erre if he keepe his chaire which yet he affirmes L. 4. de Rom. Pont. c. 4. §. 2. Protestants so you will but understand it s not erring in Absolute Fundamentall Doctrines And therefore 't is true also that there can bee no just Cause to make a Schisme from the whole Church But here 's the Iesuite's Cunning. The whole Church with him is the Romane and those parts of Christendome which subject themselves to the Romane Bishop All other parts of Christendome are in Heresie and Schisme and what A. C. pleases Nay soft For another Church may separate from Rome if Rome will separate from Christ. And so farre as it separates from Him and the Faith so farre may another Church sever from it And thâ—…s is all that the Learned Protestants doe or can say And I am sure all that ever the Church of England hath either said or done And that the whole Church cannot erre in Doctrines absolutely Fundamentall and Necessary to all mens Saâ—…vation besides the Authority of these Protestants most of them being of prime ranke seemes to me to be cleare by the Promise of Christ S. Matth. 16 â—…hat the gates of Hell shall not prevaile S. Matth. 16. 18. against it Whereas most certaine it is that the Gates of Hell prevaile very farre against it if the Whole Militant Church universally taken can Erre from or in the Foundation But then this Power of not Erring is not to be conceived as if it were in the Church primò per se Originally or by any power it hath of it selfe For the Church is constituted of Men and Humanum est errare all men can erre But this Power is in it partly by the vertue of this Promise of Christ and partly by the Matter which it teacheth which is the unerring Word of God so plainely and manifestly delivered to her as that it is not possible she should universally fall from it or teach against it in things absolutely necessary to Salvation Besides it would be well waighed whether to believe or teach otherwise will not impeach the Article of the Creed concerning the Holy Catholike Church which we professe we believe For the Holy Catholike Church there spoken of containes not onely the whole Militant Church on earth but the whole Triumphant also in Heaven For so †Ecclesia hic tota accipiâ—…da est non solum ex parâ—…e quà pâ—…rinatur â—…terris c. vâ—…tiam ex illa parte quae in coelâ—… c. S. Aug. Eâ—…hir c 56. S. Augustine hath long since taught me Now if the whole Catholike Church in this large extent be Holy then certainly the whole Militant Church is Holy as well as the Triumphant though in a far lower degree in as much as all * Nemo ex toto Sanctus Optat. L 7 contra Parmen Sanctification all Holinesse is imperfect in this life as well in Churches as in Men. Holy then the whole Militant Church is For that which the Apostle speakes of Abraham is true of the Church which is a Body Collective made up of the spirituall seed of Abraham Rom. 11. If the root be holy so are the branches Well then the whole Militant Church is Holy Rom. 11. 16. and so we believe Why but will it not follow then Thaâ—… the whole Militant Church cannot possibly erre in the Foundations of the Faith That she may erre in Superstructures and Deductions and other by and unnecessary Truths if her Curiosity or other weaknesse carry her beyond or cause her to fall short of her Rule no doubt need be made But if She can erre either from the Foundation or in it She can be no longer Holy and that Article of the Creed is gone For if She can erre quite from the Foundation then She is nor Holy nor Church but becomes an Infidell Now this cannot be For †Dum Christus or at in Excelso Návicula id est Eâ—…clesia â—…tur fluctibus in profundo c sed quia Christus orat non potest mergi S. Aug. Serm 14 de Verb. Domi. c 2. Et Bâ—…llar L. 3 ac Eccle Milit c. 13. Praesidiâ—… Christi fulâ—…itur Ecclâ—…siae perpetuitas ut inter turbulentas aâ—…itationes formiâ—…abiles mâ—…tus c. salva tamâ—…n maneat Câ—… L. 2. Instit c. 15. §. 3. Ipsa Symboli 〈◊〉 admonemur perpetuam residâ—…re in Ecclesia Christi remission m Peccatorum Calv. L. 4. Inst. c. 1. §. 17. Now remission of sins cannot be perpetuall in the Church if the Church it selfe be 〈◊〉 perpetuall But the Church it selfe cannot be perpetuall if it fall away all Divine Ancient and Moderne Romanists and Reformers agree in this That the whole Militant Church of Christ cannot fall away into generall Apostacy And if She Erre in the Foundation that is in some one or more Fundamentall Poynts of Faith then Shee may bee a Church of Christ still but not Holy but becomes Hereticall And most certain it is that no * Spiritus Sanctificationis non pâ—…ost inveniri in Haereticorum mentibus S. Hierom in Ierom. 10. Assemâ—…ly be it never so generall of such Hereticks is or can be Holy Other Errors that are of a meaner alay take not Holinesse from the Church but these that are dyed in graine cannot consist with Holinesse of which Faith in Christ is the very Foundation And therefore if we will keepe up our Creed the whole Militant Church must be still Holy For if it be not so still then there may be a time that Falsum may subesse Fidei Catholicae that falshood and that in a high degree in the very Article may be the Subject of the Catholike Faith which were no lesse then Blasphemy to affirme For we must still believe the Holy Catholike Church And if She be not still Holy then at that time when She is not so we believe a Falshood under the Article of the Catholike Faith Therefore a very dangerous thing it is to cry out in generall termes That the whole Catholike Militant Church can Erre and not limit nor distinguish in time that it can erre indeed for Ignorance it hath and Ignorance can Erre But Erre it cannot either by falling totally from the Foundation or by Hereticall Error in it For the Holinesse of the Church consists as much if not more in the Verity of the Faith as in the Integrity of Manners taught and Commanded in the Doctrine of Faith Now in this Discourse A. C. thinkes he hath met with me For he tells me that I may not only safely grant A. C. p. 56. that Protestants made the Division that is nâ—…w in the Church but further also and that with a safe Confidence as one did was it not you saith he That it was ill done of those who did first made the Separation Truly I doe not now remember whether I said it or no. But because A. C. shall have full satisfaction from me and without any Tergiversation if I did not
Animas reâ—…runt Pet. Matt. Loc. Com. Class 3. Ca. 15. Nu 4. they utterly deny any Resurrection of the Body after Death So with them that Article of the Creed is gone Now then if any man will guide his Faith by this Rule of A. C. The Consent of dissenting Parties or the Confession of the Adverse Part hee must denie the Resurrection of the Body from the Grave to Glory and believe none but that of the Soule from sinne to Grace which the Adversaries Confesse and in which the Dissenting Parties agree Punct 3. Thirdly in the great Dispute of all others about the Vnity of the Godhead All dissenting parties Iew Turke and Christian Among Christians Orthodoxe and Anti-Trinitarian of old And in these later times Orthodoxe and Socinian that Horrid and mighty monster of all Heresies agree in this That there is but one God And I hope it is as necessary to believe one God our Father as one Church our Mother Now will A. C. say here 't is safest believing as the dissenting Parties agree or as the Adverse Parties Confesse namely That there is but one God and so deny the Trinity and therewith the Sonne of God the Saviour of the world Fourthly in a Point as Fundamentall in the Faith as Punct 4. this Namely whether Christ be true and very God For which very Point most of the a Hebr. 11. 37. Cyrillus Alexandrinut malè audivit quod Ammonium Martyrem appellavit quem constitit temeritatis poenas dedisse non Necessitate negandi Christi in tormentis esse mortuum Socr. Hist. Eccl. L. 7. c. 14. Martyrs in the Primitive Church laid down their lives The dissenting Parties here were the Orthodoxe Believers who affirme Hee is both God and Man for so our Creed teaches us And all those Hereticks which affirme Christ to bee Man but denie him to bee God as the b Optatus L. 4. Cont. Parmen Arrians and c Tertul. L. de Prascrip c. 48. Carpocratians and d Tertul. Ibid. Cerinthus and e Tertul. L. de Carne Christi c. 14. Hebion with others and at this day the f Si ad Iesu Christi respicias Essentiam at que Naturam non nisi Hominem eum fuisse constantèr affirmaâ—…us Volkelius Lib. 3. de Religione Christianâ cap. 1. Socinians These dissenting Parties agree fully and clearely That Christ is Man Well then Dare A. C. sticke to his Rule here and say 't is safest for a Christian in this great Point of Faith to governe his Beliefe by the Consent of these dissenting Parties or the Confession and acknowledgement of the Adverse Partie and so settle his Beliefe that Christ is a meere Man and not God I hope hee dares not So then this Rule To Resolve a mans Faith into that in which the Dissenting Parties agree or which the Adverse Part confesses is as often false as true And false in as Great if not Greater Matters then those in which it is true And where 't is true A. C. and his fellowes dare not governe themselves by it the Church of Rome condemning those things which that Rule proves And yet while they talke of Certainty nay of Infallibility lesse will not serve their turnes they are driven to make use of such poore shifts as these which have no certainty at all of Truth in them but inferre falshood and Truth alike And yet for this also men will be so weake or so wilfull as to be seduced by them I told you * §. 35. Nu. 2. fine before That the force of the preceding Argument lies upon two things The one expressed and that 's past the other upon the Bye which comes now to be handled And that is your continuall poore Out-cry against us That we cannot be saved because we are out of the Church Sure if I thought I were out I would get in as fast as I could For we confesse as well as you That a Extra Ecclesiam veminem Vivificat Spiritus Sanctus S. Aug. Epist. 5 0. ad finem Field L. 1. de Eccles. c. 13. Vna est Fidelium Vniversalis Ecclesia extra quam nullus salvatur Conc Lateran Can. 1. And yet even there there is no mention of the Romane Church Out of the Catholike Church of Christ there is no Salvation But what do you meane by Out of the Church Sure out of the b And so doth A. C. too Out of the Catholiâ—… Romane Church there is no Possibility of Salvaâ—…on A C. p. 65. Romane Church Why but the Romane Church and the Church of England are but two distinct members of that Catholike Church which is spread over the face of the earth Therefore Rome is not the House where the Church dwels but Rome it selfe as well as other Particular Churches dwels in this great Universall House unlesse you will shut up the Church in Rome as the Donatists did in Africke I come a little lower Rome and oâ—…her Nationall Churches are in this Vniversall Catholike House as so many * And Daughter Sion was God's owne phrase of old of the Church Isa. 1. 8. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hyppol Orat. de Consum mundi Et omnis Ecclesia Virgo appellata est S. Aug. Tr. 13. in S. Ioh. Daughters to whom under Christ the care of the Houshold is committed by God the Father and the Catholike Church the Mother of all Christians Rome as an Elder Sister †For Christ was to be preached to all Nations but that Preaching was to begin at Ierusalem S. Luc. 24. 47. according to the Prophesie Mic. 4. 2. And the Disciples were first called Christians at Antioch Act. 11. 26. And therefore there was a Church there before ever S. Peter came thence to settle One at Rome Nor is it an Opinion destitute either of Authority or Probability That the Faith of Christ was preached and the Sacraments administred here in England before any settlement of a Church in Rome For S. Gildas the Ancientest monument we have and whom the Romanists themselves reverence sayes expresly That the Religion of Christ was received in Britannie Tempore ut scimus summo Tiberii Caesaris c. In the later time of Tiberius Caesar Gildas deexcid Brit. whereas S. Peter kept in Iewrie long after Tiberius his death Therefore the first Conversion of this Iland to the Faith was not by S. Peter Nor from Rome which was not then a Church Against this Rich. Broughton in his Ecclesiasticall History of Great Britaine Centur. 1. C. 8. §. 4. sayes expresly That the Protestants do freely acknowledge that this Clause of the time of Tiberius tempore summo Tiberii Caesaris is wanting in other Copies of that holy Writer and namely in that which was set forth by Pol. Virgil and others Whereas first these words are expresse in a most faire and ancient Manuscript of Gildas to be seene in S t. Rob. Cotton's Study if any doubt it Secondly these words are as expresse in
Contrary to his Conscience Presupposing it granted that the Church of Rome erres only in not Fundamentals and such Errours not Damnable which is absolutely and clearly denyed by D. White To this A. C. sayes nothing but that D. VVhite did not give this Answer A. C. p. 67. at the Conference I was not present at the Conference betweene them so to that I can say nothing as a witnesse But I thinke all that knew D. White will believe his affirmation as soone as the Iesuites To say no more And whereas A. C. referres to the Relation of the Conference betweene D. White and M. Fisher A. C. p. 67. most true it is there * A. C. in his relation of that Conference p. 26. D. VVhite is charged to have made that Answer twise But all this rests upon the credit of A. C. only For †For so 't is said in the Title-page by A. C. he is said to have made that Relation too as well as this And against his Credit I must engage D. Whites who hath avowed another Answer as a §. 37. Nu. 1. NUM 8. before is set downe And since A. C. relates to that Conference which it seemes hee makes some good account of I shall here once for all take occasion to assure the Reader That most of the Points of Moment in that Conference with D. VVhite are repeated againe and againe and urged in this Conference or the Relation of A. C. and are here answered by me For instance In the Relation of the first Conference the Iesuite takes on him to prove 1 the Vnwritten VVord of God out of 2. Thes. 2. pag. 15. And so he doth in the Relation of this Conference with me pag. 50. In the first he stands upon it That the Protestants 2 upon their Principles cannot hold that all Fundamentall points of Faith are contained in the Creed pag. 19. And so he doth in this pag. 46. In the first he would faine through 3 M. Roger's sides wound the Church of England as if shee were unsetled in the Article of Christ's Descent into Hell pag 21 And he endeavours the same in this pag. 46. In the first he is very earnest to prove That the Schisme was made by the Protestants pag. 23. And he is as earnest for 4 it in this pag. 55. In the first he layes it for a Ground That Corruption of Manners is no just Cause of separation 5 from Faith or Church pag. 24. And the same Ground he layes in this pag. 55. In the first he will have it That the 6 Holy Ghost gives continuall and Infallible Assistance to the Church pag. 24. And just so will he have it in this p 53. In the first he makes much adoe about the Errig of the 7 Greeke Church page 28. And as much makes he in this page 44. In the first he makes a great noyse about the 8 place in S. Augustine Ferendus est disputator errans c. page 18. and 24. And so doth hee here also page 45. In the first he would make his Proselytes believe That 9 he and his Cause have mighty advantage by that Sentence of S. Bernard 'T is intolerable Pride And that of S. Augustine 'T is insolent madnesse to oppose the Doctrine or Practice of the Catholike Church page 25. And twise he is at the same Art in this page 56. and. 73. In the first he 10 tels us That * Postquam discessionem a toto mundo facere coacti sumus Calv. Epist. 141. Calvin confesses That in the Reformation there was a Departure from the whole world page 25. And though I conceive Calvine spake this but of the Roman world and of no Uoluntary but a forced Departure and wrote this to Melancthon to worke Vnity among the Reformers not any way to blast the Reformation Yet we must heare of it againe in this page 56. But over and above the rest one Place with his owne glosse upon 11 it pleases him extremely 'T is out of S. Athanasius his Creed That whosoever doth not hold it entire that is saith he in all Points and Inviolate that is saith hee in the true unchanged and uncorrupted sense proposed unto us by the Pastors of his Catholike Church without doubt he shall perish everlastingly This he hath almost verbatim in the first page 20. And in the Epistle of the Publisher of that Relation to the Reader under the Name of VV. I. and then againe the very same in this if not with some more disadvantage to himselfe page 70. And perhaps had I leasure to search after them more Points then these Now the Reasons which mooved mee to set downe these Particulars thus distinctly are two The One that whereas the * In the begining of the Conference set out by A. C. Iesuite affirmes that in a second Conference all the speech was about Particular matters and little or nothing about the maine and great generall Point of a Continuall Infallible Uisible Church in which that Lady required satisfaction and that therefore this third Conference was held It may hereby appeare that the most materiall both Points and Proofes are upon the matter the very same in all the three Conferences though little bee related of the second Conference by A. C. as appeares in the Preface of the Publisher VV. I. to the Reader So this tends to nothing but Ostentation and shew The Other is that Whereas these men boast so much of their Cause and their Ability to defend it It cannot but appeare by this and their handling of other Points in Divinity that they labour indeed but no otherwise then like an Horse in a Mill round about in the same Circle no farther at night then at noone The same thing over and over againe from Tu es Petrus to Pasce oves from thou art Peter to Do thou feed my Sheepe And backe againe the same way F. The Lady asked Whether she might be saved in the Protestant Faith Vpon my soule said the Bishop you may Vpon my soule said I there is but one saving Faith and that is the Romane B. So it seems I was confident for the Faith professed § 38 in the Church of England els I would not have taken the salvation of another upon my soule And sure I had reason of this my Confidence For to believe the Scripture and the Creeds to believe these in the sense of the Ancient Primitive Church To receive the foure great Generall Councels so much magnified by Antiquity To believe all Points of Doctrine generally received as Fundamentall in the Church of Christ is a Faith in which to live and die cannot but give salvation And therefore I went upon a sure ground in the adventure of my soule upon that Faith Besides in all the Points of Doctrine that are contioverted betweene us I would faine see any one Point maintained by the Church of England that can be proved
because I take the Beliefe of the Primitive Church as it is expressed and delivered by the Councels and Ancient Fathers of those times As for the Foure Councels if A. C. aske how I have them that is their true and entire Copies I answer I have them from the Church-Tradition onely And that 's Assurance enough for this And so I am fully as sure as A. C. is or can make mee But if hee aske how I know infallibly I believe them in their true and uncorrupted sense Then I answer There 's no man of knowledge but hee can understand the plaine and simple Decision expressed in the Canon of the Councell where 't is necessary to Salvation And for all other debates in the Councels or Decisions of it in things of lesse moment 't is not necessary that I or any man else have Infallible Assurance of them though I thinke 't is possible to attaine even in these things as much Infallible Assurance of the uncorrupted sense of them as A. C. or any other Iesuites have A C. askes againe What Text of Scripture tels That Protestants now living do believe all this or that all A. C. p. 69. this is expressed in those particular Bibles or in the Writings of the Fathers and Councels which now are in the Protestants hands Good God! Whither will not a strong Bias carrie even a learned Iudgement Why what Consequence is there in this The Scripture now is the onely Ordinary Infallible Rule of Divine Faith Therefore the Protestants cannot believe all this before mentioned unlesse a particular Text of Scripture can be shewed for it Is it not made plaine before how we believe Scripture to be Scripture and by Divine and Infallible Faith too and yet wee can shew no particular Text for it Beside were a Text of Scripture necessary yet that is for the Object and the thing which we are to believe not for the Act of our believing which is meerely from God and in our selves and for which wee cannot have any Warrant from or by Scripture more then that we ought to believe but not that we in our particular do believe The rest of the Question is farre more inconsequent Whether all this bee expressed in the Bibles which are in Protestants hands For first we have the same Bibles in our hands which the Romanists have in theirs Therefore either we are Infallibly sure of ours or they are not Infallibly sure of theirs For we have the same Booke and delivered unto us by the same hands and all is expressed in ours that is in theirs Nor is it of moment in this Argument that we account more Apocryphall then they do For I will acknowledge every Fundamentall point of Faith as proveable out of the Canon as we account it as if the Apocryphall were added unto it Secondly A. C. is here extremely out of himselfe and his way For his Question is Whether all this be expressed in the Bibles which we have All this All what why before there is mention of the foure Generall Councels and in this Question here 's mention of the Writings of the Fathers and the Councels And what will A. C. look that we must shew a Text of Scripture for all this and an expresse one too I thought and doe so still 't is enough to ground Beliefe upon * Nâ—…n potest aliquid certum esse certitudire Fidei nisi aut immediate contineatur in verbo Dei aut ex verbo Dei per evidentem Consequentiam deducatur Bellar. L. 3. de Iustif. c. 8 §. 2. Necessary Consequence out of Scripture as well as upon expresse Text. And this I am sure of that neither I nor any man else is bound to believe any thing as Necessary to Salvation be it found in Councels or Fathers or where you will †Nec ego Nicaenum nec tu debes Ariminense tanquà m praejudicaturus proferre Concilium Nec ego hujus Authoritate nec tu illius detineris Scripturarum Au thoritatibus c. Res cum re Causa cum causâ Ratio cum ratione concertet S. Aug. L. 3. cont Maximinum c. 14. Testimonia Divina in fundamento ponenda sunt S. Aug. L. 20. de Civ Dei c. 1. Quia principia hujus Doctrinae per Revelationens habentur c. Tho. p. 1. q. 1. A. 8. ad 2. Solis Scriptur arum Libris Canonicis didâ—… hunc honorem deferre ut nullum Authorem corum in scribendo errâsse aliquid firmissimè credam Alios autem ita lego ut quant alibet sanctitate doctrináque praepolleant non ideò verum putem quod ipsi it à senserunt vel scripserunt S. Aug. Epist. 19. if it be Contrary to expresse Scripture or necessary Consequence from it And for the Copies of the Councels and Fathers which are in our hands they are the same that are in the hands of the Romanists and delivered to Posterity by Tradition of the Church which is abundantly sufficient to warrant that So we are as Infallibly sure of this as 't is possible for any of you to bee Nay are wee not more sure For wee have used no Index Expurgatorius upon the Writings of the Fathers * Sixtus Senens in Epist. ad Pium quintum as you have done So that Posterity hereafter must thanke us for true Copies both of Councels and Fathers and not you But A. C goes on and askes still Whether Protestants bee Infallibly sure that they rightly understand the A. C. p. 69. sense of all which is expressed in their Books according to that which was understood by the Primitive Church and the Fathers which were present at the foure first Generall Councels A. C. may aske everlastingly if hee will aske the same over and over againe For I pray wherein doth this differ from his †§. 38. N. 5. first Question save only that here Scripture is not named For there the Question was of our Assurance of the Incorrupted sense And therefore thither I refer you for Answer with this That it is not required either of us or of them that there should be had an Infallible assurance that wee rightly understand the sense of all that is expressed in our Bookes And I thinke I may believe without sinne that there are many things expressed in these Bookes for they are theirs as well as ours which A. C. and his Fellowes have not Infallible assurance that they rightly understand in the sense of the Primitive Church or the Fathers present in those Councels And if they say yes they can because when a difficulty crosses them they believe them in the Churches sense Yet that dry shift will not serve For beliefe of them in the Churches sense is an Implicit Faith but it works nothing distinctly upon the understanding For by an Implicite Faith no man can be infallibly assured that hee doth rightly understand the sense which is A. C s. Question whatever perhaps he may rightly believe And an Implicite
