peruerso vocabulo
if I had not he would neuer haue fallen to this vile and wretched shift whereto now he betakes himselfe 2 First he sayes many times ouer that though they vse the same words to the Saints they do to Christ yet they do not really and formally giue them the same worship and so thinkes he hath excused his Church from idolatrie whereof let the Reader iudge by that I haue said * Cha. 13. immediatly before Next he answers that whatsoeuer titles and formes of speech they vse in their seruice of the Saints or Friar Francis yet their meaning is not to attribute vnto them the same holinesse and merits that they ascribe to Christ but an inferiour and such as depends vpon his holinesse and merits thus as all idolaters do flying from the words to the meaning Whereto I answer that it becomes the true Church of Christ not onely to meane well but to speake well and such therein as will keepe the Catholick faith must also hold the Catholick forme of words The Apostle b 2. Tim. 1.13 charging Timothy to keepe the true patterne of wholesome words which he had heard of him Now let the Reply shew any one patterne of these inuocations and narrations in all the Scriptures Saint Austin hath a golden speech to this purpose c De ciuit l. 10 c. 23. Thus spake Plotinus as he was able or rather as he listed For Philosophers speake with freedome of words in the difficultest things that are to vnderstand neuer fearing the offence of religious eares but it is lawfull for vs to speake but after a certaine rule lest the licentiousnesse of words bring any wicked opinions as touching the things that are signified thereby Then I answer againe that this is but a shift to hide the odiousnesse of their blasphemie for albeit it be granted that by such words they meane not such merits and dignitie as belongs to Christ yet they meane more then of right appertaines to any mortall creature For there is no merit or dignitie in any creature capable of these speeches or of any other that are vsed in their Saint-inuocations but the least that is meant is more then belongs to any but the Lord Iesus Thirdly the words alledged and all other whereof any question is if we allow them that immediate grammaticall construction that belongs to all words can import no lesse then the same seruice that is giuen to Christ both really and formally Let the Iesuite take these for example part whereof d Pref. of THE WAY n. 14. I alledged e Hâ—t secund chor August de commem B. Virginis Reioyce O mother celestiall magnifie thy God that made thee singular thou wouldest call thy selfe the handmaid of Iesu Christ but as Gods law teaches thou art his Ladie mistris for right and reason will the mother be aboue her sonne therefore pray him humbly and command him from aboue that he leade vs to his kingdome at the worlds end Thou alone without example art shee whom God hath chosen to be the Mediator of God and men the repairer of the world the end of our exile the washing away of our sinne the ladder of heauen the gate of Paradise Such idolatrie as this were fitter to be purged with an humble confession then to be excufed with these vaine distinctions 3 But M. White he sayes vnderstands not wherein the formall reason of worship doth consist But he tels him the inward estimation of the minde is it Words as prayers and actions as adoring with the bodie be signes whereby this worship is outwardly yeelded and therefore they follow the inward estimation of the minde and import no more then he meanes that vses them and therefore though we vse the same words and actions to creatures that we do to God yet meaning them in one sense to the creature and in another to God this is no idolatrie This is the full summe of his barbarous and confused discourse but I answer again that thus all idolaters in the world may excuse themselues in the worship of their idols for when the Iew to his calfe and the Gentile to his image bended the knee and called it God they did not esteeme it in that degree that they did God himselfe but onely gaue it an inferiour honour such as they thought an image capable of and when they were put to it would answer as the Reply doth f For they did not think their idols to be God but resemblances of the true God Athenag Leg. pag. 20. Dio Chrysost p. 145 Peres de tradit pag. 225. Andr. orthod expl pag. 289. 294 Act. 17.23 though the word or action were one yet the honour was farre different but as I would answer them so I do the Iesuite that the inward estimation opinion of the mind determining the said words prayers and gestures to such an inferiour worship as is mentioned doth not remoue the reason of idolatrie thereby from the said words and prayers because such as it is it remaines diuine worship attributed to a creature For all religious inuocation of a creature in what opinion soeuer is diuine adoration and a part of Gods proper worship Besides our meaning and intention limiting our words cannot dispense with the commandement that forbids the vsing of g Abusus ille reprehensibilis est si praedicara quae secundùm vsum ecclesiae sâ—li Deo Patri Mediatori Christo attribuuntur vt Omnipotens Saluator c. etiam Sanctis applicantur Henr. de Hass quem refert sequitur Gabr. Lect. 32. lit 2. such words to a creature with any meaning whatsoeuer For Christ teaching vs how to pray bids vs pray Our Father which art in heauen Forgiue vs our trespasses Deliuer vs from euill For thine is the kingdome the power and the glorie We must pray to such a one as is our Father which is in heauen c. this is a commandement and Rom. 10. How shall they call vpon him in whom they haue not beleeued This is the doctrine of Saint Paul which commandement and doctrine are violated as well when we pray to a Saint with estimation that he is but an intercessor through Christs merits as when we call vpon him with an opinion that he can helpe vs without them The reason is because the commandement doctrine of the Scripture ties vs to God alone which being transgressed there is the reall and formall reason of superstition whatsoeuer the opinion and intent of the minde be 4 But the Iesuite replies that like as we kneele to God and call him our Father so do we the same things to our earthly parents and yet the honour we giue them hereby is farre different from that we yeeld to God therefore we may vse the same inuocations and words to the Saints that we doe to God when the minde acknowledges not that excellencie in them that it doth in him as children vse the same kneeling and words to their fathers
all points contained in Scripture all which are points of faith and consequently are points necessary to be beleeued either expressely and in particular or implicitely and in generall vnder paine of damnation Indeed I do grant and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts necessitate medij and some necessary to be known necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith Whereby appeareth that M. White doth vtter two grosse vntruthes 2 White p. 5. 7. when he saies that we vtterly refuse knowledge and that the Colliars faith is canonized for our Creed In other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth For in this generall act is infolded a vertuall or implicite beleefe of all points both in regard a generall includeth all particulars contained in it as also for that this particular act of beleeuing the Church eo ipso in that we are moued vnto it by the authority of diuine reuelation as the primary or formall cause and by the authoritie of the Church it selfe as a necessary condition or the secondary cause doth so dispose the minde of the beleeuer that he is ready to beleeue euerie other point reuealed by God and propounded by the Church Againe * Pag. 140. Thirdly whereas M. White 3 White p. 5. requireth particular knowledge to be ioyned with the assent of faith as though he meant that one could not beleeue any point of faith which he did not first expressely and in particular know this his assertion is not onely contrarie to his fellow M. Wotton Wotton p. 46. who admitteth a generall or implicite beleefe of some points which we do not in particular know 1. Cor. 13. v. 2. but it is also against the Scriptures Fathers and naturall reason it selfe In the Scriptures we haue that not onely Faith and knowledge Heb. 11. v. 1. are 2. distinct things but also that faith is of things not apparant or not knowne and that faith doth captiuate the vnderstanding for the seruice of Christ 2. Cor. 10 v. 5. Rom. 10. v. 16. requiring an obedience in the beleeuer all which were not verified if expresse particular distinct knowledge were presupposed before beleefe or if beleefe and such knowledge were all one thing The Fathers do not onely distinguish faith and knowledge but do also affirme Faith to be without knowledge of things beleeued Iren. l. 2. c. 45. It is better saith Irenaeus that one that knoweth nothing beleeue God and perseuere in his loue which doth quicken a man then by subtilties of questions and by much speech to fall into impietie Not to know saith S. Hilary that which thou must beleeue Hilar. l. 5. de Trin. ante medium Aug. Ep. 102. ad Euodium doth not so much require pardon as reward because it is the greatest stipend of faith to hope for those things which thou knowest not If saith Saint Augustine Christ was borne onely for those that can discerne these things with certaine knowledge in vaine almost do we labour in the Church which he saith in regard the common sort cannot with all the preaching in the world discerne with certaine knowledge the high and hard Mysteries of the blessed Trinitie Incarnation and other such mysteries of faith and therefore not the viuacitie or quickenesse of vnderstanding saith the same Saint Augustine but the simplicitie of beleeuing Aug. cont Fund c. 4. Tract 40. in Ioan. doth make the common sort of people most safe And againe he saith of some they did not beleeue because they knew but they beleeued that they might know And in the same place he asketh what is faith but to beleeue that thou seest not Conformable to which also he saith Serm. 120. de tempore After we haue receiued Baptisme we say I am a faithfull man I beleeue that which I know not Reason also and experience it selfe teacheth that beleefe and knowledge are distinct and that beleefe doth not necessarily presuppose knowledge but is rather sometimes an antecedent to it Insomuch that euen in naturall things the Philosopher acknowledgeth that one that learneth must beleeue before he come to knowledge M. White may aske how one can assent to the veritie which he doth not first apprehend or know I answer that some apprehension at least confuse rude and generall I do not deny to be requisite in the assent of faith but expresse particular distinct or cleare apprehension or knowledge is not necessary otherwise not onely the common sort but the learnedest in the world might despaire of saluationâ— in regard they could not beleeue the mysterie of the blessed Trinity which no man in this life can distinctly and clearely vnderstand and know and yet all sorts of men are bound to beleeue it explicite and much lesse could they beleeue both it and all other mysteries contained in the whole corps of the holy Scripture all which are necessary to be beleeued in one sort or other explicite or implicite as hath bene proued and yet no one learned man hath particular distinct knowledge of euerie truth contained in the Scriptures Quis enim est hic laudabimus eum 1 FOr the reducing of this wilde discourse into some order and the better discerning of the controuersie you are to note that the Iesuite in the beginning of his Treatise laied downe 4. propositions touching faith out of the which he would spin his motiues to Papistry the first is that Faith is necessary to saluation The second that this faith is but only one The third that it must be infallible The fourth that it must be entire extending it selfe to all points vniuersally This conclusion I graunted in one sense and denied in another That our beleefe must be entire whole and sound in all points by obtaining a particular distinct knowledge of the same in our selues that so our faith might include an apprehension and knowledge of that we beleeue as well as an assent in the will I granted but if his meaning were that which then I suspected and now he bewraies that the implicite faith taught by the Iesuites and schoolemen destitute of knowledge and onely beleeuing as the Church beleeues were this entire faith so necessary and infallible then I denied it and gaue my reasons and a Dig. 2. in a speciall Digress shewed and confuted it All which he passes by and onely mentions as you see my bare assertion against his implicite faith but what I said in describing it confuting it and shewing the drift and purpose of it he touches not though it concerned his cause more then that which he replies to This is his method whereto he cleaues in all his booke to reply entirely to
nothing 2 That which he sayes is two things First he repeates and expounds his conclusion Next he touches some small portion of that I said concerning it In repeating his conclusion first he sayes he meant it against such as thinke it sufficient to beleeue some few articles onely though they deny or doubt of others which yet the Church beleeues yea rashly and obstinately denies them who these men are he names not but he meanes the Protestants Because they deny such points as the Church of Rome which he meanes by his Catholicke Church vntruly propounds vnto them For they must be the persons intended that deny any thing which the Roman Church holds for an article of faith as the Popes primacy Purgatory Images and the rest which in b Commonly printed with the Trent Councell inserted in the WAY praef n. 15. the new Creed of the Trent Councell are made articles of faith But the Protestants answer readily that they confesse no point at all may be denied or doubted of either obstinately or rashly or at all that is a point of faith reuealed in the word of God but the things holden and propounded by the Church of Rome against them are the false doctrines and heresies of Antichrist ridiculously called the faith of the Catholicke Church Then expounding his conclusion he shewes in what manner faith must beleeue all things that it may be entire and he sayes either expresly or implicitely wherein he bewrayes that which I suspected and signified in my answer for his conclusion being that faith must be entire and sound stedfastly beleeuing all things reuealed I c The WAY pag. 5. answered that this might be granted in a true sense But peraduenture his mind ran vpon a further matter which his Church teaches about infolded faith meaning thereby that howsoeuer he affirmed that we are bound to beleeue all points of faith as well one as other yet that might be done sufficiently by beleeuing as the Church beleeues without knowledge of any thing that is beleeued the which my suspition he grants in this place to be true and so his conclusion which at the first carried so good a semblance of binding men to the knowledge of particular verities and made so honest a proffer against ignorance is now resolued into this sense that by an intire faith you are bound to beleeue all things the which is done by knowing nothing but onely beleeuing implicitely as the Church of Rome beleeues Let a man neuer trouble himselfe with inquiring into the mysteries of Christian religion or controuersies of faith but onely say d Rhem. annot Luc. 12.11 he will liue and die in that faith which the Catholicke Church teaches and this Church can giue a reason of the things beleeued This is the equiuocating tongue of the Church of Rome that can ambush it selfe in words and vnder faire speeches conceale no small wickednes 3 His arguments in maintenance of this implicite faith are fiue First the authority of M. Wootton who seemes to speake against me next because to get expresse knowledge of all points contained in Scripture which are points necessary to be beleeued is impossible at least for vnlearned men Thirdly faith and knowledge are two distinct things faith being of things not knowne captiuating the vnderstanding therefore this distinct knowledge is not presupposed before Fourthly reason and experience teach that beleefe and knowledge are distinct beleefe not presupposing knowledge but going before it Fiftly the Fathers Irenaeus Hilary Austin affirme faith to be sufficient without knowledge Afore I answer his arguments note fiue things First what our aduersaries meane hy implicite or infolded faith and it is nothing else but a blind assent of the mind to whatsoeuer the Church of Rome beleeues without any knowledge at all of the things themselues e Occh. dialog part 1. l. 3. c. 1. p. 18. Dur. 3. d. 25. q. 1. â—abr ibi Notab 2. Do. Bann 22. pag. 349. The Schoolemen deliuer it in finer termes that it is the assent of the minde to some generall or vniuersall thing wherein many particulars are included with will to beleeue nothing that is contrary thereunto but the meaning is that to the essence and nature of this entire faith the distinct knowledge or apprehension of any particular truth or article is not required but onely resolution and profession to be of the Churches beleefe whatsoeuer it be in the same manner that I reported the Colliars faith Thus any man by an implicite faith beleeues the articles of Religion and particular mysteries of our faith touching the Vnity and Trinity of the Godhead the Incarnation and Office of Christ the nature of Faith the practise of Repentance the Resurrection the Sacraments Redemption of mankinde state of sinne and the last Iudgement when he will beleeue and hold touching these things as the Church of Rome doth and yet in the meane time his vnderstanding in no measure penetrates into these articles nor can distinctly explicate or conceiue them Altisiodorensis f Sum. l. 3. tract 3. c. 1. qu. 5. saies To beleeue implicitely is to beleeue in this generall that whatsoeuer the Church beleeues is true Dionysius g 3. de 25. qu. vnic p. 215. This is infolded faith to beleeue in generall all that our Holy mother the Church beleeues Summa Rosella h V. Fides n. 1. quem refert Bann vbi sup To beleue all that which our mother the Church beleeues and holds as when a Christian man is asked whether Christ were borne of the virgine Marie or whether there be one God and three Persons and he answers that he cannot tell but beleeues touching these matters as the Church holdeth This is the definition of entire faith which the Iesuite saies extends it selfe vniuersally to all points at least implicitely Note Secondly what the things are and which be the points that our aduersaries teach to be sufficiently beleeued by this infolded faith The Reply seemes to affirme that it is allowed onely in some points which a man for want of sufficient meanes cannot know I grant saith he and neuer did deny but that there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts Necessitate medij and some necessary to be knowne Necessitate praecepti In which points implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines to be ioyned to the assent of our faith in other points so farre as we neither know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them we may well commend the Colliars faith in beleeuing in generall as the Church beleeueth In which wordes my aduersarie seemes to allow implicite faith only in some few cases and charges me with two grosse vntruthes because I say the Papists vtterly refuse knowledge and Canonize the Colliars implicite faith for their Creed But he should haue obserued that which was vnder his eyes and affixed to my words alledged whereby I proued what I said I alledged Iacobus