Faith and an Infallible understanding of the same thing under the same Considerations cannot possibly stand together in the same man at the same time A. C. hath not done asking yet But he would farther know Whether Protestants can be Infallibly sure that all and onely those points which Protestants account A. C. p. 69. Fundamentall and necessary to be expressely knowne by all were so accounted by the Primitive Church Truly Vnity in the Faith is very Considerable in the Church And in this the Protestants agree and as Vnisormely as you and have as Infallible Assurance as you can have of all points which they account Fundamentall yea and of all which were so accounted by the Primitive Church And these are but the Creed and some few and those Immediate deductions from it And †Tert. praescript adversus Haeres c. 13. c Tertullian and * Ruffin in Symb. Ruffinus upon the very Clause of the Catholike Church to decypher it make a recitall only of the Fundamentall Points of Faith And for the first of these the Creed you see what the sense of the Primitive Church was by that famous and knowne place of a Et neque qui valde potens est in dicendo ex Ecclesiae Praefectis alia ab his dicet c. Neque debilis in dicendo hanc Traditionem imminuet Quùm euim una cadem fides sit ueque is qui multum de eâ dicere potest plusquam oportet dicit neque qui parum ipsam imminuit Irenae L. 1. Adv. Haer. c. 2. 3. Et S. Basil. Serm. de Fide To. 2. p. 195. Edit Bafil 1505. Vna Immobilis Regula c. Tert. de veland Virg. c. 1. Irenaeus where after hee had recited the Creed as the Epitome or Briefe of the Faith he addes That none of the Governors of the Church be they never so potent to Expresse themselves can say alia ab his other things from these Nor none so weake in Expression as to diminish this Tradition For since the Faith is One and the same He that can say much of it sayes no more then he ought Nor doth he diminish it that can say but little And in this the Protestants all agree And for the second the immediate Deductions they are not formally Fundamentall for all men but for such b Quantum ad prima Credibilia quae sunt Articuli Fidei tenetur homo Explicitè credere sicut tenetur habere fidem Quantum autem ad alia Credibilia c. non tenetur Explicitè credere nisi quando hoc ci constiterit in Doctrinâ Fidei contineri Tho. 2. 2 q. 2. A. 5. c. Potest quis Errare Credendo oppositum Alicui Articulo subtill ad cujas sidem explicitam non â—…mnis teuentur Holkot in 1. sent q. 1. ad quartum as are able to make or understand them And for others t is enough if they doe not obstinatâ—…ly or Schismatically refuse them after they are once revealed Indeed you account many things Fundamentall which were never so accounted in any sense by the Primitive Church such as are all the Decrees of Generall Councels which may be all true but can never be all Fundamentall in the Faith For it is not in the power of * Resolutio Ocbam est Quod nec tota Ecclesiae nec Concilium Generale nâ—… suminus Pontifex potest facere Artiâ—…ulum quod non suit Articulus Articulus cuim est ex co solo qui à Deo Revelatuâ—… est Almain in 3. sent D. 15. q. unica Coâ—…clus 4. Dub 3. the whole Church much lesse of a Generall Councell to make any thing Fundamentall in the Faith that is not contained in the Letter or sense of that common Faith which was once given and but once for all to the Saints S. Lude 3. But if it be A. C's meaning to call S. Iude vers 3. for an Infallible Assurance of all such Points of Faith as are Decreed by Generall Councels Then I must bee bold to tell him All those Decrees are not necessary to all mens salvation Neither doe the Romanists themselves agree in all such determined Points of Faith Be they determined by Councels or by Popes For Instance After those Bookes which wee account Apochryphall were †Concil Trid Sess 4. defined to bee Canonicall and an Anathema pronounced in the Case a Six Senens Biblioth Sanct. L. 1. Sixtus Senensis makes scruple of some of them And after b Non est necessariò credendum Detâ—…minatis per Sum Pontificem c. Aimain in 3. sent D. 24. q. unica Conclus 6. Dubio 6. fine Pope Leo the tenth had defined the Pope to be aboue a Generall Councell yet many Romane Catholikes defend the Contrary And so doe all the Sorbonists at this very day Therefore if these be Fundamentall in the Faith the Romanists differ one from another in the Faith nay in the Fundamentals of the Faith And therefore cannot have Infallible Assurance of them Nor is there that Unity in the Faith amongst them which they so much and so often boast of For what Scripture is Canonicall is a great point of Faith And I believe they will not now Confesse That the Popes power over a Generall Councell is a small one And so let A. C. looke to his owne Infallible Assurance of Fundamentals in the Faith for ours God be thanked is well And since he is pleased to call for a particular Text of Scripture to proove all and every thing of this nature which is ridiculous in it selfe and unreasonable to demand as hath beene * §. 38. N. 6. shewed yet when he shall bee pleased to bring forth but a particular knowne Tradition to proove all and every thing of this on their side it will then be perhaps time for him to call for and for us to give farther Answer about particular Texts of Scripture After all this Questioning A. C. inferres That I had need seeke out some other Infallible Rule and meanes by A. C. p. 69. which I may know these things infalliâ—…ly or else that I have no reason to be so confident as to adventure my soule that one may be saved living and dying in the Protestant faith How weake this Inference is will easily appeare by that which I have already said to the premises And yet I have somewhat left to say to this Inference also And first I have lived and shall God willing dye in the Faith of Christ as it was professed in the Ancient Primitive Church and as it is professed in the present Church of England And for the Rule which governes me herein if I cannot bee confident for my soule upon the Scripture and the Primitive Church expounding and declaring it I will be confident upon no other And secondly I have all the reason in the world to be confident upon this Rule for this can never deceive me Another that very other which A. C. proposes
another intùs est is not another contrary thing but is contained within the Bowels and nature of that which is interpreted from which if the Declaration depart it is faulty and erroneous because instead of Declaring it gives another and contrary c Hoc semper nec quicquam praeterea Vin. Lyr. c. 32. sense Therefore when the Church declares any thing in a Councell either that which she declares was intùs or extrà in the Nature and verity of the thing or out of it If it were extrà without the nature of the thing declared then the Declaration of the thing is false and so farre from being Fundamentall in the Faith d In novâ Haeresi Veritas prius erat de Fide et si non ita deâ—… rata Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 〈◊〉 fine Haeretici multa quae erâ—… implicita sidei nostra compâ—… runt explicare Bonavent in 〈◊〉 D. 11. A. 1. Q. 1. ad finem Tho. 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. Quamvis Apostolica Sedes aut Generale Concilium de Haeresi censere possit non tamen ideò Assertio aliqua erit Haeresis qui. Ecclesia definivit sed quia 〈◊〉 dei Catholica repugnat Ecclesia siquidèm suâ definitione 〈◊〉 facit talem Assertionem esse Haeresin quùm etiamsi ipsa non definivisset esset Haeresis sed id efficit ut paeteat c. Alphon à Castro L. 1. Advers Haeres c. 8. fol. 21. D. If it were intùs within the Compasse and nature of the thing though not open and apparent to every eye then the Declaration is true but not otherwise Fundamentall than the thing is which is declared for that which is intùs cannot be larger or deeper than that in which it is if it were it could not be intùs Therefore nothing is simply Fundamentall because the Church declares it but because it is so in the nature of the thing which the Church declares And it is a slight and poore Evasion that is commonly used that the Declaration of the Church makes it Fundamentall quoad nos in respect of us for it doth not that neither For no respect to us can varie the Foundation The Churches Declaration can binde us to peace and externall Obedience where there is not expresse Letter of Scripture and sense agreed on but it cannot make any thing Fundamentall to us that is not so in its owne nature For if the Church can so adde that it can by a Declaration make a thing to be Fundamentall in the faith that was not then it can take a thing away from the Foundation and make it by Declaring not to be Fundamentall which all men grant no power of the Church can doe e Ecclesia non amputat necessaria non apponit superâ—…ua Vin. Lir. c. 32. Deut. 4. 2. For the power of adding any thing contrary and of detracting any thing necessary are alike forbidden * Thom. Supp q. 6. A. 6. C. and alike denyed Now nothing is more apparent then this to the eye of all men That the Church of Rome hath determined or declared or defined call it what you will very many things that are not in their owne nature Fundamentall and therefore neither are nor can be made so by her adjudging them Now to all this Discourse That the Church hath not power to make any thing Fundamentall in the Faith that intrinsecally and in its owne nature is not such A. C. is content to say nothing 2. For the second That it is prooved by this place of S. Augustine That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall You might have given me that Place cited in the Margin and eased my paines to seeke it but it may be there was somewhat in concealing it For you doe so extraordinarily right this Place that you were loth I thinke any body should see how you wrong it The place of S. Augustine is this against the Pelagians about Remission of Originall sinne in Infants * August Serm. 14. de verb. Apost c. 12. Fundata res est In aliis Quastionibus non diligentèr digestis nondum plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate sirmatis ferendus est Disputator errans ibi ferendus est error non tantum progredi debet ut etiam Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliâ—… This is a thing founded An erring Disputer is to be borne with in other Questions not diligently digested not yet made firme by full Authority of the Church there error is to be borne with but it ought not to goe so farre that it should labour to shake the Foundation it selfe of the Church This is the Place but it can never follow out of this Place I thinke That every thing defined by the Church is Fundamentall For first he speakes of a Foundation of Doctrine in Scripture not a Church definition This appeares for few lines before he tels us b Ibid. cap. 20. There was a Question moved to S. Cyprian Whether Baptisme was concluded to the eight Day as well as Circumcision And no doubt was made then of the c Origine Peccati beginning of sin and that d Ex eâ re unde nulla erat Quaestio soluta est exorta Quaestio out of this thing about which no Question was mooved that Question that was made was Answered And e Hoc de Fundamento Ecclesiae sumpsit ad confirmandum Lapidem nut antem againe That S. Cypryan tooke that which he gave in answer from the Foundation of the Church to confirme a stone that was shaking Now S. Cyprian in all the Answer that he gives hath not one word of any Definition of the Church therefore ea res That thing by which he answered was a Foundation of prime and setled Scripture-Doctrine not any Definition of the Church Therefore that which he tooke out of the Foundation of the Church to fasten the stone that shooke was not a Definition of the Church but the Foundation of the Church it selfe the Scripture upon which it is builded as appeareth in the f Concil Milevit c. 2. Milevitane Councell where the Rule by which Pelagius was condemned is the Rule of g Rom. 5. 15. Scripture Therefore Saint Augustine goes on in the same sense That the Disputer is not to be borne any longer that shall h Vt Fundamentum ipsum Ecclesiae quatere moliatur endeavour to shake the Foundation it selfe upon which the whole Church is grounded Secondly if S. Augustine did meane by Founded and Foundation the definition of the Church because of these words This thing is Founded this is made firm by full Authority of the Church and the words following these to shake the foundation of the Church yet it can never follow out of any or all these Circumstances and these are all That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall in the faith For first no man denies but the Church is a c 1 Tim. 3. 15. Foundation That things defined
things which are but Accessory c. Hooker L. 3. Eccl. Pol. §. 3. Fundamentall in the Faith to all men And secondly the whole Discourse here is concerning Faith as it is taken Objectivè for the Object of Faith and thing to be Beleeved but that Faith by which Christ is said to dwell in our hearts is taken Subjectivè for the Habit and Act of Faith Now to confound both these in one period of speech can have no other ayme than to confound the Reader But to come closer both to the Iesuite and his Defender A. C. If all Poynts made firme by full Authority of the Church be Fundamentall then they must grant that every thing determined by the Councell of Trent is Fundamentall in the Faith For with them 't is firme and Catholike which that Councell Decrees Now that Councell decrees b Si quis dixerit Ordines ab Episcopis collatos sine populi vel potestatis saecularis consensu aut vocatione irritos esse Anathema sit Con. Trid. Sess. 23. Can. 7. That Orders collated by the Bishop are not void though they be given without the Consent or calling of the People or of any secular Power And yet they can produce no Authour that ever acknowledged this Definition of the Councell Fundamentall in the Faith 'T is true I do not grant that the Decrees of this Councell are made by full Authority of the Church but they do both grant and maintaine it And therefore 't is Argumentum ad hominem a good Argument against them that a thing so defined may be sirme for so this is and yet not Fundamentall for so this is not But A. C. tels us further That if one may deny or doubtfully dispute against any one Determination of the A. C. p. 45. Church then he may against another and another and so against all since all are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which being weakened in any one cannot be firme in any other First A. C. might have acknowledged that he borrowed the former part of this out of a Cont. Haer. c. 31. Abdicatà enim qualibet parte Catholici Dogmatis alia quoque at que item alia c. Quid aliud ad extremum sequetur nisi ut totum pariter repudictur Vin. Lir. And as that Learned Father uses it I subscribe to it but not as A. C. applies it For Vincentius speaks there de Catholico Dogmate of Catholike Maximes and A. C. will force it to every Determination of the Church Now Catholike Maximes §. 30. N. 21. which are properly Fundamentall are certaine Prime Truths deposited with the Church and not so much determined by the Church as published and manifested and so made firme by her to us For so b Ecclesia Deâ—…sitorum apud se Dogmatum Custos c. Denique quid unquam Conciliorum Decretis enisa est nisi ut quod antea simpliciter credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur c. Vin. Lir. cont Harcs c. 32. Vincentius expresly Where all that the Church doth is but ut hoc idem quod anteà that the same thing may be believed which was before Believed but with more light and cleerenesse and in that sense with more firmenesse than before Now in this sense give way to a Disputator errans every cavilling Disputer to deny or quarrell at the Maximes of Christian Religion any one or any part of any one of them and why may he not then take liberty to do the like of any other till he have shaken all But this hinders not the Church her selfe nor any appointed by the Church to examine her owne Decrees and to see that she keepe Dogmata deposita the Principles of Faith unblemished and uncorrupted For if she do not so but that c Vin. Lir. cont haer c. 31. Impiorum turpium Errorum Lupanar ubi erat antè castae incorruptâ—… Sacrarium Veritatis Novitia veteribus new Doctrines bee added to the old the Church which is Sacrarium Veritatis the Repository of Verity may be changed in lupanar errorum I am loth to English it By the Church then this may nay it ought to be done however every wrangling Disputer may neither deny nor doubtfully dispute much lesse obstinately oppose the Determinations of the Church no not where they are not Dogmata Deposita these deposited Principles But if he will be so bold to deny or dispute the Determinations of the Church yet that may be done without shaking the Foundation where the Determinations themselves belong but to the Fabricke and not to the Foundation For a whole Frame of Building may be shaken and yet the Foundation where it is well lay'd remaine firme And therefore after all A. C. dares not say the Foundation is shaken but onely in a sort And then 't is as true that in a sort A. C. p. 46. it is not shaken 2. For the second part of his Argument A. C. must pardon me if I dissent from him For first all Determinations of the Church are not made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation For some Determinations of the Church are made firme to us per a Vin. Lir. cont Haer. c. 32. chirographum Scripturae by the Hand-writing of the Scripture and that 's Authenticall indeed Some other Decisions yea and of the Church too are made or may be if b Relect. cont 4. q. 1. Art 3. Etiamsi nullo Scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili Testimonio c. Stapleton informe us right without an evident nay without so much as a probable Testimony of Holy-Writ But c Non potest aliquid certum esse certitudine fidei nisi aut immediatè contineatur in Uerbo Dei aut ex Uerbo Dei per evidentem consequentiam deducatur Bellar. L. 3. de Justifica c. 8. §. 2. Bellarmine fals quite off in this and confesses in expresse termes That nothing can be certaine by Certainty of Faith unlesse it be contained immediately in the Word of God Or be deduced out of the Word of God by evident Consequence And if nothing can be so certaine then certainly no Determination of the Church it selfe if that Determination be not grounded upon one of these either expresse Word of God or evident Consequence out of it So here 's little Agreement in this great Point betweene Stapleton and Bellarmine Nor can this be shifted off as if Stapleton spake of the Word of God written and Bellarmine of the Word of God unwritten as he cals Tradition For Bellarmine treats there of the knowledge which a man hath of the Certainty of his owne Salvation And I hope A. C. will not tell us There 's any Tradition extant unwritten by which particular men may have assurance of their severall Salvations Therefore Bellarmine's whole Disputation there is quite beside the matter Or els he must
say that the Booke of Articles only was the Continent of the Church of Englands publike Doctrine She is not so narrow nor hath she purpose to exclude any thing which she acknowledges hers nor doth she wittingly permit any Crossing of her publike Declarations yet she is not such a shrew to her Children as to deny her Blessing or Denounce an Anathema against them if some peaceably dissent in some Particulars remoter from the Foundation as your owne Schoole men differ And if the Church of Rome since she grew to her greatnesse had not beene so fierce in this Course and too particular in Determining too many things and making them matters of Necessary Beliefe which had gone for many hundreds of years before only for things of Pious Opinion Christendome I perswade my selfe had beene in happier peace at this Day then I doubt we shall ever live to see it Well but A. C. will proove the Church of England a Shrew and such a Shrew For in her Booke * Can. 5. of Canons A. C. p. 48. She Excommunicates every man who shall hold any thing contrary to any part of the said Articles So A. C. But surely these are not the very words of the Canon nor perhaps the sense Not the Words for they are Whosoever shall affirme that the Articles are in any part superstitious or erroneous c. And perhaps not the sense For it is one thing for a man to hold an Opinion privately within himselfe and another thing boldly and publikely to affirme it And againe 't is one thing to hold contrary to some part of an Article which perhaps may bee but in the manner of Expression and another thing positively to affirme that the Articles in any part of them are superstitious and erroneous But this is not the Maine of the Businesse For though the Church of England Denounce Excommunication as is a Can. 5. before expressed Yet She comes farre short of the Church of Rome's severity whose Anathema's are not only for 39. Articles but for very many more * Concil Trident. above one hundred in matter of Doctrine and that in many Poynts as farre remote from the Foundation though to the farre greater Rack of mens Consciences they must be all made Fundamentall if that Church have once Determined them whereas the Church A. C. p. 45. of England never declared That every one of her Articles are Fundamentall in the Faith For 't is one thing to say No one of them is superstitious or erroneous And quite another to say Every one of them is fundamental and that in every part of it to all mens Beliefe Besides the Church of England prescribes only to her owne Children and by those Articles provides but for her owne peaceable Consent in those Doctrines of Truth But the Church of Rome severely imposes her Doctrine upon the whole World under paine of Damnation F. And that the Scriptures only not any unwritten Tradition was the Foundation of their Faith B. The Church of England grounded her Positive § 15 Articles upon Scripture and her Negative doe refute there where the thing affirmed by you is not affirmed by Scripture nor directly to be concluded out of it And here not the Church of England only but all Protestants agree most truly and most strongly in this That the Scripture is sufficient to salvation and containes in it all things necessary to it The Fathers a S. Basil. de verâ piâ fide Manifesta defectio Fidei est importare quicquam eorum quae scripta non sunt S. Hilar. L. 2. ad Const. Aug. Fidem tantùm secundum ca quae scripta sunt desider autem hoc qui repudiat Antichristus est qui simulat Anathema est S. Aug. L. 2. de Doctr. Christian. c. 9. In iis quae apertè in Scriptura posita sunt inveniuntur illa omnia quae continent sidem mâ—…resque vivendi And to this place Bellarm L. 4. de verbo Dei non scripto c. 11. saith that S. Augustine speakes de illis Dogmatibus quae necestaria sunt omnibus simpliciter of those Points of faith which are necessary simply for all men So farre then he grants the question And that you may know it fell not from him on the suddaine he had said as much before in the beginning of the same Chapter and here he confirmes it againe are plaine the b Sâ—…tus Proleg in sent q. 2. Scriptura sufficienter continet Doctrinam necessariam Uiatori Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 10. ad 1. In Doctrina Christi Apostolorum veritas fidei est suffi ientèr explicata And he speakes there of the written Word Schoolemen not strangers in it And have not we reason then to account it as it is The Foundation of our Faith And c Scripturam Fundamentum esse columnam Fidei fatemur in suo genere i. can genere Testimoniorum in materia Credendorum Relect. Con. 4. q. 1. Ar. 3. in fine Stapleton himselfe though an angry Opposite confesses That the Scripture is in some sort the Foundation of Faith that is in the nature of Testimony and in the matter or thing to be believed And if the Scripture be the Foundation to which we are to goe for witnesse if there be Doubt about the Faith and in which we are to find the thing that is to be believed as necessary in the Faith we never did nor never will refuse any Tradition that is Universall and Apostolike for the better Exposition of the Scripture nor any Definition of the Church in which she goes to the Scripture for what she teaches and thrusts nothing as Fundamentall in the Faith upon the world but what the Scripture fundamentally makes materiam Credendorum the substance of that which is so to be believed whether immediatly and expresly in words or more remotely till a cleare and full Deduction draw it out Against the beginning of this Paragraph A. C. excepts And first he sayes 'T is true that the Church of England grounded her Positive Articles upon Scripture A. C. p. 48. That is 't is true if themselves may be competent Iudges in their owne Cause But this by the leave of A. C. is true without making our selves Iudges in our owne Cause For that all the Positive Articles of the present Church of England are grounded upon Scripture we are content to be judged by the joynt and constant Beliefe of the Fathers which lived within the first foure or five hundred yeares after Christ when the Church was at the best and by the Councels held within those times and to submit to them in all those Points of Doctrine Therefore we desire not to be Iudges in our owne Cause And if any whom A. C. cals a Novellist can truly say and maintaine this he will quickly proove himselfe no Novellist And for the Negative Articles they refute where the thing affirmed by you is either not affirmed in
I think it is undoubted Truth That one and the same Conclusion may be Faith to the Believer that cannot prove and Knowledge to the Learned that can And b Cont. Fund c. 4. S. Augustine I am sure in regard of one and the same thing even this the very Wisdome of the Church in her Doctrine ascribes Vnderstanding to one sort of men and Beliefe to another weaker sort And c Tho. p. 1. q. 2. A. 2. ad 1. Nihil prohibet illud quod secundùm se demonstrabile est scibile ab aliquo acciti ut Credibile qui Demonstrationem non capit Thomas goes with him Now for further satisfaction if not of you yet of others this may well be thought on Man lost by sin the Integrity of his Nature and cannot have Light enough to see the way to Heaven but by Grace This Grace was first merited after given by Christ this Grace is first kindled in Faith by which if we agree not to some Supernaturall Principles which no Reason can demonstrate simply we can never see our way But this Light when it hath made Reason submit it self cleares the Eye of Reason it never puts it out In which sense it may be is that of a L. 3. Rationabilu ubique diffusa Optatut That the very Catholike Church it selfe is reasonable as well as diffused every where By which b Ut ipsâ fide valentiores facti quod credimus intelligere mereannur non jam hominibus sed Deo intrinsecùs mentem nostram firmante illuminante S. Aug. cont Epist Fundamenti c. 14. Reason inlightened which is stronger then Reason the Church in all Ages hath beene able either to convert or convince or at least c Omnia genera Ingeniorum subdita Scripturae S. Aug. L. 22. cont Faust. cap. 96. stop the mouthes of Philosophers and the great men of Reason in the very Point of Faith where it is at highest To the present occasion then The first immediate Fundamentall Points of Faith without which there is no salvation as they cannot be proved by Reason so neither need they be determined by any Councell nor ever were they attempted they are so plaine set downe in the Scripture If about the sense and true meaning of these or necessary deduction out of these Prime Articles of Faith Generall Councels determine any thing as they have done in Nice and the rest there is no inconvenience that one and the same Canon of the Councell should be believed as it reflects upon the Articles and Grounds indemonstrable and d Almain 3. D. 24. q. 1. Tho. 2. 2a q. 1. A. 5. C. Id quod est scitum ab uno homine etiam in statu via est ab alio Creditum qui hoc Demonstrare non novit yet knowne to the Learned by the Meanes and Proofe by which that Deduction is vouched and made good And againe the Conclusion of a Councell suppose that in Nice about the Consubstantiality of Christ with the Father in it selfe considered is indemonstrable by Reason There I believe and assent in Faith But the same Conclusion e Concilium Nicanum deduxit Conclusionem ex Scripturis Bellar 2. de Concil c. 12. §. Sic etià m if you give me the Ground of Scripture and the Creed and somewhat must be supposed in all whether Faith or Knowledge is demonstrable by naturall Reason against any Arrian in the world And if it be demonstrable I may know it and have an Habit of it And what inconvenience in this For the weaker sort of Christians which cannot deduce when they have the Principle granted they are to rest upon the Definition only and their Assent is meere Faith yea and the Learned too where there is not a Demonstration evident to them assent by Faith onely and not by knowledge And what inconvenience in this Nay the necessity of Nature is such that these Principles once given the understanding of man cannot rest but it must be thus And the †S. Pet. 3. 15. Apostle would never have required a man to be alle to give a Reason and an account of the hope that is in him if he might not be able to know his account or have lawfull interest to give it when he knew it without prejudicing his Faith by his knowledge And suppose exact knowledge and meere Beliefe cannot stand together in the same Person in regard of the same thing by the same meanes yet that doth not make void this Truth For where is that exact knowledge or in whom that must not meerely in points of Faith believe the Article or Ground upon which they rest But when that is once believed it can demonstrate many things from it And Definitions of Councels are not Principia Fidei Principles of Faith but Deductions from them And now because you aske Wherein are we nearer Consid. 7. to unity by a Councell if a Councell may erre Besides the Answer given I promised to consider which Opinion was most agreeable with the Church which most able to preserve or reduce Christian Peace The Romane That a Councell cannot erre Or the Protestants That it can And this I propose not as a Rule but leave the Christian world to consider of it as I doe First then I Consider Whether in those Places of Scripture before mentioned or any other there bâ—…e promised to the present Church an absolute Infallibility Or whether such an Infallibility will not serve the turne as * Relect. Cont. 4. q. 2. Notab 3 Exacta Omnimodâ Infallibilitate non indiget sed satis est semel acceptis c. Stapleton after much wrigling is forced to acknowledge One not every way exact because it is enough if the Church doe diligently insist upon that which was once received and there is not need of so great certainty to open and explicate that which lyes hid in the seed of Faith sowne and deduce from it as to seeke out and teach that which was altogether unknowne And if this be so then sure the Church of the Apostles required guidance by a greater degree of Infallibility then the present Church which yet if it follow the Scripture is Infallible enough though it hath not the same degree of Certainty which the Apostles had and the Scripture hath Nor can I tell what to make of Bellarmine that in a whole Chapter disputes five Prerogatives in Certainty of Truth a L. 2 de Con. c. 12. §. ult Cùm utraque sint infallibilis veritatis aquè certa dici possunt that the Scripture hath above a Councell and at last Concludes That They may be said to be equally certain in Infallible Truth The next thing I Consider is Suppose this not Exact but congruous Infallibility in the Church Is it not residing according to Power and Right of Authority in the whole Church and in a Generall Councell only by Power deputed b Nam si Ecclesiae Vniversitati non
but so not as it is the Baptisme of Hereticks but as it is the Baptisme of Christ. Iust as we approve the Baptisme of Adulterers Idolaters Witches and yet not as'tis theirs but as 't is Christs Baptisme For none of these for all their Baptisme shall inherit the Kingdome of God And the Apostle reckons Hereticks among them a Gal. 5. 19. 20. 21. Galat. 5. And againe afterwards It is not therefore yours saith †Non ergo vestrum est quod dâ—…struere metuimus sed Christi quod in 〈◊〉 per se 〈◊〉 est S. Aug. Ibid. Saint Augustine which wee feare to destroy but Christs which even among the Sacrilegious is of and in it selfe holy Now you shall see how full this comes home to our Petilianist A. C. for hee is one of the Contracters of the Church of Christ to Rome as the Donatists confined it to Africke And he cries out That a Possibility of Salvation A. C. p. 6â—… is a free Confession of the Adversaries and is of force against them and to bee thought extorted from them by force of Truth it selfe I Answer I doe indeed for my part leaving other men free to their owne judgement acknowledge a Possibility of Salvation in the Romane Church But so as that which I grant to Romanists is not as they are Romanists but as they are Christians that is as they believe the Creed and hold the Foundation Christ himselfe not as they associate themselves wittingly and knowingly to the grosse Superstitions of the Romish Church Nor doe I feare to destroy quod ipsorum est that which is theirs but yet I dare not proceed so roughly as with theirs or for theirs to deny or weaken the Foundation which is Christs even among them and which is and remaines holy even in the midst of their Superstitions And I am willing to hope there are many among them which keep within that Church and yet wish the Superstitions abolished which they know and which pray to God to forgive their errours in what they know not and which hold the Foundation firme and live accordingly and which would have all things amended that are amisse were it in their power And to such I dare not deny a Possibility of Salvation for that which is Christs in them though they hazzard themselves extremely by keeping so close to that which is Superstition and in the Case of Images comes too neare Idolatry Nor can A. C. shift this A. C. p. 66. off by adding living and dying in the Romane Church For this living and dying in the Romane Church as is before expressed cannot take away the Possibility of Salvation from them which believe and repent of whatsoever is errour or sinne in them be it sinne knowne to them or be it not But then perhaps A. C. will reply that if this be so I must then maintaine that a Donatist also living and dying in Schisme might be saved To which I answer two wayes First that a plaine honest Donatist having as is confessed true Baptisme and holding the Foundation as for ought I know the †For though Prateolus will make Donatus and from him the Donatists to be guilty of an impious Heresie I doubt he meanes Arrianisme though he name it not in making the Sonne of God lesse then the Father and the Holy Ghost lesse then the Sonne L. 4. de Haeres Har. 14. yet these things are most manifest out of S. Aug. concerning them who lived with them both in time and place and understood them and their Tenets farre better then Prateolus could And first S. Aug. tels us concerning them Arriani Patris Filii Spiritus Sancti diversas substantias esse dicunt Donatista autem unam Trinitatis substantiam confitentur So they are no Arrians Secondly Si aliqui corum minorem Filium esse dixerunt quà m Pater est ejusdem tamen substantiae non negârunt But this is but si aliqui if any so 't was doubtfull this too though Prateolus delivers it positively Thirdly Plurimi verò in iis hoc se dicunt omnino credere de Patre Filio Spiritu Sancto quod Cathilica credit Ecclesia Necipsa cum illis vertitur Questio sed de sola Communione infoeliciter litigant c. De sola Onely about the Vnion with the Church Therefore they erred not in Fundamentall Points of Faith And Lastly All that can farther be said against them is That some of them to win the Goths to them when they were powerfull said Hoc se Credere quod illi Credunt Now the Goths for the most were Arrians But then saith S. Aug. they were but nonnulli some of them And of this some it was no more Certaine then sicut audivimus as we have heard S. Aug. knew it not And then if it were true of some yet Majorum suorum Authoritate convincuntur Quia nec Donatus ipse sic credidisse asseritur de cujus parte se esse gloriantur S Aug. Epist. 50. Where Prateolus is againe deceived for he sayes expresly that Donatus affirmed the Sonne to be lesse then the Father Impius ille asserebat c. But then indeed and which perchance deceived Prateolus beside Donatus the founder of this Heresie there was another Donatus who succeeded Majorinus at Carthage and he was guilty of the Heresie which Prateolus mentions Et extant scripta ejus ubi apparet as S. Aug. confesses L. 1. de Haereâ—… Har. 69. But then S. Aug. adds there also nec facilè in iis quisquam that scarce any of the Donatists did so much as know that this Donatus held that Opinion much lesse did they believe it themselves S. Aug. Ibid. Donatists did and repenting of what ever was sinne in him and would have repented of the Schisme had it beene known to him might be saved Secondly that in this Particular the Romanist and the Donatist differ much And that therefore it is not of necessary coÌ„sequence that if a Romanist now upon the Conditions before expressed may be saved Therefore a Donatist heretofore might For in regard of the Schisme the Donatist was in one respect worse and in greater danger of damnation then the Romanist now is And in an other respect better and in lesse danger The Donatist was in greater danger of damnation if you consider the Schisme it selfe then for they brake from the Orthodox Church without any cause given them And here it doth not follow if the Romanist have a Possibility of Salvation therefore a Donatist hath But if you consider the Cause of the Schisme now then the Donatist was in lesse danger of Damnation then the Romanist is Because the Church of Rome gave the first and the greatest cause of the Schisme as is prooved †§. 21. N. c. before And therefore here it doth not follow That if a Donatist have possibility of Salvation Therefore a Romanist hath For a lesser Offender may have that possibility of safety
which a greater hath not And last of all whereas A. C. addes that confessedly Punct 6. A. C. p. 66. there is no such Perill That 's a most lowd untruth and an Ingenuous man would never have said it For in the same * §. 35. N. 12. place where I grant a possibility of Salvation in the Romane Church I presently adde that it is no secure way in regard of Romane Corruptions And A. C. cannot plead for himself that he either knew not this or that he overlook'd it for himselfe disputes against it as strongly as he can What modesty or Truth call you this For he that confesses a possibility of Salvation doth not therby confesse no perill of Damnation in the same way Yea but if some Protestants should say there is perill of Damnation to live and dye in the Romane Faith their saying is nothing in comparison of the number or worth of those that say there is none So A. C. againe And beside A. C. p. 66. they which say it are contradicted by their owne more Learned Brethren Here A. C. speakes very confusedly But whether he speake of Protestants or Romanists or mixes both the matter is not great For as for the Number and Worth of men they are no necessary Concluders for Truth Not Number for who would be judged by the Many The time was when the †Ingemuit totus Orbis Arrianum se esse miratus est S. Hier. advers Luciferian post medium Tâ—… 2. Arrianorum Uenenum non jam portiun culam quandam sed penè Orbem totum contaminaverat adeo ut propè cunctis Latini Sermonis Episcopis partim vi partim fraude deceptis caligo quaedam mentibus offunderetur c. Vin. Lir. cont Haeres c. 6. Ecclesia non Parietibus consistit sed in Dogmatum veritate Ecclesia ibi est ubi fides vera est Caterùm ante annos quindecim aut viginti Parietes omnes hic Ecclesiarum Haeretici de Atrianis aliis Haereticis loquitur possidebant c. Ecclesia autem illic erat ubi sides vera erat S. Hier. in Psal. 133. Constantius Tantane Orbis terrae pars Liberi in te residet ut tu solus homini Impio de Athanasio loquitur subsidio venire pacem Orbis ac Mundi totius dirimere audeas Liberius Esto quod ego solus sim non tamen propterea Causa fidei fit inferior nam olim tres solum erant reperti qui Rggis mandato resisterent c. Theod. L. 2. Hist. Eccles. c. 16. Dialogo inter Constant. Imp. Liberium Papam So that Pope did not think Multitude any great note of the true Church Vbi sunt c. qui Ecclesiam multitudiné definiunt parvum gregem aspernantur c. Greg. Naz. Orat 25. prin Nay the Arrians were growne to that boldnesse that they Objected to the Catholicks of that time Paucitatem the thinnesse of their number Greg. Naz. Carm. de vita sua p. 24. Edit Paris 1611. Quum ejecti tamen essent de Civitatibus jactabant in desertis suis Synagogis illud Multi vocati pauci electi Socr. L. 1. Hist. Eccl. c. 10. Arrians were too many for the Orthodox Not Worth simply for that once * Error Origenis Tertulliani magna fuit in Ecclesià Dei Populi tentatio Vin Lir. cont Har. c. 23 24. misled is of all other the greatest misleader And yet God forbid that to Worth weaker men should not yeeld in difficult and Perplexed Questions yet so as that when Matters Fundamentall in the Faith come in Question they finally rest upon an higher and clearer certainty then can be found in either Number or VVeight of men Besides if you meane your own Partie you have not yet prooved your Partie more worthy for Life or Learning then the Protestants Proove that first and then it will be time to tell you how worthy many of your Popes have beene for either Life or Learning As for the rest you may blush to say it For all Protestants unanimously agree in this That there is great perill of Damnation for any man to live and dye in the Romane perswasion And you are not able to produce any one Protestant that ever said the contrary And therefore that is a most notorious slander where you say that they which affirme this perill of Damnation are contradicted by their owne more A. C. p. 66. Learned Brethren And thus having cleared the way against the Exceptions of A. C. to the two former Instances I will now proceed as I †§. 35. N. 4. promised to make this farther appeare that A. C. and his fellowes dare not stand to that ground which is here laid downe Namely That in Poynt of Faith and Salvation it is safest for a man to take that way which the Adversary Confesses to be true or whereon the differing Parties agree And that if they doe stand to it they must be forced to maintaine the Church of England in many things against the Church of Rome And first I Instance in the Article of our Saviour Christs Descent into Hell I hope the Church of Rome believes Punct 1. this Article and withall that Hell is the place of the Damned so doth the Church of England In this then these distenting Churches agree Therefore according to the former Rule yea and here in Truth too 't is safest for a man to believe this Article of the Creed as both agree That is that Christ descended in Soule into the Place of the Damned But this the Romanists will not endure at any hand For the †Sequuntur enim Thom p. 3. q. 52 Ar. 2. c. Verba ejus sunt Anima Christi per suam essentiam descendit soluÌ„ ad locum Inferni in quo justi detinebantur c. Schoole agree in it That the Soule of Christ in the time of his death went really no farther then in Limbum Patrum which is not the place of the Damned but a Region or Quarter in the upper part of Hell as they call it built up there by the Romanist without Licence of either Scripture or the Primitive Church And a man would wonder how those Builders with untempered mortar found light enough in that darke Place to build as they have done Ezec. 13. 10. Secondly I 'le instance in the Institution of the Sacrament in both kinds That Christ Instituted it so is confessed Punct 2. by both Churches that the Ancient Churches received it so is agreed by both Churches Therefore according to the former Rule and here in Truth too 't is safest for a man to receive this Sacrament in both kindes And yet here this Ground of A. C. must not stand for good no not at Rome but to receive in one kinde is enough for the Laity And the poore * Basiliense Concilium concessit Bohemis utriusque speciâ—…i usum modò faterentur id sibi concedi ab Ecclesiâ non autem