aduersarie will vrge me with this and stand vpon it that it is the doctrine of his Church I will not striue with him onely I will commend 2. things to his consideration First how he will pleade the saluation of innumerable lay people I will not say in Lancashire but in France Spaine and Italy euery where that haue no knowledge of these things but onely beleeue as the Church beleeues whom the Church of Rome hath hitherto trained vp in this implicite faith of the Colliar how will he excuse the Colliar whom Staphylus commends so that knew not these things and what if it should fall out that the Gentleman his friend whom he mentions z A person of good esteeme and place in that your country p. 39. Repl. before in this Reply being catechized by his ghostly father should be able to say no more then the Colliar Next that euen the Iesuites and these Diuines who make shew to maintaine this explicite faith yet vtter that besides that vnanswerably makes for the implicite in all articles Henriquex a De sin hom c. 17. n. 1. lit x. sayes A man may be iustified by the implicite faith of Christ * Si planè contritus cum plena satisfactione vel cum martyrio aut indulgentia plenaria decedat and if he die be saued also with a pardon b Relect. de Sacram. part 2. q. 2. concl 3. Canus and c In Tho. 22. q. 2. art 8. dub vlt. concl 1. Bannes affirme that the explicite faith or distinct knowledge of Christ is not necessary as a meanes to iustifie vs. And Bannes d Concl. 4. addes that it were neither heresie nor error nor rashnes nor scandall to auouch that a man may also in the same manner be saued because iustification being the last disposition to glory it is very probable that he which is iustified by an implicite faith may also by the same faith without alteration be saued Vasquez e In Tho. 12. q. 2. disp 121. c. 2. sayes He doubts not but many countrie people without fault are ignorant of some necessary mysteries Vega f Pro concil pag. 92. sayes as I alledged before It is to be affirmed that men are so iustified by the faith of the Mediator that yet the vnfolded faith neither of this article nor of any other must be thought requisite vnto iustice because the explicite faith of other articles belonging either to speculation or morall life suffices thereunto I could alledge many other such doctrines but these are enough to shew my aduersary that his Diuines deale but doubly in our point of implicite faith and such as make faire offer against it yet are fast friends to the Colliar 6 Note thirdly concerning the persons who they be that our aduersaries allow to beleeue implicitly who are bound to expresse knowledge Mediauillanus g 3. d. 25 p. 89. edit Venet. per Laz. Soard 1508. sayes that such as are superiors in the Church must haue a fuller knowledge concerning faith then inferiours So that I beleeue such superiours are bound to beleeue all the articles of faith expresly though euery one of thē be not bound to beleeue their number or artificiall distinction Syluester h Sum Syluest v. fides n. 6. sayes Euery one that hath cure of soules as Prelates Priests Prophets Doctors and Preachers are bound expresly to beleeue the whole distinction of the articles of faith according to their substance but others are not so bound i Direct Inquisit part 1. q. 4. n. 3. Eymericus out of k 22. q. 2. art 6. Thomas Prelats and Curats are bound to haue the expresse faith and knowledge of all the articles of faith wherefore the explication of things to be beleeued is not alike in respect of all sorts of men necessary to saluation because Superiors which haue the charge of instructing others are bound to beleeue expresly more things then others are l 22. q. 2. art 8. disp vnic sub sin Pezantius thinks thus of the matter that Bishops are bound * A hard taske for the Boy Bishops mentioned by Gerson and others see Vers sign ruin Eccl. sign 3. 8. Pic. Mirand orat ad Leo. and for some men Bishops too mentioned by Theod. Niem nemor Semita de scism p. 66. Cathar n. specul haeret p. 71. Clemang de stat Eccl. p. 15. 30. concil delect card Alliac reform Eccl. consid 3. and for some Popes also See specul Pontif. p. 110. and possible for our yong Iesuites and Seminaries to say nothing of the old Mas Priests in times past expresly to know the articles of Faith contained in the Creed and Scripture and in the definitions of the Church so that they can both expound teach and perswade them Simple Priests must know those things that belong to the making of the Sacrament and other things contained in the Creed Preachers such things as are necessary to teach the people how to beleeue and liue parish Priests are not bound to be so perfit in the knowledge of the articles of faith that they can assoile hard questions but it is sufficient if they can instruct their charge in such things as they are tied to beleeue and do and if they haue sufficient knowledge of the Cases of Conscience And so the implicite knowledge and faith is admitted onely in the vnlearned Laity and not in Clergie men of any sort if our aduersaries will hold them to their doctrine but they dubble and perseuere not in it as will appeare by viewing the places of the Archbishop and the Cardinal whom m The WAY §. 2. n. 6. I alledged in my booke 7 Note fourthly that the things which we mislike and speake against in this matter of implicite faith are these First that in teaching of it the Church of Rome seemes manifestly to seeke her owne soueraignty euen aboue the Scripture in the consciences of men rather then the true knowledge of God and his will To what purpose they do this n 2. Th. 2.4 apoc 18.7 I sit a Queene we are not ignorant but we see it tends to the stupifying of the word by blind and brutish obedience that there need be no trauell in religion it selfe but onely a religious care that the Church of Rome be not offended Whereunto whosoeuer will cleaue resolutely to obey all her drudgery and tyrannie that man by some fine distinction or other and that by the Iesuites themselues and such as talke most of explicite knowledge shall be iustified to be of an entire faith extending it selfe vniuersally to all points one as wel as another though he were as ignorāt as a sheepe or as mad as o Suid. v. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Amphistides in Suidas that could not tell fiue nor whether his father or his mother bare him Secondly we mislike that ignorance so much condemned by the word of God should thus be bolstered out whereby true faith
Scripture D. Stapleton a Relect. p. 462. sayes The Church is the ground and pillar of truth in a higher kind then the Scripture namely in the kind of the efficient cause And b Pag. 494. in explicat qu. the authority of the Church may be vnderstood to be greater then the authority of the Scripture because it is not simply subiect or bound to it but may by it authority teach decerne something which the Scripture hath neither determined nor taught The things which the Church teaches do as much binde the faithfull as those things which the Scripture teacheth we Catholickes affirme that the Church is to be heard more certainely then the Scriptures because the doctrine thereof is more manifest and euident then the doctrine of the Scriptures or at the least equally with the Scriptures because the authority thereof is no lesse irrefragable and infallible The Scripture is the booke of the Church the testimonie of truth which the Church testifies the law of God which the Church hath publisht the rule of faith which the Church hath deliuered We had wont to maruell at the blasphemies c Illyric clau script p. 541. Hos de express verb. Dei of Cusanus Verratus Hosius That the Church hath authoritie aboue the Scripture The Scripture as it is produced by heretikes is the word of the Diuell A Councell is the highest tribunall and hath the same power to determine any thing that the Councell of the Apostles and Disciples had The things written in the Gospell haue no soundnesse but through the determination of the Church c. But now you see the same renewed in that Church to this day and the Iesuits in the midst of their learned subtilties to be as grosse as the grossest Friars preferring their Church authority farre aboue the Scriptures or any vse that a Candlesticke can haue in shewing the candle Note FOVRTHLY what it is that the Protestants say touching the authority of the Scripture and the Church so much as belongs to the present occasion First that the Scriptures haue in them a light and an authoritie of their owne sufficient to prooue themselues to be the word of God and to giue infallible assurance to all men of the true sense and this light and authority is not added increased or multiplied by the Ministry of the Church or any thing that it doth about the Scripture Secondly this light and authoritie of the Scripture shines in vs and takes effect in vs then onely when the Spirit of God opens our hearts to see it The defect of which heauenly illumination is the reason why some neuer and the elect themselues at all times do not see it but it argues no defect of light in the Scriptures Thirdly the means whereby God opens our eies and hearts to see this light and authoritie in the Scripture is the Ministry of the Church I expound my selfe it is the ordinary and publike meanes wherto he referres men And this Ministry is by preaching and expounding the Scripture out of it selfe and perswading and conuincing the consciences of men yet priuately and extraordinarily when and wheresoeuer this Ministry failes or ceasses the light and sense of the Scripture is obtained by the Scripture alone without this Church Ministry and the Scripture alone in this sort immediately at sundry times by it selfe giues full assurance and workes all other effects in our consciences that it doth when the Church propounds it Fourthly the Scripture is so sufficient of it selfe both to reueale whatsoeuer is needfull to be knowne and to establish and assure our heart in the infallible faith of that it reueales that the Church hath nether authority to adde so much as one article more then is contained therein nor power to giue this assurance from any thing but from the Scripture it selfe So farre forth that THE WHOLE TEACHING AND DOCTRINE AND AVTHORITIE OF THE CHVRCH IS TO BE ADMITTED AND YEELDED TO OR REFVSED ACCORDING AS IT CONSENTS OR DISAGREES WITH THE SCRIPTVRE the fountaine of truth the rule of faith Note FIFTLY what our aduersaries meane by the Church and the meanes whereby the Church executes her authority what the things are which by her authority she may do and what the proper effect is that this authority workes in vs. First by this Church d This is shewed c. 35. nu 1. c. 36. nu 1. they vnderstand the Church of Rome for the present time being and therein the Pope in whom they say the whole power and vertue of the Church abideth Secondly the meanes whereby it executeth her authority is vnwritten Tradition out of the which it supplies all things pretended to be needfull for the exposition of the Scripture or the defining of matters that must be beleeued Thirdly the things that she may do by her authoritie are all things that appertaine to the questions of religion 1 Cus epi. 2. 3. 7. to expound the Scripture after her owne iudgement 2 Conc. Trid. sess 24. can 3. to dispense against the Scripture 3 Stapl. princip l. 9. c. 14. relect pag. 514. to canonize new Scripture that before was none 4 Stapl. ibi relect p. 494. inde to giue authority to the Scripture 5 August de Ancon qu. 59. art 1. 2. to make new articles of faith 6 Gl. de transl episc Quanto §. veri to make that to be the sence of the Scripture that is not Lastly the effect of this power is the same that the Scripture breeds and more 7 Grets defens Bel. tom 1. pag. 1218. c. obedience in all that will be saued so that the world is bound as much to the Popes definitiue sentence as to the Scripture or the voice of God himselfe 8 The speech of all the canonists for Christ and the Pope make but one tribunal 9 Capistran de author Pap. pag 130. He is aboue al like him that came downe from heaueÌ„ 10 Capist ibi For with God and the Pope his will is sufficient reason and that which pleases him hath the vigor of a law 11 Palaeot de consist part 5. q 9. after his sentence pronounced no man must doubt or delay to yeeld 12 Petrisedes in Romano solâ—o collocata libertate plena in suis agendis per omnia poteri debet nec vlli subesse homini Gl. ibid. vbi sup yea all the CouÌ„cels and Doctors and Churches in the world must stoop to his determination 5 These fiue things thus obserued it is easie to se that our aduersaries attribute more to the Church then to be onely a meanes for the communicating of that which is in the Scripture to vs expounding the authority thereof that it exceedes the latitude of a Candlesticke and is turned into the Candle it selfe And so to returne to my aduersaries answer and to conclude I thus reason The Ministery and authority of the Church is required either
Scriptures make the Church perfect by cōmending it to it self for thē the Apostles should speak thus by my aduersaries exposition the Scriptures are profitable to make the Church perfect by commending to it the authority of the Church and yet he defendes it First because it sendes them Pastors Pope Councell and all to the interpretations of Councels and Fathers of the ancient Church But then I demand how did they make perfect the ancient Church it selfe the first Councels and Fathers of whom the Apostle speakes as well as of the latter for they had none to retire to but the Scripture onely Secondly because the Pastors of the Church sustaine two persons one as publike Pastors authorized to teach another as priuate men needing instruction themselues and so the Apostle saies the Scripture sends them as priuate men to themselues considered as publike men inabled as need shall require to define the truth in any point the which is an irkesome answer to any that shall consider it for although a Pastor be considered these 2. waies yet it is false that is assumed that he which as a priuate man erres and is ignorant yet as a publike person is able to direct himselfe and others and define the truth this I say is a trick to mocke an ape with though it be all the shift they haue to defend the Pope from being a formall hereticke and yet admitting it to be true that the Pastors of the Church considered as priuate men are sent to themselues considered as publike men yet it cannot be true that the Scripture makes thē perfect this way by sending and commending them to themselues because the perfection auouched is the effect of that teaching that reprouing that correcting that instructing which is contained in the Scripture it selfe and not in the authoritie of man whither the Scripture is imagined to send vs. For all that the Apostle in this text affirmes is of the Scripture alone as appeares 7 Besides my argument I alleadged some testimonies of Chrysostome and certaine Papists to iustifie my exposition wherein they affirme as much out of the text as I doe whereto he replies that the said testimonies must either be explicated to mean that the Scriptures are able to instruct vs with the meanes of Church authority or else be taken without limitation if they be thus explicated they proue nothing against him if they be taken without limitation they proue as much against vs as against him I answer to the first the testimonies are to be seene and the words thereof are so full that they cannot be thus explicated as for example Chrysostome in his words expounds S. Paul to distinguish the Scripture against his owne ministry Thou hast the Scripture to teach thee in steed of me if thou desire to know anything there thou maiest learne it that which can teach vs in steed of the Church Pastours can teach vs without their authority if God as Antonin says hath spokē but once that in the Scriptures that so fully that he speakes no more how can the meaning be that other authority should be ioyned with them for so God should speake twice once in the Scriptures another time in the Church and in the Scripture so far from fully that he needs speake againe in the Church The like may be said to the other testimonies but I refer the iudgement to the conscience of the Reader To the second if these words be taken without limitation that alone without any means ioyned to thē they are able to instruct vs they proue as much against me as against him that its maruell I should haue so little iudgement I demand and why so I pray because then they will make as much against our Church ministery as against his Church authority which had bene spoken to the point if we by Church ministry had meant either the same or as much as he doth by Church authority but when his Church authority intends a supply of that which is wanting in the Scripture by traditions our Church ministry no more but a simple cōdition of vsing the meanes to make vs see that which is contained in thē which ministry also we do not hold to be alway vnto all persons necessary he may let our iudgements alone and take a new reckoning of his owne that is so simple as to make alike things that are so far vnlike his Church authority and our Church ministry CHAP. XXXII Touching priuate spirits that expound against the Church 1. Such priuate expositions refused by the Protestants 2. And yet the Papists haue no other All teaching is to be examined euen by priuate men 5. Certaine propositions shewing how the Church teaching may be or may not be examined and refused Pag. 196. Wootton p. 110 White pag. 62. A.D. Concerning the ninth Chapter M. Wootton and M. White both seeme to disclaime from immediate teaching of priuate spirits and consequently seeme to grant the substance of the conclusion of this Chapter in such sense as it was principally intended by me yet wheresoeuer they be vrged to tell how they infallibly know that there is any Scripture at all and that these and no other bookes be Canonicall Scripture and that this or that is the true interpretation and sense of this or that text of holy Scripture vpon which questions well resolued the whole frame of their faith doth depend after alledging other reasons drawne from rules of art and knowledge of tongues c. which they know to be infallible they must be forced finally to flie for infallible assurance either to the immediate teaching of their priuate spirit or else to run the round betwixt Scripture and priuate spirit in such sort as I haue shewed in the Introduction Introd q. 6. and hence it seemeth to proceed that they both thought fit to make answer to my reasons which they needed not to haue done if the conclusion of this Chapter had no waies bene contrary to their doctrine White pag. 59. 60. M. White before he begin to answer my reasons distinguisheth a double meaning of the word priuate which I put in my conclusion and saith that if I meant it as it is opposed ô strange opposition to diuine and spirituall I said well but vsing it as we Catholickes do as it is opposed to common he saith that a priuate man may so be assisted with the Holy Ghost that he may interprete Scripture truely and infallibly against a company as big as the Roman Church 1 HIs third conclusion touching the rule of faith was that no priuate man who perswadeth himselfe to be specially instructed by the spirit can be this rule of faith specially so far foorth as he teaches or beleeues contrary to the receiued doctrine of the Catholicke Church the which I granted to be true but admonished the Reader withall that he had a further reach therein then yet he made shew of For his intent was to condemne all particular men and