well meaning man that is misted and believes an Hereticke Yet here let mee adde this for fuller Expression This must bee understood of such Leaders and Hereticks as c S. Mat. 18. 17. Qui oppugnant Regulam Veritatis S. Aug. L. de Haeresibus versùs finem refuse to heare the Churches Instruction or to use all the meanes they can to come to the knowledge of the Truth For else if they doe this Erre they may but Heretickes they are not as is most manifest in d Cyprianus Beatus Martyr S. Aug. L. 1. de Bapt. cont Donatist c. 18. S. Cyprian's Case of Rebaptization For here though he were a maine Leader in that Errour yet all the whole Church grant him safe and his e Donatista verò qui de Cypriani Authoritate fibi carnaliter blandiuntur S. Aug. L. 1. de Bapt. cont Donat. c. 18. nimiâ—…â—…iseri nisi se corrigant à semetipsis omninò daâ—…ati qui hoc in tanto viro eligunt imitari Ibid. c. 19. Followers in danger of damnation But if any man be a Leader and a Teaching Heretick and will add f Rei falsitatis circa accusatum Coecilianum deprehensi Donatistae pertinaâ—… dissentione firmatâ schisma in Haeresâ—… verterunt S. Aug. L. de Haeres Haer. 69. Et Tales sub Vocabulo Christiano doctrinae resistunt Christianae S. Aug. L. 18. 〈◊〉 Civ Dei c. 51. prin Schisme to Heresie and bee obstinate in both he without repentance must needs bee lost while many that succeed him in the Errour onely without the Obstinacie may bee saved For they which are missed and swayed with the Current of the time hold the same Errours with their misleaders yet not supinely but with all sober diligence to finde out the Truth Not pertinaciously but with all readinesse to submit to Truth so soone as it shall bee found Not uncharitably but retaining an internall Communion with the Whole Visible Church of Christ in the Fundamentall Points of Faith and performance of Acts of Charity not factiously but with an earnest desire and a sincere endeavour as their Place and Calling gives them meanes for a perfect Vnion and Communion of all Christians in Truth as well as Peace I say these however misled are neither Hereticks nor Schismaticks in the sight of God and are therefore in a state of Salvation And were not this true Divinity it would go very hard with many poore Christian soules that have been and are misled on all sides in these and other Distracted times of the Church of Christ Whereas thus habituated in themselves they are by God's mercy safe in the midst of those waves in which their Misleaders perish I pray you Marke this and so by God's Grace will I. For our * Qui et fi ipsi postmodum ad Ecclesiam râ—…eunt restituere tamen eos seoum reâ—…are non possunt qui ab iis seducti sunt foris morte praeventi extra Ecclesiam sine Communicatione pace perierunt quorum Animae in die Iudicii de ipsorum manibus expetentur qui perditionis Authores duces extiterunt S. Cypr. L. 2. Epist. 1. reckoning will bee heavier if wee thus mislead on either side then theirs that follow us But I see I must look to my selfe for you are secure For F. D. White said I hath secured mee that none of our Errours be damnable so long as we hold them not against our Conscience And I hold none against my Conscience B. It seemes then you have two Securities § 37 D. White 's Assertion and your Conscience What Assurance D. White gave you I cannot tell of my selfe nor as things stand may I rest upon your Relation It may be you use him no better then you do mee And sure it is so For I have since spoken with D. White the late Reverend B. of Ely and he avovvs this and no other Answer He was asked in the Conserence betweene you Whether Popish Errours were Fundamentall To this he gave an Answer by Distinction of the Persons which held and professed the Errours Namely that the Errours were Fundamentall reductivè by a Reducement if they which embraced them did pertinaciously adhere to them having sufficient meanes to be better informed Nay farther that they were materially and in the very kinde and Nature of them Leaven Drosse a 1 Cor. 3. 12. Hay and Stubble Yet he thought withall that such as were misled by education or long custome or over valuing the Soveraignty of the Roman Church and did in simplicity of heart embrace them might by their generall Repentance and Faith in the Merit of Christ attended with Charity and other Uertues finde mercy at Gods hands But that he should say signanter and expresly That none either of yours or your Fellowes Errours were damnable so long as you hold them not against Conscience that he utterly disavowes You delivered nothing to extort such a Confession from him And for your selfe he could observe but small love of Truth few signes of Grace in you as be told me Yet he will not presume to judge you or your salvation It is the b S Iohn 12. 48. Word of Christ that must judge you at the later day For your Conscience you are the happier in your Errour that you hold nothing against it especially if you speak not against it while you say so But this no man can know but your selfe c 1 Cor. 2. 11. For no man knowes the thoughts of a man but the Spirit of a man that is within him to which I leave you To this A. C. replyes And first he grants that D. White did not signanter and expresly say these precise A. C. p 67. words So then here 's his plaine Confession Not these precise words Secondly he saith that neither did D. White signanter and expresly make the Answer above mentioned But to this I can make no Answer since I was not present at the first or second Conference Thirdly he saith that the Reason which moved the Iesuite to say D. White had secured him was because the said Doctor had granted in his first Conference with the Iesuite these things following First That there must be one or other Church continually visible Though D. White late Bishop of Ely was more able to Answer for himselfe yet since he is now dead and is thus drawne into this Discourse I shall as well as I can doe him the right which his Learning and Paines for the Church deserved And to this first I grant as well as he That there must be some one Church or other continually visible Or that the Militant Church of Christ must alwayes be visible in some Particulars or Particular at least expresse it as you please For if this be not so then there may be a time in which there shall not any where be a visible Profession of the Name of Christ which is contrary to the whole scope and promise of the Gospell Well
What then Why then A. C. addes That D. White confessed that this Visible Church had in all ages A. C. p. 67. taught that unchanged Faith of Christ in all Points Fundamentall D. White had reason to say that the Visible Church taught so but that this or that Particular Visible Church did so teach sure D. White affirmed not unlesse in case the whole Visible Church of Christ were reduced to one Particular only But suppose this What then Why then A. C. telles us that D. White being urged to assigne such a Church expresly A. C. p. 67. granted he could assigne none different from the Romane which held in all ages all Points Fundamentall Now here I would faine know what A. C. meanes by a Church different from the Romane For if he mean different in Place 'T is easie to affirme the Greeke Church which as hath * §. 9. before beene prooved hath ever held and taught the Foundation in the midst of all her Pressures And if he meane differentiâ—… Doctrinall Things and those about the Faith he cannot assigne the Church of Rome for olding them in all ages But if he meane different in the Foundation it selfe the Creed then his urging to assigne a Church is void be it Rome or any other For if any other Church shall thus differ from Rome or Rome from it selfe as to deny this Foundation it doth not it cannot remaine a Differing Church sed transit in Non Ecclesiam but passes away into No-Church upon the Denyall of the Creed Now what A. C. meanes he expresses not nor can I tell but I may peradventure guesse noare it by that which out of these Premises he would inferre For hence he tels us he gathered that D. Whito's Opinion A. C. p. 67. was That the Romane Church held and taught in all ages unchanged Faith in all Fundamentall Points and did not in any age erre in any Point Fundamentall This is very well For A. C s. confesses he did but gather that this was Doctor White 's Opinion And what if he gathered that which grew not there nor thence For suppose all the Premises true yet no Cartrope can draw this Conclusion out of them And then all A. C ' s. labour's lost For grant some one Church or other must still be Visible And grant that this Visible Church held all Fundamentals of the Faith in all ages And grant againe that D. White could not assigne any Church differing from the Romane that did this Yet this will not follow that therefore the Romane did it And that because there 's more in the Conclusion then in the Premises For A. C s. A. C. p. 67. Conclusion is That in D. White 's Opinion the Romane Church held and taught in all ages unchanged Faith in all Fundamentall Points And so farre perhaps the Conclusion may stand taking Fundamentall Points in their literall sense as they are expressed in Creedes and approved Councels But then he addes And did not in any age erre in any Point Fundamentall Now this can never follow out of the Premises before laid downe For say some one Church or other may still be Visible And that Visible Church hold all Fundamentall Points in all Ages And no man be able to name another Church different from the Church of Rome that hath done this yet it followes not therefore That the Church of Rome did not erre in any age in any Point Fundamentall For a Church may hold the Fundamentall Point Literally and as long as it stayes there be without controlle and yet erre grosly dangerously nay damnably in the Exposition of it And this is the Church of Romes case For most true it is it hath in all ages maintained the Faith unchanged in the Expression of the Articles themselves but it hath in the exposition both of Creeds and Councels quite changed and lost the sense and the meaning of some of them So the Faith is in many things changed both for life and beliefe and yet seems the same Now that which deceives the world is That because the Barke is the same men thinke this old decayed Tree is as sound as it was at first and not weather-beaten in any age But when they can make me believe that Painting is true Beauty I 'le believe too that Rome is not only sound but beautifull But A. C. goes on and tels us That hereupon the Iesuite asked whether Errors in Points not Fundamental were damnable And that D. White answered they were not unlesse they A. C. p. 67. were held against conscience T is true that Error in Points not Fundamentall is the more damnable the more it is held against conscience But it is true too that Error in Points not Fundamentall may be damnable to some men though they hold it not against their conscience As namely when they hold an Errour in some Dangerous Points which grate upon the Foundation and yet will neither seeke the meanes to know the Truth nor accept and believe Truth when 't is known especially being men able to Iudge which I feare is the case of too many at this day in the Romane Church Out of all which A. C. tels us The Iesuite collected that D. White 's Opinion was That the Romane Church held all A. C. p. 68. Points Fundamentall and only erred in Points not Fundamentall which he accounted not damnable so long as he did not hold them against his Conscience And that thereupon hee said D. White had secured him since he held no Faith different from the Romane nor contrary to his Conscience Here againe wee have but A C s and the Iesuites Collection But if the Iesuite or A. C. will collect amisse who can helpe it I have spoken before in this very Paragraph to all the Passages of A. C. as supposing them true and set downe what is to be answered to them in case they proove so But now 't is most apparent by D. White 's Answer set downe before †§. 37. N. 1. at large that he never said that the Church of Rome erred onely in Points not Fundamentall as A. C. would have it But that hee said the contrary Namely that some errours of that Church were Fundamentall reductivê by a Reducement if they which embraced them did pertinaciously adhere to them having sufficient meanes of information And againe expresly That hee did not say that none were damnable so long as they were not held against Conscience Now where is A. C ' s. Collection For if a Iesuite or any other may collect Propositions which are not granted him nay contrary to those which are granted him hee may inferre what hee please And he is much too blame that will not inferre a strong Conclusion for himselfe that may frame his owne Premises say his Adversary what hee will And just so doth A. C. bring in his Conclusion to secure himselfe of Ialvation because he holds no Faith but the Romane nor that
to depart from the Foundation You have many dangerous Errours about the very Foundation in that which you call the Romane Faith But there I leave you to looke to your owne soule and theirs whom you seduce Yet this is true too That there is but one saving Faith But then every thing which you call De Fide of the Faith because some Councell or other hath defined it is not such a Breach from that One saving Faith as that he which expresly believes it not nay as that he which believes the Contrary is excluded from Salvation so his a S. 22. Nu. 5. Disobedience there while offer no violence to the Peace of the Church nor the Charity which ought to be among Christians And b Multa sunt de side quae non sunt absolutè necessaria as Salutem Bellar. L. 3. de Eccles. Milit. c. 14. §. Quinto si esset Bellarmine is forced to grant this There are many Things de Fide which are not absolutely necessary to salvation c Wald. Doct. Fid. l. 2. Ar. 2. § 23. Therefore there is a Latitude in the Faith especially in reference to different mens salvation To set d §. 38. Nu. 8. Bounds to this and strictly to define it for particular men Just thus farre you must believe in every Particular or incurre Damnation is no worke for my Pen. These two things I am sure of One That your peremptory establishing of so many things that are remote Deductions from the Foundation to bee believed as Matters of Faith necessary to Salvation hath with other Errours lost the Peace and Unity of the Church for which you will one day Answer And the other That you of Rome are gone farther from the Foundation of this One saving Faith then can ever be proved we of the Church of England have done But here A. C. bestirres himselfe finding that he is come upon the Point which is indeed most considerable A. C. p. 68. And first hee answers That it is * Pope Pelagius the second thought it was sufficient For when the Bishops of Istria deserted his Communion in Causa trium Capitulorum He first gives them an Account of his Faith that he embraced that Faith which the Apostles had delivered and the foure Synods explicated And then he adds Ubi ergo de Fidei firmitate nulla vobis poterit quastio vel suspicis generari c. Concil To. 4. p. 473. Edit Paris So then that Pope thought there could be no question made or suspition had of any mans faith that professed that Faith which the Apostles delivered as 't is explicated by those Great Councels And yet now with A. C. 't is not sufficient Or els he holds the Faith of our Lord Iesus Christ in such râ—…spect of persons contrary to the Apostles Rule S. James 2. 12. as that profession of it which was sufficient for Pope Pelagius shall not be sufficient for the poore Protestants not sufficient to beget a Confidence in this Case to say wee believe the Scriptures and the Creeds in the same sense which the Ancient Primitive Church believed them c. Most true if we onely say and do not believe And let them which believe not while they say they doe looke to it on all sides for on all sides I doubt not but such there are But if we doe say it you are bound in Charity to believe us unlesse you can prove the Contrary For I know no other proofe to men of any Point of Faith but Confession of it and Subscription to it And for these particulars we have made the one and done the other So 't is no bare saying but you have all the proofe that can be had or that ever any Church required For how farre that Beliefe or any other sinkes into a man's heart is for none to judge but God Next A. C Answers That if to say this be a sufficient Cause of Confidence he marvels why I make such A. C. p. 68. difficulty to bee Confident of the Salvation of Romane Catholikes who believe all this in a faire better manner then Protestants doe Truly to say this is not a sufficient cause but to say and believe it is And to take off A. C s. wonder why I make difficulty great difficulty of the salvation of Romane Catholikes who he sayes believe all this and in a farre better manner then Protestants doe I must be bold to tell him That Romanists are so farre from believing this in a better manner then we do that under favour they believe not part of this at all And this is most manifest For the Romanists dare not believe but as the Romane Church believes And the Romane Church at this day doth not believe the Scripture and the Creeds in the sense in the which the Ancient Primitive Church received them For the Primitive Church never interpreted Christ's descent into Hell to be no lower then Limbus Patrum Nor did it acknowledge a Purgatory in a side-part of Hell Nor did it ever interpret away halfe the Sacrament from Christ's owne Institutior which to breake * Stapl. Returne of Vntruths upon B. Iewell Art 2. Vntruth 49 fol. 44. Stapleton confesses expresly is a damnable Errour Nor make the Intention of the Priest of the Essence of Baptisme Nor believe worship due to Images Nor dreame of a Transubstantiation which the Learned of the Romane Partie dare not understand properly for a change of one substance into another for then they must grant that Christ's reall and true Body is made of the Bread and the Bread changed into it which is properly Transubstantiation Nor yet can they expresse it in a credible way as appeares by †Est totalis Conversio substantiae Panis Vini in Corpus Sanguinâ—…m Domini Bellar. L. 3. de Euchar. c. 18. §. 1. Substantiaâ—… 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Transubstantiatio sicut Ecclesia appellat Greg. de Valen. To. 4 〈◊〉 q. 3. punct 3. Now you shall see what stuffe Bellarmine makes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Conversio Panis in Corpus Domini nec est Productiva nâ—… Conservatâ—… sed Adductiva Nam Corpus Domini praeexistit ante Conversionem 〈◊〉 non sub speâ—…iebus Panis Conversio igitur non facit ut Corpus Christ simplicitèr esse incipiat sed ut incipiat esse sub speciebus Panis 〈◊〉 Bellar. L. 3. de Euchar. c. 18. §. Ex his colligimus So upon the whole matter there shall be a totall Conversion of the Bread into the Body of Christ And yet there shall be no Conversion at all but a Bringing of the Body of Christ before praeexistent to be now under the Species of Bread where before it was not Now this is meerly Translocation 't is not Transubstantiation And I would have Bellarm. or any Iesuite for him shew where Conversio Adductiva is read in any good Author But when Bellar. comes to the Recognition of his workes upon this place he tels us That some excepted against him
Paris 1609. S. Gregory Nazianzen And his words are that Ancient Rome from of old hath the right Faith and alwayes holds it as becomes the City which is Governesse over the whole World to have an entire faith in and concerning God Now certainly it became that City very well to keepe the Faith sound and entire And having the Government of a great part of the World then in her power it became her so much the more as her Example thereby was the greater And in S. Gregory Nazianzen's time Rome did certainly hold both rectam integram fidem the right and the whole entire Faith of Christ. But there is nor Promise nor Prophecy in S. Gregory that Rome shall ever so doe For his words are plaine semper decet it alwayes becomes that great City to have and to hold too integram Fidem the entire Faith But at the other semper 't is b The words in the Greeke are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Haec quidem fuit diu nunc adhuc est recti grada 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Est So S. Gregory sayes but of an 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or a retinebit he sayes nothing retinet that City from of old holds the right faith yet but he saith not retinebit semper that the City of Rome shall retaine it ever no more then it shall ever retaine the Empire of the World Now it must be assur'd that it shall ever hold the entire faith of Christ before we can be assured That that Particular Church can never erre or be Infallible Besides these the Cardinall names Cyrillus and Ruffinus but he neither tells us where nor cites their words Yet I thinke I have found the most pregnant place in S * Petram opinor per agnominationem nihil aliud quà m inconcustam firmissimam Discipuli fidem vocavit In quà Ecclesia Christi ita fundata firmata esset ut non laberetur esset inexpugnabilis inferorum portis in perpetuuâ—… manens S. Cyril Alex. Dial. de Trin. l. 4. p. 278. Parisiis An. 1604. Cyril and that makes clearly against him For I finde expresly these three things First that the Church is Inexpugnable and that the Gates of Hell shall never prevaile against it but that it shall in perpetuum manere remaine for ever And this all Protestants grant But this That it shall not fall away doth not secure it fromall kinds oferror Secondly Bellarmine quotes S. Cyril for the Particular Romane Church and S. Cyril speakes not of the Romane at all but of the Church of Christ that is the Catholike Church Thirdly that the Foundation and firmenesse which the Church of Christ hath is placed not in or upon the * Et ego dico tibi i. tuae Confessioni quâ mihi diâ—…isti Tu es Christus c. Dion Carthus in S. Mat. 16. 18. Et super hanc Petram i. Fidei hujus sirmitatem fundamentum Vel super hanc Petram quam confessus es i. super Meipsum Lapidem Angularem c. Ibid. Person much lesse the Successor of S. Peter but upon the * faith which by Gods Spirit in him he so firmely professed which is the Common received Opinion both of the Ancient Fathers and the Protestants Vpon this Rocke that is upon this faith will I build my Church S. Matth. 16. So here 's all the Good he hath gotten S. Matt. 16. 18. by S. Cyril unlesse he can cite some other place of S. Cyril which I believe he cannot And for Ruffinus the Place which Bellarmine aimes at is in his Exposition upon the Creed and is quoted in part the b Bellar. L. 4. de Rom. Pont. Cap. 3. §. penult Chapter before But when all his words shall be laid together they will make no more for Bellarmine and his Cause then the former Places have done c Illud non importunè commonendum puto quod in diversis Ecclesiis aliqua in his verbis inveniunt ur adjecta In Ecclesiâ tamen Vrbis Romae hoc non deprehenditur factum Pro eo arbritror quod neque Haeresis ulla illic sumpsit exordium mos ibi servatur antiquus eos qui gratiam Baptismi suscepturi sunt publicò id est Fidelium populo audiente Symbolum reddere Et utique adjectionem unius saltem Sermonis eorum qui praecesserunt in Fide non admittit auditus In caeteris autem Locis quantum intelligi datur propter nonnullos Haereticos addita quaedam videntur per quae novellae Doctrinae sensus crederetur excludi c. Ruffin in Exposit. Symbol ut habetur inter Opera S. Cypriani Praefat. Expos. Ruffinus his words then runne thus Before I come to the Words of the Creed this I thinke fit to warne you of That in divers Churches some things are found added to the words of the Creed But in the Church of the City of Rome this is not found done And as I thinke it is for that no Haeresie did take its rise or beginning there And for that the old Custome is there observed Namely that they which are to receive the grace of Baptisme doe publikely repeate the Creed in the hearing of the People who would not admit such Additions But in other places as farre as I can understand by reason of some Hereticks some things were added but such as were to exclude the sense of their Novell Doctrine Now these words make little for Bellarmine who cites them and much against Ruffinus that uttered them They make little for Bellarmine First because suppose Ruffinus his speech to be true yet this will never follow In Ruffinus his time no Haeresie had taken its beginning at Rome therefore no Haeresie hath had rooting there so many hundred yeares since Secondly Bellarmine takes upon him there to proove That the particular Church of Rome cannot erre Now neither can this be concluded out of Ruffinus his words First because as I said before to argue from Non sumpsit to Ergo sumere non potest No Haeresie hath yet begun there therefore none can begin there or spring thence is an Argument drawne Ab actu ad Potentiam negative from the Act to the Power of Being which every Novice in Learning can tell proceeds not Negatively And Common Reason telles every man 't is no Consequence to say Such a thing is not or hath not beene Therefore it cannot be Secondly because though it were true that no Haeresie at all did ever take its beginning at Rome yet that can never proove that the particular Church of Rome can never erre which is the thing in Question For suppose that no Haeresie did ever beginne there yet if any that began elswhere were admitted into that Church it is as full a proofe That that Church can erre as if the Haeresie had beene hatched in that Nest. For that Church erres which admits an Haeresie into it as well as that which broaches it Now Ruffinus sayes no more