haue said A. D. Whereas I obiect that sectaries and the Diuell himselfe doth alledge words of Scripture Pag. 202. White pag. 64. M. White granteth it but saith he either they alledge not true Scripture or not truly applied as also they alledge the authority of the Church but either not the true Church or the true Church not truly Testimonium hoc verū est This which M. White granteth is the very truth and wanteth nothing but that he apply it to his priuate men Luther and Caluin and to his owne selfe Partiality will not suffer him to apply it thus but there is no reason that he should be iudge it is more fit that the iudgement of this matter be left to the Catholicke Church which he confesseth to be taught of God White pag. 63. 10 If my answer be true that when sectaries or the Diuell alledge Scripture or the Church they do it not truly let the Repliar giue ouer bragging and shew really that the Protestants haue not alledged these things truly And if it be no reason we be iudges our selues no more is it that the Pope and Papacy which k Nomine Ecclesiae intelligimus eius caput id est Romanum Pontificem Grego de Valent pag. 24. tom 3. Quod autem haec regula animata rationalis sit summus Pontifex non est hic locus proprius probandi Fra. Albertin Coroll p. 251. c. No maruell now though the Catholicke Church were so fast talked of he meanes by the Catholick Church be iudge but were it at that that we might haue a free Councell assembled and holden as Councels were of ancient time where the Pope and his faith might be tried as well as we it would soone appeare the Protestants haue not bene partiall in their cause when the late Trent Councell it selfe had come nearer vs then it did if it had not bene managed by Machiauellisme more then religion and the greatest tyranny and cosenage and villany vsed in it that euer stirred in any publicke busines CHAP. XXXIIII 1 The Papists pretending the Church haue a further meaning then the vulgar know 2 The Popes will is made the Churches act 3 Base traditions expounded to be diuine truth A. D. Concerning the tenth Chapter both my Aduersaries make maine opposition against the conclusion of this Chapter Pag. 202. one reason whereof is that they do not or will not rightly vnderstand what I meant when here I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith note therefore first whereas the name Church may be taken seuerall waies Intro q. 3. according to that which I noted in the Introduction whereas also in euery one of these senses it may be taken either as it is generally in all ages or as it is particularly in this or that determinate age my Aduersaries omitting all other senses principally vnderstand me to meane by the name Church the Pope or Pastours of this present age whereas in this Chapter I do not at least ex professo or primarily intend to speake of the Church in this sense but rather do speake of the Church in a more generall indefinite and indeterminate sense as it signifieth one or other companie of men liuing either in all ages or in one or other age who in one or other sense may be called the Church the doctrine whereof say I is the rule and meanes ordained by God to instruct all sorts of men in all matters of faith Note secondly that by the doctrine of the Church I do not vnderstand any Friars dreames White pag. 3 as M. White dreameth nor humane traditions especially opposite to Scripture but diuine doctrine including therein both the written diuine Scripture and the vnwritten diuine traditions and the true diuine interpretation of them both as by word writing signes or otherwise it is or may be propounded and deliuered to vs by the authority of the Church all which although it may worthily be called diuine doctrine as being first reuealed by God here I call Church-doctrine because as it was first reuealed and committed to the keeping of Prophets and Apostles who in their time were chiefe and principall members of the militant Church so by Gods ordinance it was to be propounded and deliuered to other men by the same Prophets Apostles and others their successors as they are Doctors and Pastors of the same Church Note thirdly that by the rule of faith I meane such a rule as is also a sufficient outward meanes ordained and set apart by God to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith which consequently must haue those three conditions or properties of the rule set downe and declared in the sixt Chapter viz that it must be infallible easie to be vnderstood of all sorts and vniuersall or such as may sufficiently resolue one in all points of faith Note fourthly that when I say the doctrine of the Church is the rule of faith I do not vnderstand that the doctrine as seuered from the Church or the Church as diuided from the doctrine is the rule of saith but that the doctrine as deliuered by the Church or the Church as deliuering doctrine is that rule and meanes which God hath ordained to instruct men in faith Note fifthly that to proue the doctrine of the Church to be the rule of faith in such sort as now I haue said it might suffice for this Chapter that it be shewed that at least once or in one age there were one or other company of liuing men in one or other sense called the Church who were ordained by God and set apart to instruct all sorts of men in all points of faith being for that purpose in their doctrine and teaching furnished with these three conditions which are requisite in the rule of faith for this being shewed in this Chapter I shall easily shew in the next that the same is to be said of some or other company continuing in all ages In this Chapter therefore I chiefly vndertake to proue that once or in one age there was a company of liuing men who in one sense may be called the Church whom God specially appointed as a meanes sufficient quantū ex se to instruct all men in all matters of faith being for that purpose furnished with the three conditions or properties of the rule of faith 1 THe conclusion of this Chapter was that the infallible rule which we ought obediently to follow in all points of faith is the doctrine and teaching faith and beleefe of the true Church his meaning wherein he saies I would not or did not rightly vnderstand Let vs therefore see how I vnderstood it My answer was that we would freely grant this conclusion if the meaning were no more but that the doctrine and faith of the vniuersall Church is the rule of faith but there is a higher matter meant First that the Churches word and authority without grounding the same on the Scripture is the rule
whether this doctrine of these succeeding Pastors shal need to be the same that the doctrine of the Apostles was but onely affirmes that as the Apostles doctrine for the time they liued was the rule so the doctrine of the succeeding Pastors is the rule leauing roome enough for this doctrine of these succeeding Pastors to vary from the doctrine of the Apostles that when we shew the present abuses in the Church of Rome and decrees of their latter Popes for these last 800. yeares to haue swarued from the Apostles doctrine and practise they may pleade the authoritie of their succeding Pastors And indeede it is true that the Church of Rome holds that it is not necessary the doctrine and teaching of the present and succeeding Pastors be the same in all things that it was in the Apostolicke and Primitiue Church but the Pope hath power to make a NEW CREED and NEW ARTICLES of faith For Iacobatius m De Concil p. 310. A. saies The Pope alone may make new articles of faith according to one acceptation of the word Article that is for such as must be beleeued which before needed not be beleeued and Zenzelin a Popish doctor n Gl. extr Ioh. 22. cum inter § doclaramus saies The Vicar of Christ may make an Article of faith taking an article not properly but in a large sense for that which must be beleeued when before by the precept of the Church it was not necessary to be beleeued Augustinus Triumphus writes o August Anconit sum de eccle potest q. â—9 art 1. that it belongs to the Pope alone to make a new Creed For in a Creed those things are put that vniuersally belong to Christian faith he therefore hath authority to make such a Creed who is the head of Christian faith and in whom as in the head all the members of the Church are vnited and by whose authoritie all things pertaining to faith are confirmed and strengthened And p Art 2. againe That the Pope may dispense in adding articles may be vnderstood 3. waies First in respect of the multiplication of the articles themselues Secondly in respect of expounding the things contained in the articles Thirdly in respect of the augmentation of such things as may be reduced to the articles ALL THESE WAIES the Pope may dispense in adding articles because as he may make a new Creed so he may MVLTIPY NEW ARTICLES OVER AND ABOVE THE OTHER Secondly he may by more articles explicate the articles already placed in the Creed Thirdly because peraduenture all things beleeued in the Creed may be reduced after the aforesaid articles and by such reduction may be increased so that vnder each article MORE THINGS NECESSARY TO BE BELEEVED MAY BE PVT THEN ARE YET PVT The which being done marke what they say touching their authority q Roder. Dosm de auth script l. 3. c. 12. The Popes assertions ascend to the height of diuine testimony as the assertions of the Apostles did and of such as made the holy Scripture and there be who contend that they belong to the sacred Scripture it selfe which is contained in the bookes of the Bible This doctrine whereof all our aduersaries bookes are full shewes plainely that they intend not that this their Church teaching so much magnified to be the rule should alway be one and the same but such as shall follow the Popes lust and be altered with the time that so this Antichrist of Rome might abolish the whole Testament of Christ this is the first thing to be noted that the reader may see what he meanes by his Church doctrine that is the rule 4 The next thing is his distinction about this doctrine of the Church that it was the rule in the Apostles dayes and is the rule in succeeding ages but not as contained in onely Scripture but as deliuered by these Pastors Which speech containes 2. things a Negatiue and an affirmatiue the negatiue is that the doctrine of the Church is not the rule as it is contained in onely Scripture Meaning as * Ch. 27. n. 3. I haue shewed that all diuine doctrine belonging to the rule is not contained in the Scripture but much or the most of it in tradition vnwritten and that which is contained is not the rule by vertue of writing but by vertue of the Church that makes it authenticall Panormitan r Panorm tom 2. de praesumptione c. Sicut noxius sayes The words of the text of Scripture are not the Popes words but the words of Salomon in the Prouerbs but because this text is made Canonicall it is to be beleeued and induceth necessity so to do as if the Pope had set it foorth himselfe Because we make all those things to bee ours whereto we might impart our authority But whether without Canonization the sayings of Salomon be approued in the Church seeing they are in the body of the Bible say as the glosse saith and Ierom holdeth who seemes to conclude that they are Apocrypha which is to be noted and that because of this as also because Salomon had no power to make Canons This also must be obserued that the Reader may know the meaning of his conclusion and what it is that we deny therein For NO DOCTRINE EITHER OF THE APOSTELS IN THEIR TIME OR OF THE SVCCEEDING PASTORS OF THE CHVRCH IN ANY TIME IS THE RVLE OF FAITH BVT ONELY THAT WHICH IS CONTAINED IN THE SCRIPTVRE As I haue Å¿ In the WAY digr 3. shewed His affirmatiue is that the doctrine of the Church is the rule as it is deliuered by the Pastors or the Pastours deliuering this doctrine are the rule which is the same that he said a little before the doctrine as deliuered by the Church or the Church as deliuering doctrine is the rule t Pars obiecti formalis fidei est vox Ecclesiae D. Stapler relect p. 484. Saltem aequalis est Ecclesiae Scripturae authoritas ibi pag. 494. His meaning is that the Churches testimony and authority mingles it selfe with the authority of the doctrine and is ioyntly with it or aboue it the rule of faith as when diuers simples haue their ingredience into one compound and two men equally carry betweene them one burthen Their doctrine this way is knowne wel enough how the Scriptures in regard of vs haue all their authority from the Church the sense of the Scripture is to be fetched from the Church whatsoeuer the Church of Rome shall teach is the word of God c. The which things being couched in the Iesuites conclusion as he vnderstands it we detest and spit vpon when he shall thus debarre the Scripture from being the rule to set vpon the bench his Papall Antichristian authority If the shame either of God or men or any respect of truth were with them they durst not thus presumptuously and basely steale the authority to themselues whereby both themselues and we and all the world
for the maior is his owne doctrine and the doctrine of all the Diuines on his side and then he is debarred from denying the Church to be inuisible till he haue preserued the Pope from being Antichrist which he can neuer do and if he fall out to be Antichrist then I hope he will confesse the sayings of Saint Augustine concerning the Church against the Donatists proue no perpetuall and continuall visibility of the state thereof Pag. 243. Stapleton in relect contr 4. q. 3. art 1. Greg. de Val. tom 3. dis 1. q. 1 A. D. Note Secondly that although it be true which my aduersaries impertinently obiect that the Church is not actually seene at all times by all men yet it is visible that is to say such as at least in potentia remota may be seene or knowne by all if the impediments be not on our parts who should see it Although also it be not alike visible and perspicuous as our Diuines well declare at all times yet it is alwaies so visible and perspicuous that with prudent and diligent inquirie it may be found and discerned in regard euen in times of greatest obscurities there were alwaies some eminent and knowne members of it by reason of which euen men of the world may discerne and distinguish it from other men which were not of the true Church Moreouer although it haue not alwaies an outward illustrious and worldly estate especially in times and places where persecution rageth nor cannot alwaies practise publickly the rites and ceremonies of diuine worship but is forced sometimes to do this in priuate as Christians did in the first ten persecutions vnder the heathen Emperors and as Catholickes in England are forced to do now adaies yet the Church neuer did doth or shall want an inward estate subordination and gouernment of Pastors this being a thing appointed by God himselfe Acts the 20. v. 28. Ehpes 4. v. 12. to be alwaies in the Church nor euer did doth or shall want altogether the practise of rites pertaining to Sacraments and other duties necessary pertaining to diuine worship and profession of the Christian faith neither was or shal this inward estate or practise of the Church vniuersally in any age be so secret but that some notice at least in generall was and may be had of it euen by infidels and enemies in so much that for the time to come S. Augustine affirmeth Aug. l. 20. De ciuit c. 8. that euen in Antichrists time the Church shall be conspicuous in some sort and for times past there are recordes at this day extant in Histories written either by friends enemies or both by which it is to vs and will be to posterity apparant enough that there were such a company of Christian professors vsing such practise in all ages And although the names of all professors nor all particular points pertaining to to their profession be not set downe yet diuers both men and matters are so set downe in stories as it is no great difficulty to assigne a catalogue of some true Christian professors continually in all ages The which records of Histories was doubtlesse first made and afterward preserued by diuine prouidence as a necessary meanes to certifie vs of the fulfilling of the diuine Prophesies and promises made in Scripture about the continuance of the Church For if it be true which M. White saies to wit White pag. 338. that things past cannot be shewed by no other meanes then by histories if we had not Histories to shew and assure vs that Christians had bene in all ages we could not know whether the diuine Prophesies and promises made in Scripture about the continuance of the Church had bene fulfilled or no and so we could not take that solide comfort and confirmation of our faith and hope by these Prophesies and promises for which they were ordained 3 He affirmes fiue things FIRST that howsoeuer the Church be not actually seene at all times by all men yet it is such as may be seene and knowne by all if the impediment be not on their part that should see it this is true But it is not true that his aduersaries obiect this to him impertinently For a The WAIE §. 17. n. 3. I obiected it to let him see how and in what sense we hold the inuisibility of the Church not simply but respectiuely in regard of those that see not the corruptions hiding and defacing it Now I neuer knew before that it was impertinent to expound the sense of the question in controuersie NEXT he grants it is not alike visible and perspicuous at all times as his Diuines well declare The which possible he would neuer haue bin known of if b Digr 17. I had not put him in minde But being graunted c Bel. de eccl l. 3. c. 13. the Cardinall and all that speake as he doth must bate an ace of his assertion God hath at all times a Church consisting not of a few people but a great multitude as conspicuous as an earthly kingdome For if it be not alway alike perspicuous but sometime d Staplet Grego Valent. vbi sup as Stapleton and Gregory declare in the places quoted if they had bene quoted truely it may be so tossed with errors and scismes and persecutions that to such as are vnskilfull and do not discreetely weigh things and times it shall be very hard to be discerned then it falles a great deale short of a great multitude as conspicuous as any earthly kingdome THIRDLY he saies that although it be not alike visible at all times yet it is alwaie so visible that with prudent and diligent inquirie it may be discerned Which we deny not but the reason hereof is not in regard there are alway some eminent members of it wholy free from all the corruption preuailing because those eminent members the Iesuite vnderstands to be the Pope and some part at least of his hierarchy the visibilitie of the Church e Simanch institut Cathol tit 24. n. 1. Azor. instit tom 2 l. 5. c. 21. quinto being defined by the perpetuall subiection thereof to a visible Pope but because euen then when it is most inuisible and kept downe with persecution and heresie the substance and rule of faith is preserued and such as are enlightned by the Spirit of God by diligent inquirie may perceiue the soundest part of the Church to be not in the multitude as the world thinketh which hath innouated the ancient faith but among those few meane oppressed ones that this glorious and conspicuous multitude condemnes and persecutes not the eminency of Sate but the eminency of truth and doctrine being the signe wherby to know them FOVRTHLY he confesses the Church cannot alway practise publikely the rites of Gods worship but is forced sometimes to do it in priuate this is also true for albeit the publicke worship shall neuer faile to be openly exercised yet sometime this open exercise
may be more corrupt and defiled with the inuentions of men then the priuate retained by those that cannot or dare not reforme the abuses But then why doth he censure me all ouer his booke for holding this and scoffe at that I said the faithfull may sometime professe onely in secret among themselues And but that he will not let his stomacke come downe he should haue added f According to the doctrine of his Diuines Telelpho de Casent l. de magn Tribul pag. 32. Ouand 4. d. 18. prop. 3. Viega in Apoc. p 763. n. 12. Bozi de sig eccl l. 24. c. 10. Aquipontan de Antich cont Sohn p. 23. that the Sacrifice of the Masse also shall be abolished in the time of Antichrist and then his Church will be as inuisible as ours When it shall not onely be said in secret as Seminaries in England now adaies do it but by their leaue THEY DO NOT THAT ALONE IN SECRET but it shall not be sayed at all which these Catholickes would repine at now adaies in England FIFTHLY he sayes that howsoeuer the Church be not alway illustrious nor cannot alway practise the rites of Gods worship publikely yet it shall neuer want Pastors to gouerne nor altogether the vse of the Sacrament and other duties pertaining to diuine worship and the profession of faith at least in an INWARD estate The which is true and the Protestants say it as well as he expounding those Pastours to haue bene many of the ordinary Pastours liuing in the communion of the Church of Rome for certaine ages past and those Sacraments and rites pertaining to diuine worship to haue bene part of that which was exercised and this profession of Christian faith to haue bene the testimony that many in the said ages haue giuen against the corruptions of the Papacy partly by holding the substance of truth with their errors and partly by suffering persecution for misliking the Papacy And we confesse also that which he addes that this inward state and practise of the Church shall neuer be vniuersally so secret but that some notice shall be had of it euer by enemies and omitting his conceite of Antichrist to come which S. Austin in the place quoted affirmes not we shew for the time past sufficient records thereof both friends and foes testifying in their writings the resistance that in all ages was made against the Papacy as it grew on and the succession of our faith and religion in the middest of the Roman Church it selfe appearing in the books of the Schoolemen and Friars themselues which records and what would the Repliar haue more by diuine prouidence are preserued in the writings of all that liued in those ages euen such as embraced the Papacy though now g By a practise of purging bookes mentioned afore the Church of Rome do what it can to abolish them and certifie vs that the Protestant Religion hath continued in the Church in all ages since Christ Which Records if we wanted then might we as the Repliar speakes iustly misdoubt our case whether the diuine promises made to Gods Church haue bene fulfilled in vs. And though it be true that M. White said Things past cannot be shewed but by stories and many things belonging to the Church and religion no doubt for want of histories be forgotten the said histories being either suppressed or adulterated yet he addes that there is NO ARTICLE OF THE PROTESTANT RELIGION BVT WE CAN SHEW IT IMBRACED AND NO ARTICLE OF THE PAPACIE BVT WE CAN SHEW IT RESISTED EVEN IN THE WRITINGS AND RECORDS OF THE CHVRCH OF ROME IT SELFE and by these records we can shew that whatsoeuer wee mislike in our Aduersaries was not at the beginning but crept in and mingled it selfe with the truth through the faction and conueiance of priuate persons in the Church so the fulfilling of Gods promises touching the perpetuall continuance of the Church is knowne sufficiently and our hope confirmed as the Iesuite requires Though the Romish practise in razing and forging histories and antiquity be discouered to be such that were there no records in the world the testimonie of the Scripture alone whereto our faith agrees should suffice for our comfort and to confirme our faith and hope and perswade vs that the diuine promises haue bene fulfilled A. D. Note thirdly that not onely the Church de facto Pag. 244. hath not bene hitherto so visible as I haue sayed but also which chiefly is to be pondered the nature of the Church consisting of Professors of Christian faith is such that according to the ordinary course of Gods prouidence it cannot be altogether secret from the world at least for a long time especially for so long a time as Protestants are forced to pleade for an inuisible Church The reason of which is because the Church is bound to an outward actuall profession of faith White p. 96. Wootton pag. 190. 29. 1. first as my Aduersaries admit among the faithfull themselues in practising the rites and ceremonies of Seruice and Sacraments which may indeed be done in secret although hardly so secret as at least in continuance of time some kinde of generall notice is not giuen of it to others by one chance or other as experience hath of this present and former ages teacheth Secondly the Church is bound to another kind of actuall profession to wit before men of the world according to that of our Sauiour Let your light so shine before men Matth. 5. v. 16. that they may see your good workes and glorifie your Father which is in heauen and according to the example of the primitiue Christians who did not onely shine among themselues but were (a) Mat. 5. v. 14. the lights of the world (b) 1 Cor. 4. v. 9. being made a spectacle to the world (c) Philip. 2. v. 15 D. Thom. 2. 2. q. 3. art 2. as lightes in the world And although all the members in the Church are not bound at all times actually to shine in this manner yet so often as the notable glory of God and the good of soules necessarily requireth euery one is bound thus by wordes or workes to make profession of his faith in the sight of the world Now although Gods glory and the good of soules do not necessarily require that this or that priuate man should professe his faith at all times yet that some or other should professe is alwaies necessary both for the glory of God the good of soules for if for any notable time Isay 54. v. 1. 2. Malac. 1. v 11. Aug. orat aduers Iudaeos de vnitate Ecclesiae cap. 7. ep 48. there were no professing true Christians eminently knowne at least in generall in the world first it were a notable dishonor to God in that it should shew that all his seruants loued or feared the world more then him and that they had lesse regard to publish his honor in the world then the Diuels instruments
AND IN THE WRITINGS OF THESE MEN TOVCHING THE SCRIPTVRES SACRAMENTS CHVRCH POPE COVNCELS TRANSVBSTANTIATION IMAGES INVOCATION OF SAINTS IVSTIFICATION GOOD WORKS c. WAS THE DOCTRINE OF THE CHVRCH AND PROFESSED BY THE BISHOPS OF ROME FATHERS AND COVNCELS EXPRESSED IN THE FIRST 800 YEARES OF THIS CATALOGVE this is our obiection whereto the Replier answers that he can retort it more strongly against the Protestants c. But this is but wind and so let it passe and come we forward to the substance of his answer CHAP. XLIII 1. Whatsoeuer the Fathers of the Primitiue Church beleeued is expressed in their bookes 2. The Replier is driuen to say they held much of his religion onely implicitely What implicite faith is according to the Papists The death of Zeuxis The Fathers write that which cannot stand with Papistrie Pag. â—67 A. D. Secondly I answer that to say there be diuers points held by vs whereof no mention is made in those ancient Fathers is no good argument to proue that which we hold was not holden by them For this is Argumentum ab authoritate negatiua which argument is of no force to proue this point vnles it be first proued that those Fathers held nothing explicitè or implicitè which is not expresly to be fouÌ„d in their writings But this my aduersaries will neuer be able to proue Now on the contrary side we can shew good reasons or at least probable presumptions sufficient to proue first that they held more then is expressed in their writings Secondly that they held explicitè or implicitè the same in all points of doctrine which we hold First I say we haue reason to thinke that they held more then is expressed in their writings because since ordinarily the writings of these Fathers were not by them set out of purpose to expresse in particular euery thing that they held implicitè or explicitè concerning all matters of faith but rather were written vpon some speciall occasion it is to be thought that their writings contain only some parts of the doctrine to wit so much of it as was that requisite to be written vpon that special occasion The which is confirmed euen by experience of these our times in which although learned men do ordinarily set downe more expresly in Catechismes bookes of controuersies c what the Catholik faith is in diuers points then formerly it hath bin set downe as they haue more occasion by reason of more heresies daily arising then learned men of former ages when those heresies were not haue had Yet no learned man now adaies writeth euery thing which explicitè or implicitè he beleeueth to be the Catholick faith For euery Catholicke man beleeueth explicitè or implicitè all that is contained in Scriptures and traditions in that he beleeueth whatsoeuer was reuealed by God to the Apostles deliuered by them in word or writing to the Catholicke Church and which the Church in Scriptures and vnwritten traditions propoundeth and deliuereth to vs diuers particulars whereof are not necessary to be expresly knowne to or written by any particular learned man of any age but are alwaies preserued at least in the implicite or infolded faith of the Church the which infolded faith of the Church may and shall be vnfolded the holy Ghost still assisting and suggesting all the aforesaid reuealed truth as necessitie shall require that the truth should be in any point expresly declared which necessitie chiefly is when some new heresie ariseth oppugning particularly the truth of that point 1 HEre he sayes the Fathers named in his Catalogue might hold what the church of Rome holds though there be no mentioÌ„ therof in their writings because they might hold that which is not expresly in their writings We had thought vntil now that this had bin a plain demonstration The ancient Fathers in all their writings make no mention of diuers points of the Popish religion Ergo they held them not Or thus What religion the Fathers held that they mention in their writings But the Popish religion they mention not in their writings Ergo they held not the Popish religion But he hauing good experience that the second proposition is true denies the first and will shew either by good reasons or probable presumptions that they held more then they mention and expresse in their bookes Wherein at once he hath destroyed his Catalogue and laid his religion open to the scorne of women and children For if the Fathers in all their writings handled nothing but the cause of religion teaching expounding and defending it against Iewes Gentiles hereticks schismatickes whereby they could not but mention what they held and yet neuer mentioned diuers points of Poperie it is plaine they neuer held them But the Iesuite sayes this is Argumentum ab authoritate negatiua which is not good they might hold either explicitè or implicitè that which they haue not expressed Wherein you must marke his tergiuersation For to shew a visible Church in all ages professing openly his Romane faith that all men may see it he tenders this catalogue But when we bid him proue that the Fathers of the first 600 or 800 yeares beleeued and professed that part of his Romane faith which the Church of England reiects that it may appeare so to vs and we may see it he sayes he can shew good reasons and presumptions that they beleeued more then is expressed in their writings whereas he should shew by their WRITINGS that they held and beleeued as the Romish Church now doth because it is impossible to shew what they held but by their writings and himselfe sayes in another place We cannot haue any certaintie of things past but by the writings of those times And if he will haue his Church to be so visible in the Fathers time and those Fathers to be so eminent members thereof good reason men see it yet see it they cannot by presumptions but by their writings 2 But he sayes We haue reason to thinke that they held more then expressed in their writings forsomuch as no man writes euery thing which explicitè or implicitè he beleeues I answer though it be granted that both they and we in all our writings may omit some things not belonging to faith or religion yet many articles of faith such as our aduersaries say theirs are the deniall whereof they call schisme and damnable herersie and persecute with fire sword and gun-powder cannot but be expressed for so much as such articles are simply needfull vnto saluation and are the grounds and conclusions of all theologicall writing and discourse Secondly it is impertinent to the obiection which denies the Fathers of the first 600 yeares to haue done that which the Catalogue sayes they did professed VISIBLY as the Romane Church now doth which obiection is not satisfied by saying they might explicitè or implicitè professe that they neuer writ because no man writes all he beleeues but by shewing in their writings this
downe all with his hands and fight with Iupiter with his new termes and larger explications he coniures the old faith out of the Church His golden Vincentius hath another point to this purpose that the Repliar ouersees d Monitor c. 30 It is lawfull that those ancient articles of heauenly doctrine be dressed and filed and polished but villanie to change them villanie to maime and curtall them Let them receaue if you will euidence light distinction but withall let them hold their fulnesse integritie and proprietie This rule the Church of Rome hath not obserued but contrary thereunto it hath not onely expounded the articles of the ancient faith corruptly but also added many new articles which in the ancient Church were neuer knowne CHAP. XLVI 1 The errors broached by the later Diuines of the Church of Rome 2 Their errors maintained by that Church And their writings to good purpose alledged by the Protestants 3 How that which they speake for the Protestants is shifted off 5 One reason why we alledge their sayings 6 That which is said in excuse of their disagreement answered A. D. The second obiection My Aduersaries may secondly obiect that all this notwithstanding it cannot be denied Pag. 274. but that in particular mens writings set out in these latter ages there haue bene are found diuers errors cōtrary to the former faith of the Fathers To iustifie the truth of this obiection it seemeth that M. White hath with great paines raked together all the riffe-raffe and odde opinions he could finde in any particular Catholicke Authors as thinking be like this way to discredit the Catholicke cause But he is very shallow witted if hee thinke by this meanes to ouerthrow or shake the vniuersall faith of the Catholicke Church Introduct quest 3. For as I noted in the Introduction the Catholicke Church doth not binde her faith vpon any priuate Doctors opinion nor indeed do those priuate Doctors deliuer their said opinions as any points of their owne or other mens faith euen then when in these their priuate opinions they hold this or that matter to pertaine to faith which other men thinke not to pertaine to faith but rather submit all their opinions as hereticall Doctors which haue no faith but priuate opinions wil not to the faith iudgement and censure of the Catholicke Church being also ready to renounce any of their opinions whensoeuer by lawfull definitiue sentence of the present Pastours or otherwise they may perceiue them to be contrary to the ancient faith of the Church Hence M. White may see how vainely he hath spent his time in seeking the sinkes and sweeping together so many odde sentences of some Catholicke Authors as here and there he noteth in his writings the which haue no more force against the sincere vnity of doctrine of faith maintained by the authority of our Church then that heape of filth and ordure of ill life of some particular men which he hath scraped together doth proue against the sanctitie of the profession of the Catholicke Church And it is maruaile that the man hath so little wit as to labour so much either in shewing the contrariety of opinions among Catholickes which altogether is impertinent to the vnity of their faith or in discouering the faults of some leude persons which is altogether impertinent to the sanctity of the profession of the Church especially when if he did but looke into the bosome of his owne Protestant congregation and particularly into the life and doctrine of the very primitiue parents thereof he may finde it no lesse but all circumstances considered namely of the smalnesse of the number of men and the little space of time since it came into the world c. far