explicandi Emanationem Sp. S. quà m in ipsá re c. Iodocus Clictoveus in Damase L 1. Fid Orth. c. 11. Et quidam ex Graecis concedunt quòd sit á Filio vel ab eo prostuat Thom. p. 1. q. 36. A. 2. C. Et Thomas ipse dicit Sp. S. procedere mediatè à Filio ib. A. 3. ad 1. salâ—…em ratione Personarum Spirantium Respondeo cum Bessarione Gennadio Damascenum non negâsse Sp. S. procedere ex Filio quod ad rem attinet quùm dixerit Spiritum esse Imaginem Filii per Filium sed existimásse tutiùs dici per Filium quà m ex Filio quantum ad modum loquendi c. Bellarm. L. 2. de Christo c. 27. §. Respondeo igitur Et Tollet in S. Iohn 15. Ar. 25. Lutheran Resp. ad Resp. 2. Ieremiae Patriarchae The Master and his Schollers agree upon it The Greeks saith he confesse the Holy Ghost to bee the Spirit of the Son with the Apostle Galath 4. and the Spirit of truth S. Iohn 16. And since Non est aliud it is not another thing to say The Holy Ghost is the Spirit of the Father and the Sonne then that He is or proceeds from the Father and the Sonne in this They seeme to agree with us in candem Fidei sententiam upon the same Sentence of Faith though they differ in words Now in this cause where the words differ but the Sentence of Faith is the same d Eadem penitùs Sententia ubi suprà Clictov penitùs eadem even altogether the same Can the Point be fundamentall You may make them no Church as e Bellarm. 4. de Notis Eccl. cap. 8. §. Quod autem apud Graecos Bellarmine doth and so deny them salvation which cannot be had out of the true Church but I for my part dare not so do And Rome in this Particular should be more moderate if it be but because this Article Filióque was added to the Creed by her selfe And 't is hard to adde and Anathematize too It ought to be no easie thing to condemne a man of Heresie in foundation of faith much lesse a Church least of all so ample and large a Churchas the Greeke especially so as to make them no Church Heaven Gates were not so easily shut against multitudes when S. Peter wore the Keyes at his owne girdle And it is good counsell which a Lib. 3. cont Hares fol. 93. A. 〈◊〉 vidcant ht qui famile de haerest pronumiant quaÌ„ facile etiam ipsi errent Et intelligant non esse tam leviter de Haeresi censenduÌ„ c. In verbo Beatitudo Alphonsus à castro one of your owne gives Let them consider that pronounce easily of Heresie how easie it is for themselves to erre Or if you will pronounce consider what it is that separates from the Church simply and not in part only I must needs professe that I wish heartily as well as b Iunius Animad in Bellar. cont 2. L. 3. c. 23. others that those distressed men whose Crosse is heavie already had beene more plainly and moderately dealt withall though they thinke a diverse thing from us then they have beene by the Church of Rome But hereupon you say you were forc'd F. Whereupon I was forced to repeate what I had formerly brought against D. White concerning Points Fundamentall B. Hereupon it is true that you read a large § 10 Discourse out of a Booke printed which you said was yours The Particulars all of them at the least I do not now remember nor did I then approve But if they be such as were formerly brought against Doctor White they are by him formerly answered The first thing you did was the * P. First righting the Sentence of S. Austine Ferendus est Disputator errans c. Here A. C. p. 44. tells us very learnedly that my corrupt Copy hath righting instead of reading the Sentence of S. Austine Whereas I here use the word righting not as it is opposed to reading as any man may discerne A. C. palpably mistakes but for doing right to S. Austine And if I had meant it for writing I should not have spelled it so righting of S. Augustine which Sentence I doe not at all remember was so much as named in the Conference much lesse was it stood upon and then righted by you Another place of S. Augustine indeed was which you omit But it comes after about Tradition to which I remit it But now you tell us of a great Proofe made out of this †By which is proved That all poynts Defined by the Church are Fundamentall Place For these words of yours containe two Propositions One That all Poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall The other That this is proved out of this Place of S. Augustine 1. For the first That all Poynts defined by the Church are fundamentall It was not the least meanes by which Rome grew to her Greatnesse to blast every Opposer she had with the name of Hereticke or Schismaticke for this served to shrivel the credit of the Persons And the Persons once brought into contempt and ignominie all the good they desired in the Church fell to dust for want of creditable Persons to backe and support it To make this Proceeding good in these later yeares this Course it seemes was taken The Schoole that must maintaine and so they doe That all Points Defined by the Church are thereby a Your owne word Fundamentall b Inconcussâ fide ab omnibus Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. Art 10. C. necessary to be believed c Sco us 1. Sent. d. 11. q. 1. of the substance of the Faith and that though it be determined quite d Ecclesiae Voces etiam extra Scripturam Stap. Relect. Con. 4. q. 1. Ar. 3. Quae maturo judicio definivit c. Solidum est etiamsi nullo Scripturarum aut evidenti aut probabili testimonio confirmaretur bid Extra Scripturam And then e Et penes Cercopes Victoria sit Greg. Naz. de Differen vitae Cercopes 1. Astutos veteratoriae improbitat is Episcopos qui artibus suis ac dolis omnia Concilia perturbabant Schol. ib. leave the wise and active Heads to take order that there be strength enough ready to determine what is fittest for them But since these men distinguish not nor you betweene the Church in generall and a Generall Councell which is but her Representation for Determinations of the Faith though I be very slow in sifting or opposing what is concluded by Lawfull Generall and consenting Authority though I give as much as can justly be given to the Definitions of Councels truly Generall nay suppose I should grant which I doe not That Generall Councells cannot erre yet this cannot downe with me That all Poynts even so defined are Fundamentall For Deductions are not prime and native Principles nor are Superstructures Foundations That which is a
Foundation for all cannot be one and another to different Christians in regard of it selfe for then it could be no common Rule for any nor could the soules of men rest upon a shaking foundation No If it be a true Foundation it must be common to all and firme under all in which sense the Articles of Christian Faith are Fundamentall And f Quum exim una cadem sides sit neque is qui multum de ipsà dicere potest plusquam oportet dicit neque qui parùm ipsam imminuit Iren. L. 1. advers haeres c. 3. Ireneus layes this for a ground That the whole Church howsoever dispersed in place speakes this with one mouth He which among the Guides of the Church is best able to speake utters no more then this and lesse then this the most simple doth not utter Therefore the Creed of which he speaks is a common is a constant Foundation And an Explicite faith must be of this in them which have the use of Reason for both Guides and simple people All the Church utter this Now many things are defined by the Church w ch are but Deductions out of this which suppose them deduced right move far from the Foundation without which Deductions explicitly believed many millions of Christians go to Heaven and cannot therefore be Fundamentall in the faith True Deductions from the Article may require necessary beliefe in them which are able and do go along with them from the Principle to the Conclusion But I do not see either that the Learned do make them necessary to all or any reason why they should Therfore they cannot be FundameÌ„tall yet to some mens Salvation they are necessary Besides that which is Fundamentall in the Faith of Christ is a Rocke immoveable and can never be varied Never a Resolutio Occhami est quòd nâ—… tota Ecclesia nec Concilium Generale nec summus Pontifex potest facere Articulum quod non suit Articulus Sed in dubiis propositionibus potest Ecclesia determinare an sint Cathilicae c. Tamen sic determinando non facit quod sint Catholicae quum prius essent ante Ecclesiae Determinationem c. Almain in 3. D. 25. Q. 1. Therefore if it be Fundamentall after the Church hath defined it it was Fundamentall before the Definition els it is mooveable and then no Christian hath where to rest And if it be immooveable as b Regula Fidei una omnino est solailla immobilis irreformabilis Tertul. de Virg. vel cap. 1. In hac fide c. Nihil transmutare c. Athan. Epist. ad Iovin de side indeed it is no Decree of a Councell be it never so Generall can alter immooveable Verities no more than it can change immooveable Natures Therefore if the Church in a Councell define any thing the thing defined is not Fundamentall because the Church hath defined it nor can be made so by the Definition of the Church if it be not so in it selfe For if the Church had this power she might make a New Article of the Faith c Occham Almain in 3. Sent. D. 25. q. 1. which the Learned among your selves deny For the Articles of the Faith cannot increase in substance but onely in Explication d Thom. 2. 2. q. 1. Ar. 7. C. And for this I 'le be judg'd by Bellarmine f Fides Divina non ideo habet certitudinem quia toti Ecclesiae communis est sed quia nititur Authoritate Dei qui nec falli nec fallere potest quum sit ipsa Veritas L. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Quod verò Concilium Probatio Ecclesiae facit ut omnibus innotescat Objectum Fidei Divinae esse revelatum à Deo propter hoc certum indubitatum non autem tribuit firmitatem verbo Dei aliquid revelantis Ibid. §. At inqust who disputing against Amb. Catharinus about the certainty of Faith tels us That Divine Faith hath not its certainty because 't is Catholike .i. common to the whole Church but because it builds on the Authority of God who is Truth it self and can neither deceive nor be deceived And he addes That the Probation of the Church can make it known to all that the Object of Divine Faith is revealed from God and therefore certaine and not to be doubted but the Church can adde no certainty no firmenesse to the word of God revealing it Nor is this hard to be farther proved out of your owne Schoole For a Scotus in 1. Sent. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus professeth it in this very particular of the Greeke Church If there be saith he a true reall difference betweene the Greekes and the Latines about the Point of the Procession of the Holy Ghost then either they or we be verè Haeretici truly and indeed Hereticks And he speakes this of the old Greekes long before any Decision of the Church in this Controversie For his instance is in S. Basil and Greg. Nazianz. on the one side and S Ierome Augustine and Ambrose on the other And who dares call any of these Hereticks is his challenge I deny not but that Scotus adds there That howsoever this was before yet ex quo from the time that the Catholike Church declared it it is to be held as of the substance of Faith But this cannot stand with his former Principle if he intend by it That whatsoever the Church defines shall be ipso ficto and for that Determination's sake Fundamentall For if before the Determination supposing the Difference reall some of those Worthies were truly Hereticks as he confesses then somewhat made them so And that could not be the Decree of the Church which then was not Therefore it must be somwhat really false that made them so and fundamentally false if it made them Hereticks against the Foundation But Scotus was wiser than to intend this It may be he saw the streame too strong for him to swim against therfore he went on with the doctrine of the Time That the Churches Sentence is of the substance of Faith But meant not to betray the truth For he goes no further than Ecclesia declaravit since the Church hath declared it which is the word that is used by diverse b Bellarm. L. 2. de Conc. Auth. c. 12. Concilia cùm definiunt non faciunt aliquid esse infallibilis veritatis sed declarant Explicare Bonavent in 1. d. 11. A. 1. q. 1. ad sinem Explanare declarare Tho 1. q. 36. A. 2. ad 2. 2. 2. q. 1 A. 10. ad 1. Quid unquam aliud Ecclesia Câ—… ili rum Decretis enisa est nisi ut quod anica simplicitèr credebatur hoc idem postea diligentiùs crederetur Vin. Lyr. cont 〈◊〉 c. 32 Now the a Sent. 1. D. 11 Master teaches and the b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11 Art 7. Schollers too That every thing which belongs to the Exposition or Declaration of
by it are founded upon it And yet hence it cannot follow That the thing that is so founded is Fundamentall in the Faith For things may be d Mos fundatissimus S. Aug. Ep. 28. founded upon Humane Authority and be very certaine yet not Fundamentall in the Faith Nor yet can it follow This thing is founded therefore every thing determined by the Church is founded Again that which followes That those things are not to be opposed which are made firme by full Authority of the Church cannot conclude they are therefore Fundamentall in the Faith For full Church Authority alwayes the time that included the Holy Apostles being past by and not comprehended in it is but Church Authority and Church Authority when it is at full sea is not simply e Staple Rebect cont 4. q. 3. A. 1. Divine therefore the Sentence of it not fundamentall in the Faith And yet no erring Disputer may be endured to shake the foundation which the Church in Councell layes But plaine Scripture with evident sense or a full Demonstrative Argument must have Roome where a wrangling and erring Disputer may not be allowed it And ther 's f Quae quidem si tam manifesta monstratur ut in dubium venire non possit praeponenda est omnibus illis rebus quibus in Catholicâ teneor Ita si aliquid apertissimum in Evangelio S. Aug. contra Fund c. 4. neither of these but may Convince the Definition of the Councell if it be ill founded And the Articles of the faith may easily proove it is not Fundamentall if indeed and verily it be not so And I have read some body that sayes is it not you That things are fundamentall in the Faith two wayes One in their Matter such as are all things which be so in themselves The other in the Manner such as are all things that the Church hath Defined and determined to be of Faith And that so some things that are de modo of the manner of being arc of Faith But in plaine truth this is no more then if you should say some things are Fundamentall in the faith and some are not For wrangle while you will you shall never be able to proove that any thing which is but de modo a consideration of the manner of being only can possibly be Fundamentall in the faith And since you make such a Foundation of this Place I will a little view the Mortar with which it is laid by you It is a venture but I shall finde it a Ezek. 13. 11. untempered Your Assertion is All poynts defined by the Church are Fundamentall Your proofe this Place Because that is not to be shaken which is setled by b Plenâ Ecclesiae Authoritate full Authority of the Church Then it seemes your meaning is that this poynt there spoken of The remission of Originall sinne in Baptisme of Infants was defined when S. Augustine wrote this by a full Sentence of a Generall Councell First if you say it was c 1. 2. de Author Concil c. 5. §. A solis particularibus Bellarmine will tell you it is false and that the Pelagian Heresie was never condemned in an Oecumenicall Councell but only in Nationalls But Bellarmine is deceived For while the Pelagians stood out impudently against Nationall Councels some of them defended Nestorius which gave occasion to the first d Can. 1. 4. Ephesine Councell to Excommunicate and depose them And yet this will not serve your turne for this Place For S. Augustine was then dead and therefore could not meane the Sentence of that Councell in this place Secondly if you say it was not then Defined in an Oecumenicall Synode Plena authoritas Ecclesiae the full Authority of the Church there mentioned doth not stand properly for the Decree of an Oecumenicall Councell but for some Nationall as this was condemned in a * Concil Milevit Can. 2 Nationall Councell And then the full Authority of the Church here is no more then the full Authority of this Church of †Nay if your owne Capellus be true De Appell Eccl Afric c. 2. n. 5. It was â—…ut a Provinciall of Numidia not a Plenary of Africk Africk And I hope that Authority doth not make all Points defined by it to be Fundamentall You will say yes if that Councell be confirmed by the Pope And then I must ever wonder why S. Augustine should say The full Authority of the Church and not bestow one word upon the Pope by whose Authority only that Councell as all other have their fulnesse of Authority in your Iudgement An inexpiable Omission if this Doctrine concerning the Pope were true But here A. C. steps in againe to helpe the Iesuite and he tells us over and over againe That all A. C. p. 45. points made firme by full Authority of the Church are Fundamentall so firme he will have them and therefore fundamentall But I must tell him That first 't is one thing in Nature and Religion too to be firme and another thing to be fundamentall These two are not Convertible T is true that every thing that is fundamentall is firme But it doth not follow that every thing that is firme is fundamentall For many a Superstructure is exceeding firme being fast and close joyned to a sure foundation which yet no man will grant is fundamentall Besides what soever is fundamentall in the faith is fundamentall to the Church which is one by the vnity a Almain in 3. Sent. Dis. 25. q. 2. A Fide enim unà Ecclesia dicitur una of faith Therefore if every thing Defined by the Church be fundamentall in the faith then the Churches Definition is the Churches Foundation And so upon the matter the Church can lay her owne foundation and then the Church must be in absolute and perfect Being before so much as her Foundation is laide Now this is so absurd for any man of learning to say that by and by after A. C. is content to affirm not only that the prima Credibilia the Articles of Faith but all which so pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith as that thereby Christ doth dwell in our hearts c. is the Foundation of the Church under Christ the Prime Foundation And here he 's out againe For first all which pertaines to Supernaturall Divine and Infallible Christian Faith is not by and by b Aliquid pertinet ad Fidem dupliciter Uno modo directè sicut ea quae nobis sunt principalitèr divinitùs tradita ut Deum esse Trinum c. Et circa haec opinari falsum hoc ipso inducit Haeresin c. Alio modo indirectè Ex quibus consequitur aliquid contrarium Fidei c. Et in his aliquis potest falsum opinari absque periculo Haeresis donec Sequela illa ei innotescat c. Tho. p. 1. q. 32. A. 4. C. There are things Necessary to the Faith and
speake of the Written Word and so lie crosse to Stapleton as is mention'd But to returne If A. C. will he may but I cannot believe That a Definition of the Church which is made by the expresse Word of God and another which is made without so much as a probable Testimony of it or a cleare Deduction from it are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation Nay I must say in this case that the one Determination is firme by Divine Revelation but the other hath no Divine Revelation at all but the Churches Authority onely 2. Secondly I cannot believe neither That all Determinations of the Church are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church For the Authority of the Church though it be of the same fulnesse in regard of it self and of the Power which it commits to Generall Councels lawfully called yet it is not alwayes of the same fulnesse of knowledge and sufficiency nor of the same fulnesse of Conscience and integrity to apply Dogmata Fidei that which is Dogmaticall in the Faith For instance I thinke you dare not deny but the Councell of Trent was lawfully called and yet I am of opinion that few even of your selves believe that the Councell of Trent hath the same fulnesse with the Councell of Nice in all the fore-named kinds or degrees of fulnesse Thirdly suppose That all Determinations of the Church are made firme to us by one and the same Divine Revelation and sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority yet it will not follow that they are all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I hope A. C. himselfe will not say that the Definitions of the Church are in better condition than the Propositions of Canonicall Scripture Now all Propositions of Canonicall Scripture are alike firme because they all alike proceed from Divine Revelation but they are not all alike Fundamentall in the Faith For this Proposition of Christ to S. Peter and S. Andrew Follow me and I will make you fishers of men a S. Matth. 4. 19 is as firm a Truth as that which he delivered to his Disciples That he must die and rise againse the third day b S. Matth. 16. 21 For both proceed from the same Divine Revelation out of the mouth of our Saviour and both are sufficiently applied by one and the same full Authority of the Church which receives the whole Gospell of S. Matthew to be Canonicall and infallible Scripture And yet both these Propositions of Christ are not alike Fundamentall in the Faith For I dare say No man shall be saved in the ordinary way of salvation that believes not the Death and the Resurrection of Christ. And I believe A. C. dares not say that No man shall be saved into whose Capacity it never came that Christ made S. Peter and Andrew fishers of men And yet should he say it nay should he shew it sub annulo Piscatoris no man will believe it that hath not made shipwrack of his Common Notions Now if it be thus betweene Proposition and Proposition issuing out of Christ's own Mouth I hope it may well be so also betweene even Iust and True Determinations of the Church that supposing them alike true and firme yet they shall not be alike Fundamentall to all mens beliefe F. Secondly I required to know what Points the Bishop would account Fundamentall He said all the Points of the Creed were such B. Against this I hope you except not For § 11 since the a Tertull. Apol. contra Gentes c. 47. de veland virg c. 1. S. August Serm. 15. de Temp. cap. 2. Ruffin in Symb. apud Cyprian p. 357. Fathers make the Creed the Rule of Faith b Alb. Mag. in 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. since the agreeing sense of Scripture with those Articles are the two Regular Precepts by which a Divine is governed about the Faith since your owne Councell of c Concil Trident Sess. 3. Trent decrees That it is that Principle of Faith in which all that professe Christ doe necessarily agree Fundamentum firmum unicum not the firme alone but the onely Foundation since it is Excommunication d Bonavent ibid. Dub. 2. 3. in literam ipso jure for any man to contradict the Articles contained in that Creed since the whole Body of the Faith is so contained in the Creed as that the e Thom. 2. 2ae q. 1. Art 7. c. substance of it was believ'd even before the comming of Christ though not so expresly as since in the number of the Articles since f Bellar. L. 4. de Verb. Dei non Script c. 11. §. Primum est Bellarmine confesses That all things simply necessary for all mens salvation are in the Creed and the Decalogue what reason can you have to except And yet for all this everything Fundamentall is not of a like nearenesse to the Foundation nor of equall Primenesse in the Faith And my granting the Creed to be Fundamentall doth not deny but that there are g Tho. 2. 2ae q. 1. A. 7. C. quaedam prima Credibilia certaine prime Principles of Faith in the bosome whereof all other Articles lay wrapped and folded up One of which since Christ is that of S. h 1. S. Iohn 4. 2. Iohn Every spirit that confesseth Iesus Christ come in the flesh is of God And one both before the comming of Christ and since is that of S. Paul i Heb. 11. 6. He that comes to God must believe that God is and that he is a rewarder of them that seeke him Here A. C. tels you That either I must meane that those Points are onely Fundamentall which are expressed A. C. p. 46. in the Creed or those also which are infolded If I say those onely which are expressed then saith he to believe the Scriptures is not Fundamentall because 't is not expressed If I say those which are infolded in the Articles then some unwritten Church Traditions may be accounted Fundamentall The truth is I said and say still that all the Points of the Apostles Creed as they are there expressed are Fundamentall And therein I say no more than some of your best Learned have said before me But I never either said or meant That they onely are Fundamentall That they are a Conc. Trident. Sess. 3. Fundamentum unicum the only Foundation is the Councell of Trent's 't is not mine Mine is That the Beliefe of Scripture to be the Word of God and infallible is an equall or rather a preceding Prime Principle of Faith with or to the whole Body of the Creed And this agrees as before I told the Iesuite with one of your owne great Masters Albertus Magnus b In 1. Sent. D. 11. A. 7. Regula Fidei est concors Scriptururum sensus cum Articulis Fidei Quia illis duobus regularibus Praeceptis regitur Theologus who is not farre from