more faulty in either kinde And so he ought to haue bene affraid least when he had said all against Catholickes that his blind zeale or malice could deuise that the shame would be returned so much the more against his Euangelicall brethren some of which as Luther confesseth haue bene for their ill liues far worse then euen themselues were when they were Papists and as I may boldly say for odde errors absurd and impious opinions far worse then any Papists Which their absurd and impious opinions who list to reade he may finde set downe in Caluino-Turcismo and other Authors See Caluino-Turcismus and may oppose them to these which M. White relateth with this aduantage that whereas if by ignorance or passion some Catholicke writers hold any vnfit opinions yet actually or virtually they submit them to the faith and censure of the Church and so are not to be thought obstinately to erre in faith but in priuate opinion about some matter not sufficiently knowne to them to be contrary to the faith of the Catholicke Church But Protestant Doctors who haue no other faith but their owne firmely setled opinion gathered as it seemeth to them out of Scripture who also will not neither actually nor virtually submit these their opinions to the faith and censure of any Church ours or their owne may by their erronious opinions obstinately mainteined against the Church be conuinced of so many absurd and impious obstinate errors in faith as they haue absurd and impious opinions grounded as it seemeth to them vpon Scriptures White p. 349. But it seemeth M. White regardeth not what may be obiected against his brethren so that he may say something against vs and therefore in one place he doth in effect vrge this argument against vs If the ancient Catholicke truth did continue among vs in all points then there could not be among our Doctors variety of opinions in any point no more then there is in the doctrine of the blessed Trinity or Incarnation I answer first that this may better be vrged against the Protestants who as appeareth in Caluino-Turcismo haue not onely vncertainty and variety of opinions in other points but euen about the doctrine of the blessed Trinity and Incarnation neither haue they any such sufficient meanes as we haue to take away this variety of opinions Secondly I answer that the variety of opinions which is among our Doctors either is not in matters pertaining to faith or if the matter pertaine to faith the varietie is not in the substance of the point but in some circumstance which may be held this or other waies without preiudice to faith or if in some rare case any priuate Doctors hold opinion against the substance or circumstance so far as pertaineth to faith this is in ignorance and with readines to put away this opinion so soone as they vnderstand the contrary to pertaine to faith by some euident proofe of Scripture or tradition or by declaration of the present Church which is an argument that although they erre in opinion yet they erre not in implicite beleefe euen of the very point wherein through ignorance they do erre in opinion Now the reason why this ignorance and consequently variety of opinion may
vbi sup Fourthly the Feast of the Conception which imports she was without sinne is celebrated 5 Vasq vbi sup In which regard sayes Vasquez it would seeme verie strange to me if the Church should euer define she was conceiued in sinne when by her authoritie she hath alreadie commaunded the Feast of the Conception in token she was not conceiued in sinne and the common consent of Catholicks both vulgar and Diuines contending for the immaculate conception without sinne Suarez q Vbi sup prop. 4. sayes Sixtus Quartus did much fauour it whose decree the Councell of Trent approues and the whole Church doth vehemently leane to it that now the contrarie can haue either none at all or no firme or euident foundation But the truth is it is fully defined in the Councell of Basill Hitherto r Sess 36. sayes the Councell a difficult question hath bene made touching the Conception of the glorious Virgin We hauing diligently seene and examined the reasons define and declare that the doctrine which teaches her neuer to haue bene actually subiect to sinne but alwayes free from it and from all actuall sinne to be consonant to the religion OF THE CHVRCH AND CATHOLICKE DOCTRINE and that it shall be lawfull for no man hereafter to teach the contrarie moreouer we renew the ordinance made for the celebrating of this holy conception on the 6. of the Ides of December Whereby we see how false it is that it is not held as a point of faith For building themselues vpon this decree and vpon Å¿ Cum Praeexcelsa Graue nimis in extrau comm another of Sixtus Quartus whereto the t Sess 5. §. Declarat tamen Councell of Trent manifestly giues way by confirming the conceit u Almain Clictouae Titlem reported by Vasq Suar. vbi sup the forwarder sort of our aduersaries affirme it resolutely to be a point of faith defined by the Church But whether it be true or no that the faith of their Church is nothing but what this froward generation will confesse to be defined by the Pope by this it is plaine that touching this point the Pastors and Doctors and people of the Romane church differ from antiquitie Vasquez w Communis consensus Catholicorum non solùm imperiti vulgi sed etiam Doctorum Theolâ—gorum pro immaculata conceptione pugnat Vasq vbi sup sayes expresly Not onely that vnskilfull vulgar but the Doctors and Diuines and all Catholickes with one consent fight for the immaculate conception What immodestie is it now to denie that to be the Churches faith which is thus holden and to say it is not diligently digested that is thus concocted in the conceits not onely of the vulgar but of the Doctors and Diuines and all Catholickes with one consent in the Church of Rome CHAP. L. 1. Touching Seruice and Prayer in an vnknowne language 2. The Text of 1. Cor. 14. expounded and defended against Bellarmine 7. The ancient Church vsed prayer in a knowne language A. D. Secondly touching Latin Seruice although M. White say as it is easie to say that all antiquitie is against vs in this point Pag. 279. White p. 343. yet he will neuer be able to proue solidely that the ancient Church did condemne this our practise The words of the Apostle which he alledgeth proue nothing to the purpose as is shewed by Bellarmine and as for other authors which he citeth they do not disallow this this our practise Bellar. l. 2. de verb. Del. c 16. or account it vnlawfull whereas both by reason and authoritie our authors shew it to be both lawfull and laudable See Bellarmine lib. 2. de verbo Dei cap. 15. 1 THe vse of the Church of Rome to haue the publicke Seruice and Prayers and ministration of Sacraments in an vnknowne tongue is well enough knowne This I affirmed to be against antiquitie and a point wherein they haue altered the faith of the ancient Church And first I alledged the words of Saint Paul then the testimonie and confession of other Ecclesiasticall writers to all which he answers nothing but referres me to Bellarmine In which absurd course if I would imitate him I might also referre him to such as haue answered Bellarmine and the reader that expected to see the thing tried betweene vs should be deluded Neuerthelesse I will doe my best to bring this broode of darknesse to the light and euery thing that I haue said to the triall that the truth may appeare and the shame be theirs that turne their backes 2 First he sayes I will neuer be able soundly to proue that the auncient Church condemned this their practise I answer the Apostle condemnes it in the words a 1. Cor. 14.7 alledged If an instrument of musicke make no distinction in the sound how shall it be knowne what is piped or harped So likewise you vnlesse by the language you vtter words that haue signification how shall it be vnderstood what is spoken for you shall speake in the aire I will pray and sing with the spirit and I will pray and sing with the vnderstanding also Else when thou blessest with the Spirit how shall he that occupies the roome of the vnlearned say Amen at thy giuing of thankes seeing he knowes not what thou sayest I had rather in the Church to speake fiue words with my vnderstanding that I might also instruct others then a thousand words in a strange tongue No enemie that the Church of Rome hath can more fully condemne Seruice in an vnknowne language nor in more effectuall termes speake against it For be requires all that which is done in the Church be it Exhortation Prophecie Singing Expounding or Praying to be done in a language that the people present vnderstands and rebukes the contrary All that the Replier sayes hereto is that Bellarmine hath shewed these words proue nothing Which is his policie to auoide the scanning of them for he knowes all the learned of his side be so deuided in their answer to these words that whatsoeuer he should say would fall out to be contrary to that which others affirme For the auoiding of which inconuenience he referres vs to Bellarmine as if in him we should find a iust answer and full satisfaction But he abuses the Reader as shall plainly appeare by propounding the summe and substance of all that Bellarmine sayes to the place First he sayeth It is certaine the Apostle in a great part of this chapter speakes not of the reading of the Scripture nor concerning the Seruice of the Church but of certaine spirituall exhortations and conferences then vsed Touching this point how true or false soeuer it be I will not greatly stand with him but then it is as certaine that in a great part of this Chapter he speakes of Church-seruice and prayers and of reading the Scripture as well as of spirituall conferences and collations So his patron Gretser that hath lately vndertaken to defend all his
* Jtaque ne in posteruÌ„ quidem Lipsi rosas ogita sesamam aut papauer sed spinas si as aâ—â—ynthium acetuÌ„ Lips const 1.10 I must craue the readers patience if contrarie to my vsuall course he finde me in this passage something sharpe because M. Whites outrages are such as require more then an ordinarie sharp reprehension Let him therefore take the Gun roome or if he will the n Lucian Iupit Tragoe 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 cart where in old time they vsed to raile freeliest I am indifferent what he say hauing propounded to my selfe to answer not his scurrilitie but his Diuinitie though he keepe so good promise in this he threatens and his insolencies both in railing and bragging be such that it were able to dissolue into some passion or other the best patience that an aduersary can haue And had he as well performed the grosse vntruths he vndertakes to shew as he hath his sharpnesse which he promises he might haue gone for a good pay-master but to raile and run away is womens fight If he would haue men to thinke my outrages are such as he sayes he should haue expressed some of them and quoted the pages of my booke where the reader might see them which when he doth not nor cannot do the reader may suspect he sayes this to make way for his owne railing For the Booke it selfe will testifie what I haue done better then any thing I can say here wherein there are I denie not many sharp and bitter speeches against the abuses of the Church of Rome but they are not mine but the Papists whom being vrged thereunto I alledge it is one of the things that hath alwaies made me haue a base opinion of our aduersaries that these foule tales of their Church being blabbed out by themselues yet they would neuer giue vs leaue to report them againe or mention them Other outrage or railing then this I haue vsed none nor neuer did in all my conflicts with theÌ„ neither is it my maner to practise or defend it but by this my last will testament I bequeath it in legacie to himselfe and o Namely to D. Harding StapletoÌ„ Sanders Parsons Euans Surius Feuardentius Gret ferus I'acenius his Cleargie and other his consorts whose spirit I haue reasonably tasted these many yeares together p Iude v 9. The Angell disputing with the Diuell about the bodie of Moses durst not blame him with reuiling speeches but bad the Lord rebuke him According to which example I wish there were lesse bitternesse and more going to the argument in their writings For mine owne part q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Isid Pelus pag. 453. I thinke it not so meete to speake euery thing that my aduersarie deserues to heare as to let nothing passe me that becomes not my selfe CHAP. II. 1. The Papists trampling of the Scriptures and preferring their Church 2. The Church of Rome touched in her honestie and reported to be a whore The conditions of a whore Pag. 22. A. D. First in his epistle Dedicatorie in which he speaketh not to simple men but to his most reuerend Fathers in God Toby the Archbishop of Yorke his Grace Primate and Metropolitan of England and to George Lord Bishop of Chester his very good Lords he affirmeth to our disgrace that all our speech is of the Church no mention of the Scriptures or God our Father but of our Mother the Church the which he confirmeth with a scurrilous comparison Much like saith he as they write of certaine Ethiopians that by reason they vse no mariage but promiscuously companie together it commeth that the children follow the mother the fathers name is in no request but the mother goeth away with all the reputation Thus he Now how lowd and lewd an vntruth this is I referre to the iudgement of any man almost neuer so simple supposing he haue had any ordinarie conuersation with Catholickes or be in a meane measure acquainted with their words and writings For what man is so simple who cannot discerne this to be euidently contrarie to our ordinarie practise and common speech and contrarie to our profession and publicke doctrine of faith And is it then possible that a Minister whose name is White should haue a face so blacke as without blushing so soberly to asseuere such a notorious vntruth especially in the sight or hearing of those his good Lords and reuerend Fathers in God Surely it is maruell that those his reuerend Fathers or some for them did not examine and marke this and other his grosse vntruths or marking them that they would for their credits sake suffer them to passe especially twice to the print And much more maruell it is that in stead of reproouing the man for such his shamefull vntruths which had beene the dutie of reuerend Fathers in God they would permit him to vse their names in the forefront or beginning of his booke by which men may suppose that they by their authoritie doe canonize or at least giue countenance to so many his grosse errors and vntruths as are found in this his booke 1 THe first example of my outrages and insinceritie is in those words of the epistle Dedicatorie All their speech is of the Church no mention of the Scriptures or God our Father but of our mother the Church c. Wherein if there be any trespasse yet he shewes it but meanly by saying it is a lewd and lowd vntruth and referring the matter to such as are acquainted with Catholickes and their writings For this and the railing that followes and his emptie maruelling at the BB. that would permit me to say so purges not Papists from the imputations but charges them deeper For S. Chrysostome sayes that a 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hom 22. Rom. when a mans aduersarie fals to scolding it is a signe he is guiltie And if the truth must be tried by the words and writings of his Catholickes then the matter will go well enough on M. Whites side For how should the coÌ„moÌ„ people of whoÌ„ I properly spake talk of the Scripture which they know not b THE WAY § 2. n. 3. See Staplet relect pag. 535. which they are forbidden to reade c THE WAY § 1. n. 3. which they must beleeue containes the least part of that which belongs to their faith The Rhemists d Annot. Luc. 12 11. teach lay Catholickes when any of them are called before the commission to answer that he is a Catholicke man and that he will liue and die in that faith which the Catholicke Church teaches and this Church can giue them a reason of all the things which they demand of him and he that answers thus they say saith enough and defends himselfe sufficiently Here we see all their speech is of the Church no mention of the Scriptures And he that dwels among them or hath occasion to discourse with them of religion shall finde the truth
may be said This I must or I may beleeue vpon the tradition and authority of the Church though it be not any way reuealed in the Scripture The which assertion of ours hath 2. parts the one affirmatiue that the Scripture alone and absolutely considered in it owne Latitude and extent containeth all things belonging to faith without defect This is proued a Digr 3. 1 2. in the way The other Negatiue that the Churches authoritie is neither needfull nor able to supply any necessary or new point of faith that is not contained in the Scripture I deny it not to be ordinarily a necessary condition for the knowing and beleeuing that which the Scripture reueales for b Ro. 10.14 How shall they heare that they may beleeue without a Preacher c Act. 8.31 How can we vnderstand except we haue a guide d Mal 3.7 for the Priests lips should preserue knowledge and at his mouth they should seeke the Law for he is the Messenger of the Lord of hoasts I onely deny it to be the rule and foundation of faith or so much as the last infallible and cleare ground whereupon the beleeuer in any point that he beleeues restes himselfe The which to hold proportion with the Iesuit in this place I onely proue by the Papists owne principles to wit that the proposition of the Church is e Grego Val. tom 3. disp 1. q. 1. punct 1. pag. 32. §. sit nunc Sexta neither the last and clearest motiue whereupon our faith staies but there are higher and clearer then it which can be nothing but the immediate supernaturall light of the verities beleeued themselues shining vpon our hearts from the Scripture whereunto the light of Church authority when it hath reuealed the doctrine contained in Scripture to vs giues place as all lesser lights do when a greater begins to shine 2 Secondly I answer that from this Principle of ours Nothing may be beleeued but what is set downe in Scripture expressely or may be gathered from thence by good consequence it doth not follow that a particular man as Luther or White cannot beleeue the promises of Gods speciall mercie touching his owne saluation because though Luther or Whites name be not expressely set downe in the promise yet that which is set downe is so offered to vs that being penitent beleeuers and iustified and standing in grace whereof there is an infallible assurance f THE WAIâ— Digr 43. by our aduersaries owne confession we may conclude our owne particular Saluation from thence and must indeuour to beleeue it This part of my answer affirmes 2. things First that a penitent sinner iustified and eleuated into the state of grace may infallibly proue or gather the assurance of his Saluation by good consequence from the Scripture Secondly that this assurance thus to be gathered appertaines to those verities which are beleeued by the habite of faith I do not say any man can at all times so firmely and without feare of the contrary beleeue his owne reconciliation with God as he can the first articles of faith that are expressely and immediately reuealed I onely affirme that he beleeues it by the habite of supernaturall faith and is bound to endeuour and vse the meanes that he may beleeue it 3 The first point I haue purposely shewed g Digr 40. n. 39. 4â— n. 10. in the THE WAIE and confirmed by the confession of diuers of our Aduersaries whither I referre the Iesuit that he may see how and in what manner this assurance is gathered Onely I will here admonish the reader that if the penitent beleeuer could not by necessary consequence of Scripture and true application of the generall promises of the Gospell to his owne particular person conclude his saluation he were in no wise bound to beleeue it but now when he hath receiued the Testimony of Gods Spirit within him crying Abba Father the power of the same Spirit in his body and soule renuing him and producing the effectes of sauing grace the Faith of Christ whereby he giues consent to the Gospell the life of Christ whereby he liues not himselfe but Christ liues in him the power of his death whereby he dies to the world and sinne when finally in truth and conscience he performes all the conditions that the Scripture requires and feeles within him those very signes whereby the Gospell describes the elect it may not be doubted but by good consequence both in matter and forme he may conclude his owne saluation It is no where written in the Bible that Luther or Caluine shall rise at the last day yet the Reply will allow them to beleeue it by consequence from that which is written All men shall rise It is no where written that this Iesuite shall come into Iudgement and giue an account of this his faith and the waies wherein he walkes yet I presume he beleeues it by faith in that by consequence it necessarily followes of that Article He shall come to iudge the quicke and the dead In the same manner a penitent sinner examining himselfe concludes his owne saluation from the Scripture that sayes h Marc. 16.16 Rom. 10.9 Euery one that repents and beleeues shall be saued Therefore if there be any certainty of a mans owne repentance of his being in Grace of the testimony of Gods Spirit and i Paret Lombarâ—um nec vâ—luâ—sse nec doâ—â—isse vt doâ—erentur Christian de peccatorum remissione gratia Dei vita aeterna perpetuo dubitare aut diffidere quemad modum re vera nec vllus Orthodoxus sani iudicij Ecclesiastes inter Pontificios quod equidem sciam vnquam illud docuit Mart. Eisengren defens Concil Trid. de cert grat p. 216. fie vpon that mouth that will say there is none when the Scripture k 2. Co. 13.5 biddes vs Try our selues touching them it must needes be yeelded that there is a certainty likewise of his saluation 4 The second point that the remission of our sinnes and eternall life is beleeued by Faith is cleare vpon 4. points 1. because in the Creed those 2. Articles are made the obiect of Faith therefore the penitent sinner applies them to himselfe by the same habit 2. l Aliqui Catholici existimarunt posse vnumquemque credete fide diuina sine peculiari reuelatione dimissa sibi esse peccata Vasqu 12. disp 200. n. 5. Many learned Papists confesse so much Fisher of Rochester m Roffenf opusc de fid miserecord dei axiom 10. If we will enter into heauen we must not come with a double heart or wauering Faith but with that which is ALTOGETHER VNDOVBTING and MOST CERTAINE For to doubting minds there is no way open Gropper and the Diuines of Collen n Antididag c. de iustif §. proditum est p. 29. We are iustified by Faith whereby WITHOVT DOVBTING we firmely beleeue that our sinnes who are truely penitent are forgiuen vs for Christ
for him The l Heb. 11.36 Scripture reports how many of the children of God were tried by mocking and scourging by bonds and prisonment they were stoned hewen apeeces tempted they wandered vp and downe destitute and afflicted All which the Apostle saies they did by faith and confidence of the Promises and yet their assurance was no other nor otherwise begotten then the ordinary assurance of all Gods children which is concluded by ioyning the light of their conscience kindled by the holy Ghost to the immediate light of the conditions reuealed in the Scriptures 5 That which our Aduersaries assigne to be the cause why a man cannot be sure of his saluation because no man is sure of his Perseuerance is easily answered by affirming likewise that the grace of perseuerance with other gifts is giuen all the elect in their iustification For S. Paule m Rom. 8.38 sayes he was certaine of it and what he in that place auouches of himselfe belongs to others as well as himselfe by the confession of n Staplet de iustif l. 9. c. 13. Tolet. in Rom. 8. v. vlt. our strongest aduersaries and he auouches not onely that Gods loue to him but more properly that his loue to God shall neuer faile o Perer. in Ro. 5. d 12. n. 59. The Iesuit also confesses it to be the doctrine of p De Bono perseuerant Saint Austine that grace is giuen by Christ whereby not onely man may perseuere but â—â—lso that he shall perseuere q 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Chrysost hom 9. in Rom. The fauorits of Princes are aduanced to honour and riches but their preseuerance therein is vncertaine But it is not so with the grace of God bestowed in Iustification and therefore we may beleeue as well our Perseuerance as our Grace And if the iustified be certaine of the grace of Iustification that he hath then may he be certaine and well assured of his Perseuerance because it is a grace purchased vs by Christ and included in that Peace which the iustified by faith haue with God through him or else let him shew that can where any firme and setled peace of minde is where there is vncertainty and doubtfulnesse touching Perseuerance r Concil Trid. sess 6. can 22. Vega pro Concil l. 12. cap. 23. Barth Mediâ— 12. qu. 109. art 10. ad 3. Greg. de Valent. tom 2. pag. 849. c. And that it is in the power of a iustified man with Gods helpe to perseuere in grace to the end is defined by the Trent Councell and holden to be the doctrine of all Catholikes which power a 1. Pet. 5.1 Saint Peter also testifies to be reduced into act by the almightie power of God keeping him * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as with a garrison through faith to saluation according to that of b Ier. 32.40 the Prophet I will put my feare into their hearts that they shall not depart from me Which ouerthrowes all them that make the vncertaintie of Perseuerance a reason against the certainty of saluation CHAP. XVII Concerning points Fundamentall and not Fundamentall The distinction expounded and defended 4. Who shall iudge what is Fundamentall and what not A iest at the election of Pope Leo the tenth A. D. * White p. 100. M. White by the foundation or points fundamentall Pag 66. vnderstandeth all truthes which are necessary for the saluation of all men but this definition is not found in * Act. 4.12 1. Cor. 3.11 Ephes 2.19 the texts of Scripture cited by him in the margent Neither doth it helpe the matter for the question may still be how many and which truthes those be which be necessarie The which questioÌ„ if we leaue to be determined by euerie mans priuate spirit or particular iudgement we shall either haue no point of faith to be accouÌ„ted a point fundamentall in regard the ignorance of some may be such that they may thinke a man may be saued by morall good life although through ignorance he beleeue nothing at all or else we may haue so many fundamentall points of faith as it shall please euerie braine-sicke fellow to hold to be necessary to saluation The which how great confusion it will breed in the Church euery man of meane capacity may easily see And therfore euery man ought to see how necessary it is that the determinatioÌ„ of this necessary question be not left to the priuate spirit or particular iudgement of this or that man but to the iudgement of the Catholike Church accounting with S. Austine all those points which are diligently digested and confirmed by full authority of the same Church to be fundameÌ„tall or to pertaine to the foundation and consequently to be such as must necessarily be beleeued actually or vertually by all men and such as may not doubtfully be disputed of and much lesse rashly and obstinately be denied by any man 1 OVr doctrine is that in the things reuealed in the Scripture and belonging to the obiect of faith there is a difference whereby some are more necessary to be knowne and without error to be vnderstood then othersome For though it be lawfull for no man either to misbeleeue or obstinately not to beleeue any thing that is writteÌ„ yet the simple ignorance or error in many things hinders not saluation nor the substance of Faith but either a priuate man or a whole particular Church thus ignorant or erring either inuincibly or not affectedly and obstinately in such things and yet holding others aright hath sauing faith and is in the state of grace This difference of things arises from 3. respects First of the commandement enioyning and vrging the knowledge of one thing more then the knowledge of another as for example the knowledge of Christ crucified more then the knowledge of his Genealogy for though both be reuealed alike yet not both vnder the like penalty Secondly of the nature and condition of the things when this doth more properly and necessarilie belong to saluation then that for without the knowledge of story of Gedeon I may be saued but without the knowledge of Christs nature and office I cannot Thirdly of their vse WheÌ„ one thing is the foundatioÌ„ and ground that giues light and subsistence to another as the knowledge of Christs office merits brings light to the vnderstanding of the doctrine touching our owne vnworthinesse c. Out of these respects and degrees of things that are beleeued as they stand in order one to another and in vse to vs we call some FVNDAMENTALL and some NOT FVNDAMENTALL not with relation to our faith so much as to our knowledge in as much as it is daÌ„gerous to misdoubt the truth of any thing that is reuealed to us if it were but a 2. Sam. 24.9 1. Chro. 21.5 Whether the number of the children of Israell able to beare armes when Dauid numbred them were 1500000 though no man will say an error or ignorance in this matter were
Graffius a Friar lately writing from Capua i Decis aurear l. 2. c. 8. nu 16. that euery Christian is not bound to know the articles of faith explicitely but only Cleargy meÌ„ I cited Antonine an Archbish and a Saint in the Church of Rome k Sum. mor. part 1. tit 5. c 2. §. 1. who reporting the tale of the Colliar first saies that a great Doctor being demanded what he beleeued answered as the Church and being further demanded what the Church beleeued answered that it beleeued the articles contained in the Creed And then falles to commending that faith which shewes that he thought it was the entirest beleeuing eueÌ„ of the Creed to do it by implicite faith I alledged Pighius and Hosius the Cardinall who l Pigh hier l. 1. c. 5. Hos cont Brent l. 3 p. 146 in the places cited affirme that it is the safest way to hold a mans selfe to the faith of the Church though it should erre in the faith And that this Colliars faith is more safe then any meditation or exercise in the Scripture And whosoeuer shall view the places Hosius especially shall well perceiue that I speake the truth which I will yet iustifie further by shewing Catholicke Diuines as my aduersaries stiles a packe of heretikes to teach that it is sufficient by this implicite faith to beleeue euen the principall articles of faith contained in the Creed m Tract de fid William the B. of Paris n L. 3. tract 3. c. 1. qu. 5. Altisiodorensis o V. Fides nu 1. Summa Rosella and others p refeâ—t D. Ban. 22. qu. 2. art 8. § Dubitatur secundo hold that it is not necessary to beleeue any article of faith expressely but it is enough to beleeue all that our mother the Church beleeues and holds So that if a man were demanded whether Christ were borne of the Virgine and whether there were one God and 3. Persons he might sufficiently answer I cannot tell but I beleeue as the Church holds and this faith would iustifie and saue him The Iesuits q Lorin in Act. Apost p. 438. 1. b. Grego de Valent. tom 3. disp 1. qu. 2. punct 4. pag. 311. A. report that it is the opinion of many Authors in the Church of Rome that the explicite faith of Christ as he is true God and man and the Redeemer of mankinde euen after the sufficient publishing of the Gospell is not necessary necessitate medij either for Iustification or saluation and he cites Richardus Mediauillanus Vega and Soto Which is true for these are Vegaes expresse words r Pro. Concil TrideÌ„t l. 6. c. 15. p. 92. edit Colon 1572. It is to be affirmed that men are so iustified by the faith of the Mediator that yet the vnfolded faith neither of this article nor of any other must be thought requisite vnto iustice because the explicite faith of other articles belonging either to Speculation or morall life suffices thereunto and this is it which our Diuines commonly teach when they say the Faith of one mediator either vnfolded or infolded is enough for iustificatioÌ„ neither can they hold otherwise that thinke as Å¿ Reported before c. 22. n. 1. many in the Romane Church do the Gentiles without any knowledge of Christ or supernaturall faith at all may be saued 5 I know well enough some of our aduersaries speake otherwise and seeme to require a more vnfolded faith whose doctrine I will not conceale t Eymeric part 1. q. 7. n. 8 The Directorie of the Inquisitors out of u 22. qu. 2. art 5. Aquinas saies A man is bound explicitely to beleeue the articles of faith but other points of faith onely implicitely That which * D. Bann vbi sup Alexand Pezant 22. q. 2. art 8. disp 1. Greg. Val. tom 3. disp 1. qu. 2. punct 3. 4. 5. Vasqu 12. disp 121. others speake more at large First * These are the Propositions of Pezantius a Iesuite Schoolman that in the state both afore and after sinne it was necessary for all of yeares of discretion both by the command and necessity of the meanes to beleeue some supernaturall thing by explicite faith Secondly The things thus to be beleeued are all points needfull for the ordering of their life as to beleeue there is a God and his diuine prouidence and the immortality of the soule that he is the Creator Rewarder and Gouernor of all Thirdly that now in the state of the Gospell it is also necessary to beleeue in Christ as the Redeemer of mankinde by faith explicite Fourthly by the Commandement all are bound to beleeue explicately the Mysterie of the Incarnation and the Trinitie the principall articles of faith contained in the Creed which by themselues pertaine to the substance of faith and some other things which tend to direct them in working aright But what those articles of the Creed are which thus belong to the substance of faith Pezant saies the Doctors are not agreed but he laies downe his owne iudgement that they are the articles touching the Vnitie Essence and Trinitie of the Persons in the Godhead touching the Creation the Remission of sinnes Eternall life the Natiuitie Passion Resurrection and Second comming of Christ the Sacraments of Baptisme Eucharist and Confession the precepts also of Faith Hope and Charity the ten Commandements and Praiers deliuered in the Catechisme It is also probable he saies that all good Catholickes should beleeue explicitely the virginity of Mary that they may worship her but it is certain that the article touching the Church that there is but one congregation thereof which is of the faithfull * Were you there Sir that obey the Pope Christs Vicar must be beleeued explicitely and some say also certaine traditions touching the signe of the Crosse and the adoration of Saints and Images This is the largest and most particular explication that I finde in any of them touching the things that all men vnlearned as well as learned are bound either by Commandement or absolute necessity to beleeue by faith explicite Yea the Scholiast vpon the Directory of the Inquisition x Pag. 60. requires the articles of faith to be gotten perfectly without Booke which the Iesuits y Grego Val. p. 320. c Pezant pag. 505. d. deny But how shall I know this is the doctrine of their Church how will my aduersary assure me that other Diuines in his Church as Catholicke as these are of the same minde that I might truely say I mistooke them when I said they vtterly refuse knowledge and canonize the Colliar If they would hold them euery where and constantly to this it were a good step to an end in this controuersie and our doctrine were iustified that particular knowledge is to be ioyned with the assent of faith and we must not so beleeue the Church but that we be able also in some measure to conceiue and penetrate the things themselues If my