that Proposition in terminis So here the very Foundation of A. C ' s. Dilemma fals off For I say not That onely the Points of the Creed are Fundamentall whether expressed or not expressed That all of them are that I say And yet though the Foundation of his Dilemma be fallen away I will take the boldnesse to tell A. C. That if I had said That those Articles onely which are expressed in the Creed are Fundamentall it would have beene hard to have excluded the Scripture upon which the Creed it selfe in every Point is grounded For nothing is supposed to shut out its owne Foundation And if I should now say that some Articles are Fundamentall which are infolded in the Creed it would not follow that therefore some unwritten Traditions were Fundamentall Some Traditions I deny not true and firme and of great both Authority and Vse in the Church as being Apostolicall but yet not Fundamentall in the Faith And it would be a mighty large fold which should lap up Traditions within the Creed As for that Tradition That the Bookes of holy Scriptures are Divine and Infallible in every part I will handle that when I come to the proper place * §. 16. N. 1. for it F. I asked how then it happened as M. Rogers saith that the English Church is not yet resolved what is the right sense of the Article of Christs Descending into Hell B. The English Church never made doubt that § 12 I know what was the sense of that Article The words are so plaine they beare their meaning before them Shee was content to put that a Art 3. Article among those to which she requires Subscription not as doubting of the sense but to prevent the Cavils of some who had beene too busie in Crucifying that Article and in making it all one with the Article of the Crosse or but an Exposition of it And surely for my part I thinke the Church of England is better resolved of the right sense of this Article then the Church of Rome especially if shee must be tryed by her Writers as you try the Church of England by M. Rogers For you cannot agree whether this Article be a meere Tradition or whether it hath any Place of Scripture to vvarrant it a Scotus in 1. D. 11. q. 1. Scotus and b Stapleton Relect. Con. 5. q. 5. Art 1. Stapleton allow it no footing in Scripture but c Bellarm 4. de Christo. c. 6. 12. Scripturae passim hoc docent Bellarmine is resolute that this Article is every where in Scripture and d Thom. 2 â—…ae q. 1. A 9 ad 1. Thomas grants as much for the whole Creed The Church of England never doubted it and S. e S. Aug. Ep. 99. Augustine prooves it And yet againe you are different for the sense For you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ in triduo mortis in the time of his Death did go downe into Hell really and was present there or vertually and by effects only For g Tho. p. 3. q. 52. A. 2. c. per suam essentiam Thomas holds the first and h Dur in 3. d. 22. q. 3. Durand the later Then you agree not Whether the Soule of Christ did descend really and in essence into the lowest pit of Hell and Place of the Damned as i Bellar. L. 4. do Christo. c. 16. Bellarmine once held probable and prooved it or really only into that place or Region of Hell which you call Limbum Patrum and then but vertually from thence into the Lower Hell to which k Bellar. Recog p. 11. Bellarmine reduces himselfe and gives his reason because it is the l Sequuntur enim Tho. p. 3. Q. 52. A. 2. common Opinion of the Schoole Now the Church of England takes the words as they are in the Creed and believes them without farther Dispute and in that sense which the ancient Primitive Fathers of the Church agreed in And yet if any in the Church of England should not be throughly resolved in the sense of this Article Is it not as lawfull for them to say I conceive thus or thus of it yet if any other way of his Descent be found truer then this I deny it not but as yet I know no other as it was for m Non est pertinaciter asserendum quin Anima Christi per alium modum nobis ignotum potuerit descendere ad Infernum Nec nos negamus alium modum esse for sit an veriorem sed fatemur nos illum ignor arc Durand in 3. sent Dist. 22. q. 3. Nu. 9. Durand to say it and yet not impeach the Foundation of the Faith F. The Bishop said That M. Rogers was but a private man But said I if M. Rogers writing as he did by publike Authority be accounted only a private man c. B. I said truth when I said M. Rogers was a private § 13 man And I take it you will not allow every speech of every man though allowed by Authority to have his Bookes Printed to be the Doctrine of the Church of Rome * And this was an Ancient fault too for S. Augustine checks at it in his time Noli colligere calumnias ex Episcoporum scriptis sive Hillarii sive Cypriani Agrippini Primò quia hoc genus literarum ab Authoritate Canonis distinguendum est Non enim sic leguntur tanquam it a ex iis testimonium proferatur ut contrà sentire non liceat sicubi fortè aliter sentirent quà m veritas postulat S. Aug. Ep. 48. c. And yet these were farre greater men in their generations then M. Rogers was This hath beene oft complained of on both sides The imposing particular mens assertions upon the Church yet I see you meane not to leave it And surely as Controversies are now handled by some of your party at this day I may not say it is the sense of the Article in hand but I have long thought it a kinde os descent into Hell to be conversant in them I would the Authors would take heed in time and not seeke to blinde the People or cast a mist before evident Truth least it cause a finall descent to that place of Torment But since you will hold this course Stapleton was of greater note with you then M. Rogers his exposition of Notes upon the Articles of the Church of England is with us And as he so his Relection And is it the Doctrine of the Church of Rome which Stapleton affirmes †Stapl. Cont. 5. q. 5. A. 1. The Scripture is silent that Christ descended into Hell and that there is a Catholike and an Apostolike Church If it be then what will become of the Popes Supremacie over the whole Church Shall he have his Power over the Catholike Church given him expresly in Scripture in the a S. Mat. 16. 19. Keyes to enter and in b S. Ioh. 21. 15. Pasce
to feede when he is in and when he had fed to c S. Luk. 22. 35. Confirme and in all these not to erre and faile in his Ministration And is the Catholike Church in and over which he is to do all these great things quite left out of the Scripture Belike the Holy Ghost was carefull to give him his power Yes in any case but left the assigning of his great Cure the Catholike Church to Tradition And it were well for him if he could so prescribe for what he now Claymes But what if after all this M. Rogers there sayes no such thing As in truth he doth not His words are d Rogers in Art Eccle. Angl. Art 3. All Christians acknowledge He descended but in the interpretation of the Article there is not that consent that were to be wished What is this to the Church of England more then others And againe e Ibid. Till we know the native and undoubted sense of this Article is M. Rogers We the Church of England or rather his and some others Iudgement in the Church of England Now here A. C. will have somewhat againe to say though God knowes 't is to little purpose 'T is A. C. p. 47. that the Iesuite urged M. Roger's Booke because it was set out by Publike Authority And because the Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England A. C. may undoubtedly urge M. Rogers if he please But he ought not to say that his Opinion is the Doctrine of the Church of England for neither of the Reasons by him expressed First not because his Booke was publikely allowed For many Bookes among them as well as among us have beene Printed by publike Authority as containing nothing in them contrary to Faith and good manners and yet containing many things in them of Opinion only or private Iudgement which yet is farre from the avowed Positive Doctrine of the Church the Church having as yet determined neither way by open Declaration upon the words or things controverted And this is more frequent among their Schoolemen then among any of our Controversers as is well knowne Nor secondly because his Booke beares the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England For suppose the worst and say M. Rogers thought a little too well of his owne paines and gave his Booke too high a Title is his private Iudgement therefore to be accounted the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England Surely no No more then I should say every thing said by * Angelici D. S. Tho. Summa Thomas or †Celebratissimi Patris Dom. Bonaventurae Doctoris Seraphici in 3. L. Sent. Disputata Bonaventure is Angelicall or Seraphicall Doctrine because one of these is stiled in the Church of Rome Seraphicall and the other Angelicall Doctor And yet their workes are Printed by Publike Authority and that Title given them Yea but our private Authors saith A. C. are not allowed for ought I know in such a like sorte to expresse A. C. p. 47. our Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to Question Here are two Limitations which will goe farre to bring A. C. off whatsoever I shall say against him For first let me instance in any private man that takes as much upon him as M. Rogers doth he will say he knew it not his Assertion here being no other then for ought he knowes Secondly If he be unwilling to acknowledge so much yet he will answer 't is not just in such a like sort as M. Rogers doth it that is perhaps it is not the very Title of his Booke But well then Is there never a Private man allowed in the Church of Rome to expresse your Catholike Doctrine in any matter subject to question What not in any matter Were not Vega and Soto two private men Is it not a mâ—…tter subject to Question to great Question in these Dayes Whether a man may be certaine of his Salvation câ—…rtitudine fidei by the certainty of Faith Doth nâ—…t * Bellar. Lib. 3. de Justificat c. 1. 14. Bellarmine make it a Controversie And is it not a part of your Catholike Faith if it be determined in the †Huic Concilio Catholici omnes ingenia sua judicia sponte subjiciunt Bellar. 3. de Justif. c. 3. §. Sed Concilii Tridâ—…i Councell of Trent And yet these two great Friers of their time Dominicus Soto and Andreas Vega a Hist. Concil Trident. Lib. 2. p. 245. Edit Lat. Leidae 1622. were of contrary Opinions and both of them challenged the Decree of the Councell and so consequently your Catholike Faith to be as each of them concluded and both of them wrote Bookes to maintaine their Opinions and both of their Bookes were published by Authority And therefore I think 't is allowed in the Church of Rome to private men to expresse your Catholike Doctrine and in a matter subject to Question And therefore also if another man in the Church of England should be of a contrary Opinion to M. Rogers and declare it under the Title of the Catholike Doctrine of the Church of England this were no more then Soto and Vega did in the Church of Rome And I for my part cannot but wonder A. C. should not know it A. C. p. 47. For he sayes that for ought he knowes Private men are not allowed so to expresse their Catholike Doctrine And in the same Question both Catharinus and Bellarmine b Bellar. L. 3. de Iustif. c. 3. take on them to expresse your Catholike Faith the one differing from the other almost as much as Soto and Vega and perhaps in some respect more F. But if M. Rogers be only a private man in what Book may we finde the Protestants publike Doctrine The Bishop answered That to the Booke of Articles they were all sworne B. What Was I so ignorant to say The Articles § 14 of the Church of England were the Publike Doctrine of all the Protestants Or that all Protestants were sworne to the Articles of England as this speech seems to imply Sure I was not Was not the immediate speech before of the Church of England And how comes the Subject of the Speech to be varied in the next lines Nor yet speake I this as if other Protestants did not agree with the Church of England in the chiefest Doctrines and in the maine Exceptions which they joyntly take against the Romane Church as appeares by their severall Confessions But if A. C. will say as he doth that because there was speech before of the Church of A. C. p. 47. England the Iesuite understood mee in a limited sense and meant only the Protestants of the English Church Bee it so ther 's no great harme done †And therfore A. C. needs not make such a Noise about it as he doth p. 48 but this that the Iesuite offers to enclose me too much For I did not
Tradition may be knowne to be such by the light which it hath in it selfe which is an excellent Proposition to make sport withall were this an Argument to be handled merrily 3. For the third Opinion and way of proving either some thinke that there is no sufficient warrant for this unlesse they fetch it from the Testimony of the Holy Ghost and so looke in vaine after speciall Revelations and make themselves by this very Conceit obnoxious and easie to be led by all the whisperings of a seducing private spirit or els you would faine have them think so For your side both upon this and other Occasions do often challenge That we resolve all our Faith into the Dictates of a * A Iesuite under the name of T S. set out a Booke An. 1630. which he called The Triall of the Protestant private Spirit private Spirit from which we shall ever prove our selves as free if not freer than you To the Question in hand then Suppose it agreed upon that there must be a d Ut Testimonia Scripturae certam inaubitatam fidem praestent necessarium videtur ostendere quod ipsae Divinae Scripturae sint Dei Spiritu inspiratae Orig. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Divine Faith cui subesse non potest falsum under which can rest no possible errour That the Bookes of Scripture are the written Word of God If they which goe to the testimony of the Holy Ghost for proofe of this doe meane by Faith Objectum Fidei the Object of Faith that is to bee believed then no question they are out of the ordinary way For God never sent us by any word or warrant of his to looke for any such speciall and private Testimony to prove which that Booke is that we must believe But if by Faith they meane the Habit or Act of Divine infused Faith by which vertue they doe believe the Credible Object and thing to bee believed then their speech is true and confessed by all Divines of all sorts For Faith is the gift * 1. Cor. 12. 3. 4. Datur nobu a Deo c. S. Aug. in Psal. 87. of God of God alone and an infused †Quia homo assentiendo eis quae sunt fidâ—…i clevatur supra Naturam suam oportel quòd hoc inâ—…t ei ex supernaturali pâ—…incipio intâ—…riùs movente quod est Dens Tho. 2 2 ae q. 6. A. 1. c. And your owne Divines agree in this That Fides acquisita is not sufficient for any Article but there must be Fides infusa before there can be Divine Certainty Fides acquisita innititur conjecturis humanis Ad quem modum Saraceni suis Praeceptoribus Iudaei suis Rabinis Gentâ—…s suis Philosophs omnes suis Maj ribus inharent non sic Christians sed per interius lumen infusum à Spiritu Sancto quo firmissimè certissimè moventur ad credenâ—…m c. Canus L. 2. Locor c. 8. §. I am si hac Habit in respect whereof the Soule is meerely recipient And therefore the sole Infuser the Holy Ghost must not beâ—… excluded from that worke which none can doe but Hee For the Holy Ghost as * Symb. Nicen. The Holy Ghost spake by the Prophets c. Et 1. S. Pet. 2. 21. Quis modus est quo doces animas ea quae futura sunt Docuistâ—… enim Prophetas tuos S. Aug. L. 11. Confess c. 19. Hee first dictated the Scripture to the Apostles b Nec enim Ecclesiae Testimonium aut Judicium praedicamus Dei Spiritum vel ab Ecclâ—…sia doceâ—…te vol à nobis audientibus excludimus sed utrobique disertè includimus c. Stapl. trip contr Whitak c. 3. So did he not leave the Church in generall nor the true members of it in particular without Grace to believe what himself had revealed and made Credible So that Faith as it is taken for the vertue of Faith whether it be of this or any other Article c Fides quae caepit ab Ecclesia Testimonio quatenus proponit inducit ad Fidem deâ—…nit in Deo intùs revelante intùs docente quod forts Ecclesia pradicavit Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. q. 3. a. 2. When grave and learned men doe sometimes hold that of this Principle there is no proofe but by the Testimony of the Spirit c. I thinke it is not their meaning to exclude all outward Proofes c but rather this That all other meanes are uneffectuall of themselves to worke Faith without the speciall Grace of God Hook c. Lib. 3. §. 8. though it receive a kinde of preparation or Occasion of Beginning from the Testimony of the Church as it proposeth and induceth to the Faith yet it ends in God revealing within and teaching within that which the Church preached without For till the Spirit of God move the Heart of man he cannot believe be the Object never so Credible The speech is true then but quite d De habitu Fidei quoad fieri ejus generationem quùm à Deo immediatè solo Dono gratuito infusus est Nihil ad Quastionem nisi quoad hoc quod per Scriptura inspectionem c. Henr. à Gand. Sam. a. 10. q. 1. lit D. out of the State of this Question which inquires onely after a sufficient meanes to make this Object Credible and fit to be believed against all impeachment of folly and temerity in Beliefe whether men do actually believe it or not For which no man may expect inward private Revelation without the externall means of the Church unlesse perhaps the e Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. Q. 3. A. 2. Doth not onely affirme it but proves it too à paritate rationis in case of necessity where there is no Contempt of the externall meanes case of Neceâ—…ity be excepted when a man lives in such a time place as excludes him from all ordinary means in which I dare not offer to shut up God from the foules of men nor to tie him to those ordinary waies and means to which yet in great wisdome and providence He hath tied and bound all mankind Private Revelation then hath nothing ordinarily to doe to make the Object Credible in this That Scripture is the Word of God or in any other Article For the Question is of such outward and evident meanes as other men may take notice of as well as our selves By which if there arise any Doubting or Infirmity in the Faith others may strengthen us or we affoord meanes to support them Whereas the a Quid cum singulis agitur Deus scit qui agit ipsi cum quibus agitur sciunt Quid autem agatur cum genere Humano per Historiam commendari volâ—…it per Prophetiam S. Aug. de vera Relig. c. 25. Testimony of the Spirit and all private Revelation is within nor felt nor seen of any but him that hath it So that hence can be drawn no proofe to
writ downe my words in fresh memory and upon speciall notice taken of the Passage and that I did say either Iâ—…dem or aequipollentibus verbis either in these or equivalent words That the Protestants did make the Râ—…nt or Division from the Romane Church What did the Iesuite set downe my words in fresh memory and upon speciall notice taken and were they so few as these The Protestants did make the Schisme and yet was his memory so short that he cannot tell whether I uttered this iisdem or aequipollentibus verbis Well I would A. C. and his Fellowes would leave this Art of theirs and in Conferences which * A. C. p. 57. they are so ready to call for impose no more upon other men then they utter And you may observe too that after all this full Assertion that I spake this iisdem or aequipollentibus verbis A. C. concludes thus The Iesuite tooke speciall notice in fresh memory and is sure he related at A. C. p. 55. least in sense just as it was uttâ—…red What 's this At least in sense jâ—…st as it was uttered Do not these two Enterfeire and shew the Iesuite to be upon his shuffling pace For if it were just as it was uttered then it was in the very forme of words too not in sense onely And if it were but At least in sense then when A. C. hath made the most of it it was not just as 't was uttered Besides at least in sense doth not tell us in whose sense it was For if A. C. meane the Iesuite's sense of it he may make what sense he pleases of his owne words but he must impose no sense of his upon my words But as he must leave my words to my selfe so when my words are uttered or written he must leave their sense either to me or to that genuine Construction which an Ingenuous Reader can make of them And what my words of Grant were I have before expressed and their sense too Not with my selfe That 's the next For A. C. sayes 't is truth and that the world knowes it that the A. C. p. 56. Protestants did depart from the Church of Rome and got the name of Protestants by protesting against it No A. C. by your leave this is not truth neither and therefore I had reason to be angry with my selfe had I granted it For first the Protestants did not depart For departure is voluntary so was not theirs I say not theirs taking their whole Body and Cause together For that some among them were peevish and some ignorantly zealous is neither to be doubted nor is there Danger in confessing it Your Body is not so perfect I wot well but that many amongst you are as pettish and as ignorantly zealous as any of Ours You must not suffer for these nor We for those nor should the Church of Christ for either Next the Protestants did not get that Name by Protesting against the Church of Rome but by Protesting and that when nothing else would serve †Conventus suit Ordinum Imperii Spirae Ibi Decretum factum est ut Edictum Wormatiense observaretur contra Novatores sic appellare placuit ut omnia in integrum restituantur sic nulla omnino Reformatio Contra hoc Edictum solennis fuit Protestatio Aprilis 16. An. Ch. 1529. Et hinc ortum pervulgatum illud Protestantium nomen Se. Calvis Chron. ad An. 1529. Thâ—…s Protestation therefore was not simply against the Romane Church but against the Edict which was for the restoring of all things to their former estate without any Râ—…formation against her Errours Superstitions Do you but remove them from the Church of Rome and our Protestation is ended and the Separation too Nor is Protestation it selfe such an unheard of thing in the very heart of Religion For the Sacraments both of the Old and New Testament are called by your owne Schoole Visible Signes protesting the Faith Now if the Sacraments be Protestantia Signes Protesting why may not men also and without all offence be called Protestants since by receiving the true Sacraments and by refusing them which are corrupted they doe but Protest the sincerity of their Faith against that Doctrinall Corruption which hath invaded the great Sacrament of the Eucharist and other Parts of Religion Especially since they are men a Quibus homo fidem suam protestaretur Tho. p. 3. q. 61. A. 3. 4. C. which must protest their Faith by these visible Signes and Sacraments But A. C. goes on and will needs have it that the Protestants were the Cause of the Schisme For A. C. p. 56. saith he though the Church of Rome did thrust them from her by Excommunication yet they had first divided themselves by obstinate holding and teaching opinions contrary to the Romane Faith and Practice of the Church which to do S. Bernard thinks is Pride and S. Augustine Madnesse So then in his Opinion First Excommunication on their Part was not the Prime Cause of this Division but the holding and teaching of contrary Opinions Why but then in my Opinion That holding and teaching was not the Prime Cause neither but the Corruptions and Superstitions of Rome which forced many men to hold and teach the contrary So the Prime Cause was theirs still Secondly A. C s. words are very considerable For he charges the Protestants to be the Authours of the Schisme for obstinate holding and teaching Contrary Opinions To what I pray Why to the b I know Bellarm. quotes S. Ierome Sciro Romanam Fidem c. suprà §. 3. Nu. 9. But there S. Ierome doth not call it Fidem Romanam as if Fides Romana and Fides Catholica were convertible but he speakes of it in the Concrete Romana Fides i. Romanorum Fides qua laudata suit ab Apostolo c. Ro. 1. 8. S. Hieron Apol. 3. cont Ruffin That is that Faith which was then at Rome when S. Paul commended it But the Apostles commending of it in the Romanes at one time passes no deed of Assurance that it shall continue worthy of Commendations among the Romans through all tâ—…mes Romane Faith To the Romane Faith It was wont to be the Christian Faith to which contrary Opinions were so dangerous to the Maintainers But all 's Romane now with A. C. and the Iesuite And then to countenance the Businesse S. Bernard and S. Augustine are brought in whereas neither of them speak of the Romane and S. Bernard perhaps neither of the Catholike nor the Romane but of a Particular Church or Congregation Or if he speake of the Catholike of the Romane certainly he doth not His words are Quae major superbia c. What greater pride then that one man should preferre his judgement before the whole Congregation of all the Christian Churches in the world So A. C. as out of Saint Bernard †Quae major superbia quà m ut unus homo toti Congregationi judicium