against himselfe To the second that my opinion for the knowledge of all points of faith one as well as another is intollerable because it is impossible for vnlearned men to get expresse knowledge of all points contained in Scripture I answer that my words alleadged do not affirme the necessity of knowing all things reuealed as that Iacob had a lame leg or Abraham two wiues but all points of our faith expounding faith not as he doth for euery thing that is reuealed but of the substantiall articles of faith which the vnlearnedst that are may learne and vnderstand if they will vse the Ministry of the Church and exercise their wits therin as the word requires x The story may be seene inâ— Acts and Monum of the Ch. The Church of Rome had experience of this at the sacking of Mirandula Chabriers where not the elder sort alone but the very children of lay men whom vnmercifully they assassinated and butchered were found in knowledge to parallel the Doctors that examined them And Iustine against Trypho y Dial. cum Tryph. sayes of his time that such as could no letter on the booke vnderstood all the mysteries of faith And this is manifest by the places of Chrysostome Theodorit and Eusebius following My aduersary therefore must hold him to that obiect of faith that I speake of and then shew it is impossible to be apprehended which he cannot do And whereas he sayes He graunts and neuer did deny but there are some points necessary to be particularly knowne of all sorts wherein implicite beleefe doth not suffice but expresse particular knowledge is required by Catholicke Diuines I answer that when I spake against implicite faith demanding To what purpose should God propound all the points of our faith one as well as another vnlesse his will were that we should learne them all I knew not what my aduersary would grant or deny but hauing shewed that the Colliars faith was canonized by no small fooles in his Church and commended for sufficient in all points I vsed this reason against it which I confirmed by a text of Scripture and a speech of Saint Austine And if my aduersary conuinced thereby relinquish that rude opinion requiring expresse particular knowledge at least in some points if not Necessitate medij yet Necessitate praecepti this to requite his kindnesse to M. Wootton I gratefully accept and wish him that when he writes againe he will ingenuously expresse what those his some points are and how far foorth the commandement of faith ties vs to know them For these things may be so expounded that what in words is granted in effect shall be denied and then the Pope may commend his towardlinesse z Nub. as the woman doth her daughter in Aristophanes * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 A goodly sparke with a tongue that will strike on both sides 10 And whether he meane this or that yet my report that the Church of Rome vtterly refuses knowledge and that the Colliars faith is canonized for the Papists Creed should not haue bene called a grosse vntruth vntill my reasons whereuppon I grounded it had bene answered or at least mentioned but that it is a priuiledge and speciall indulgence that my aduersary hath obtained to reply without making any answer For is not the Colliars faith so reported and commended by the Authors whom I cited that any may fee they allowed it in all points whatsoeuer whether there were means to know them or no means doth not Staphylus a By this faith of the Colliar euery vnlearned man may try the spirits of men whether they be of God or no By this faith he may resist the Diuell and iudge the true interpretation from the false â—iscerne the Catholicke from the hereticall Minister the true doctrine from the forged Fred. Staphyl apol pag. 53. make it the best kind of faith that is and the rest whom I quoted in the margent propose it as the best forme of beleeuing any thing whatsoeuer and yet the Iesuite replies as if they allowed it onely in some few points so far as we nether know nor haue sufficient meanes to know them But his owne words immediately following in defence of this faith touching such things that in this generall action is infolded a particular or implicite beleefe of all points in asmuch as a generall includeth all particulars and beleeuing the Church disposes the minde c. bewraies that he holds the same thing that I obiected For this is the very reason that the grossest maintainers of implicite faith vse to defend it against them that require the knowledge questioned 11 To his third argument That faith and knowledge are 2. distinct things therefore there may be true faith without any distinct knowledge of the things beleeued I answer that the knowledge which I require is not of the essence and reason of the things beleeued but of their proposition and that concerning them which is reuealed as I haue distinguished and therefore I deny the consequence For though such knowledge be not faith but a habit distinct from it yet it concurres to the habit of faith in as much as no man can assent to that whereof he neuer heard for b Ro. 10.14 how shall they beleeue in him of whom they haue not heard The knowledge that hath no ingredience into faith is the knowledge of that which is not reuealed for faith not onely goes before such knowledge but also vtterly repels it neuer admitting any penetration into Gods secret mysteries for c 1. Cor. 2.9 the things which the eye hath not seene nor the eare heard nor can enter into the heart of man hath God prepared for them that loue him And in this sence all the texts of Scripture and places of the Fathers quoted by my aduersary against knowledge are vnderstood and so I answer his last argument For it was the constant and vniforme doctrine of the ancient Church that how soeuer faith apprehends mysteries not to be inquired into yet the proposition and doctrine of all the articles of faith must distinctly be conceaued that a man be able to vnderstand what they are Saint Chrysostome d Hom. 16. in Ioh. rebuking this ignorance proceedes into this discourse which plainely shewes that he was of this minde We beleeue saith he In the Father and the Sonne and the holy Ghost The resurrection of our bodies and euerlasting life If a Gentile aske you who is this Father who is this Sonne this holy Ghost are there 3. Gods what would you say to this what answer would you make how would you dissolue his obiections And when you should stand dumbe to these things suppose he should bring in another question touching the resurrection whether you should rise againe in this or in another bodie if he should demaund why Christ came in the flesh rather at this time then in the former ages what if he should pose vs in such and
Scripture Bellarmine g Bell. de verb. Dei lib. 4. c. 1. The name of tradition is applied by Diuines to signifie onely vnwritten doctrine Alphonsus h Alphons à Castr adu haer lib 1. c. 5. This is to be laid for a most sound foundation that the traditions of the vniuersall Church and the determinations thereof in things concerning faith are of no lesse authority then the sacred Scripture it selfe though there be no Scripture to proue them Hessels of Louan i Hessel expli symb c. 69. p. 38. The Apostles neuer intended by their writing to commit to writing the whole doctrine of faith but as necessity vrged them what in their absence they could not teach that they committed to writing Costerus the Iesuite k Coster enchirid p. 43. It was neuer the mind of Christ either to commit his mysteries to parchment or that his Church should depend on paper writings Lindane l Lind. panopl. pag. 4. We Catholickes teach that Christians are to beleeue many things which are to be acknowledged for Gods word that are not contained in the Scripture and many things finally to be receiued with the same authoritie wherewith those doctrines of faith are receiued which are contained in holy writ Rodericus Delgado m Roderic dosm de autor Script l. vlt. p. 63 Albeit these things are not found written in the Bible yet they must no lesse be obserued by the godly that they may fulfill the precepts and firmely beleeue the mysteries of the heauenly faith Doctor Stapleton n Staplet princip doctr l. 12. cap. 5. There both were among the Iewes and are among vs very many things religiously performed in the worship of God and also necessary to saluation and necessarily to be beleeued which yet are not comprehended in the Scriptures but are approued or commended to vs ONELY by the authority of the Church Gregory of Valentia o Valent. tom 3. p. 258. D. All the controuersie is whether the Apostles by word of mouth WITHOVT WRITING deliuered any such doctrines as now affoord an infallible argument for the determining of the controuersies of faith in the Church These wordes of our aduersaries make it more then plaine that the Church of Rome holds the Scriptures vnsufficient not onely in respect of breeding faith or bringing men to know and beleeue it ordinarily which we grant but also in respect of containing it in themselues which we deny And that my aduersary holds the same thing I will prone directly For ha-laid downe 4. grounds First that true faith is necessary Secondly that this faith is onely one Thirdly that this faith must be certaine Fourthly and entire in all points he addes the fift that it must not be doubted but God hath prouided and left some certaine rule and meanes whereby euery man may in all points and questions be sufficiently and infallibly instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith and then immediately he puts the question what in particular may be assigned to be this rule wherto he answers in his first conclusion The Scripture alone especially as translated into English cannot be this rule Which I denied Therefore his question was touching the sufficiency of the Scripture as the said sufficiency is opposed to vnwrittē traditiō not as it is distinguished against the requisite condition of the meanes to be vsed for the vnderstanding of the Scripture And this I confirme for my aduersary saies they hold the Scripture to be part of the rule because it is part of the doctrine of the Church immediatly reuealed by God but yet there are many substantiall points of faith not contained in them Yea p Pag. 67. Reply his expresse words are The question is betwixt vs and Protestants whether God did reueale any thing to the Prophets and Apostles necessary to be beleeued which is not now expressed or so contained in the Scripture that by euident and necessary consequence excluding all tradition and Church authority it may be gathered out of some sentence expresly set downe in the Scripture I did not therefore peruert the state of the question but my Aduersary hauing nothing else to say thought good by this shift to rid himselfe from that which he saw could not be answered 4 Neuerthelesse pleasing himselfe with his owne conceite he concludes that conuicted with the euidence of truth I haue yeelded to his conclusion in that sence wherein he meant it That Scripture alone is not the rule of faith And therefore all my discourse is idle and impertinent I answer two things first if his conclusion The Scripture alone is not this rule which almighty God hath prouided whereby euery man may sufficiently be instructed WHAT is to be holden for true faith meane no more but onely to adde the Ministry of the Church and mens owne industry to the Scripture as the meanes for the ordinary vnderstanding and beleeuing that which is written in it in this sence the Scripture alone is the rule whereby to iudge whatsoeuer matter belongs to faith but Scripture alone is not the ordinary rule and meanes by it selfe to kindle in vs the true knowledge and faith of that which it containes without the Ministrie of the Church and other things be ioyned with it for the learning of it then I grant it and require the Iesuite againe in lieu thereof either to renounce his traditions or else confesse they haue no other vse but onely to helpe to expoūd and teach that which is wholly contained in the Scripture without any power to supply any defect of doctrine that may be supposed to be therein And when he hath done the next treatise of faith he writes to distinguish a little better betweene the Rule and the Meanes of applying it and not say that is no sufficient rule whereby to be instructed WHAT is faith and WHAT not which onely is not a sufficient meanes to bring men to faith without the subordinate condition of such meanes as is required in the application of any rule Secondly I answer that his conclusion meanes more viz. That Scripture alone is vnperfect and defectiue 2. waies The first in that without other meanes it doth not ordinarily breed or draw foorth in vs assent to that it reueales nor so much as make vs see the reuelation to be And therefore there needes the Church by her Pastor to teach and perswade vs and there needes the Spirit of God and industrie in our selues This way no Protestant euer denied The second is in that it alone containes not all Gods word or all such truth as he hath reuealed necessarily to be beleeued but onely one small and obscure part thereof the best part or at least some part being by Tradition onely vnwritten This way we deny with open mouth and the Iesuite holds it and in the place now controuerted hugges it in his armes and therefore I discoursed against him as I did and in no other sense and so consequently it is
Gospell where the Pope is ignorant or erres it is manifest whose iudgement is to be preferred and in this case such a learned man if he were present at a generall Councell should oppose himselfe against it if he perceiued the maior part through malice or ignorance to go against the Gospell Occham k Occh. Dial. p 180. affirmes that THE POPE AND CARDINALS ARE NOT THE RVLE OF OVR FAITH because though a Catholicke Pope and Catholicke Cardinals ought to be the teachers of faith so that the faithfull should firmely beleeue whatsoeuer they teach and define according to the rule of faith yet if they presume to teach or dâ—fine any thing contrary to the rule of faith which the holy Scripture teaches then Catholickes are not to follow but reproue them These men affirme all things that I say First that the Scripture is the rule of faith Secondly that the Pope with his Councels and Cardinals may erre Thirdly that they may erre in faith and teach erroniously Fourthly that their teaching may be examined Fifthly that euen by priuate men Sixthly the Scripture being the rule whereby Seuenthly vpon which examination their teaching may be refused This is the limitation that I mentioned Let the Repliar and all of his minde open their eyes and confesse we hold nothing but that which the learnedst in his owne Church allow and teach His second exception How shall they relieue themselues who cannot reade nor vnderstand the Scripture l §. 7. pag. 30. I answered in the WAY whereto my aduersary hauing nothing to reply according to his Methode onely repeates his cauill againe but it doth him no good For such as cannot reade yet may heare them read or preached and propounded by others it being sufficient that they haue the knowledge of the Scriptures any way which are so plaine and easie in all things belonging to the substance of faith that as I haue shewed m Gregory the B. of Rome speaking of an vnlearned man saies Nequaquam literas nouerat sed Scripturae sacrae sibi met codices emerat religioso quosque in hospitalitatem suscipiens hos coraÌ„ se studiose legere faciebat Factum est vt iuxta modum suum plene sacram Scripturum disceret cum siâ—ut dixi literas funditus ignoraret Dial. l. 4. c. 14. ibi Graec. Zachar. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the simplest that are hauing the assistance of Gods Spirit to enlighten them which assistance is not tyed to the presense of the Church as my aduersary cauilles may vnderstand them And to omit the words of the Scripture it selfe which the Repliar and his complices despise and reuile let him say directly whether the Ancient Church taught not thus S. Austine n Epist 3. The Scripture like a familiar friend speakes those plaine things which it containes to the heart of learned and vnlearned Chrysostome o Hom. 1 in Matth. The Scriptures are easie to vnderstand and exposed to the capacity of euery seruant Plowman widow boy and him that is most vnwise Cyrill Alexand p Contr. Iulian. pag. 160. The Scripture that it might be knowne to all men as well small as great are profitably commended to vs in a familiar speech so that they exceede the capacity of no man Isidore Pelusiota q l 2. ep 5. Forasmuch as God gaue lawes to weake men and such as need plaine words therefore he tempered his heauenly doctrine * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with rude words fit for the simple That euery woman and child and the vnlearnedst among mortall men by THE VERY HEARING IT SELFE might get some good r Sixt. Senens Biblioth l 6. annot 152. §. quod autem Grego Valent. 22. pag. 118. §. iam quae Diuers of the learnedst of our aduersaries grant this to be true in that part of the Scripture which containes the principles of faith and the things that all men generally are bound to beleeue which is sufficient to vphold that I say for I will easily allow great obscurity to be in much of the rest according to that which Å¿ Act. 8.31 2. Pet. 3.16 the Scripture and t Basil de fid p. 394. Iren. l. 2. c. 47. August ep 3. the Fathers oftentimes obserue but the rule of faith contained in euident places will preserue the vnlearned from erring therein perniciously A.D. By which explication is answered that which M. White saith is vnanswerable Pag. 220. White p 76. to wit If we must not accept euery doctrine taught by Pastours then there must be another rule by which we must be directed in hearing For it is not necessary to admit another rule distinct from the doctrine of Pastours but it sufficeth that we can distinguish in this rule two distinct manners of teaching the one priuate and without authoritie which we are not bound to accept the other publike and with authority which we may not reiect in any point 7 To the text of Mathew 23.2 The Scribes and Pharisees sit in Moses chaire c. I answered u The WAY pag. 75. that our Sauiour bindes vs not to heare the Pastours of the Church further then they teach according to the truth This exposition I confirmed by the testimonies of * Fer. in Matth. l. 3 c. 23. Can. Loc. l. 5. c. 4 Iansen concord c. 120. Em. Sa. notat Mat. 23. 4. Papists to whom here I adde a fift Pope Adrian x Hadria quodl 6. art 2. p. 38. we are tyed to obey them in such things as they teach according to Moses chaire Hence I said it followes vnanswerably that there is another rule whereby I may be directed in hearing For else how should a man be able to distinguish those points wherein he must follow his teachers from those wherein he must not And indeed this reason is vnanswerable For if our Sauiour hath bound me to heare them that sit in Moses chaire no further then they teach true doctrine according to the chaire it must necessarily be said that there is some rule distinct from their teaching whereby I may infallibly discerne if they teach falsely against the chaire But the Reply sayes this needs not it being sufficient that we can distinguish two manners of teaching the one Priuate and without authority which we are not bound to accept the other publicke and with authoritie which we may not reiect in any point But for the making of this distinction it needes that there be a rule for though it be sufficient thus to distinguish that is to say by discerning and iudging betweene that which is taught by publicke and that which is taught by priuate authoritie a man may sufficiently guide himselfe in following his Pastors yet how shall I distinguish this which way shall I know the publicke teaching from the priuate without A RVLE Say plainely what is the RVLE to discerne that doctrine which is taught without authority from that which is taught with authoritie and if there be