and weighed as well as that which they say against it yet with c Non est inferiorum judicare an Superiores legitimè procedant necne nisi manifestiss imè constet intolerabilem Errorem committâ—… Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c 8. §. Alii dicunt Concilium Nisi manifestè constet Iacob Almaln in 3. sent D. 24. q. unicâ fine Bellarmines Exception still so the errour be not manifestly intolerable Nor is it fit for Private men in such great Cases as this upon which the whole peace of Christendome depends to argue thus The Error appeares Therefore the Determination of the Councell is ipso jure invalid But this is farre the safer way I say still when the Errour is neither Fundamentall nor in it selfe manifest to argue thus The Determination is by equall Authority and that secundùm jus according to Law declared to be invalid Therefore the Errour appeares And it is a more humble and conscientious way for any private man to suffer a Councell to goe before him then for him to out-runne the Councell But weake and Ignorant mens outrunning both God and his Church is as bold a fault now on all sides as the daring of the Times hath made it Common As for that which I have added concerning the Possibility of a Generall Councells erring I shall goe on with it without asking any farther leave of A. C. For upon this Occasion I shall not hold it § 33 amisse a little more at large to Consider the Poynt of Generall Councels How they may or may not erre And a little to looke into the Romane and Protestant Opinion concerning them which is more agreeable to the Power and Rule which Christ hath left in his Church and which is most preservative of Peace established or ablest to reduce perfect unity into the Church of Christ when that poore Ship hath her ribs dashed in sunder by the waves of Contention And this I will adventure to the World but only in the Nature of a Consideration and with submission to my Mother the Church of England and the Mother of us all the Universall Catholike Church of Christ As I doe most humbly All whatsoever else is herein contained First then I Consider whether all the Power Consid. 1. that an Oecumenicall Councell hath to Determine and all the Assistance it hath not to erre in that Determination it hath it not all from the a Si Ecclesiae Vniversitati non est data ulla Authoritas Ergo neque Concilio Generali quatenâ—… Ecclesiam Universalem repraesentat Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c. 16. §. Quòd si Ecclesia Catholike Universall Body of the Church and Clergie in the Church whose b Concilium Generale Ecclesiam reprasentans Ia. Almain in 3. Sent D. 24. Qâ—…unicâ Episcopi sunt Ecclesia reprasentativè ut nostri loquuntur Bellar. L. 3. de Eccl. Milit. c. 14. §. 3. Representative it is And it seemes it hath For the Government of the Church being not c §. 26. Nu. 8. Monarchicall but as Christ is Head this Principle is inviolable in Nature Every Body Collective that represents receives power priviledges from the Body which is represented els a Representation might have force without the thing it represents which cannot be So there is no Power in the Councell no Assistance to it but what is in and to the Church But yet then it may be Questioned whether the Representing Body hath d Omnis repraesentatio virtute minor est Reipsâ vel Veritate cujus Reprasentatio est Colligigitur apertè ex Tho. 1. 2. q. 101. A. 2. ad 2. all the Power Strength and Priviledge which the Represented hath And suppose it hath all the Legall Power yet it hath not all the Naturall either of strength or wisdome that the whole hath Now because the Representative hath power from the Whole and the Maine Body can meet no other way therefore the Acts Lawes and Decrees of the Representative be it Ecclesiasticall or Civill are Binding in their Strength But they are not so certaine and free from Errour as is that Wisdome which resides in the Whole For in Assemblies meerely Civill or Ecclesiasticall all the able and sufficient men cannot be in the Body that Represents And it is as possible so many able e Posset enim contingere quòd Congregati in Concilio Generali essent pauci viles tam in re quà m in hominum reputatione respectu illorum qui ad illud Concilium Generale minime convenissent c. Ockam Dial par 3. lib. 3. c. 13. and sufficient men for some particular businesse may be left out as that they which are in may misse or mis apply that Reason and Ground upon which the Determination is principally to rest Here for want of a cleare view of this ground the Representative Body erres whereas the Represented by vertue of those Members which saw and knew the ground may hold the Principle inviolated Secondly I Consider That since it is thus in Nature Consid. 2. and in Civill Bodies if it be not so in Ecclesiasticall too some reason must be given why a Ecclesia est tinum Corpus mysticâ—…m per Similitudâ—…nem ad Naturale Durand 3. D. 14. Q. 2. N. 5. Biel. Lect. 23. in Can. Miss For that Body also consists of men Those men neither all equall in their perfections of Knowledge and Iudgement whether acquired by Industry or rooted in Nature or infused by God Not all equall nor any one of them perfect and absolute or freed from passion and humane infirmities Nor doth their meeting together make them Infallible in all things though the Act which is hammered out by many together must in reason be perfecter then that which is but the Child of one mans sufficiency If then a Generall Councell have no ground of Not erring from the Men or the Meeting either it must not be at all or it must be by some assistance and power upon them when they are so met together And this if it bee lesse then the Assistance of the Holy Ghost it cannot make them secure against Errour Thirdly I Consider That the Assistance of the Consid. 3. Holy Ghost is without Errour That 's no Question and as little there is That a Councell hath it But the Doubt that troubles is Whether all assistance of the Holy Ghost be afforded in such a High manner as to cause all the Definitions of a Councell in matters Fundamentall in the Faith and in remote Deductions from it to be alike infallible Now the Romanists to prove there is b Omnem veritatem infallibiliter docendi c. Stapl. Relect. Praf ad Lectorem infallible assistance produce some places of Scripture but no one of them inferres much lesse enforces an infallibility The Places which Stapleton there rests upon are these c S. Ioh. 16. 13. I will send you the Spirit of Truth which will lead you into all Truth And d
spiritualiter idest invisibiliter per virtutem Spiritus Sancti Thom. p. 3. q. 75. A. 1. ad 1 um Spiritualiter manducandus est per Fidem Charitatem Tena in Heb. 13. Difficultate 8. Faith made spiritually partaker of the true and reall Body and Blood of Christ †I would have no man troubled at the words Truly and Really For that Blessed Sacrament received as it ought to be doth Truly and Really exhibit and apply the Body and the Blood of Christ to the Receiver So Bishop White in his Defence against T. W. P. Edit London 1617. p. 138. And Calvin in 1 Cor. 10. 3. Verè datur c. And againe in 1 Cor. 11. 24. Neque enim Mortis tantùm Resurrectionis suae beneficium nobis offert Christus sed Corpus ipsum in quo passus est resurrexit Concludo Realiter ut vulgò loquuntur hoc est Verè nobis in Coenâ datur Christi Corpus ut sit Animis nostris in cibum Salutarem c. truly and really and of all the Benefits of his Passion Your Romane Catholikes adde a manner of this his Presence Transubstantiation which many deny and the Lutherans a manner of this Presence Consubstantiation which more deny If this argument be good then even for this Consent it is safer Communicating with the Church of England then with the Roman or Lutheran Because all agree in this Truth not in any other Opinion Nay †Hoe totum pendet ex Principiis Metaphysicis philosophicis ad Fidei Doctrinam non est necessarium Suarez iâ—… 3. Thom. Disput. 50. §. 2. Suarez himselfe and he a very Learned Adversary what say you to this A. C doth Truth force this from him Confesses plainely †That to Beleeve Transubstantiation is not simply necessary A. C. p. 64. 65. to Salvation And yet he knew well the Church had Determined it And * Bellar. L. 3. de Eucha c. 18. §. Ex his colligimus Bellarmine after an intricate tedious and almost inexplicable Discourse about an Adductive Conversion A thing which neither Divinity nor Philosophy ever heard of till then is at last forced to come to this a Sed quidquid fit de Modis loquendi illud tenendum est Conversionem Panis Uini in Corpus Sanguinem Christi esse substantialem sed arcanam ineffabilem nullis naturalibus Conversionibus per omnia similem c. Bellar. in Recognit hujus loci Et Vid. §. 38. Nu. 3 Whatsoever is concerning the manner and formes of speech illud tenendum est this is to be held that the Conversion of the Bread and Wine into the Body and the Blood of Christ is substantiall but after a secret and ineffable manner and not like in all things to any naturall Conversion whatsoever Now if he had left out Conversion and affirmed only Christs reall Presence there after a mysterious and indeed an ineffable manner no man could have spoke better And therefore if you will force the Argument alwayes to make that the safest way of Salvation which differing Parties agree on why doe you not yeeld to the force of the same Argument in the Beliefe of the Sacrament one of the most immediate meanes of Salvation where not onely the most but all agree And your owne greatest Clarkes cannot tell what to say to the Contrary I speake here for the force of the Argument which certainly in it selfe is nothing though by A. C. made of great account For he sayes 'T is a A. C. p. 64. Confession of Adversaries extorted by Truth Iust as * Sed quia it a magnum firmamentum vanitatis vestrae in hâc sententia esse abitramini ut ad hoc tiâ—… terminandam putares Epistolam quo quasi recentiùs in Animus LegeÌ„tium remaneret brevitèr respondeo c. S. Aug. L. 2. cont Lit. Petil. c. 108. Andhere A. C. ad hoc sibi putavit terminandaÌ„ Collationem sed frustra ut apâ—…bit Num. 6. Petilian the Donatist brag'd in the case of Baptisme But in truth 't is nothing For the Syllogisme which it frames is this The Papists and the Protestants which are the Parties differing agree in this That there is Salvation possible to be found in the Romane Church But in Point of Faith and Salvation 't is safest for a man to take that way which the differing Parties agree on Therfore 't is safest for a man to be and continue in the Romane Church To the Major Proposition then I observe first that though many Learned Protestants grant this all doe not And then that Proposition is not Universall nor able to sustaine the Conclusion For they doe not in this all agree nay I doubt not but there are some Protestants which can and do as stifly and as churlishly deny them Salvation as they doe us And A. C. should doe well to consider whether they doe it not upon as good reason at least Next for the Minor Proposition Namely That in point of Faith and Salvation 't is safest for a man to take that way which the Adversary confesses or the Differing Parties agree on I fay that is no Metaphysicall Principle but a bare Contingent Proposition and may be true or false as the matter is to which it is applyed and so of no necessary truth in it selfe nor able to leade in the Conclusion Now that this Proposition In point of Faith and Salvation 't is safest for a man to take that way which the differing Parties agree on or which the Adversary Confesses hath no strength in it selfe but is sometimes true and sometimes false as the Matter is about which it is conversant is most evident First by Reason Because Consent of disagreeing Parties is neither Rule nor Proofe of Truth For Herod and Pilate disagreeing Parties enough yet agreed against Truth it selfe But Truth rather is or should be the Rule to frame if not to force Agreement And secondly by the two Instances †§. 35. N. 3 before given For in the Instance betweene the Orthodox Church then and the Donatists this Proposition is most false For it was a Point of Faith and so of Salvation that they were upon Namely the right use and administration of the Sacrament of Baptisme And yet had it beene safest to take up that way which the differing Parts agreed on or which the adverse Part Confessed men must needs have gone with the Donatists against the Church And this must fall out as oft as any Heretick will cunningly take that way against the Church which the Donatists did if this Principle shall goe for currant But in the second Instance concerning the Eucharist a matter of Faith and so of Salvation too the same Proposition is most true And the Reason is because here the matter is true Namely The true and reall participation of the Body and Blood of Christ in that Blessed Sacrament But in the former the matter was false Namely That Rebaptization
A. C. p. 72. namely the Faith of the Romane Church may Therefore with A. C ' s. leave I will venture my salvation upon the Rule aforesaid and not trouble my selfe to seeke another of mans making to the forsaking or weakening of this which God hath given me For I know they Committed two Evills which forsooke the Fountaine of Living Waters to hew out to themselves Cisternes broken Cisternes that can hold no VVater Ier. 2. For Ier. 2. 13. here 's the Evill of Desertion of that which was right and the Evill of a bad Choise of that which is hew'd out with much paines and care and is after Vselesse and Vnprofitable But then Thirdly I finde that a Romanist may make use of an Implicite Faith at his pleasure but a Protestant must know all these things Infallibly that 's A. C s. word Know these things Why but is it not enough to believe them Now God forbid What shall become of Millions of poore Christians in the world which cannot know all these things much lesse know them Infallibly Well I would not have A. C. weaken the Beliefe of poore Christians in this fashion But for things that may be knowne as well as believed nor I nor any other shall need forsake the Scripture to seeke another Rule to direct either our Conscience or our Confidence In the next place A. C. observes That the Iesuite was as confident for his part with this difference that he had sufficient A. C. p. 69. reason of his Confidence but I had not for mine This is said with the Confidence of a Iesuite but as yet but said Therefore he goes on and tels us That the Iesuite A. C. p. 70. had reason of hâ—…s Confidence out of expresse Scriptures and Fathers and the Infallible Authority of the Church Now truly Expresse Scriptures with A. C s. patience he hath not named one that is expresse nor can he And the few Scriptures which he hath alledged I have * §. 25. N. 5. §. 33. Confid 3. N. 1. Answered and so have others As for Fathers hee hath named very few and with what successe I leave to the Readers judgement And for the Authority of the Catholike Church I hold it a §. 21. N. 5. as Infallible as he and upon better Grounds but not so of a Generall Councell which he here meanes as appeares b A. C. p. 71. after And for my part I must yet thinke and I doubt A. C. will not be able to disprove it that expresse Scripture and Fathers and the Authority of the Church will rather be found proofes to warrant my Confidence then his Yea but A. C. saith That I did not then taxe the Iesuite with any A. C. p. 70. rashnesse It may be so Nor did he me So there we parted even Yea but he saith again that Iacknowledge there is but one saving Faith and that the Lady might be saved in the Romane faith which was all the Iesuite tooke upon his soule Why but if this be all I will confesse it again The first That there is but one faith I confesse with S. Paul Esphes 4. And the other that the Lady might be Ephes. 4. 5. saved in the Romane Faith or Church * §. 35. N. 1. I confesse with that charity which S. Paul teacheth me Namely to leave all men especially the weaker both sex and sort which hold the Foundation to stand or fall to their owne Master Rom. 4. And this is no mistaken charity As for Rom. 14. 4. the Inference which you would draw out of it that 's answered at large †§. 35. N. 2. A. C. p. 70. already But then A. C. addes that I say but without any proofe that the Romanists have many dangerous errours but that I neither tell them which they be nor why I think them dangerous but that I leave them to looke to their owne soules which he sayes they doe and have no cause to doubt How much the Iesuite and A. C. have said in this Conference without any solid proofe I againe submit to judgement as also what proofes I have made If in this very place I have added none 't is because I had made proofe enough of the selfe samething a §. 33. N. 12 §. 35. N. 7. before Where lest hee should want and call for proofe againe I have plainly laid together some of the many Dangerous errours which are charged upon them So I tell you which at least some of which they be and their very naming will shew their danger And if I did remit you to looke to your own soules I hope there was no offence in that if you doe it and do it so that you have no cause to doubt And the reason why you doubt not A. C. tels us is Because A. C. p. 70. you hâ—…d no new devise of your owne or any other mens nor any thing contrary to Scripture but all most conformable to Scriptures interpreted by Vnion Consent of Fathers and Definitions of Councels Indeed if this were true you had little cause to doubt in point of your Beliefe But the Truth is you doe hold new devises of your owne which the Primitive Church was never acquainted with And some of those so farre from being conformable as that they are little lesse then contradictory to Scripture In which particulars and divers others the Scriptures are not interpreted by Vnion or Consent of Fathers or Definitions of Councels unlesse perhaps by some late Councels packed of purpose to doe that ill service I have given instances enough * §. 33. N 12. § 35 N. 7. before yet some you shall have here lest you should say againe that I affirme without proofe or Instance a Conc. Lateran can 1. I pray then whose devise was b Conc. Constan. Sess. 13. transubstantiation And whose Communion under one kinde †Propter Haeresin Rex non solum Regno privatur sed filii ejus à Regni successione pelluntur Simanca Cathol Instit. tit 9. §. 259. Absoluti sunt Subditi a Debito fidâ—…litatis Et custodes arcium c. Ibid. tit 46. §. 73. It was stifly avowed not long since by That no man could thew any one Romane Catholike of note and learning that affirmed it lawfull to kill Kings upon any pretext whatsoever Now surely he that sayes as Romanists doe that 't is lawfull to Depose a King sayes upon the matter 't is lawfull to kill him For Kings doe not use to be long-lived after their Deposition And they selâ—…ome stay till griefe breake their hearts They have Assassinates ready to make thorter worke But since he is so confident I le give him an Author of note and very Learned that speakes it out Rex debet occidi si solicitet populum colere Idola vel deserere Legem Dei. Tostat in 2 Sam. c. 11. q. 17. And he makes bold with Scripture to prove it Deut. 13. And
in another and another and so in all of like nature I say in all of like nature And A. C. may remember he expressed himselfe a little before to A. C. p. 71. speake of the Defining of such Divine Truths as are not absolutely necessary to be expresly knowne and actually believed of all sorts of men Now there is there can be no necessity of an Infallible certainty in the whole Catholike Church and much lesse in a Generall Councell of things not * §. 21. N. 5. absolutely necessary in themselves For Christ did not intend to leave an Infallible certainty in his Church to satisfie either Contentious or Curious or Presumptuous Spirits And therefore in things not Fundamentall not Necessary 't is no matter if Councels erre in one and another and a third the whole Church having power and meanes enough to see that no Councell erre in Necessary things and this is certainty enough for the Church to have or for Christians to expect especially since the Foundation is so strongly and so plainely laid downe in Scripture and the Creed that a modest man might justly wonder why any man should run to any later Councell at least for any Infallible certainty Yet A. C. hath more Questions to aske and his next is How we can according to the ordinary Course be A. C. p. 72. Infallibly assured that it erres in one and not in another when it equally by one and the same Authority defines both to be Divine Truth A. C. taking here upon him to defend M. Fisher the Jesuite could not but see what I had formerly written concerning this difficult Question about Generall Councels And to all that being large he replied little or nothing Now when he thinks that may be forgotten or as if it did not at all lie in his way he here turnes Questionist to disturbe that businesse and indeed the Church as much as he can But to this Question also I answer againe If any Generall-Councell doe now erre either it erres in things absolutely necessary to Salvation or in things not necessary If it erre in things Necessary we can be infallibly assured by the Scripture the Creeds the foure first Councels and the whole Church where it erres in one and not in another If it be in non necessariis in things not necessary 't is not requisite that we should have for them an infallible assurance As for that which followes it is notoriously both cunning and false 'T is false to suppose that a Generall Councell defining two things for Divine Truths and erring in one but not erring in another doth define both equally by one and the same Authority And 't is cunning because these words by the same Authority are equivocall and must be distinguished that the Truth which A. C. would hide may appeare Thus then suppose a Generall Councell erring in one point and not in another it doth define both and equally by the same delegated Authority which that Councell hath received from the Catholike Church But it doth not define both and much lesse equally by the same Authority of the Scripture which must be the Councels Rule as well as private mens no nor by the same Authority of the whole Catholike Church who did not intentionally give them equall power to define Truth and errour for Truth And I hope A C. dares not say the Scripture according to which all Councels that will uphold Divine Truth must Determine doth equally give either ground or power to define Errour and Truth To his former Questions A. C. adds That if we leave this to be examined by any private man this examination not being Infallible had need to be examined by another A. C p. 72. and this by another without end or ever comming to Infallible certainty necessarily required in that one faith which is necessary to salvation and to that peace and unity which ought to be in the Church Will this inculcating the same thing never be left I told the lesuite a §. 32. N. 5. §. 33. Consid. 7. Nu. 4. before that I give no way to any private man to be Iudge of a Generall Councell And there also I shewed the way how an erring Councell might be rectified and the peace of the Church either preserved or restored without lifting any private spirit above a Councell and without this processe in Infinitum which A. C. so much urges and which is so much declined in all b Arist. 1. Post Tex 6 4. Metaph T. 14. Sciences For as the understanding of a man must alwaies have somewhat to rest upon so must his Faith But a c §. 38 Nu. 〈◊〉 private man first for his owne satisfaction and after for the Churches if he have just cause may consider of and examine by the a Hic non loquimur de Decisione seu Determinatione Doctrinali quae ad unumquemque virum peritum spectare dignoscitur sed de Authoritativâ Iudiciali c la. Almain L. de Author Eccl. c. 10. princ Iudgement of discretion though not of power even the Definitions of a Generall Councell But A. C. concludes well That an Infallible certainty is necessary for that one Faith which is necessary to salvation And of that as I expressed b §. 38. Num. 1. before a most infallible certainty we have already in the Scripture the Creeds and the foure first Generall Councels to which for things Necessary and Fundamentall in the Faith we need no assistance from other Generall Councels And some of your c Sunt qui nescio quà ducti ratione sentiunt non esse opus Generali Concilio De Constantiensi loquitur dicentes omnia bene à Patribus nostris Ordinata ac Constituta modò ab omnibus legitimè fideliter servarentur Fatemur equidem id ipsum esse verissimum Tamen cùm nihil fere servetur c. Pet. de Aliaco L. de reformat Eccles. fine So that after-Councels are rather to Decree for Observance then to make any new Determinations of the Faith owne very honest and very Learned were of the same Opinion with me And for the peace and unity of the Church in things absolutely necessary we have the same infallible direction that wee have for Faith But in Things not necessary though they be Divine Truths also if about them Christian men doe differ 't is no more then they have done more or lesse in all Ages of the Church and they may differ and yet preserve the d Non omnis Error in his qua fidei sunt est aut Infidelitas aut Haeresis Holkot in 1. Sent. q. 1. ad 4. K. One necessary Faith and e Scimus quosdam quod semel imbiberint nolle deponere nec proposstum suum facilè mutare sed salvo inter Collegas pacis concordiae vinculo quaedam propria quae apud se semel sint usurpata retinere Quâ in re nec nos vim cuiquam facimus aut legem