Church so vniuersally that there was no visible companie of people appearing to the world free from it and whether any company at all knowne or vnknowne were free from it wholy or not I neither determine nor greatly care All that I hold touching the inuisible Church being that the true Church being ouergrowne with heresie and corruption there hath not at all times bene therein a distinct company to be seene which in all points were free from the corruption though there may be shewed a company that held all the substantiall points simply necessary to saluation Had the Iesuite vnderstood my words in this sense which I often declared all ouer my Booke he would neuer haue trifled away time in prouing the Church whose doctrine is the rule to be visible which I deny not but he would haue gone roundly to worke in shewing the visible Church to be neuer so corrupted but there is some one or more speciall companies therein visibly to be seene by all and separated from the rest that is not defiled with the corruption For the Church is visible to be seene at all time more or lesse whose teaching in the sound part thereof is to be followed to the worlds ende Neuerthelesse first he excepts that I say the question is of the Church militant containing as part of it euill men and hypocrites whereas to speake precisely he makes not the Question that way but to cut off occasions of cauill he saies he desputes whether the Church whereof he spake in the precedent Chapters whose doctrin in all ages is the rule of faith whether I say this Church be in all ages visible or sometimes inuisible as if the Church whose doctrine is the rule in all ages were any other then the militant His conclusions whereby he taught his friend how to resolue himselfe in religion were these That there is a rule left by God whereby all men may be instructed This rule is not the Scripture but the doctrin of the true Church which Church is alway visible that all men at all times may see it wherein he affirmes as I do the militant Church to be visible because that onely is it that mortall men can heare and haue accesse to and this I shew distinctly to be the question For first his owne expresse words are c In THE WAY pag 99. It is euident that the Church militant consists of good and bad but this Church consisting of good and bad is the same that before in his conclusion he affirmed to be visible confuting our supposed ground wherupon we held it inuisible Secondly in this very passage he sayes it is true that the same Church he speakes of is the Church militant or part of it Thirdly he expounds himselfe to meane that Church whose doctrine is the rule to teach vs. But the doctrine of no Church teaches vs but that of the Militant liuing here vpon earth where they that liue are taught Fourthly he meanes that Church whereto euery one may haue accesse and repaire for instruction whereto also they may ioine themselues and wherein they may admonish their brethren and therefore precisely he speakes of the Militant church vpon earth and his words that to speake precisely he makes not the question this way but onely askes whether the Church whose doctrine is the rule be visible are so precise that a man would think his head-peece were not wel seasoned when either he must grant this his visible Church to be militant or confesse it to be none of Gods Church for so much as all the Church of God whose doctrine is the rule of faith is for the time being militant here on earth and part of that which is mentioned in the Creed where we say credo Ecclesiam Therefore the question betweene vs is whether the companie of those that professe and teach the true faith of Christ without mixture of corruption among whom possible many hypocrites and wicked men liue which companie is called the Militant-church be at all times visible The Reply sayes it is and must no more denie his assertion to be meant euen precisely of this companie 4 His second exception is about the words visible and inuisible where he sayes fiue things First that by a visible Church I make him to mean a company alway so illustrious that it may be knowne to all men liuing at all times Secondly that I make him to meane this companie also to be so illustrious that actually it is thus knowne Thirdly that he meanes not the word visible in this second sence Fouthly that he knowes the Church is sometime obscured and shines not actually through the whole world Fiftly that the Church is alway visible in this sence that alway euen in the greatest obscuritie it hath some eminent professors which either are actually knowne or may in particular be assigned The first is true for he sayes it expresly in the last And I suppose he will not denie it when so many of his owne Diuines hold it Dom. Bannes d Tom. 3. pag. 103. sayes the Church is so visible that it is palpable Bellarmine e De Eccl. l. 3. c. 13. God hath at all times a Church consisting not of a few people but of a great multitude as conspicuous as any earthly kingdome Greg. of Valence f Tom. 3 p. 143. Our assertion is that in all ages there may euidently be seene and discerned and as it were pointed out with the finger a companie of men whereof euery one may beleeue that it is the true Church The second is false For though it follow manifestly vpon his words and that which the Diuines of his church teach of the visâ—â—â—lenesse of their church yet I charged him not so farre but contented my selfe with confuting that which is contained in his first and last assertion Neuerthelesse it is true that he and all Papists must by their owne principles hold the Church to be euen actually visible to all men For he sayes g Repl. p. 170. God hath giuen sufficient meanes to all men for their saluation h In THE WAY §. 13. and the teaching of this his church is the meanes But no meanes is sufficient that is not actually reuealed as i Ch. 25. n. 15.16 I haue shewed heretofore out of the Repliers owne authors Therefore if sufficient meanes be onely that which is actually reuealed and the Church be the meanes it followes the Church must be actually visible or else let vs see how the Replier will quit himselfe The third is also false as I haue said but yet allowing it to be true I haue not peruerted the question because I affirme and dispute against the visiblenesse of the Church in that sâ—nce which he holds in the first and last assertion The fourth I accept as the truth and haue shewed in k Digr 17. THE WAY that as his owne Diuines expound it it vtterly destroyes his first and last assertions and yeelds as much as
And albeit we thus distinguish the Militant from the Catholick inuisible Church of the elect part whereof is alway in the Militant church and one cause among many be the same that the Replier hath assigned lest if none should pertaine to the Church but the elect men should despaire of attaining the truth forasmuch as it is not found but in the Church because they should not be able to tell who are elect yet that we say is a direct answer to them that bid vs assigne a continuall visible Church professing the Protestant religion for we assigne and name not the inuisible Church of the elect as the Replier absurdly reports but the Militant Church of Rome that all men haue seene many ages together But when they reply that the Church of Rome differs from the Protestants in many points then comes in that we say of the inuisible state of the Church that the true Church of God wherein saluation is to be found may yet for some space and distance of time be so ouerwhelmed with heresie and persecution that no companie can be seene to beleeue and professe in all things aright according to the Apostles teaching by reason of errors either greater or lesser added to their Apostolicke faith the which errors when God giues libertie to remoue that the rule of faith may be holden without them then it may truly and directly be said the reformed Church that hath remoued these corruptions for some space in former times was inuisible What vntruth now or what flying out of one Church into another is here or what strait is this Let the Iesuite say resolutely and directly without cauilling Ad 3. 4 To the third that this Church which other Protestants commonly call the visible Church M. White will needs defend to be sometime inuisible I answer other Protestants and M. White with them call the Militant Church visible and hold it to be alway so because it is such as may be seene and at all times is to be seene and yet againe M. White and all other Protestants with him will denie it to be alway visible in that sence which the Iesuites vse to deliuer this is no contradiction when the Church is called visible in one state and yet inuisible in another As the Sunne is affirmed to be visible when it is in our Horizon and then affirmed againe to be inuisible when it is gone downe or obscured by eclipse A. D. To ouerthrow this absurd answer of my aduersaries Pag. 238. I will in this place shew first that this distinction of two Churches is false Secondly that if it were true at least in this place it is friuolous Thirdly that the Church Militant containing all professors of the faith cannot be as M. White would haue it inuisible 5 The first of these is needlesse For no man holds two Churches but onely two or more respects of one Church as I noted the which respects h Catech. Rom pag. 112. our aduersaries all of them distinguish as well as we The next is with his owne word friuolous For to what end should he stand prouing that friuolous which his aduersarie sayes not How absurd therefore soeuer he thinke my answer yet this is no good way to infringe it by reporting that to be my answer which is not and disputing against that I say not neuer meaning to deale with that which is my true answer indeed The third tends well enough to the prouing his conclusion being vnderstood of such an inuisiblenesse as I haue declared yet when all he will say was propounded in his first booke and directly answered and much more then his Reply containes why did he not reply vpon that but multiply new reasons before he hath defended the old Neuerthelesse omitting his two first points wherein he touches not my booke I will answer that which he sayes concerning me in the third A. D. § 3. Concerning the third point Pag. 241. Wotton p. 107. White p. 87. 100. that the companie of Professors cannot be inuisible M. White and M. Wotton both seeme to defend that not onely the true Church consisting in their opinion onely of the elect is altogether inuisible but the other Church which they grant to consist of all Professors of the faith may sometimes be inuisible this assertion they maintaine as it seemeth of purpose that when after I shall vrge them to assigne a continuall professing Protestant companie as we can shew a continuall companie of professors of the Romane faith they may by this starting hole of the inuisibilitie or secretnesse of the Church escape away without answering my demand which can neuer be directly and sufficiently answered To defend this paradoxe of inuisible professors of the faith first they peruert the state of the question as in the beginning I noted Secondly M. White noteth two things White pag. 87. the first is that the Church militant may consist of a small number as it did in the beginning to wit at the time of the passion of Christ and as it shall do in the end of the raigne of Antichrist the second is that although it alwayes professe the faith yet this may be secretly that the world shall not perceiue By which two blind shifts he would gladly bleare the eyes and bewitch the vnderstanding of his Reader so farre as to perswade that in all ages there was at least some few professing Protestants although for many hundred yeares before Luther they were so secret and inuisible that the world nor God I weene could not but the faithfull Protestants themselues forsooth could see and know them 6 First it is true that M. White affirmes the true Church of God to consist onely of the elect the rest being neither perfectly nor truly nor properly members of the Church but onely improperly and aequiuocally or as Canus i Membra videlicet aliquando non ex vita quam sua sponte natura vendicant sed ex situ quem sortita in corpore sunt per Metaphoram transferri solent Propriè ac verè membrum corporis Ecclesiae non sunt Can. loc pag 321. Ad vnionem corporis mystici siue Ecclisiae nunquam pertinent existentes in peccato mortali Alexand. quem refert Ioh. Turrecrem sum de eccl l 1. c. 57. speakes metaphorically by reason of the place they occupie in the church and I alone say not this but as learned Papists as any are say it with me howsoeuer k Solent haretici dicere esse Sanctos Electos esse propriè membra Ecclesiae alios impropriè sed falluntur Staplet relect pag. 8. Yet the learnedst of his owne side say it as well as we as appeares he whom my aduersarie followes relate this opinion as if none but Protestants held it Next I affirme againe and the Replier yeelds it that l No man can tell who be Gods elect A. D. Repl. pag. 238. None can know who are elect or where in particular the
must distinguish for Gregory and Austine no doubt taught many points that were true and wherein we consent with them yea the substance of sauing faith but some things they innouated wherein the Church of Rome now followes them adding to the wordes of wholesome doctrine their owne corrupt opinions the first we graunt was professed before and was the faith of the Brittans at their first conuersion but not the latter And herein appeares the cunning and fraude of our aduersaries that by the testimonies of such as affirme Gregoryes faith in things of the first kind to be Apostolik go about to proue it to be such also in things of the latter kinde The Repliar therefore hath to proue that not the truthes which they taught but the additions which they brought in wherein the Protestants refuse them were the substance of their faith and that whereto our nation was conuerted in the Apostles time Which they can neuer do Thirdly that diuers particular points of the Papists doctrine are acknowledged by learned Protestants to haue bene taught by the ancient Fathers as Vowes Reall presence c. is answered before in the second obiection touching the Centuries And by the D. of Winchester in his booke against Briarly b Prot. App. l. 2. c. 1. inde where the particular instances are examined And if the Repliar and his Author will make good their assertion they must proue that the Fathers with one consent taught these things and withall so meant and expounded them as they are now meant and expounded in the Papacy Let this be done in those points that we refuse and good reason the game be theirs But if these learned Protestants do no more but note the particular corruptions that crept into particular writings and Churches whereby our aduersaries haue taken occasion to increase them they must not be said to acknowledge either that these things were the Catholicke doctrine of the whole Church or that they were intended and beleeued as the Romane Church now beleeues them 4 His fourth and last argument is because forsooth it is not the condition of the Romane Church to inuent or alter any doctrine but humbly and obediently to maintaine what they haue receaued from their predecessors to hate innouation to note reprehend resist all innouation in faith that it cannot be possible there should be any difference betweene the faith of the Fathers and the doctrine of the Church of Rome as the Protestants ignorantly and maliciously obiect And indeed if that part of the Church of Rome which we haue refused I meane the Papacy were the true vniuersall Church he said well for it is against the property of that Church to dissent from any part of the ancient faith as he hath well obserued out of his Gregory and Vincentius but how will he proue that side and faction in the Church of Rome which is charged with innouating and dissenting to be the true Church how shall the reader be assured that these heards of Popes Cardinals Prelats Monkes Friars Iesuites are those faithfull Pastors whose nature is not to innouate when all the world hath discouered them and their doctrine to be nothing else but weedes and excrements arising in the Church Is there not an assertion a Greg. Val. p. 96. tom 3. in the Spaniard quoted that saies By the vnfolded act of faith the same things haue not alway bene beleeued but diuers points in the progresse of time haue bene manifest and beleeued Doth not Austine of Ancona b Sum. de eccl pot q. 59. art 3. say the Pope may make a new Creed multiply the articles of faith and put more points vnder each article then were before This is enough to shew the vntruth of that the Replyar saies for vnder the pretence of the Pope and his Church power to vnfold that which the Fathers and auncient Church beleeued infoldedly and to make new articles they haue altered and innouated all things and their pestilent and palpable heresies are made a part of the old Churches infolded faith and these men being the formallest innouators that euer were yet must be said to dissent from the Fathers in nothing because whatsoeuer they daily inuent and innouate the Fathers held at least implicitely Vnhappie Rome c See Ph. Camerar tom 2. c. 10. whose certen name was neuer publikely knowne and whose certen doctrine to the worlds end can neuer be determined but still it may multiplie and diminish d Solin Poly. hist c. 1. The Gentile Romanes were persuaded the eternitie of Rome should consist in the concealing of the true name thereof and therefore Valerius Soranus was executed because he told the name and our Catholicke Romanes haue placed all their hope of enduring in concealing their faith vnder the veile of infolded faith Hold ye fast to this conceite ye braue Romanists and you may boldly reproch them all with ignorance that deny the consent of your doctrine with the Fathers 5 This obiection the Repliar saw coming for his conscience told him the present Church of Rome had increased that which the Fathers taught and therefore he answers that true it is the Doctors of his Church haue written more largely about diuers points then was done in former times But this was for the confutation of heresies rising and for the more explication of the formerly receaued faith and they haue vsed more significant words then formerly were vsed but yet the sense of such words differs not from the faith and phrases formerly vsed but onely explicate more plainely that which was formerly beleeued by the Church which kinde of explication Vincentius allowes in his golden Treatise But all this is vntrue and is briefely answered the Church of Rome and the D D. therein since the Fathers time haue done more then either the explicating of the ancient faith or giuing new names to old articles They haue innouated diminished corrupted the substance of the articles themselues as I shewed particularly a Dig. 19. 51 in the WAY euen in this very point of transubstantiation And this pretence of vsing more significant words by reason of heresies rising is but a cloke for the treachery the greatest heretickes that arose being themselues and the words deuised being the engines to aduance their heresies the sense whereof hath no agreement with the faith of the Fathers which being too scant for him that would sit as God in the Church of God must be inlarged by dispensations explications determinations new articles fulnesse of power and what not The contents of the Scripture were not enough to hold themselues to that which is expressed therein b Alphons haer v. eccl 3. n◠were to play the foole and to destroy all Christian religion The Pope is like Typhaeus the giant in Nannus c 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dionys l. 2. pag. 36. that must haue a higher rooffed firmament to walke vnder and bigger starres to giue him light or else he would put