but that it shall still be a maiâ—… Note of the true Church and in that sense which he would have it And his Reason is b Quia Doctrina Sana est ab ipsa verà legiâ—…ima Successione indivâ—…lsa Stapl. Ibid. Bâ—…se sound Doctrine is indivisible from true and Lawfull Succession Where you shall see this great Clarke for so hee was not able to stand to himselfe when he hath forsaken Truth For 't is not long after that he tels us That the People are led along and judge the Doctrine by the Pastors But when the Church comes to examine she judges the Pastors by their Doctrine And this c Nam è Pastore Lâ—…s fieri potâ—…st Stap. ibid. Nâ—…tab 4. he sayes is necessary Because a Man may become of a Pastor a Wolfe Now then let Stapleton take his choise For either a Pastor in this Succession cannot become a Wolfe and then this Proposition's false Or els if he can then sound Doctrine is not inseparable from true and Legitimate succession And then the former Proposition's false as indeed it is For that a good Pastour may become a Wolfe is no newes in the Ancient Story of the Church in which are registred the Change of many a Vincent Lit. cont Har. c. 23. 24. Great men into Hereticks I spare their Names And since Iudas chang'd from an Apostle to a Divell S. Ioh. 6. 't is no wonder to see S. Ioh. 6. 70. others change from Shepheards into Wolves I doubt the Church is not empty of such Changelings at this day Yea but Stapleton will helpe all this For he adds That suppose the Pastors do forsake true Doctrine yet Succession shall still be a true Note of the Church Yet not every Succession but that which is Legitimate and true Well And what is that Why b Legitima autem est illorum Pastorum qui Vnitatem tenent Fidem Stap. ibid. Notab 5. That Succession is lawfull which is of those Pastors which hold entire the Unity and the Faith Where you may see this Samson's haire cut off againe For at his word I 'le take him And if that onely be a Legitimate Succession which holds the Vnity and the Faith entire then the Succession of Pastors in the Romane Church is illegitimate For they have had c In their owne Chronologer Onuphrius there are Thirty acknowledged more Schismes among them then any other Church Therefore they have not kept the unity of the Church And they have brought in grosse Superstition Therefore they have not kept the Faith â—…ntire Now if A. C. have any minde to it he may do well to helpe Stapleton out of these bryars upon which he hath torne his Credit and I doubt his Conscience too to uphold the Corruptions of the Sea of Rome As for that in which he is quite mistaken it is his Inference which is this That I should therefore consider carefully Whether it be not more Christian and lesse braine-sicke to think that the Pope being S Peter's Successour with a Generall Councell should be Iudge of Controversies c. And that the Pastorall Iudgement of him should be accounted Infallible rather then to make every man that can read the Scripture Interpreter of Scripture Decider of Controversies Controller of Generall Councels and Judge of his Judges Or to have no Judge at all of Controversies of Faith but permit every man to believe as he list As if there were no Infallible certainty of Faith to be expected on earth which were instead of one saving Faith to induce a Babilonicall Confusion of so many faiths as fancies Or no true Christian Faith at all From which Evils Sweet Jesus deliver us I have Considered of this very carefully But this Inference supposes that which I never granted nor any Protestant that I yet know Namely That if I deny the Pope to be Iudge of Controversies I must by and by either leave this supreme Judicature in the hands and power of every private man that can but read the Scripture or els allow no Iudge 〈◊〉 and so let in all manner of Confusion No God forbid I should grant either For I have expâ—…esly * §. 26. Nu. 1. declared That the Scripture interpreted by the Primitive Church and a Lawfull and free Generall Councell determining according to these is Iudge of Controversies And that no private man whatsoever is or can be Iudge of these Therefore A. C. is quite mistaken and I pray God it be not wilfully to beguile poore Ladiâ—… and other their weake adherents with seeming to say somewhat I say quite mistaken to inferre that I am either for a private Iudge or for no Iudge for I utterly disclaime both and that as much if not more then he or any Romanist who ever he be But these things in this passage I cannot swallow First That the Pope with a Generall Councell should be Iudge for the Pope in ancient Councels never had more power then any the other Patriarchs Precedency perhaps for Orders sake and other respects he had Nor had the Pope any Negative voice against the rest in point of difference †Patrum Avorum nostrorum tempore pauci audebant dicere Papam esse supra Concilium Aeneas Sylvius sen Pius 2. L. 1. de Gestis Concil Basil. Et illâ—… imprimis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 quis 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—…nes qui aliquo numero sâ—… Concilio subjiciâ—…nt Ibid. in fascic rerum Expetend fol. 5. 〈◊〉 autem Papam esse non solùm supra Concilium Generale sed Vniversam Ecclesiam est propositio ferè de Fide Bellar. L. 2. de Concil c. 17. 〈◊〉 1. No nor was he held superiour to the Councell Therefore the ancient Church never accounted or admitted him a Iudge no net with a Councell much lesse without it Secondly it will not downe with me that his Pastorall Iudgement should be Infallible especially since some of them have been as * Quum hoc tempore nullus sit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 fâ—…nd est qui sacras Litâ—…ras dâ—…dicerit quâ—… fronte aliquis eorum docere audebit quod non didicerit Arnulph in Concil Rheâ—…nsi Nam câ—… constet plures eorum adeò illiteratos esse ut Grammaticam penitùs ignorarent qui sit ut Sacras Literas interpretari possint Alphons à Castro L. 1. advers Hâ—… c. 4. versùs medium Edit Paris 1534. For both that at Antwerpe An. 1556. and that at Paris An. 15â—… 〈◊〉 beene in Purgatorie And such an Ignorant as these was Pope Iohn the foure and twentieth Platiâ—… 〈◊〉 Vitae ejus Et § 33. Nu. 6. Ignorant as many that can but read the Scripture Thirdly I cannot admit this neither though hee doe most cunningly thereby abuse his Readers That any thing hath been said by me out of which it can justly be inferred That there 's no Infallible certainty of Faith to bee expected on earth For there is most Infallible certainty of it that is of the Foundations of it in Scripture and the Creeds And 't is so clearely delivered there as that it needs no Iudge at all to sit upon it for the Articles themselves And so entire a Body is this one Faith in it selfe as that the †Resolutio Occham est Quod nec tota Ecclesia net Concilium Generale nec Summus Pontifex potest facere Articulum quod non fuit Articulus Sed Ecclesia bene determinat de Propositionibus Catholicis de quibus erat dubium c. Ia. Almain in 3 Sent. D. 25. q. unicâ Dub. 3. Sicut ad ea quae spectant ad Fidem nostram nequaquam â—…x voluntate humana dependent non potest Summus Pontifex nec Ecclesia ae Assertione non verâ veram nec de non falsâ falsam facere it à non potest de non Catholicâ Catholicam facere nec de non Haretica Hareticam Et ideo non potest â—…ovum Articulum facere nec Articulum Fidei tollere Quoniam sicut Veritates Catholicae absque omni approbatione Ecclesiae ex naturâ rei sunt immutabiles immutabilitèr verae it à sunt immutabilitèr Catholica reputandae Similitèr sicut Hareses absque omni reprobatione damnatione sunt falsae it à absque omni reprobatione sunt Haereses reputanda c. Et posteà Patet ergo quod nulla Veritas est Catholica ex approbatione Ecclesiae vel Papae Gab. Biel. in 3. Sâ—…nt Dist. 25. q. unica Art 3. Dub. 3. versùs sinem Whole Church much lesse the Pope hath not power to adde one Article to it nor leave to detract any one the least from it But when Controversies arise about the meaning of the Articles or Superstructures upon them which are Doctrines about the Faith not the Faith it selfe unlesse where they be immediate Consequences then both in and of these a a §. 26. Nu. 1. Lawfull and free Generall Councell determining according to Scripture is the best Iudge on earth But then suppose uncertainty in some of these superstructures it can never be thence concluded That there is no Infallible certainty of the Faith it selfe But 't is time to end especially for me that have so Many Things of Weight lying upon me and disabling me from these Polemicke Discourses beside the Burden of sixty five yeares complete which drawes on apace to the period set by the Prophet David Psal. 90. and to the Psal. 90. 10. Time that I must goe and give God and Christ an Account of the Talent committed to my Charge In which God for Christ Iesus sake be mercifull to me who knowes that however in many Weaknesses yet I have with a faithfull and single heart bound to his free Grace for it laboured the Meeting the Blessed Meeting of Truth and Peace in his Church and Psal. 85. 10. which God in his own good time will I hope effect To Him be all Honour and Praise for ever Amen FINIS
Puente La Convenientia de las dâ—…s Monarquias Catolicas la de la Iglesia Romana y la del Imperiâ—… Espaniol y 〈◊〉 de la prâ—…dentia de los Reyes Catolicos de Espania a tâ—…dos los Reyes dâ—…l mundâ—… a Spanish Friar followes the same resemblance betweene the Monarchies of Rome and Spaine in a Tract of his intitled The Agreement of the two Catholike Monarchies and Printed in Spanish in Madrid Anno 1612. In the Frontispice or Title Page of this Booke there are set out two Scutchions The one bearing the Crosse-Keyes of Rome The other the Armes of Castile and Leon both joyned together with this Motto In vinculo pacis in the bond of peace On the one side of this there is a Portraiture resembling Rome with the Sunne shining over it and darting his beames on S. Peters Keyes with this Inscription * Luminare Majus ut prâ—…sit Vrbiâ—… Orbi Luminare Majus the greater Light that it may governe the City that is Rome and the whole world And on the other side there 's another Image designing Spaine with the Moone shining over that and spreading forth its Raies upon the Spanish Scutchion with this Impresse †Luminare Minus ut subdatur Vrbi dominetur Orbi Luminare minus the lesse Light that it may be subject to the City of Rome he meanes and so be Lord to governe the whole world besides And over all this in the top of the Title-Page there is Printed in Capitall Letters Fecit Deus duo Luminaria magna God made two great Lights There followes after in this Author a Discovery at large of this Blazoning of these Armes but this is the Substance of it and abundantly enough to shew what is aimed at by whom and for whom And this Booke was not stollen out without the will and consent of the State For it hath Printed before it all manner of Licence that a Booke can well have For it hath the approbation of Father Pedro de Buyza of the Company of the lesuites Of Iohn de Arcediano Provinciall of the Dominicans Of Diego Granero the Licencer appointed for the supreme Councell of the Inquisition And some of these revised this booke by a Por Orden de los Seniores del Conseso Supremo Order from the Lords of that Councell And last of all the b Por Mandade del Rey nucstro Senior Kings Priviledge is to it with high Commendation of the Worke. But the Spanyards had need looke to it for all this least the French deceive them For now lately Friar Campanella hath set out an Eclogue upon the Birth of the Dolphin and that Permissu Superiorum by Licence from his Superiors In which he sayes expresly c Quum Gallia alat 20000000 hominum Ex singulis centenis sumendo unum colligit 200000. strenuorum militum stipendiatorum commodè perpetuoque Propterea omnes terrae Principes metuunt nunc magis à Gallia quà m unquam ab aliis Paratur enim illi Regnum Vniversale F. Tho. Campanellae Ecloga in Principis Galliarum Delphini Nativitatem cum Annot. Discip. Parisiis 1639. cum permissu Superiorum That all the Princes are now more afraid of France then ever for that there is provided for it Regnum Vniversale The Vniversall Kingdome or Monarchy But t is time to Returne For A. C. in this passage hath beene very Carefull to tell us of a Parliament A. C. p. 60. and of Living Magistrates and Iudges besides the Law-Bookes Thirdly therefore the Church of England God be thanked thrives happily under a Gracious Prince and well understands that a Parliament cannot be called at all times And that there are visible Iudges besides the Law-Bookes and One Supreme long may he be and be happy to settle all Temporall differences which certainly he might much better performe if his Kingdomes were well rid of A. C. and his fellowes And she believes too That our Saviour Christ hath left in his Church besides his Law-booke the Scripture Visible Magistrates and Iudges that is Archbishops and Bishops under a gracious King to governe both for Truth and Peace according to the Scripture and her owne Canons and Constitutions as also those of the Catholike Church which crosse not the Scripture and the Iust Laws of the Realme * Non est necesse ut sub Christo sit Unus Rector totius Ecclesiâ—… sed sussicit quòd sint plures regentes diversas provincias sicut sunt plures Reges gubernantes plura regna Ocham Dial. L. 2. Tract x. p. 1. c. 30. ad 1. But she doth not believe there is any Necessity to have one Pope or Bishop over the Whole Christian world more then to have one Emperor over the whole World Which were it possible She cannot thinke fit Nor are any of these intermediate Iudges or that One which you would have Supreme Infallible But since a Kingdome and a Parliament please A. C. so well to patterne the Church by I 'le follow him in the A. C. p. 60. way he goes and be bold to put him in minde that in some Kingdomes there are divers Businesses of greatest Consequence which cannot be finally and bindingly ordered but in and by Parliament And particularly the Statute Lawes which must bind all the Subjects cannot be made and ratified but there Therefore according to A. Cs. owne Argument there will be some Businesses also found Is not the setling of the Divisions of Christendome one of them which can never be well setled but in a †Propter defectum Conciliorum Generalium totius Ecclesiâ—… qua sola audet intrepidè corrigere omnes ea mala qua Vniversalem tangunt Ecclesiam manentia diu incorrecta crescunt c. Gerson Declar at Defectuum Uirâ—… 〈◊〉 To. 1. p. 209. Generall Councell And particularly the making of Canons which must binde all Particular Christians and Churches cannot be concluded and established but there And againe as the Supreme Magistrate in the State Civill may not abrogate the Lawes made in Parliament though he may Dispense with the Sanction or penalty of the Law quoad hic nunc as the Lawyers speake So in the Ecclesiasticall Body no Bishop no not the Pope where his Supremacie is admitted hath power to * Sunt enim Indissolubilia Decreta quibus reverentia debita est Prosper cont Collatorem c. 1. And Turrecremata who saies every thing that may be said for the Popes Supremacy yet dares not say Papam posse revocare tollere omnia Statuta Generalium Conciliorum sed Aliqua tantum Io. de Turrecre Summa de Ecclesiâ L. 3. c. 55. Et postea Papa non potest revocare Decreta primorum quatuor Conciliorum quia non sunt nisi Declarativa Articulorum Fidei Ibid. c. 57. ad 2 um disanull or violate the true and Fundamentall Decrees of a Generall Councell though he may perhaps dispense in some Cases with some Decrees By all which it
appeares though somewhat may be done by the Bishops and Governours of the Church to preserve the unity and certainty of Faith and to keepe the Church from renting or for uniting it when it is rent yet that in the ordinary way which the Church hath hitherto kept some things there are and upon great emergent Occasions may be which can have no other helpe then a lawfull fre and well composed Generall Councell And when that cannot be had the Church must pray that it may and expect till it may or else reforme its selfe per partes by Nationall or Provinciall Synods as hath beene said a §. 24. N. 1. before And in the meane time it little beseemes A. C. or any Christian to check at the wisdome of †And shall we think that Christ the wisest king hath not provided c. A. C. p. 60. Where I cannot commend either A. C. his Modesty that he doth not or his cunning that he will not go so 〈◊〉 as some have done before him though in these words shall we think c hee goes too farre Non videretur Dominus discretus fuisse ut cum reverentiá ejus loquar nisi unicum post se talem Vicarium reliquisset qui haec omnia potest Fuit autem ejus Vicarius Petrus Et idem dicendum est de Successoribus Petri cum cadem absurditas sequeretur si post mortem Petâ—…i Humanam Naturam à se creatam sine regimine Vnius Personae reliquisset Extravagant Com Tit de Majoritate Obedientiâ c. Vuam Sanctam In addition D. P. Bertrands Edit Paris 1585. Christ if he have not taken the way they thinke fittest to settle Church Differences Or if for the Churches sin or Tryall the way of Composing them be left more uncertaine then they would have it that they which are approved may be knowne 〈◊〉 Cor. 11. 19. But the Iesuite had told me before that a Generall Councell had adjudged these things already For so hee saies F. I told him that a Generall Councell to wit of Trent had already Iudged not the Romane Church but the Protestants to hold Errours That saith the B. was not a Lawfull Councell B. It is true that you replied for the Councell of § 27 Trent And my Answer was not onely That the Councell was not Legall in the necessary Conditions to be observed in a Generall Councell but also That it was no Generall Councell which againe you are content to omit Consider it well First is that Councell Legall the Abettors whereof maintaine publikely That it is lawfull for them to conclude any controversie and make it bee de fide and so in your Iudgement Fundamentall though it have not I doe not say now the Written Word of God for warrant either in expresse Letter or necessary sense and deduction as all unerring Councels have had and as all must have that will not erre but not so much as †Etiamsi non confirmetur ne probabili Testimonio Scripturarum Stapl. Relect. Cont. 4. Q. 1. Ar. 3. Probable Testimony from it nay quite extrà without the Scripture Nay secondly Is that Councell * Here A. C. tells us that doubtlesse the Arrians also did mislike that at Nice the Pope had Legates to carry his messages and that one of them in his place sate as President Why but first 't is manifest that Hosius was president at the Councell of Nice and not the Bishop of Rome either by himselfe or his Legates And so much Athanasius himselfe who was present and surely understood the Councell of Nice and who presided there as well as A. C. tells us Hosius hic est Princeps Synodorum So belike He presided in other Councells as well as at Nice Hic formulam Fidei in Nicaenâ Synodo concepit And this the Arrians themselves confesse to Constantius the Emperour then seduced to be theirs Apud S. Atbanas Epist. ad solitar vitam agentes But then secondly I doe not except against the Popes sitting as President either at Nice or Trent For that he might do when called or chosen to it as well as any other Patriarch if you consider no more but his sitting as President But at Nice the Cause was not his own but Christs against the Arrian whereas at Trent it was meerely his owne his own Supremacy and his Churches Corruptions against the Protestants And therefore surely not to sit President at the Triall of his owne Cause though in other Causes hee might sit as well other Patriarchs And for that of Bellarmine L. 1. de Concil c. 21. §. Tertia conditio Namely That 't is unjust to deny the Roman Prelat his Right Ius suum in Calling Generall Councells and Presiding in them in possession of which Right he hath bin for 1500. yeares That 's but a bold Assertion of the Cardinalls by his leave For he gives us no proofe of it but his bare word Whereas the very Authenticke Copies of the Councells published and printed by the Romanists themselves affirme cleerely they were called by Emperors not by the Pope And that the Pope did not preside in all of them And I hope Bellarmine will not expect we should take his bare word against the Councells And most certaine it is that even as Hosius Presided the Councell at Nice and no way that as the Popes Legate so also in the second Generall Councell which was the first of Constantinople Nectarius Bishop of Constantinople Presided Concil Chalced. Act. 6. p. 136. apud Binium In the third which was the first at Ephasus S. Cyril of Alexandria Presided And though Pope Coelestine was joyned with him yet be sent none out of the West to that Councel til many things were therein finished as appeares apud Act. Concil To. 2. c. 16. 17. In the fourth at Chalcedon the Legats of the Bishop of Rome had the Prime place In the fift Eutychius Bishop of Constantinople was President In the sixe and seventh the Legats of the Pope were President yet so as that almost all the duty of a Moderator or President was performed in the seventh by Tharasius Bishop of Constantinople as appeares manifestly in the Acts of that Councell And since these seven are all the Generall Councells which the Greekes and Latines joyntly acknowledge And that in these other Patriarchs Bishops Presided as oft at least as the Bishops of Rome what 's become of Bellarmines Brag That the Pope hath beene possest of this Right of Presiding in Generall Councells for the space of 1500. yeares Legall where the Pope the Chiefe Person to be Reformed shall sit President in it and be chiefe Iudge in his own Cause against all Law Divine Naturall and Humane In a place not free but in or too neare his owne Dominion To which all were not called that had Deliberative or Consultative Voice In which none had Suffrage but such as were sworne to the Pope and the Church of Rome and professed Enemies to all that called for